"Well, no, it can't be so, because I would have heard of it otherwise... right?"

I can't be the only one who has been startled by something a friend or acquaintance says, and thought that he must be mistaken, he misheard, he mistook Eye of the Tiber or SNL for actual news; yeah, I know I was out of radio contact/insane busy/sick/obsessed with some nonsense for a couple weeks, but that shouldn't matter, I would have heard later, that would have had some traction, people would still be....

The Greater Horn-billed American News Cycle, however, is a skittish beast, and sometimes an item much like one that preceded it and another that succeeded it, both of which were hobby hoses ridden by the media for many days fails, inexplicably, to fascinate the chattering classes.

This is one of those how-did-I-miss-that horrors that I used to think, (and then I used to hope,) someone had fabricated.

There are people I know who have connections to the culpable institution, and to some of the principles, (and no, not the victims,) for whose sakes I would hope it was untrue, but when the bare facts are laid out, there's not much doubt.

But imagine any sort of concern or establishment, one of whose employees or members admitted to abusing 13- or 14-year old prostitutes overseas, another to drugging young victims who were in his care, another pretending to be interested in figurative art to have children disrobe, another who abused children and was merely removed as a dorm supervisor but allowed to continue as a teacher.... it goes on.Then imagine that organization issuing this statement regarding all those crimes and all those sins when they are forced to release files:

The files provided include those of [men] currently living [right here where many of their crimes took place] under safety plans. Their actions are limited and they are closely supervised. Files also include nine [men] who are deceased and two men who have left.... The allegations against these men involve incidents that occurred more than two decades ago; some of the incidents are 30 or 40 years old. 
There are documents in each file which may be quoted and framed in a lurid context. [YA THINK?!???] But the huge majority of the documents in each of these files acknowledges the very real failures of some [men] while showing each of the accused [men] as a fallible, relatable person. [which are, what? NOT so "lurid"?]
The files also show that [we] did not try to cover up allegations and did a reasonable job of managing the [man] and the problem.

That would do it for me, I guess. Everything's on the up-and-up, credibility restored, huh?