So if Penn State fired the University President, and head football coach, why didn't they fire....

[Scuba]

... Mike McQueary, the graduate assistant who witnessed the showering incident in the first place. He's still serving as wide receivers coach for the team.

[Mudoria]

1. He may have been

[LAGC]

2. No shit.

If he really witnessed a sexual attack, he should have gone straight to the police. THAT NIGHT.

He's just as bad as the coach for doing nothing but passing on the "tip" to his superiors the NEXT DAY.

[seabeyond]

3. one has power and authority. one does not. and i agree he should have gone to cops

regardless and been willing to lose his job. i dont care if he is fired, too.

[TheWraith]

22. Yes, he should have gone to the police. However, there are mitigating circumstances.

At the time, he was nobody other than a graduate student. The man he'd be accusing was a legend at Penn State second only to Paterno. It would be solely the student's word against Sandusky's, which is an obvious reason for him to want to enlist the help and support of someone more powerful than him.

Moreover, Paterno's behavior, and that of the other high ranking officials, was worse because they were aware that Sandusky had had accusations made against him before. Even if they hadn't believed the previous ones, this should have been a bright red flag.

[creeksneakers2]

32. Joe wasn't aware of any other accusations

And was only given vague information by the graduate student.

[TheWraith]

34. Yeah, right. I don't believe that for one split second. Either part of it.

His lack of reaction doesn't exactly speak to a man who's shocked and disturbed by something. If I heard that my former right hand man was in my gym shower molesting a 10 year old boy, you can bet I would be curious enough about that to follow up on it.

[joeybee12]

43. Agreed...the charges are so horrific that even if you don't believe them...

you would do everything to make sure you were right in your belief. JoePa did nothing other than report it.

[TheWraith]

48. Precisely. Whether you thought it was true, not true, or were unsure, you take some action.

Paterno took none other than to inform the ass-covering squad, which is the behavior of a man who knows and wants to turn a blind eye.

[yellowcanine]

67. I flat out do not believe that. I believe he may have been in denial but that is not the same thing

as not being aware.

[yellowcanine]

66. I get that. But what about calling 911? The cops come and it is no longer just his word

against the legendary coach. Ok he panicked - I get that also. But it seems to me at some point once he is out of the building he calls 911 if he has any thought for the victim at all and not just his own career.

[OneGrassRoot]

4. What do we know definitively about his role?

I ask because I'm being called on the carpet for not letting "due process" take its course, specifically as it concerns him.

It was my impression that it is a matter of record that he witnessed this criminal act (seems I read a legal document that was released in which this is revealed in graphic detail???).

I also can't fathom how he could have walked away from that, let alone not call the police. I guess he and his dad went to see Paterno the next day to report it at the time?

Does anyone know the timeline of that particular event and McQueary's involvement?

Doing the "proper protocol" thing is often very different from doing the RIGHT thing.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. The guy claims to be just a witness but his actions are those of

a person with deeper involvement. Why did he not intervene? Nor call the cops? Is he just a cowardly shit raised by monsters to be a monster, or was he covering his own actions?

[OneGrassRoot]

11. I know, I agree. I was just hoping for help...

from those who have been following the official news releases and reports closely to share the specifics they know.

I could have sworn I read something official (maybe the grand jury report?) that gave details of what McQueary said he witnessed.

[fishwax]

15. your timeline is correct

I can't comprehend how he stayed on the staff.

He hasn't been seen or heard from since the story broke.

[spooky3]

16. Oh, I understand completely why they kept this "loyal employee" on staff but what I don't get is

how what is likely to be a big, strapping guy who we know is much younger than Sandusky couldn't have pulled him off the child immediately.

[fishwax]

17. I understand why they kept him too. I just don't understand how he could stay.

[OneGrassRoot]

18. Exactly. I can't envision a story that justifies how he and Paterno....

both handled this (or didn't handle it, to be more precise).

I'll wait and see; I just saw a report that McQueary's dad said McQueary is anxious to tell his side of the story but can't right now, legally.

Forget what went through his head when he left that locker room as far as being intimidated, fearing for his future, blah, blah.

I hope he does a HUGE mea culpa for not intervening directly and getting that child out of there, away from Sandusky.

Many of us can't fathom how anyone can witness a crime -- especially one against one so vulnerable! -- and not do something right then and there, with no regard to how it may affect you later.

Whew.....there is a lot of pus to come out of this boil still.

[SidDithers]

38. NBC Sports editorial about McQueary here:

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/10/mcquearys-dad-its-eating-him-up-not-being-able-to-tell-his-side/

Edit: The comments are pretty uniformly critical of McQueary.

Sid

[fishwax]

45. hmm -- that says McQueary is under investigation by the grand jury

“It’s not that he’s not willing,” John McQueary, his father, told the New York Times. “I think it’s eating him up not to be able to tell his side, but he’s under investigation by the grand jury. He’ll make it. He’s a tough kid.”

I haven't seen that elsewhere.

[SidDithers]

56. Good catch...

I read it but that part didn't sink in. I just assumed they were talking about the Sandusky grand jury.

Sid

[OneGrassRoot]

69. I've developed a theory about McQueary...

Just a theory, mind you.

But the thing is, no one can imagine why he walked away that night.

An adult...a male fully capable of physically interceding. At the very least he could have gone to get help.

Most of us would have had a thought process. We would have acted to stop it RIGHT THEN.

I've been trying to understand what could have possibly caused McQueary to react the way he did and walk away and tell his dad, rather than act.

The only thing that may explain it, to me, is that he may be another victim of Sandusky.

It wouldn't excuse him not acting in that moment, but -- to me -- it could explain it. It could have been traumatized.

[fishwax]

72. I dunno -- he doesn't fit Sandusky's profile

All of Sandusky's victims (that we know of) were from his organization for troubled kids. They came from low socioeconomic backgrounds and likely from single-parent homes. McQueary's background doesn't reflect that--his father was apparently Chief Operating Officer of a medical and surgical group in the area. I read somewhere that the McQuearys and the Sanduskys lived in the same neighborhood or development.

That's not to say, of course, that such kids never are victims of such abuse, but it doesn't seem to fit Sandusky's profile. Like many abusers, he apparently targeted kids from bad backgrounds who would be more susceptible to his control and abuse.

[OneGrassRoot]

73. True. It also doesn't explain the janitor not interceding.

I just read about a janitor witnessing a similar criminal act and not doing anything to stop it.

I give up. I can't grasp why these men wouldn't step in and stop those horrible acts.

I know people are saying it's because they were afraid -- and that I can understand -- but the thing is, most people wouldn't have time to think about the consequences. Most people (I hope) would step in and stop it.

I've never witnessed the abuse of a child or an adult, but when I've encountered animal abuse, I had no thought process other than to stop it right then and there, and acted on it.

:(

[kath]

77. "tough kid" ?!?! Jeebus - he was 28 when he witnessed the anal rape back in March 2002, so that

makes him 35 or 36 now. Not a kid, not a leader. A coward.

[pampango]

5. Glad they started at the top (not the bottom), but he should go too. n/t

[exboyfil]

7. I think he may be untouchable for a time

Because if he is fired, he may claim that he was fired for telling the truth. Of course everyone knows his name and what a baby he is (going to your dad??? when seeing a boy sexually molested when you are 26).

Explain that to your wide receivers. I got to think he is a joke now.

[Safetykitten]

8. His time there as an employee is short. He has alot to explain.

[MadBadger]

9. I dont think his name was ever in the Grand Jury Report

Though later identified by the media. Could it be a legal issue?

[Ganja Ninja]

10. I'm sure it's coming sooner or later.

If they keep him it's probably because they need him to finish the season. I'm not sure how much blame he deserves. He should have called the police but it's not every day you run across a grown man buggering a 10 year old boy in a shower. Especially one that you looked up to and admired, a former coach. That must have been unbelievably shocking. He went to JoePa after catching Sandusky in the act and told him exactly what was going on. After that JoePa started watering down the allegations when he went up the chain of command. Because of that I put more of the blame on JoePa.

They are probably going to clean house completely by the end of the season. I can't imagine anybody in that football program surviving this. The school can't afford to take the chance that anymore revelations may come out.

[coalition_unwilling]

26. "They need him to finish the season" - As if any further proof

that America is totally 100% FUBAR.

Not snarking at you but rather at the absurdity that is American higher education and Division 1 NCAA sports.

[Ganja Ninja]

49. I tend to give McQueary the benefit of the doubt.

What he saw must have freaked him out. It's easy to say what you would have done when you aren't the one going through it all. It must have all seemed so surreal.

He went to his dad right away because he was someone he trusted. They went to JoePa (at the time a man in his late 70's) and told him the next morning.

People say he he should have intervened to stop the rape but I'm willing to bet that once Sandusky saw he had been discovered he stopped, dressed and got out of that building as fast as humanly possible. Once he's left the building it's really a matter for police detectives and if you have ever dealt with them you know how slow and unhurried they can move. McQueary wasn't even interviewed for something like a week and a half after he reported it. I put the blame there on the police.

I put the blame first on the rapist. After that JoePa & university officials should have done a lot more a lot faster. And finally on law enforcement for not moving faster.

But worst of all is the fact that Sandusky is caught in 2002 and still had an office and keys to the building on campus right up until a few days ago when the whole story broke. Nine years went by and the university did nothing.

McQueary is probably the least culpable in all of this.

[coalition_unwilling]

51. Plus, when you're are accusing a sacred cow (like Sakndusky) and you're

a lowly GA, as McQuary (McQueary?) was, you have to worry that the establishment will back the sacred cow and toss you tot he wolves. I know, I've been in s similar situation in academia and had it happen to me.

[creeksneakers2]

33. Joe didn't water anything down

And he wasn't told exactly what happened.

[SidDithers]

39. Were you in the room?...

That's not what the Grand Jury was believes.

Sid

[TBF]

12. My guess is his time is short too -

if he only went to his supervisor and not the police ... guessing they will also fire him. They're going to want to put this incident totally behind them and go on as an institution as best as they can.

The trustees have a fiduciary duty. Imagine that your high school son/daughter just got accepted into Penn State for next fall. Do you send them? That is what the trustees are thinking about. They are a top notch school & those top students (and especially their parents) are going to say "you also got into Dartmouth - I think that's a better choice right now". If they cover up this, what else are they willing to covering up? I wouldn't be sending my kids there.

[Marrah_G]

13. He should also be let go

Yes- he was a student and he informed the head coach, but he also did nothing after seeing nothing was done and the man was still out there able to rape more children. Furthermore, he did nothing to stop the rape. A grad student is not a child. he was a man who witnessed another man raping a child and did not step in and stop the actions.

[SidDithers]

40. He wasn't just a student. He was a 28 year-old former Penn State quarterback...

at the time of the 2002 incident that he witnessed.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

14. I dont think he will be there long with this hanging over his head. nm

[TorchTheWitch]

19. fire him for what?

He was a student at the time, DID report it to Paterno who likely told him he would take care of it (ie: contact police as well) with allegations he had no way to prove about a VERY powerful person at the university. By the time he noticed nothing was coming of it he would have known more than anyone else that there was likely a cover-up going on and had no idea just how high that cover-up went.

[Scuba]

20. For not reporting the crime to the police. Remember, he was 26 years old.

[WinkyDink]

24. 28, and 6'4".

[Johonny]

28. Here the part of the story I don't understand

if it wasn't eventually reported to the police, then how did the campus police become involved and how did that one missing DA refuse to prosecute the whole matter. I'm sort of confused by the whole time line and which case is what. I frankly think there is corruption far beyond the University grounds and into the surrounding close nit community. How corrupt were the local police and DA at the time, it's hard to know.

This person may be a horrible person or may be a person caught in a bad situation where the right thing was impossible to do because the mechanism for doing the "right" thing was not working. When/if the criminal trials occur we will probably get a more clear time line of who did what when and why they acted the way they did.

[alcibiades_mystery]

29. There are two separate incidents

The 1998 incident is the one that was investigated, and the one for which the DA declined to charge. It was reported by the victim's mother.

The 2002 incident is the one for which everybody's been fired. It was never reported to the police, unless you count Paterno's meeting with Schultz (the head of the University police) as a report to the police.

[Aerows]

36. The 1998 one was very fishy

The police even listened in on the call and Sandusky admitted he acted inappropriately with the boy. If his own admission isn't enough, what is? He wouldn't even promise the mother to never shower with another boy again.

There was another one in 2000 where a janitor caught Sandusky orally assaulting a boy in the shower, right in the act. That one ended up going nowhere, too.

[shanti]

71. sandusky

really thought he was untouchable, didn't he?

[LibertyLover]

57. From what I remember from visiting a friend going to PSU in

the 1980s, the campus police and the town police are virtually interchangeable, including being fungible in terms of enforcement of laws (i.e you can get a legal speeding ticket from a State College policeman while on campus or a PSU campus policeman while in town). Because of that Paterno may have thought that a meeting with Schultz was as good as or the same as meeting with State College police.

[TorchTheWitch]

78. what difference did it make how old he was at the time?

None. And he was a powerless grad student at the time not a staff member in a leadership position with enough clout to have their word carry weight concerning extremely serious allegations toward a powerful and also hero worshiped retired coach. McQueary was less obligated to report to the police than Paterno was, and Paterno wasn't fired for not calling police - he was fired for doing nothing more than the law required when he was in a leadership position with the far larger obligation to ensure the allegations were reported to authorities and whatever else in his power as head coach to keep Sandusky off campus and protect those people on campus from an alleged sexual predator. Paterno also likely told him that he would do the necessary reporting (including calling police and child services). McQueary is the only one of the bunch who did the most ethical thing. He trusted Paterno - his superior and the one person he was confident would take his allegations seriously - to do the right thing. But it was Paterno and the two administrators above Paterno that dropped the ball. Had it not been for Paterno, Curley and Shultz dropping the ball and even engaged in a purposeful cover-up McQueary not calling the police himself wouldn't be on anyone's radar screen.

Frankly, if McQuery had called police himself without first reporting to the higher ups so they could have a pow-wow on how to handle the situation (assuming it would have been done ethically) the school would have pissed a ring around itself and kicked him out on his ass. School officials REALLY hate it when they aren't given and opportunity to be fully informed before shit hits fan so they can prepare how to deal with the situation specifically concerning the media and donor dollars.

[Blue_Tires]

21. well the current coaching staff will ALL be gone after three more games anyway

as the university makes it's pitch for Urban Meyer or someone similar...

[WinkyDink]

23. Do you really think he'll be on the sidelines Saturday? P.S. He's the State's star witness.

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. He would be torn apart by the fans

There's no way that Mike McQueary is anywhere near that stadium on Saturday.

[renate]

25. he had a split-second decision to make. yes, he chose poorly

But he was probably 100% aware that if he stepped in and stopped the rape, his career would be completely over--the rest of his life changed forever. And that nothing would happen to Sandusky, because Sandusky was powerful and an ally of the almighty Joe Paterno, and McQueary was an inconvenient witness whom nobody would miss.

This happens to graduate students in academia, too. If they have proof that their well-established, well-connected, well-known advisers are falsifying data--which to a scientist is a huge moral issue as well--they are rolling the dice with the futures they have worked so hard for, because there are no guarantees that the adviser will be punished; if the university needs the professor's reputation badly enough, it's the grad students' own names that will be dragged through the mud and their own futures at other labs that are threatened. (In fact, the professors' other grad students would suffer, too, if their boss's reputation is destroyed. So the confluence of morality with the power of higher-ups to make the whistle-blower and even bystanders suffer makes for another complicated moral dilemma.)

Mike McQueary made the wrong decision because there was an attack in progress and he could have stopped it; however, I don't know that I can wholly blame him for realizing that it would have been the end of his career without actually solving anything. If that's what he was thinking, he turned out to be right, since nobody did anything with the information he reported. It probably took a lot of bravery for him to do even that.

[coalition_unwilling]

27. I wish you would make these observations an OP - really captures

one of the moral predicaments that teaching assistants and graduate assistants are placed in, whether to take actions that will 100% ruin their careers but carry a very low probability of actually rectifying anything at all among the sacred cows of academia.

[KatyMan]

47. So it's better for a 10 year old to be raped

than one's career possibly being tarnished?
If I'm walking past an alley and see someone getting raped, but decide not to get inovlved because I might have to miss work in order to testify, is that ok?

[coalition_unwilling]

53. You're creating a strawman, probably not intentionally. What I and

the person Renate I was responding to were saying is that, McQueary had to calculate that making the accusation carried a 100% probability of destroying his career and a 1% likelihood of actually stopping anything at all.

Unless you've been in academia and watched the old boys' club circle the wagons to protect one of its own, this may seem like specious logic to you, I admit. But it's really pernicious the way the bureaucracy acts to protect the interests of the bureaucracy and not necessarily to protect the innocent.

[KatyMan]

60. I see your point in the second paragraph

But regardless of that, if you see something as monstrous as the rape of a 10 year old boy by a 50 year old man, you stop it, period. If you don't you're nearly as big a monster as the rapist (not you of course, the general "you")

[coalition_unwilling]

61. I am the type who will throw away my career for the quixotic

gesture. Done it more than once and may do it again.

But I'm reluctant to paint myself as heroic, because I'm usually a chicken-shit who remains silent. So I honestly don't know how I would react, faced with the same set of circumstances and assuming I actually wanted a career in coaching. For me, it's always been that, when push comes to shove, I don't give enough of a shit about what I'm doing to stand in the way of my speaking my mind. But if I actually gave a shit about what I was doing . . .

Definitely some moral ambiguities here, is all I'm saying.

[KatyMan]

74. I'm like you

not as assertive as I should be, etc. Just today I was in line behind a guy that had 20 items in a 10 item checkout. In my mind I asked him "Can you not read or can you not count?", but in reality I just stood there with my one item and waited my turn, and to be honest felt like a jackass for not at least saying something to the guy. I felt like he beat me, I lost.

But the point that I was trying to make (with an unintentional strawman :)) was this: if you see a person doing serious physical, mental and emotional damage to a 10 year old boy and you stop to think about your career and the good ol boy network and walk away from the scene, you're a monster.

ETA: Again I meant "you" in the general "you" sense, like the royal we! ;)

[coalition_unwilling]

75. In the grand jury report, McCreary testified that both Sandusky and

the 10-year-old boy being anally raped saw McCreary watching them. Like something surreal almost, frozen in time. Apparently no one said anything, not McCreary, not Sandusky and not the 10-year-old. McCreary leaves and goes to his office where he calls his father! Father advises McCreary to leave building and return to family home. McCreary does so.

I will be writing more about this later today and tomorrow. I feel a monster (npi) essay brewing, so I'll pm you when I publish it. Preview: did we really think we could torture Iraqis and others, only have a few lower-level grunts punished but the command structure survive largely intact WHILE MANY LOOKED ON IN SILENCE and not have that same phenomenon happen domestically? I know, I know, first reports of PSU abuse happened in 1998, so chronologically I'm off a bit, but seriously this is bringing the war home in a major way. Come to think of it, Rodney King was brutalized by Los Angeles Police Department officers in 1991 WHILE MANY LAPD officers who knew better stood around doing nothing!

[KatyMan]

76. That's a very interesting point

And I look forward to reading your essays, sounds like good stuff.

[alcibiades_mystery]

31. He wasn't some ordinary greaduate student

He was the former fucking starting quarterback.

Gimme a break.

[Aerows]

37. I'm not sure that would have made a bit of difference

Since he wasn't playing football anymore.

[alcibiades_mystery]

55. Oh, it makes a little bit of difference

The kinds of issues you're discussing are certainly relevant when discussing ordinary graduate students.

In 2002, the ordinary graduate student at Penn State 1) was not the former starting quarterback, 2) was not from State College originally, 3) did not grow up on the same block as Jerry Sandusky, 4) never spoke to Joe Paterno in his or her life, and wouldn't even know how to go about doing so.

How do I know this? Because in 2002 I was myself a 28 year old graduate assistant. At Penn State.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

42. I understand what you are saying but I find it hard to believe that...

..... the whole lid wouldn't have blown off if he stopped the attack, threw a towel around the kid and dialed 911.

The cops would have interviewed the victim and coach would be behind bars that night.

[Aerows]

35. Well, the janitor that caught him with a little boy

in the shower a few years later in the act of orally assaulting him - this was a different incident - reported it, too. All the people involved in that report were afraid of getting fired. The janitor was so upset they were afraid he was going to have a heart attack.

This clearly wasn't a good place to work if you were low on the totem pole.

[Ganja Ninja]

52. Exactly.

The university was covering for him. You can't have repeated incidents be reported and never any action taken unless the people running the show are afraid and covering up. Someone on our local sports talk radio suggested that Sandusky might have had some dirt on Penn State's recruiting practices and that's why they didn't act.

[lumberjack_jeff]

63. I think the rape the janitor witnessed was first. "Fall of 2000" n/t

[NoGOPZone]

41. Certainly should be fired

Paterno and the administration deserve what has happened to them, but McQueary, as a witness, was the one law enforcement would most want to interview.

[rdking647]

44. anyone that knew

about the incident should be fired..everyone...
its inexcusable

[NashVegas]

46. I See His As a Much Grayer Area

As already stated, McQuery witnessed an act by the person with the second-to-most power to completely fuck up his career. As a former QB, the odds are he'd already seen plenty of that would shock most of us.

He reported what he saw to Sandusky and I've seen reports that he had some 5 meetings with higher-ups. I'm sure he was offered a very nice deal to keep his mouth shut, and it's also VERY possible it was intimated (it would never have been said outright) that he'd never be able to find a job in the business if he went to the police.

That said, he still doesn't exactly look like a prince, here.

I have so much more scorn for Paterno. Paterno had real power, he'd already had a winning career, probably had plenty of cash to see him through old age, and he chose not to exercise it against Sandusky, and walk the fuck away from the school if they didn't back him up.

If McQuery does indeed show up on the sidelines this Saturday, that takes some cohones and I'll have some respect.

[thelordofhell]

50. Give Penn State credit

They've fired more people in the last month than the Catholic Church has in the last 100 years

:sarcasm:

[Liberal_in_LA]

54. and the board should fire themselves also - I bet some of them knew

[Freddie Stubbs]

58. Also, the Athletic Director (who is under indictment) is "on administrative leave"

[Spike89]

59. Way too many assumptions being made here

The biggest and most unsupported assumption (from what I've seen of the reports) is that the rape continued once McQueary discovered it. So many are screaming that he did nothing to stop the assault when that isn't clear at all. Obviously he didn't go and physically intervene, but there it seems unlikely that the vile pedophile merely waved at McQueary and went back to buggering the child. If, at least as likely, Sandusky (sp?) immediately stopped when caught and got the hell out of there, I have much more understanding of why McQueary hasn't been fired already.

Naturally, if it turns out that McQueary wasn't observed by the coach and the rape was ongoing, then he's complicit and a coward for not intervening. Should he still, in that event gone to assist the kid and make sure he got immediate help? Hell yes, but again, I don't know how the situation actually went down in that locker room. However, building a narrative around the most unlikely scenario based on the sketchy facts isn't helpful. No one gets any type of pass here, but as horrible as the facts are, those are what we need to stick to.

I do think that in the current environment at Penn State, it is more likely that the situation around the grad assistant and the details of exactly what happened are a bit murkier than what so many are assuming. The school did fire Paterno, I can't imagine they are protecting McQueary if there isn't more to the story.

[lumberjack_jeff]

62. As a graduate student, was he a mandated reporter? n/t

[Scuba]

64. As a human being, isn't he a mandatory reporter?

[lumberjack_jeff]

65. The distinction isn't trivial.

My understanding is that you're mandated to report suspicions to the authorities.

[yellowcanine]

70. Anyone who believes they are witnessing a crime is obligated to report it.

Morally for certain and probably legally in most cases also.

Mandatory reporting only comes into play with "suspected" abuse of a minor - like seeing a bruise, etc.

If you witness an actual crime you are supposed to report it to law enforcement. Not doing so can get you charged with obstruction of justice or even accessory after the fact.

[sweetapogee]

68. this is

just the beginning of what will become a very large scandal. There is plenty more blood to be spilled. I'm sure Mr. McQueary has a number on his days at PSU.