Understandable questions, reasonable answers, sensible denial

Edited, 12/1:

A couple questions that arose from a resident of Syracuse regarding her skepticism over the Fine allegations:

"Why give (the tape) to ESPN and not the police?"
The police made clear to Davis that they wouldn't be able to charge Fine even if they had undeniable proof of his alleged abuse of Davis and his stepbrother, due to the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse in the state of New York.

"Why use that tape now and not initially?"
The tape was provided to ESPN years ago, who through long-established standards of journalistic integrity would not run this story without at least one corroborating witness or accuser.  When Davis' stepbrother came forward in the wake of the accusations against Jerry Sandusky at Penn State, they had their corroboration and ran the story.
 
The media have great power, and I don't think any of us want the standards of journalistic integrity tossed aside so that anyone can be publicly accused of such damnable acts without appropriate evidence of their veracity.
 
Why did this woman - indeed, why do we in general - need to ask such questions? Because we don't want to believe such accusations. Because the good part of our nature wants to believe the best of people, and we'd far rather think an accuser lying than that he or she might be telling the truth about the abuser.  Because the heinousness of sexual abuse offends our sensibility, and we misunderstand the nature of abuse and abusers. Because the abuse is evil, and we insist on believing that evil is only perpetrated by evil people. Certainly no one we know well and love could ever do such a thing! But the truth is as Solzhenitsyn observed: the line between good and evil passes right through every human heart.
 
This is the part most of us miss about the mission of Christ, who came not for the righteous (of whom there are none), but sinners.  There are no righteous because each of us has evil within us.  Although we may usually choose righteousness, we often choose some degree of sinfulness in its place, perhaps dismissing it as merely playful "naughtiness."  Although we may not choose such a great evil as to molest a child, we also rarely understand the brokenness that drives such sin.  I do not excuse it, based on that brokenness.  Yet I desire healing for abusers as well as the abused, while still expecting them to face the consequences of their actions and to take every step necessary to prevent ever again repeating them.
 
When we strike a balance between the antipodes of blind denial and retribution, we find healing that astounds.