Ashton Kutcher

[ciroccoj]

Not a particular fan of his as an actor, never been interested in anything having to do with him and Demi Moore, never watched any of his shows, definitely never followed him on Twitter.

But I can't help wondering about the rage directed at him after he disagreed with Penn State firing Paterno. Instant, virulent, and so concentrated that he apparently signed off from Twitter saying "I'm gonna leave this to the professionals 'cause I'm obviously an idiot who shoots off his mouth without knowing any of the facts."

Rage at an actor who said something off the cuff without knowing the facts behind the story. This was a mistake, people. It's not like he, you know, hurt a child. Or saw anyone hurt a child and didn't stop it or go to the police to report it. Or heard about someone abusing children and didn't do anything about it, for years. Or heard about the people who facilitated said abuse being fired, knowing full well the details of what had happened, and then rioted in protest.

Really? Ashton Kutcher? Really?

Comments

[officerjudy.livejournal.com]

ah, but that's Twitter. the place can be brutal sometimes.

[daf9.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't get it either. Of course I don't get the massive rage directed at Paterno at this point either since there isn't much detail available at this point about what he knew either.

[ciroccoj.livejournal.com]

Well, assuming Paterno was telling the whole truth (and I'm not confident on that), according to his own testimony he received a phone call from a graduate student, who was very upset, and called Tim Curley the next day to tell him the graduate student had "witnessed something of a sexual nature - fondling or doing something of a sexual nature with a very young boy." This was in 2002.

He didn't go to the police. He didn't make sure Tim Curley went to the police. He didn't ask the graduate student exactly what he'd seen. He did nothing to Sandusky except tell him he wasn't going to be the next coach. He didn't resign when all of this came out.

According to his testimony, he should have a lot of rage directed at him, IMHO.

[ciroccoj.livejournal.com]

Huh. I just re-read my reply and it actually sounds a bit snarky :/

Just in case it sounded snarky to you too: I really didn't mean it that way.

[daf9.livejournal.com]

Didn't sound snarky at all. But here's the thing...

According to the grand jury presentment, Paterno didn't just call Curry, he arranged for Curry (and some other administrative dude who oversaw the campus cops) to meet with the grad student. They questioned the guy about what he'd seen. Isn't clear what he told them as he says one thing while they say another. But Paterno wasn't at that meeting so he'd be in no position to know. Sandusky, btw, was at that point no longer an assistant coach; he'd retired or been fired back in 1999. It isn't clear what the grad student told Paterno either. Paterno says he wasn't explicit while the witness says he was. I think either or both of them would have reason to lie. The witness because he might have been feeling a little guilty about seeing a 10 year kid being assaulted and walking away rather than trying to intervene. Especially since he says in his grand jury testimony that both Sandusky and his victim saw him.

I don't think anyone comes out of this looking good but the rage directed at Paterno just seems overblown to me. He's not the one who witnessed the attack; the 28 year old grad student/assistant coach did. If anyone should have intervened or at least called the cops it should have been him. He's the one who saw and presumably might have been able to identify the victim. Instead he called his dad, who didn't call the cops either. He apparently advised his son to tell Paterno who in turn informed his boss who met with the grad student along with the other administrative dude. And that's where it ended. However much the grad student was perturbed by the situation at the time he never contacted the cops, either then or later. Why folks think Paterno in particular should have done something (as opposed to the witness or even his dad) is the part I find a little hard to understand.

[ciroccoj.livejournal.com]

I agree that he's not nearly as culpable here as the grad student & his dad - or Sandusky, of course. But he should have done more. Totally aside from him being in charge of Penn State's football program, as a human being who knew or had reason to suspect that a child had been sexually abused, he should have done more than just pass on the message and arrange a meeting. He should have told the graduate student to contact the police, or done so himself. He knew Sandusky still had access to the campus, and to young boys. Arranging a meeting and then not following up just wasn't good enough.

If someone comes up to me and tells me they've "witnessed something of a sexual nature - fondling or doing something of a sexual nature with a very young boy", I'm sorry, but I'm not going to refer it to my boss, or the boss of the person carrying out the alleged abuse, or the landlord of the building where it happened, or whatever. It's not an internal matter at that point. It's a serious crime that needs to be reported to the people who are supposed to deal with serious crimes.

Now, if I refer it to the police and it goes nowhere, I'm going to assume that the witness said they weren't that sure of what they saw, or that the police investigated and found the witness not credible, or... something. But leaving it with administration? Not good enough, for anybody, IMHO. Never mind the whole "face of football at major university" and "icon of the football world" and "role model to hundreds of young men" etc etc.