Well, there is no "responsible party" at PSU. Two adult males are accused of awful crimes. There is an alleged victim and two alleged perps. All of them have legal rights. PSU needs to let the process play out.
What people don't understand about law today is that you don't need a legit claim. This is especially true in cases where one party is a public figure and the reputation of the claim will cause irreparable harm. The woman, I am almost 100% certain, will make some kind of claim that PSU didn't protect her. That claim will never go to court and be settled but an sloppy statement by the coach could add to her claim. So if CJF said "man, we feel horrible for her" that would be used as evidence that they know they were capable and should be held in a civil penalty. Or if PSU said "we are aware of the situation and decided it warranted the men's dismissal" and for whatever reason they win their case, they'll sue PSU for defamation. And they'll win a substantial out-of-court settlement.
One of my best friends, the founder of the company I worked for, had an Xmas party with the senior leadership team. A woman got drunk and in some edgy conversations that included five people, she grabbed his hand and placed it on her breast. She was telling him she had the nicest breasts in the room. Two months later, she sued. His lawyer advised that she would lose in court because several people witnessed it, including me. But she would say he bought the drinks and purposely got her drunk so she'd be vulnerable. That would extend the case and damage his reputation. So he settled out of court for a low six-figure sum with an NDA. Three months later she made the claim that employees were pirating software and her lawyer tried to get an analysis done of every single employee's software to audit if it was licensed or pirated. At this point, the company realized that they had to fight lest have several more of these experiences. The company spent ~ $300k and two years to fight that lawsuit. That is just the hard numbers. They lost a ton more in soft dollars as various employees spent a lot of time working on it. A year later, a woman sued because she was not hired for a position claiming this was done because she was Asian. The company, based in LA, brought the lawyer in and gave him a tour. Not only was the owner Asian, but over 50% of the employees were Asian as well. LOL.
Interesting stories in your closing paragraph, Obli, but not at all surprising in this day and age.
As for your other points, you're right of course, but there is no debate about the fact that the only permissible answer in this situation...and we've heard it 100 times before in circumstances like this...is: "I'm not at liberty to comment on an ongoing legal matter."
Yesterday's manufactured media indignation had no quarrel with that response nor was it aimed at the reaction of the team and the university to the alleged incident a few months ago.
Rather, it was only about the optics...stepping away from the podium and having the flunky provide the canned statement instead of the coach.
As I said in a post above, these media guys need something for their daily dose of indignation and yesterday that was it. But there's no there there. The caravan is already moving on. However, I guess this was as good a way as any for us to while away the hours before the game tomorrow evening.