What i thought i saw from just skimming this thread is that we don't need 'journalists' or at least we don't need so darn many. It seems to be suggested that journalist can only write about something after the trial and the "facts" are all in and the jury has reached a verdict as to which facts we can believe.
Now if we want to talk about things that are true that could be reported:
It's true that Beau said what he said about what happened. We don't know that he actually reported all to Sanderson but a good journalist could ask Cael.
It's true his wife said what she said.
It's true two (or more) women made claims or at least a journalist could double check that and find out if they really were 17 and not suppose to have access.
It appears to be true security footage exists. A journalist could investigate/ask who controls the tapes/hard drive, do the still exist, we're they deleted?
It appears no one from the university has made comment. A journalist could investigate is this true and ask Cael, the AD, the president for comment if none why?
I could go on. There are plenty of true things and fact to investigate which could generate several articles.