Audrey Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 This. He knew that Sandusky was not arrested, charged, tried or jail. He *knew* Sandusky continued to have access to children. He's guilty similarly to Rusty Yates being guilty. :iagree: Absolutely. It might turn out that he is legal not culpable, but ethically... he was so very, very wrong. A child -- a 10 year old child -- was being raped and he did not stop that abominable act. That was his most egregious ethical error. Reporting it was secondary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrganicAnn Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Also I wonder what MM was told. If he was continually told "we're investigating it" by PSU and the Police, then he may not have realized that his reporting was inadequate to stop the problem. He may have thought that things were happening to take care of the problem. The police or PSU is not going to give him details of what action or inaction they are taking. (warning tangent: doesn't anyone wonder if they've investigated the Sandusky's adoption of five boys. Also the schools that let Sandusky pull boys out of the classrooms.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.