Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I wasn't sure that paterno had anything to do with the illegal shit, and it sounded like he fulfilled his end of the bargain when he told his superiors what he'd heard, so it was a surprise to me that he got fired. Now that he's hired a high powered defense attorney however, maybe there is fire.

I only got 3 hours of sleep last night...so I'll blame that for my mental lapse.

Every person involved had a moral (if not legal) obligation to report/stop/expose this predator. Instead, they took it to their superiors, then washed their hands of it, even when nothing was done. Shameful. Those raging students should have been flipping Joe Paterno's car along with everyone else in the chain of do-nothing, cover-their-asses, pedophile-enabling motherfuckers. Seriously? McQueary, a TWENTY-EIGHT year old man, sneaked out of the locker room after witnessing a man raping a child hard enough that balls were slapping (not that it would have mattered it he were being gentle, but this guy was hammering away)? Who can defend him? Then he told his father who advised him to tell a football coach? Who can defend him? The football coach, aware that Sandusky had been accused (not proven) before, took it to an athletic director? Who can defend him? The AD ordered Sandusky to bring no more children onto the Penn State campus and the university president agreed with this course? Seriously? "Jerry, go rape these boys somewhere else." That's the answer these guys came up with? What possible defense is there for ANY of these people? They made it possible for Sandusky to assault numerous other children. Man, this is a sad, sad thing.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

Pretty much this.

With it having come to light that the only person who had any balls was the perpetrator, I'd def agree with Boredalt that all the people who factually knew it was happening and had the evidence/opportunity to stop it deserve to be stoned to death.

That said...I would not judge them so harshy...because the truth is, in big organizations, this "cover your ass" (metaphorically) mentality is the rule rather than the exception. I question how many administrators - or any normal people, really - in a similar position would actually have done what it is said these people should have done.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

This is exactly it. Tell the guy to call himself. Just need to add, "I'm notifying the police myself if you fail to do so." It's what McQueary's father should have advised; it's what Paterno should have advised. This should have been EVERYONE's advice.



The only thing worse that this psycho could have done to this child would have been to murder him. What if McQueary had witnessed Sandusky stabbing the kid with a knife instead of with his dick? Would you still be saying, "I would not judge them so harshly"? McQueary had a moral obligation to, AT THE VERY LEAST, go straight to a phone to call the police, if we was too scared to interrupt the assault directly. And, if he was too afraid to step in, what does that say about him that he left a child to be buggered by a man McQueary himself was too afraid to confront?

Nope. To quote our buddy Tuhl: "Fuck them. By no definition are they decent human beings."

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

I would not because I believe the rights of the accused come first and would not want to be an agent of innuendo.



The premise of your line of questioning is that murder is regarded, by you, me, or the putative bystander, as more offensive than pederasty. However, this premise is faulty on two counts: it is provably untrue, and it is irrelevant.

The only difference between putting a knife as opposed to a dick in the kid is that the former would generally be regarded as more difficult to get away with, and therefore more actionable. Whether the kid was raped or murdered would make absolutely no difference so far as my judgement goes because the degree of cowardly self-interest in play would remain the same; the only variable that would change is the degree to which the bystander thinks he can entertain his cowardice at the cost of another person's suffering.



I said that I doubted whether most people in that position would behave any differently. And I stand by that remark. By corollary, I would agree that most people "are not decent human beings".

I put a very high price on moral courage and disdain many people for this very reason. I believe moral courage is, sadly, a rare virtue in this day and age.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

How would the rights of the accused be threatened by you relaying to the police what you were told? "Mr. Jones told me he witnessed Mr. Smith committing X crime. I did not witness X crime, but since Mr. Jones is afraid/against notifying the police, and X crime is serious, I am telling you what I heard." Now, the police can investigate to determine the veracity of what Mr. Jones told you. No one's rights are jeopardized by questions. If it is true, you've potentially saved future victims and started a possible path the justice for Mr. Smith's victim(s). If you have a relationship with an individual close to the point that they could bring this to you, you would likely believe it, and if you believe it, could you live with yourself for not pushing the issue at least to the point of investigation?



I agree. I was trying to exaggerate to prove a point when it was unnecessary. How you put it is much better.



Seriously? You think "most people" could see what McQueary saw, then live with telling a football coach, and seeing that it got covered up? Most people? I want to believe you're wrong.



I admire people who do the right thing, even when it hurts them.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

The Fifth Amendment disagrees.

And the fact of the matter is, for many, an accusation is as good as guilt. Even an accusation undermines a man's reputation, however baseless it may be.



"If" it is true. So we begin by assuming the proof?



I can live with anything I do that I believe to be just in its own right. It would be arrogant unto hubris for me to believe that my associates are more morally infallible than people who aren't my associates.

Closely connected to this question is why I am so distrustful of oversocialized people / people who are too eager to make friends.



Don't we all.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Do we know that no one reported it to the police? Maybe someone did and they didn't have an investigation

Good question.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

They didn't report it to the police. Children and youth services are in on child abuse cases from the start, there would have been an investigation.

That's the entire reason the a lot of heads are rolling, people knew and didn't report it. If the whole thing blew up years ago and the administration attempted to root it out the story would be how Sandusky deserves to be taken out back and shot like a dog. Instead it's about how PS knew what was happening and refused to act on it. If they reported it to the police and nothing happened, they would have brought that up immediately.

Dvergar /
Quisling

Your premise is that the cops/social services are more infallible than other authorities from the same community, e.g., the university administration.

The very fact that there are scores of people on the streets rioting because the man was fired should be proof enough to question the values of the community that these cops and social workers, just like everyone else, are drawn from. So why should we believe they are any less potentially culpable?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

There was an "incident" reported to police back in 1998 with Sandusky. However, it wasn't pursued...I read an article that the DA was heavily involved in Sandusky's charity and so he had a conflict of interest.

In any case, nothing happened in 1998...and it was why Sandusky went from being the "head coach in waiting" to retiring in 1999 at the age of 55 (a young age for a successful coach to retire at).

Then all this happened in 2002 and nothing was reported to the police by Penn State.

If there's a conflict of interest with the DA why do they not have someone else work on it instead?