<p>If they are lying about ignoring child abuse it is not bordering evil it is evil. That is why I have a huge problem with one thing we know for sure- a 28 year old walked away from a child he believed to being raped. I happen to feel the rage at McQuery has not been near enough. I have problems making any excuse for his behavior.</p>
<p>^^ But you’re OK with the most powerful men on campus, who did as little as possible to help the boy at the time, and are doing as much as possible to cover their a$$es now.</p>
<p>tom, I guess what disturbs me is that you are giving all the benefit of the doubt to the top officials, and none to the victims or, in this case, the eyewitness.</p>
<p>I have not given anyone any benefit of the doubt. I have said on numerous posts I am prepared to be critical when I have all the information. </p>
<p>Please comment on this-</p>
<p>Penn State coach Paterno praised for acting appropriately in reporting Jerry Sandusky sex abuse suspicions
Published: Saturday, November 05, 2011, 12:25 PM Updated: Monday, November 07, 2011, 1:22 PM
SARA GANIM, The Patriot-News By SARA GANIM, The Patriot-News The Patriot-News</p>
<p>Penn State Joe PaternoJOE The Patriot-News, 2011
Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno did the right thing and reported an eye-witness report of child sex abuse by Jerry Sandusky in the football locker room in 2002, according to the indictment released this morning by the state Attorney General.</p>
<p>A source close to the investigation tells The Patriot-News that Paterno will not be charged, and will be a prosecution witness who will testify.</p>
<p>The sources said the deputy state prosecutor handling the case said that Paterno did the right thing, and handled himself appropriately in 2002 and during the three-year investigation that ended Friday.</p>
<p>tom, what if you never have “all the information”? Or what if you end up with two very different versions of “all the information,” with both sides insisting that theirs is the only true version? That’s very likely how this will end.</p>
<p>So I then should assume someone is evil or participated in a cover up? I should assume the worst about someone when there is no definitive proof of that. Is that okay because there were vile crimes against children? Anyone with possible contact that was not perfect has their reputation tarnished for life even if we can not prove they did anything wrong? </p>
<p>I can see how that helps victims of abuse.</p>
<p>By the way how come you say I do not give the victims the benefit of the doubt. I never questioned anything about any victims?
I made a comment on the one thing we know for sure- McQuery claims he saw a boy being raped and he left. After that we do not have all the information.</p>
<p>Can I ask again why not many commented on Hunt’s question- what if the charges are dropped?</p>
<p>and of this source from the DA’s office- in The sources said the deputy state prosecutor handling the case said that Paterno did the right thing, and handled himself appropriately in 2002 and during the three-year investigation that ended Friday.</p>
<p>I have no idea what your response meant to my lone response, tom.</p>
<p>You posted that dropping the charges is-It is not a determinant of the truth. </p>
<p>And I replied that the GJ report is also not determinant of the truth either.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then do you think Paterno is evil? He admittedly knew it was sexual child abuse, and did nothing, if we are to believe Curley and Schultz.</p>
<p>Also, I stated it will be hard to prove those perjury charges, unless another witness comes forward as having been present during the McQ Curley Schultz discussion. </p>
<p>You know that, I know that, they know that, so what’s the point of the question?</p>
<p>We do not know that Paterno did nothing- according to a source in the DA’s office he acted appropriately in 2002. I would like to find out what the source meant and exactly what Paterno did. You do not see the need- that is okay.</p>
<p>Are you asking me the point of my question of what if the charges are dropped?</p>
<p>There are no charges against McQueary either, so he must have also acted appropriately.</p>
<p>But there are charges against the other two. So they must have acted inappropriately, by your standards.</p>
<p>What are you talking about. I posted a link from a source in the DA’s office that knows more than you and I do. I also said that I would like to know more about what this source said acting appropriately means.</p>
<p>I may not be okay with what Paterno did or did not do- once we find out what that is.</p>
<p>You want to be outraged at McQueary, why? But not Paterno. They both knew what Sandusky was, and did nothing, and haven’t been charged.</p>
<p>If Paterno witnessed a rape and walked away I would be outraged at him. We know McQuery did that- we do not have a full and complete picture of what the others did after that, You think you do and you may be correct but you can not be certain with what we know now.</p>
<p>All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.</p>
<p>–Edmund Burke</p>
<p>Paterno testified McQ told him it was sexual in nature. We know that. Paterno’s testimony and McQ’s are equal in relation to what we think we know.</p>
<p>I keep coming back to the fact that Sandusky was banned from campus and told not to bring boys there anymore. If the conversations that the people in power had around the shower event had not included a description of a sexual occurrence, why would they have banned him? For horseplay? No. Their actions in 2002 do not support their current story. </p>
<p>For me, no, I would not believe they were innocent if the charges were dropped. I would assume they got away with being coconspirators and accessories to child abuse and if I was one of the later victims I would take them down through civil court.</p>
<p>tom, the GJ findings are attempts to bring out all the facts and evidence.
Perjury and omissions are definitely possible in the GJ presentment.</p>
<p>If the perjury charges are dropped, I would want to know exactly WHY, before deciding what that means.</p>
<p>mom- my point is that you do not know if all of them did nothing. We may find out that is the case or some did nothing or some even lied. </p>
<p>What did the source at the DA"s office mean when they told the press that Paterno acted accordingly in 2002? I would like to hear more about that. I might not agree but I would like to know what that meant.</p>
<p>performersmom the GJ report is not an attempt to bring out all the facts and evidence- not by any stretch. It is a one-sided document meant only to get an indictment.</p>
<p>McQuery walked away from a rape- and then waited a day to contact Paterno
Paterno took a day to report to Curley.</p>
<p>I am sorry I do not see those as equivalent actions. McQuery could have stopped an attack and comforted a victim. Paterno could have done neither at the time the incident was reported to him.</p>