HockeyDad Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 The Catholic Church discouraged people from reporting abuse to the police, with the promise to the families that they’d make sure it didn’t happen again. We all know how well that self-policing turned out. You think abuse is happening? Report it to the police as your first action. After that, if you want to push the rope with the corps or DCI, have at it. Of course, we all know how well that has gone. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 54 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: Ok here is the crux of my disagreement: you say DCI had no verifiable credible evidence. Who decides that what they have is credible? I’m reading that “who” as Dan since it was presented to him. Or what am I missing. There needs to be an outside group to oversee checking allegations of a criminal nature. That’s all I’m trying to say. And I won’t say Penn State to keep Jeff happy lol See it no different than going to a company and saying something illegal is going on in the company. And their response is “the company president looked into it and we’re clean”. Give ya a warm and fuzzy feeling yet... The person who receives the information is responsible for making the decision. In this case it was Dan. So, let's look at that. Considering the information he received, should he have (a) immediately called the police; (b) had DCI investigate the matter; or (c) follow protocol set forth to him by the member corps, bylaws, rules, and regulations. He did (c). You have already stated he should not have done (b). So please provide the info which shows he should have done (a); otherwise he was correct with doing (c). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: The Catholic Church discouraged people from reporting abuse to the police, with the promise to the families that they’d make sure it didn’t happen again. We all know how well that self-policing turned out. You think abuse is happening? Report it to the police as your first action. After that, if you want to push the rope with the corps or DCI, have at it. Of course, we all know how well that has gone. Again, please show were Dan knew or was informed rape was occiring. Otherwise this is nowhere at all even in the same universe as that cover-up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Stu said: The person who receives the information is responsible for making the decision. In this case it was Dan. So, let's look at that. Considering the information he received, should he have (a) immediately called the police; (b) had DCI investigate the matter; or (c) follow protocol set forth to him by the member corps, bylaws, rules, and regulations. He did (c). You have already stated he should not have done (b). So please provide the info which shows he should have done (a); otherwise he was correct with doing (c). Do you have a problem understanding my words as per specific incident vs in general. Or are you just trolling for a response? Honestly what information can there be in a general sense (not a specific incident) lmao ps jeff, etc say they think it’s someone other than DA Edited March 12, 2019 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: Do you have a problem understanding my words as per specific incident vs in general. Or are you just trolling for a response? Honestly what information can there be in a general sense (not a specific incident) lmao So by this you must then agree Dan was correct in his decision. He received third party unsubstantiated information, no immediate need to call police, not in a position to investigate, he followed protocol. So again you must then agree he was correct in his decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Just now, Stu said: So by this you must then agree Dan was correct in his decision. He received third party unsubstantiated information, no immediate need to call police, not in a position to investigate, he followed protocol. So again you must then agree he was correct in his decision. wow... ask a general question and Stu comes up with this made up scenario to somehow prove he’s right about something I never even said.. sad really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 12 minutes ago, Stu said: Again, please show were Dan knew or was informed rape was occiring. Otherwise this is nowhere at all even in the same universe as that cover-up. Please tell me how this response has any relationship at all to what I posted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Oh and for the record the last few pages started with Stu saying something about Dan being the one to decide if criminal allegations are credible. I said he should not be the one to do that due to possible conflict of interest. had to remind myself lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 4 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: Please tell me how this response has any relationship at all to what I posted. You brought you brought up the Catholic Church situation in context with DCI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabMaster Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 1 minute ago, JimF-LowBari said: wow... ask a general question and Stu comes up with this made up scenario to somehow prove he’s right about something I never even said.. sad really... It is a tactic he believes in and a way he thinks he cleverly makes his point: Unless you SPECIFICALLY say something, he spins it so it favors his point which I am thinking it is simply to be contrary or argumentative to anything anyone says. And it can flex between a specific statement or a general statement. But that's just my own opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.