Quote:
Originally Posted by ClarkNasty
Just re-quoting - Kim Jones interview is very eye-opening, but reading the actual charges (and description of Sandusky's crimes) is just brutal and terrifying. Considering it seems every single one of his acts was highly opportunistic, that he was impulsive and almost got "caught" many times, and was basically around little boys his entire life... I'd agree with the poster who mentioned Sandusky's victims could number in the 100s. This is seriously so ****ed up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36
as someone who has expressed anti oski sentiments before, i think oski is doing fine work itt. he should probably back off a bit, but he's made several jokes and provided legal clarification.
I like Oski - the only problem I have is that (it seems) he was clarifying the legal POV for Paterno's actions without all the facts. IANAL... but it seems possible Paterno could actually face criminal charges at this point?
Actually would be intereresting to hear an updated POV on this: with what Paterno knew, as a University employee, who are held to much higher standards than your average citizen... with what he knew in 1998 and 2002, especially 2002, could he be legally culpable?