Can I ask our in-house PA resident a question?

Understand, this is absent any and all sarcasm.

Why exactly did they fire Joe Paterno?

I'm serious. And I'm not saying that I agree or disagree, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the reasoning. I haven't read the 23 page Grand Jury report, but it occurs to me that Paterno isn't in any legal trouble. To the best of my limited knowledge of PA state law in these cases any school official, from kindergarten to graduate school, whom witnesses or suspects sexual abuse of a minor must report it through one of three official channels: the police, Child Services, or his superiors. From what I've gathered Paterno did just that, in the case of the latter.

So again, why did they fire him? I can't find a definitive answer in any of the coverage or reports. If I had to guess it would go something like the following - the offender was allowed to retire unscathed. He worked directly for Paterno. Paterno has more authority within that school and his program than any three deans combined (presumably). If you add those 3 factors together the trustees must have come to the conclusion that the only way Sandusky could have "walked away" without arrest is if Paterno signed off on the maneuver.

Clearly Sandusky should have been fed to wolves (the actual police). But according to the letter of the law Paterno fulfilled his legal requirement. Is it just an assumed fact among locals and the trsutees that in this case, with Paterno having so much influence, so much sway, that they can not fathom that such a thing could have been hushed up and made to "go away" without the knowledge and consent of Paterno? Because if that's the case, I get it. That seems a reasonable position for the trustees. However, doesn't that leave Paterno some legal room to claim his contract was unlawfully terminated? If he was inclined to preserve his reputation, on the face of it, it would seem he'd have a case.

And look, I don't want to have to do the thing where I qualify all this with stating how serious I take the charges, how vulgar and heart breaking it all is, and how many victims there were - we all here would serve that pedophile up to an electric chair, in a heart beat. I just want to be sure of the "he should have done more" standard. If you suspect sexual abuse of a minor, as a school official, and you don't approve of how your superiors are investigating the accusation you reported, are you to conduct an investigation yourself? If Paterno doesn't get a satisfactory action on the part of the school president after he reported the accusations, is he obliged to go directly to the authorities? Morally, I would unquestionably say yes, and loudly. I just get a little uncomfortable with the "fire everybody" mentality when those positing such a demand don't offer specifics on how Paterno should have done more.

Unquestionably the coward of the century award goes to that spineless twerp whom actually witnessed the sex act in the showers with the minor. In that instance I say yes, you personally interfere, right then (and I mean in the shower). And then go directly to the police. I'm simply saying that if a member of the coaching staff comes to Paterno and says he saw Joe's offensive coordinator committing this crime, and that coordinator happened to be a 20 year friend of Paterno, it might be understandable if Paterno turned around and reported it to the school president and the chief of campus security. But after that, if the two of them both decide they're not going to the police (lack of evidence, fear of hurting the school reputation, etc), is Paterno liable to the point of being fired for not going above the head of the President, to the police? And if so, OK. But why was the campus security chief and the athletic coordinator - both in the loop as much as Paterno, neither of whom went to the cops - not fired as well?

Again, I think anyone involved in sweeping this under the rug & letting that animal simply "retire", deserves to be fired. I guess what I'm asking is, if Paterno reported it to multiple school officials, and then they did nothing, is that cause enough to say Paterno participated in the "sweeping?"