Replies

So someone who SEES a rape,

is a witness and is obliged to report and testify about it.

and someone who KNOWS someone raped

and has nothing about which to testify doesn't "know" someone was raped. And remember, hearsay is generally not admissible in court.

AND PROTECTS THEM FOR YEARS

Is a pretty rotten person but how, specifically, did Paterno protect Sandusky? He pushed Sandusky out after the '98 investigation ended with no charges being filed, and he passed on the information regarding the 2002 case to people who should be presumed to be have been better able to investigate it than an 80-year-old football coach. And while they didn't take him out to the woods and shoot him like they should have, or call police like the should have, they did put new restrictions on his behavior to the point which appears to at least have been somewhat effective as there were no further reports of locker room abuse as per the Grand Jury report.

The act that brought Sandusky down occurred off campus.

And remember, hearsay is generally not admissible in court.

First, calling the police has nothing to do with hearsay. Hearsay is a rule of evidence.

Second, unless something said out of court is offered to prove the truth of the utterance, it's not hearsay. I can testify that I heard Bob tell me he saw John rape Mary. If that testimony is offered as evidence that I heard John say that, then it's not hearsay. If that testimony is offered as evidence that John raped Mary, then it's hearsay.

For Paterno to report that somebody told him that Sandusky abused somebody isn't hearsay if it's offered to prove that somebody told Joe about Sandusky. It's only hearsay if it's offered as proof of the rape.

Third, you would be surprised. There are so many exceptions to the hearsay rule that in Evidence class your professor will joke that the rule is actually an exception to the exceptions to the rule.

Fourth, most state's child abuse laws mandate reporting in school and similar situations by people in authority who hear a creditable claim of abuse. Yeah. So does Pennsylvania. The only question is who has the obligation to report that abuse that he or she didn't see.

I've actually posted the link to Pennsylvania's reporting statute on a couple of your posts about hearsay. Have you missed it?

Finally, Curley reporting it, under your analysis, would be double hearsay. So . . . wow, we have a bigger problem.

You keep bringing up hearsay.

What am I missing?

Ok- I finally understand now. The real victims here are the officials of the university, Paterno, Sandusky,whatever audience the rape had etc, etc.
Nothing to do with boys being sodomized.
Nothing to do with a foundation to HELP disadvantaged kids being used to molest them instead.
The tragedy is what bad press the university is getting. The shame is firing a poor, old man who never did nothin’ but make everyone happy.
The people rioting in the streets aren’t horrified by the sexual molestation of children( after all, maybe they consented and sex is natural and its nobody’s business, and, and...) those kids probably enticed the venerable, respected Sandusky. Dirty little punks to hurt the U. of Pennsylvania and ruin everyones enjoyment of football!
I get it- I’m done.
Paterno is a victim, Sandusky is a victim, everyone who knew is a victim and we’re picking on them!
Forget the anally ruptured children.They shoulda had witnesses. All hail the god Football.
May God help this country.

and has nothing about which to testify doesn't "know" someone was raped. And remember, hearsay is generally not admissible in court.

I know you're not an attorney, but do you realize that under this hearsay piffle you've been posting on every thread, if somebody at worked yelled to me from the breakroom "quick, call the cops - Susie's boyfriend just came in and stabbed her!", I'd have to say:

"Sorry, I didn't see it, so it would be hearsay. Quit putting pressure on that artery and call them yourself. I'm going to report it to my supervisor."