OldandStillaVol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,874
- Likes
- 3,347
He should have clarified this.I am saying that he should have reported it to his superior so that these claims could be investigated. Paterno, due to his relationship with Sandusky, could not be an impartial investigator anyhow. This is why professional investigators have to at times recuse themselves from investigations due to conflicts of interests with regard to relationships with either the accused or the accuser.
"I believe I saw fooling around".
"I think I saw fooling around".
"I saw fooling around".
One of these ducks is not like the others.
Before he did this.
He should have clarified this.
Who says that Paterno did not attempt to get clarity from McQueary's statement? You are leaping. Paterno could have asked for clarification and McQueary could have continued with, "I cannot be certain, but I think I saw". Let the evidence indict Paterno; not your speculation and not some hypothetical "what I would have done in that situation".
If you have never been in that exact situation, you cannot know exactly how you would have responded. At best, you can hope you would act a certain way according to certain knowledge you are privy to at that time.
Thats all Im going off of. We differ on whether he should have done more to protect his campus and the kids inside of his facility. That part is irrelevant to you.
Exactly. It's not like child ass raping is on the same level as staring at the window and asking yourself if those trees are real or if you're in some sort of parallel universe. It's real ****ing life with real people that are being victimized beyond belief.
everything i posted was in the grand jury indictment.
