Goodbye, Joe

Sadly WTF "innocent until proven guilty" only applies to a court of law, but "innocent until proven guilty" is a whole other issue in the eyes of the public. Originally Posted by Guilty Pleasures

People can choose to cement their views before all the facts come out...that is their choice. I chose to wait. Where I get a bit pissy is when some say I am protecting child rapist for doing so. That is the mindset of a simpleton...or a cunning bitch. Either way, I will have none of it..

Olivia is just like George W Bush in her stance...either you are 100% for their position or a protector of child rapist and terrorist. How stupid is that? That is the mindset I have had a problem with. Do not expect me to be kind if you cxall me a protector of rapists!

Ok, you wanna argue that we really don't know how we would have reacted under similar circumstances? Fair enough, and to a certain extent you may have a point. But, and this is a big but, we know how we should have reacted, do we not? Is there any debate on that? And we know that the people involved did not do what they should have done. And sorry, WTF, that is all out in the open....we don't need to wait for a jury to have the final say on that one. Originally Posted by Doove

If we all agree (in hindsight) that is should have been reported , should we not then take a look at the context of the why it was not reported?

What I was arguing is the context of the inaction.

Much like you do when there is a dead person. You have different degree's in just how that person came to pass.

Was it an:
Accident?
Self defense?
Crime of passion?
Intentional?
Cover-up?


My point is some of you do not want to put any context to this. It is black and white, cut and dried. That is not how life works for some of us, for us we see the world in shades of gray.

Have any of you taken the time to think just how bad the flip side to this is. What if an innocent person is even accused of this? Do you think maybe that is why it is handled with care. Not because they (Penn St) wanted to be part of some huge cover-up conspiracy to defend child molestors.

If you want to fry a person accused of harming a child, then you need to turn around and fry anyone that falsely accuses one of harming a child. Do you understand just what a monkey fuc this whole type of situtation is? It is not so cut and dried as some of you make it. Look at the false scare of child molesters back in the eighties and nineties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-car...abuse_hysteria

Day-care sex-abuse hysteria was a panic that occurred primarily in the 1980s and early 1990s featuring claims against daycare providers of satanic ritual abuse and several forms of child abuse.[1][2] A prominent case in Kern County, California, first brought the issue of day care sexual abuse to the forefront of the public awareness, and the issue figured prominently in news coverage for almost a decade. The Kern County case was followed by cases elsewhere in the United States as well as Canada, New Zealand, Brazil, and various European countries.


This is why IMHO the process needs to hear all sides.

bob costa interviews Sandusky.

http://audio.weei.com/a/48664497/bob...young-boys.htm

IMO the process will hear all sides, but in the courtroom of public opinion he should fry.

but I am glad WTF agrees that Casey Anthony was innocent, and OJ too. after all the process heard all sides and a jury decided. end of story.

bob costa interviews Sandusky.

http://audio.weei.com/a/48664497/bob...young-boys.htm

IMO the process will hear all sides, but in the courtroom of public opinion he should fry.

but I am glad WTF agrees that Casey Anthony was innocent, and OJ too. after all the process heard all sides and a jury decided. end of story. Originally Posted by budman33

I did not agree that both OJ and CA were innocent.

See how lies get started , you liar.

I, in fact think after their trial that they were guilty.

Silly me, I like waiting on those pesky trials before making up my mind.

Context budman , context. You seem to be having trouble with my context.

ok context. Under what context is it ever ok to shower naked with a 10 year old?

I was in athletics all through school. Not once did my coaches ever jump in the shower with us. one on one, in a shower... how much exercising does a coach actually do? Gimme a fucking break.

soaping therm up, bear hugs, these are things he has already admitted. wtf WTF

ok context. Under what context is it ever ok to shower naked with a 10 year old?

I was in athletics all through school. Not once did my coaches ever jump in the shower with us. one on one, in a shower... how much exercising does a coach actually do? Gimme a fucking break.

soaping therm up, bear hugs, these are things he has already admitted. wtf WTF Originally Posted by budman33

I remember my 5 year old son and daughter both wanted their privacy while bathing, and made it clear to me and my husband they could do it themselves. In fact both kids were very self conscious about being seen naked by me or the hubby. We gave them their privacy. I cannot imagine a 10 year old boy feeling comfortable with an adult male (let alone not related to them) showering next to them naked. So this admittance by the coach is in fact telling to me also.

I did not agree that both OJ and CA were innocent.

See how lies get started , you liar.

I, in fact think after their trial that they were guilty.

Silly me, I like waiting on those pesky trials before making up my mind.

Context budman , context. You seem to be having trouble with my context. Originally Posted by WTF

My point was that if the accuser is just as culpable as the accused, then it could also be argued that after someone is found not guilty of a crime it is just a culpable to declare that they were guilty.

If you want to be SANCTIMONIOUS before a judgement is rendered then you should be just as sancitmonious afterwards or excuse yourself from teh discussion.

I still dont quite understand this defense of yours.

ps. 10 more potential victims just stepped forward.

We are talking about two different parties. I have been talking about joepa. Not sanduski. No way no how should an adult in their right mind be showering with a kid.

I think budman33 was responding to your "context" post. Not the OP's original post.

My point was that if the accuser is just as culpable as the accused, then it could also be argued that after someone is found not guilty of a crime it is just a culpable to declare that they were guilty.

If you want to be SANCTIMONIOUS before a judgement is rendered then you should be just as sancitmonious afterwards or excuse yourself from teh discussion.

I still dont quite understand this defense of yours.

. Originally Posted by budman33

If the accuser is found to have lied , then yes they should be held accountable. If the DA lies to get a grand jury indictment, they should be charged.

That is a far cry from a not guilty verdict.

Are you starting to see why these cases or so hard? Can you see just wtf is meant by context?

Who has the power? Do we give it to children and believe everything they say...children that are already prone to trouble? There is no easy fix or we would not be having this conversation. That is why I have said there are shades of gray and to just wait for all the evidence to come out. Each case is different and needs to be heard in it's entirety. That is not making excuses for the guilty, that is to insure that innoccent folks are not wrongly convicted. Is it a perfect system? No but do you have a better one?


Just take Olivia example...I would not have fired her boss. Was what he did smart? No but without further facts , that seemed rather flimsy thing to take your boss to the HR person over.

I know exactly what I would do. I almost got fired from a very large oil field services company for reporting that the production manager was simulating having sex over the loud speaker one Saturday when two of my subordinates were working. They came to me Monday and told me the story. I immediately went to my boss who happened to be the president of the division. My boss said he his hands were tied. He couldn't do anything about it because the production manager was too valuable to loose. My subordinates and myself would just have to understand that. It was for the good of the entire company bla, bla, bla.

I took it to the holding company's HR the next morning. Apparently the mother ship didn't feel that sexual harassment of this nature was acceptable. The production manager was terminated and he lost his visa to stay in the States. I ended up getting a six figure separation check from said company less than two mouths later. So I guess I kind of did get fired for it. But I did the right thing, and I got a big fat check to boot.

. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Am I in the minority here also? Simulating sex over the loudspeaker? Reminds me of Porky's! That seems rather extreme to want someone fired over that and it sounds like the company thought so too.

Triva...who was the female gym teacher in Porky's?

I think budman33 was responding to your "context" post. Not the OP's original post. Originally Posted by Guilty Pleasures

Yes but he was confused in the context that I was using it. In no way is it proper to shower with kids. This ain't Europe!


I never put myself in harms way with kids...I quit volunteering at the local YMCA years ago because of the mere fact that a uncomfortable situtation can arise when you are even left alone with a kid. Just think how hard it is to get folks to help with at risk youth.

Yes but he was confused in the context that I was using it. In no way is it proper to shower with kids. This ain't Europe!


I never put myself in harms way with kids...I quit volunteering at the local YMCA years ago because of the mere fact that a uncomfortable situtation can arise when you are even left alone with a kid. Just think how hard it is to get folks to help with at risk youth. Originally Posted by WTF

Well you do have a point, I knew teachers who were in my kids classes who were instructed by the school to not give children hugs or such as to not create a climate conducive to accusations by parents or kids. To me this is sad that we are in a situation where so many predators exist and this leads to everyone being afraid to work with children (except the predators).

Originally Posted by Marshall

I forgot about that felony of jap slapping retarded internet posters. I though I had already apologized to you.

I forgot what a badass you are Marshall. Chuck Norris is no longer the man. Marshall is the new sheriff in town!

Damn Marshall; you turned WTF into your bitch !