[Goose]

My suspicion is that the administration was unaware of all the facts and subtleties of the whole story until recently, just based on how they acted.

I agree that the administration and the GM did not seem prepared to deal with this situation based on how they acted. However, an alternate explanation is that they knew about the problem in sufficient detail but failed to address it. IMO the latter is more probable. The GM in particular should have informed himself of all the "facts" the moment he became aware his head coach had personal behavior issues of any kind. These kind of problems, particularly in today's world, clearly can become "serious". Knowing the details would be necessary to evaluate how bad the problem may become.
 
Since Stanford did not move immediately to terminate TT when the second investigation was completed, there was no "good" path out of the subsequent morass. Lacking any "good" way out, it is unsurprising the problem wasn't addressed more proactively. Luck would have needed to recommend voluntarily disclosure of the fact Stanford was aware of the problem yet had retained TT anyway. That necessity was so unpalatable that adopting it was emotionally inadmissible. Without adopting that recommendation no "solution" was possible. Therefore there was none when events made such a disclosure moot.

[Goose]

My suspicion is that the administration was unaware of all the facts and subtleties of the whole story until recently, just based on how they acted.

I agree that the administration and the GM did not seem prepared to deal with this situation based on how they acted. However, an alternate explanation is that they knew about the problem in sufficient detail but failed to address it. IMO the latter is more probable. The GM in particular should have informed himself of all the "facts" the moment he became aware his head coach had personal behavior issues of any kind. These kind of problems, particularly in today's world, clearly can become "serious". Knowing the details would be necessary to evaluate how bad the problem may become.
 
Since Stanford did not move immediately to terminate TT when the second investigation was completed, there was no "good" path out of the subsequent morass. Lacking any "good" way out, it is unsurprising the problem wasn't addressed more proactively. Luck would have needed to recommend voluntarily disclosure of the fact Stanford was aware of the problem yet had retained TT anyway. That necessity was so unpalatable that adopting it was emotionally inadmissible. Without adopting that recommendation no "solution" was possible. Therefore there was none when events made such a disclosure moot.