Is ESPN culpable and complicit with child molesting?

[grepal]

I just heard Mark Schwartz of ESPN state on CNN that the reason ESPN sat on the tape of Laurie Fine is that they do not feel it it their job to report crimes like child abuse to the police. While I am very familiar with a reporter's obligation to keep a source anonymous, I am sure this is not a case of keeping a source anonymous. IMO ESPN acted shamefully and cowardly in not reporting on this story in 2003 when they were given the tape. At the very least they should have used their considerable influence to make sure the police were made aware of the content of the tape and they should have dropped the bomb using the tape as corroboration. Maybe they should have run the story as an accusation and alleged behavior, not as a forgone fact, bur they did not follow up on the moral obligation any person or entity has to put an end to the behavior of a rapist, molester, or murderer. Was another person hurt because of ESPN'S silence? I hope not, heck I hope the story is "a bunch of a thousand lies". That is not the point,

The reporter, his editor, the network president, and the head of the parent corporation should resign as should all who took part in an 8 year network coverup. Whether the allegations are true or not is not the issue here, the issue is a corporate culture that publicly states feels it is not their job to bring to light such atrocities when they uncover the information. Guess what, all of us not in law enforcement do not have a job that requires we stop child molesters, that does not mean we sit on information that needs to be used to stop and investigaste such activities. Give me a freaking break, it is the oblgati0n of all of us to stop such activity if we ever see it.

ESPN = Cowards

 

[Toga]

He seriously said that?

 

[rstone7727]

We need a CNN link grepal..

 

[asj410]

Schwarz is just an absolute moron, through and through.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Yeah. If they actually did sit on a piece that could have been used as evidence, that's a serious ethical issue.

 

[Cusefan95]

Yeah. If they actually did sit on a piece that could have been used as evidence, that's a serious ethical issue.

Part of me wonders if they are trying make this as much of a sheet show as possible to distract attention from their ethical lapses here...

 

[grepal]

I saw the interview live on CNN. If I can find a link I'll put it here.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

I just heard Mark Schwartz of ESPN state on CNN that the reason ESPN sat on the tape of Laurie Fine is that they do not feel it it their job to report crimes like child abuse to the police.

Wait a minute...wasn't it the job of individuals at PSU to report molestation to the police? Why the double standard?

This has all the earmarks of "we don't want anyone breaking our story except us, even if it means witholding evidence that probably should go to the police."

As a corollary, if SU had the tape in 2005, why was Bernie allowed to continue running the hoops camp for kids? Guilty or not, why would SU allow itself to be put at that risk?

 

[Cheriehoop]

Wait a minute...wasn't it the job of individuals at PSU to report molestation to the police? Why the double standard?

This has all the earmarks of "we don't want anyone breaking our story except us, even if it means witholding evidence that probably should go to the police."

As a corollary, if SU had the tape in 2005, why was Bernie allowed to continue running the hoops camp for kids? Guilty or not, why would SU allow itself to be put at that risk?

If Davis gave the tape to ESPN and didn't provide it to SU when Davis went there? So perhaps SU didn't know of the existence of the tape? Just gets weirder and weirder.

 

[grepal]

CNN replaying Schwarts interview now. After commercial they will ask legal "expert" whether or not ESPN had a legal responsibilty to tirn the tape over. No matter what the answer is they had a moral responibility to do so.

 

[texascpa]

Ethical, yes, legal, doubtful. Usually only teachers, social workers and other specific government employees have a legal responsibility.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[baggerbob]

If any protesters say anything about SU it needs to be pointed out they need to boycott ESPN for sitting on the tape for 8 years. If they had given the tape to police something might have been done then, so ESPN is to blame for any continued abuse that might have occured. SU needs to be sure they had no knowledge of the tape or Laurie fine's statements to the Post Standard.

 

[GonzoInMD]

So, if ESPN has an audio tape stating that a famous athlete/coach/etc has murdered someone, they don't feel a moral obligation to turn it over to the authorities?

 

[grepal]

Ethical, yes, legal, doubtful. Usually only teachers, social workers and other specific government employees have a legal responsibility.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The legal expert stated that even spousal immunity has an exemption (legally) in cases of child abuse in most states. No idea what the rules are in NY, but does it matter really. Under the same fire ESPN kindles under the PSU heirarchy I believe thir own leadership and staff need to fall on some swords.