Bman32x;4627393 said:
As far as I know, bc it's all we've been allowed to know, is that 98 incident was brought to all of their attention, they deliberated and made a council decision to not do anything. As far as before that, in 2002 after that, I pray there weren't many more kids hurt by Sandusky. Again, that's all I know until the court docs and Freeh's findings are released.
The 98 incident was actually brought to the attention of the local police, who then consulted with state police, an investigation was launched by the DA that included the state public welfare dept and agents, and they were the ones who decided that nothing should be done and that Sandusky shouldn't be charged with any wrongdoing.. not PSU officials.
Now, im sure PSU officials were aware of this situation, but after having state welfare agents say he did nothing wrong.. would it not be reasonable to think it was a false accusation and that Sandusky didn't do anything wrong.
So the incident in 2002, where McQueary was the only one to have witnessed it and acted like he didn't know that the child he saw was being molested and/or raped by Sandusky is the first known offense of Sandusky, and in my opinion, the only known offense, until someone shows me otherwise.
Not many people, i can't really knew how deep this crap went and how serious of a problem it was until recently when it all came out.
That being said, for this one incident alone, it was a tremendous lack of judgement to not go to the police by everyone involved. I agree with you on that.
As for the Freeh report, i can understand how he came to the conclusion he did about Joe wanting to take another route besides getting police involved, and i think its very reasonable.. however, there isn't evidence to show that that is, in fact, what happened. Its the opinion of Freeh that that's what Joe wanted to do.. so to state it as fact would be incorrect.