Originally Posted by
cspan37421
1. Why do you think that is likely? He later called into a meeting and was quite specific in a meeting with Schulz and Curley. See p. 7. If he under-reported it to JoePa, why was he ever called back? You make it sound as if he was trying to avoid hurting the old man's sensibilities. Besides, it also says on p. 7 that Paterno reported that the GA has stated "fondling or something of a sexual nature" - that's not much under-reporting to me. I would not come to that inference at all. Have you read the report, esp. p. 7?
2. Promptly = a day later? I suppose that's a matter of opinion, but in a case when you've got child rape, waiting a day could mean another victim, or another incident of the same victim.
4. I don't know the law but it seems to me that a case could be made that EVERYONE who knew it had an obligation to report to the police or child protective services.
5. Second hand? How do you figure that? He had a first-hand report. His report, without the GA present, would be second-hand.
7. No one is questioning the credibility of a claim JoePa has made in this matter. They're asking about who did what, and who should have done what.