Is Penn State a Catholic School?

They can't be a Catholic university since they're a state school. What do you mean that they seem to be playing from the church's playbook? As to not taking someone out on the spot--it's human nature to want to avoid becoming involved in an action that might require that person to go to court. The old "the kid isn't my kid" and "I need to mind my own business or he'll cause trouble for me" come into play.

 

I'm not saying that I disagree with you--but--if we are going to have the separation of church and state then it seems contradictory to say that the only valid consequences for the actions of a church official are those provided by the state. That being said, the Vatican seemed more interested in containing the problem, if possible, than causing the perpetrators to experience any consequences for their crimes. An ideal solution would have been to try the perpetrators in clerical courts, strip those convicted of their status, then laicizing them and throwing them into the laity to be dealt with as "civilians." I believe that John Paul II was unable to do that, at least in part, due to his personal history.

But yes, I agree that anyone who witnessed this crime should go to jail. Unfortunately, the law does not see it that way. No one who witnesses a crime is obligated to report that crime, according to the law. That is why Cardinal Law went to Rome instead of to prison. He did not do the "right thing," but he broke no laws.

 

Look at my post. Where did I suggest that they should have a free pass to commit crimes? I even suggested a way in which it could have been done, ideally. And no, no witness is required to report anything, just as no one is required to stop and provide aid to an injured person at the scene of an accident. If a person is in certain positions of authority (which Law was) and a crime is reported to them, then they are ethically obligated to report it to the police. Clergy and counselors are in a bit of a sticky position, since they are bound by confidentiality--however--the ethics boards of counseling associations are taking reporting laws into account.

 

Problem with accusing people is that there has to be some evidence.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footba...ug=pf-forde_paterno_not_regarded_target110711

 

To convict Paterno? For what?

 

From what I understand, Paterno went to his direct supervisor. I'm not entirely convince that he didn't do his job--but it will just be a matter of time before we know what the DA thinks. I would hope that if he's not charged, then it will be because he really didn't break the law instead of because of his reputation.

 

Unreal... if it was me that caught the guy raping the kid, I'd have had a court date too... for beating the crap out of the guy. I wouldn't even second guess myself in court, with all that entails, since that would also be the last kid he'd ever rape.

 

Not only happening in the US have a read of this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15640173

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...ocId=CNG.d2bfb13e2013e477cebefe8ffd8277d7.761

 

Actually, at the risk of being argumentative, Paterno was no longer a university employee. Therefore, he was not a "mandatory reporter." Only mandatory reporters, such as educators, doctors, psychologists, and similar professional, are required by law to report. Paterno, who went to a university official, was not required to report what he had not seen to any legal authorities. We can argue all day whether he was morally obligated to do so, with most of us agreeing that he was, but Paterno broke no laws. When I made my post, above, I thought he was still an employee of the university and not only visiting to do work for his charity.

Pennsylvania
Failure to Report
Cons. Stat. Ch. 23, § 6319
A mandatory reporter who willfully fails to report as required commits a misdemeanor of the third degree for the first violation and a misdemeanor of the second degree for a second or subsequent violation.

 

The way I read the story, it was the child rapist who was not an employee. Paterno was an employee at the time.

 

It's sad that someone with so many fans could let so many down like this. I have no use for this Sandusky character, feed him to the wolves for all I care. But what about Paterno? If Sandusky raped one more child after Paterno had the chance to hand this over to authorities then he is morally culpable and I think he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, whatever that happens to be. His being fired is the only thing the University could do in this case. The whole house sounds like it needs a pretty good cleaning if you ask me. Didn't this go all the way to the highest levels of the school?