Pensfan
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2009
- Messages
- 7,472
- Reaction score
- 76
We're talking about highly successful people who were intellectual scholars and captains of industry, and they couldn't grasp the concept of this monster being a child rapist due to some lack of a knowledge base on pedophilia? And that's why they didn't do anything to stop him and protect these children?
Wow. I guess someone just needs to go ahead and get that IGNORANT brush out and paint me from head to toe because I'll NEVER be able to wrap my country bumpkin mind around that theory.
I didn't know it required special training to recognize the reprehensible acts of a child rapist.
From your previous quote:
Quote:
“If you think about it from a logical standpoint, how do you have this group of people that are so intertwined with each other, and then have something like this come up, and then they not talk about it?”
http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/12...-business-1-5/
Notice that I said the 1998 incident and not the 2002 rape. I believe the people that knew of the 1998 incident (but not Raykovitz andn probably not the DA) didn't have the knowledge base to add together all of Sandusky's behaviors and realize that he was a pedo. Sandusky had the "savior of children image" which also prevented those who knew from accurately realizing that he was a child predator.
I believe very few were told about the 2002 incident too. None of these men would tell others that they knew of an old man that raped a little boy in the shower and they did nothing which protected the child rapist. None.