I've talked about the Penn State scandal so much I feel like I need to talk about it with the blogosphere as well, even though it's been talked about so much I don't know that I have anything new to add.
But what good is an opinion if I don't share it?
First, if you're feeling up to it, I invite you to watch the video of Bob Costas interviewing Jerry Sandusky. It is sickening.
I've heard a lot of debate about Joe Paterno, Mike McQueary, who should have called the police, who did call police, who knew what, what the police did, and so on and so forth. Let me say that I'm saddened the way Paterno's career ended, and it's unfortunate that McQueary is getting threats and bearing what he feels to be are unfair threats.
However, boys are coming forward saying they were sexually assaulted on Penn State turf by a member of the Penn State coaching staff and nothing was ever done. The bulk of my sympathy lies with them.
Maybe Mike McQueary acted legally, as did Joe Paterno and other people who knew. I've heard rumors of some sort of internal investigation and nothing showed up, so they assumed it was all fine, even though McQueary and a janitor said they witnessed sex acts. Maybe the janitor simply could not report what he'd need.
But I think, if the boys being assaulted were the coach's son, or brother, or nephew, would they have acted differently? If any of them had known the boy in the showers, would there have been more follow up? Would they have demanded answers? Would they have removed Sandusky from the coaching staff? Would they have allowed their sons or brothers or nephews to be alone with him, knowing what they knew?
That, I believe, it as the basis of this what's legal, what's moral and who's taking the fall argument. Every single one of those people who have been implicated in some way regarding the investigation almost certainly would have acted differently had that boy belonged to them. They should have taken the same care for the boys who belonged to other parents, aunts, uncles, sisters and brothers.