McQueary will not go to jail, for one simple reason.

[Lyric]

Nobody knows who that boy was. In fact, other than McQueary's own account--there's no other evidence at ALL that the shower rape of that particular child even happened. They need McQueary to cooperate and testify, because he is literally the ONLY witness who can provide testimony about what happened that day. We wouldn't even know about that particularly horrific crime if McQueary hadn't reported it to the higher-ups at the University. The janitor saw a different child; McQueary is the only one who actually witnessed the shower rape. Everything the police know about that offense, they know because of McQueary. He could have remained silent and focused entirely on protecting his own ass, but he didn't. No matter how much we despise him for his cowardice at that moment, he is still the one responsible for bringing the facts to light about that particular incident. Without him...that incident (and all chance of justice for that particular child) is gone.

He was wrong not to intervene, and he was even MORE wrong not to immediately call the police. But that doesn't change the practical reality that they NEED him in order to make that charge stick, and they need him to be as cooperative and forthright as possible. They'll probably offer him some kind of immunity in exchange for his testimony--and frankly, that's not surprising. Criminal justice is often about making tough decisions, and it's FAR more important to make that charge stick to Sandusky than it is to punish McQueary. That particular charge is, at the moment, the most shocking and graphic of them all, and it's certainly the one that's going to affect the jury the most when this thing is brought to trial.

Even more importantly, McQueary's testimony could very well be the deciding factor in convicting Sandusky. After all of this time, there's no physical evidence of rape. To have an objective eyewitness to a sexual assault is an absolute GIFT to the prosecution, especially if the boy himself eventually comes forward. Otherwise, it's just the victims' words against Sandusky's. I don't need to tell you how often rapists walk free because their victims can't provide any evidence other than their own accusation. I'd like to believe that that wouldn't happen in this case, but we all know better. The FIRST thing Sandusky's attorney is going to do is to dig up anything he can find to make the victims look like greedy young men who are only accusing Sandusky because they're looking for a payday. It's horrible, but it happens. McQueary's testimony could put a stop to that, because he was neither the victim or a relative of the victim. From a legal standpoint, he had nothing to gain by telling his story. In fact, the opposite is true. He's lost his job and nearly everyone in the country despises him right now, and all of this is because he told the truth instead of keeping silent. He just didn't tell the truth to the right people.

From a moral standpoint, I agree--McQueary made a cowardly, WRONG choice. When my Dad was murdered, one man did the actual killing, but his "buddy" watched and didn't intervene. In fact, like McQueary, he ran home to his Daddy and asked him what he should do. Was I angry at him? Hell yes. But his testimony at the murderer's trial was the key to putting the actual KILLER behind bars. Yes, his choice was cowardly and selfish. If he'd intervened, my Dad might still be alive. But at the very least, he made sure that the man who beat my father to death went to prison for life, and could never kill another human being. Maybe that wasn't enough for me to "forgive" him, but it was certainly enough for me to stop hating him. Despite his shitty choice, he wasn't the man who killed my Dad.

McQueary is a very small fish in all of this, and keeping him cooperative as a witness will help the prosecution catch the BIG fish and nail his ass to the wall. As angry as I am, I have enough experience in this kind of thing to recognize that the most important fact of all is this: McQueary made a shitty choice, but he wasn't the one raping kids. That doesn't mean that he's innocent, and it doesn't make him worthy of forgiveness. But at least he can do something that nobody else can do. He can provide the kind of eyewitness testimony that will put Sandusky's child-raping ass in prison for the rest of his life. Maybe that's not enough to make up for not stopping the rape to begin with, but it's at least a reason that I wouldn't want to see McQueary dead. I can't say the same about Sandusky.

Just my thoughts on the whole thing.

[riderinthestorm]

1. Maybe that boy in the shower was actually McQueary as a child with Sandusky

I've said it on other threads but with Penn State taking active steps to protect McQueary, and his NOT being fired, I'm wondering if McQueary was sexually assaulted as a kid. He was a promising football star in the youth leagues in that area. It's not inconceivable that he met some of the Penn State big wigs growing up. It's exceedingly odd that he went to his DAD when he saw that scene. It's even more probable that McQueary was also sexually assaulted and was having flashbacks (or worse).

You are right, we don't know who that boy is. But Penn State is going to great lengths to protect McQueary now and I don't think it's just because they "need" his testimony so they are keeping him happy, happy.

I don't know any more than you obviously but as a volunteer for more than a few decades at local rape crisis centers and the local women's shelter, McQueary is ringing my bells.

[Lyric]

2. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me.

The part about McQueary being an assault victim himself.

Can you imagine the aftermath of THAT revelation? Ugh.

[riderinthestorm]

8. Honestly. I'm wondering if McQueary got his job way at that time not to shut him up about that boy

but because McQueary could have given testimony about himself AND that boy. Really opened up the rats nest. From my experience with rape victims, they often suffer from PTSD for decades if they don't get help. Prefacing all of this with a big dose of skepticism that it may not have actually happened, it would however make a LOT of really odd things fall into place. Including why he was given that job - not to just protect Sandusky for that time, but to protect against a former player and rising star (who was also an adult) from spilling the beans. It would also explain his "freezing", and going to his Dad first. He may not have even remembered his own rape (many victims suppress it). He may never have even told his Dad (very common too).

He's certainly young enough to have been a Sandusky victim. He may not have wanted to come forward at that time himself (may not want to come forward now) - its damn hard enough to get a victim to report to the police, let alone the media firestorm that would have erupted over reporting a beloved sports icon.

I just wonder.....

[Lyric]

11. And of course, our society's ingrained homophobia makes it all the worse.

So many male victims of male pedophiles are reluctant to say anything because admitting to being sexually touched by another man (even unwillingly) makes them worry that society will consider them "tainted" by homosexuality. And that worry is real; parts of our society ARE sick and homophobic enough to think that way. I've witnessed it. It's heartbreaking.

[MH1]

18. ^^ This.

I've often said that part of the trauma of sexual abuse is that societal attitudes make it worse.

[stillwaiting]

41. "Society" can be a monster.

In America, it certainly is one.

[lunatica]

14. Ringing my bells too.

It's the only thing that makes sense. He could have even been Sandusky's victim a few years earlier.

[WinkyDink]

34. Uh, duh. Have you looked at the timeline at all? McQ was 28.

[riderinthestorm]

42. He grew up in the same neighborhood as the Sandusky's. Was friends with one of Sandusky's children

if I recall correctly. As a rising young star in that area, it's perfectly possible he came into a lot of contact with the Penn State league while in the junior leagues. Sandusky's 32 years older than McQueary. I don't believe Sandusky only started raping boys when he got to be 60. I'm sure he started MUCH younger than that....

All that said, it's just one possibility. I'm not prepared at all to defend McQueary at all on this but I guess I've decided to step back from active anger until we know more.

[lunatica]

48. Do you know he wasn't there years earlier?

Duh!

[TBF]

49. That would explain a lot -

especially McQueary's weird response of going to his dad rather than the police. The defense absolutely needs McQueary, and they will protect him. But his story may include much more detail than we've heard so far.

[markpkessinger]

3. He won't go to jail because he fulfilled his legal obligation under PA law...

... even as he failed miserably in his moral obligation as a human being.

[pnwmom]

4. For an even simpler reason. His silence didn't break PA law.

So even if the boy's identified is discovered, he couldn't be charged. You have to name particular statutes in an indictment.

[bluesbassman]

5. Excellent points Lyric. I've been thinking about this aspect too.

My hope is that McQueary's testimony will be enough. I don't believe he is in any danger of criminal prosecution, but his conscience will prosecute him every day for the rest of his life.

So sorry about your Dad, I don't know if you've ever shared that before, but it's the first time I've heard it. My sincere condolences for your loss.

[Lyric]

10. Thank you.

I have posted about it before, but it's been a while. I usually talk about it whenever people decide to start presumptuously speaking about how the death penalty is important "for the victim's family". I assure you, there are plenty of "victim's family" members out here who do NOT support executions. I hate it when people who HAVEN'T been in that situation presume to speak for those of us who HAVE.

[FourScore]

19. You sound like a remarkable human being, Lyric.

I'm sure your father would be very proud of you.

Thank you for sharing you're insight.

[rocktivity]

6. I'd settle for him being fired.

McQueady did nothing illegal, true. But telling his father before telling Paterno is grounds was dereliction of duty. He's on indefinite paid administrative leave now and should end up demoted or transferred at the very least.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. Per another DU thread is he out as the WR coach

and in some sort of protective custody.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2288830&mesg_id=2288830

At this point a new head coach will be appointed. Normally all the staffers are let go and the new bubba builds his own staff. Even if McQuaedy had no involvement in any of this mess, he was out. However, since he was a key player, effectively McQuaedy's career is over. No one will touch him now. Not saying that for sympathy, but as a fact.

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. The more I think about McQueary's story

The less sense it makes.

There's more to this, for sure.

I predict that our jaws will all drop several more times before this is over, and with the McQueary-witnessed incident as the central feature in that string of surprises. The narrative laid out by the grand Jury on Victim #2 just doesn't feel right - the general condemnation of McQueary is rooted in the way the narrative completely disrupts not only common sense, but our society's general understanding of how people tend to act. There's something fucking very wrong here, certainly with the underlying facts (that goes without saying), but also in the narrative itself.

[riderinthestorm]

9. I 100% agree. And Penn State's actions in protecting McQueary to this degree

(and not Paterno or Sandusky) are very, very strange.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. Per another thread, he is gone from PSU

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2288830&mesg_id=2288830

If the source material is correct he is out as the wide receiver coach and under some sort of police protection

[Fumesucker]

13. I think there's something off about it too..

It's been bugging me almost subconsciously.

The narrative doesn't yet gel.

[lunatica]

12. I'm thinking there were many more boys who didn't have a witness

Simply because pedophiles want to satisfy their sexual urges just as much as anyone else does. To believe that he only raped a few boys in a span of ten years is to be very uninformed about sexual urges.

[Fumesucker]

15. The average is evidently 150 victims for an active pedophile

I think this is going to be a long way past that eventually..

[elias7]

16. Good to know that DU is so full of heroes

Who are certain of how they would act in such a moment. I'd like to think I would have DONE THE RIGHT THING in all of your eyes, but maybe I was raped when I 10 myself, or maybe I knew Mr Sandusky was a violent man who would hunt me down and shoot me, or something.

Shit, the guy talked to his dad, talked to coach paterno, made sure things moved up the chain of command, like most of us would have done in our workplace for many things of uncertain or dubious nature.

I don't know if all of us really live at the level of moral virtue and courage that we condemn those for not attaining.

[riderinthestorm]

17. You know what's funny Elias? I actually WAS one of those all outraged at first at McQueary!

As a small woman I felt ferocious and fearless and sure that I would tear Sandusky's head off while helping that child to the hospital.

But the story has always been a bit... off. McQueary, as a grown man by many years, sought out his Dad? Weird. Then Penn State didn't fire him and now has actively moved to protect him. That's when I began to simmer down and maybe try to get a fix on McQueary. Why was he being protected by Penn State, then and now? Why did he freeze so badly? Why is he not talking to ANYONE?

That's when it hit me that he's acting like a rape survivor whose afraid to report, or will only report so far (like to a hospital nurse but not a police office). And Penn State is acting like a rape crisis center protecting a survivor.

Oh it could be that he's a cowardly shit, who didn't take the right action but like you, I'm growing wary of that narrative. Something's very odd here.

[On the Road]

23. Why is it Odd That He Would Seek Out His Dad?

From your posts, you are more familiar with these situations in your every day life. Presumably, he wasn't. Probably was not even familiar with the requirements of the law. Going to a trusted authority is the first thing that would occur to an awful lot of people.

[riderinthestorm]

25. No real reason other than most adults in my experience when seeing a crime, call the police

not Dad...


...unless there's some other kind of history there that would have one thinking of calling a parent instead of the police. And typically when/if a parent DOES get a report of a crime being committed, typically encourage their child, even an adult child, to go to the police. Unless of course, there's a history there.... My mom and dad are still alive. I'm in my 50s but even in my late 20s if I saw a crime, I wouldn't think of calling them first, ever. But I have not been sexually abused.

That's just a gut instinct on my part. May be wrong of course. I am perfectly willing to accept that.

[beac]

28. Respectfully, b/c I know you are just trying to make sense of an inexplicable

series of actions, IMO you are heading down the wrong road on this one.

McQueary was a grad student, planning a career in football and Paterno was his ticket to that career. His dad was a neighbor of Sandusky and probably worshiped at the altar of Penn State football like most in the area. I think McQueary went to his dad for advice on how to minimize the damage to his own career (b/c he had to tell SOMEONE or Sandusky might have concocted some BS story that accused McQueary of something heinous. McQueary knew who 'JoePa' would believe if Sandusky got there first.)

If McQueary had been one of Sandusky's victims, would he have attended events featuring Sandusky and for his charity for YEARS after the event? Surely not. He did that b/c, even though he knew Sandusky was a child rapist, hobnobbing at those events was good for McQueary's career.

I believe that you, unlike some blanket defenders of McQueary, are grasping to find a "good" reason why McQueary aided in the cover-up. Sandusky was likely a victim of abuse himself. Where former victims lose their right to sympathy is when they become abusers themselves, either directly or by enabling abuse.

That said, I do not share your opinion that McQueary was one of Sandusky's victims and until he makes a such a claim himself, I think it is unfair to the known victims to add McQueary to their number b/c it would help us "make sense" of his terrible decisions. Sometimes people just do horrible things because they are horrible people.


(And FWIW, I too have some experience w/rape victims.)

[riderinthestorm]

43. Thanks beac. And I'm prepared to be 100% wrong.

Honestly, I didn't even begin to think this until Penn State moved to protect him (instead of instantly firing him). What an odd thing, I thought.... But yes, you are absolutely right - some people are just cowardly shits and it may be McQueary is just such a person.

Your scenario is at least as likely, and then I'll revert to my former outrage if/when that proves to be the case.... :hug:

[coalition_unwilling]

29. I suspect that when McCreary saw that it was Sandusky

anally raping the 10-year-old, McCreary froze because he understood Sandusky as a sacred cow (or shaman) of the PSU tribe and he was a lowly grad assistant.

Your words contain a lot of wisdom. However, I cannot escape the image of McCreary seeing a 10-year-old being anally raped and abandoning that little boy trapped in the clutches of a perv. That poor little boy - who would speak for him, who would protect him?

[elias7]

39. I think it is something like that

I would like to think in the same position I would be able to muster the courage to stop the act dead in its tracks, free the boy, incapacitate Sandusky, and call the police all at once. I just hear a lot of bluster in many posts critical of McCready and just wonder how well we would stand our own scrutiny if we had been put in that position.

[coalition_unwilling]

40. Oh, I know what I did when I was 14 and it was acted out in front of

me. I did and said nothing, to my everlasting shame and regret. In my defense, I did not even fully understand the full import of what I was seeing at the time. But I knew something was wrong and still did nothing to stop it. Does it also matter that the perpetrator was a teacher with the power of corporal punishment over me and I was merely a sophomore in high school? Yeah, it mitigates my responsibility somewhat. But not entirely.

I'm with you on the 'bluster factor' here at DU, though, almost as if folks are using their keyboards to fashion themselves the heroes they might secretly wish to be when in private with only themselves. The 'Walter Mitty' effect comes to mind.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

21. He's also pivotal to the prosecution of Tim Curley & Gary Schultz

If not for the fact of the grand jury believing him over them neither those two would currently be charged with perjury. I don't know what all he said to the GJ when he was before them, but I'm willing to let this play out a bit more and see which way it goes.

[rocktivity]

24. I've always said that the best thing about DU is that you can become an expert

when you least expect it -- even a situation like this.

Thanks for sharing.

:hug:
rocktivity

[JohnnyLib2]

26. Thanks, Lyric. Using your experience with the legal system,

learned in such a painful way, brings some reality into this discussion. :thumbsup:

[coalition_unwilling]

27. Well thought out and articulate. Much appreciated (and very, very

sorry to hear about your Dad).

[beac]

30. Not telling the truth to the right people amounted to the same as keeping silent,

And he went to Sandusky's charity events for years after witnessing the rape.

As I said in a reply above, I think he went to Paterno b/c he thought there was a good chance Sandusky might try to smear him in some way in order to undermine his credibility. Not realizing that Paterno already KNEW Sandusky was a pedophile (and I believe Paterno knew this NLT 1998), McQueary could have easily feared Sandusky would reverse the roles in the story and try to paint McQ as the child rapist. McQueary probably thought he was the FIRST to tumble to Sandusky's perversion.

What he couldn't have known was that Sandusky was likely just hoping like hell that McQueary would put the reputation of Penn State/Paterno ahead of his obligation to report a crime. And that, essentially, is what he did.

Had McQueary stumbled upon any other non-employee of PSU (Sandusky was no longer working at PennState) raping a kid in the showers, he NEVER would have called his dad and then waited 24 hours to report it to a man who had no legal authority to do anything.

This was about protecting himself, his career and PSU football.

Will he make a small atonement by helping to put his co-conspirators behind bars? Yes.
Does he deserve any credit for bringing the scandal to light? No.
That honor goes to brave Victim #1.



And thank you for your humane and principled stance with regard to your dad's murder. I'm sure it was not easy to resist the urge for bloody vengeance. You are a well-evolved human and we are lucky to have your perspective here on DU.

[TorchTheWitch]

31. immunity from WHAT?

Guess what? It's perfectly legal to witness a crime and do absolutely nothing. As it SHOULD be.

You're speaking as though McQuery needs to be coddled and coaxed into helping the investigation when he's probably the one person who wants to help cooperate more than anyone else and he HAS been eagerly cooperating.

And just why is it that nobody here is ripping the janitor a new asshole for witnessing Sandusky molesting a child and not calling the police or stopping it himself and when he didn't even go as far as McQuery did in telling any superior about since he only told his co-worker janitors who all likewise did nothing?

MANY people witnessed various inappropriate and criminal behavior conducted by Sandusky, and McQuery was the ONLY ONE that did ANYTHING about it yet here he's being demonized nearly as much as the perverted criminal himself.

[WinkyDink]

35. Maybe you should read PA's law about public institutions and responsibility to report SUSPECTED

child-abuse. That would not be 'report to your Dad and Coach," either.

McQ WAS A GODDAMN MORAL COWARD. BTW: He had once broken up a student knife-fight, so he was clearly not a physical coward, re: a naked 57-yr-old Sandusky.

As for the janitor: So which is your position, that the Golden Boy Assistant is to be excused, while a low-level, poor janitor truly afraid of losing his job is NOT? GMA*B.

[bengalherder]

45. I gotta give the janitor a break on this.

I work around a large college environment. There is a real 'upstairs/downstairs' hierarchy there. I doubt anyone would believe the janitor just because of his merely being a janitor. In fact, the poor guy probably would be fired or forced to leave in some manner. He certainly would never get a raise again. I've seen no mention of the janitor's background, but at the local school, most of the janitors would also face language and cultural barriers to expression of the information and it's being taken seriously by admin and police...that plus a label of 'liar' or 'informer' might make it a tad hard to find employment in that very small sleepy Happy Valley town...

I would like to think I would stick my neck out, but I have other options and do not live in an isolated pocket of the world.

[ellisonz]

32. You need to read the Grand Jury Indictment of Curley and Schultz.

There are 8 identified victims. There is testimony from several other individuals that what Sandusky was doing was known and that everyone from Paterno on up knew or should have known. I strongly suspect there are more. Sandusky goes down either way. It's the convictions of Curley and Schultz that require McQueary's testimony. I really wonder why Paterno was not called before the grand jury to testify. Something is seriously wrong with justice system in Centre County.



This case could see Federal involvement.

[WinkyDink]

36. Paterno testified.

[ellisonz]

37. You're correct.

Still I'd like to see this federalized. Sandusky clearly may have violated the Mann Act and really makes you wonder if a Federal Court wouldn't hit Paterno with charges. PA is likely to give him a free pass.

[beac]

44. Wow. That graphic really packs a punch.

A sea of red "Knowledge, Limited Response". SO many knew and NONE of them really tried to stop it.

[ellisonz]

46. It's likely to get bigger with time.

[beac]

The orange "victim" list too.

Horrible.

[rocktivity]

50. From the Grand Jury report (warning: graphic)

(link):
...Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant's report at his home on a
Saturday morning. Paterno testified that the graduate assistant was very upset. Paterno called
Tim Curley ("Curley"), Penn State Athletic Director and Paterno's immediate superior, to his
home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that the graduate assistant had seen Jerry
Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a
young boy.

Approximately one and a half weeks later, the graduate assistant was called to a meeting
with Penn State Athletic Director Curley and Senior Vice President for Finance and Business
Gary Schultz ("Schultz"). The graduate assistant reported to Curley and Schultz that he had
witnessed what he believed to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in the Lasch Building
showers. Curley and Schultz assured the graduate assistant that they would look into it and
determine what further action they would take. Paterno was not present for this meeting...

...Curley testified that the graduate assistant reported to them that "inappropriate conduct"
or activity that made him "uncomfortable" occurred in the Lasch Building shower in March
2002. Curley specifically denied that the graduate assistant reported anal sex or anything of a
sexual nature whatsoever and termed the conduct as merely "horsing around" When asked
whether the graduate assistant had reported "sexual conduct" "of any kind" by Sandusky, Curley
answered, "No" twice. When asked if the graduate assistant had reported "anal sex between Jerry
Sandusky and this child," Curley testified, "Absolutely not."

...Schultz testified that...in a subsequent meeting with Curley...the graduate assistant reported
the incident in the shower involving Sandusky and a boy. Schultz was very unsure about what he
remembered the graduate assistant telling him and Curley about the shower incident. He testified
that he had the impression that Sandusky might have inappropriately grabbed the young boy's
genitals while wrestling and agreed that such was inappropriate sexual conduct between a man and a
boy. While equivocating on the definition of "sexual" in the context of Sandusky wrestling with and
grabbing the genitals of the boy, Schultz conceded that the report the graduate assistant made
was of inappropriate sexual conduct by Sandusky. However, Schultz testified that the allegations
were "not that serious" and that he and Curley "had no indication that a crime had occurred."

I might have been cowardly enough not to try to stop the attack. I might have been ambitious enough to sacrifice the victim to ensure my place inside the Paterno papacy. But there's no way I would have allowed Paterno, Curley, Schultz to effectively call me a liar and slanderer, and the fact that they didn't fire McQueady for lying about or slandering Sandusky speaks for itself!

:headbang:
rocktivity

[WinkyDink]

33. McQ won't go to prison for ONE REASON ONLY: HE'S TURNED STATE'S EVIDENCE.

PERIOD.

No jail in return for testimony.

[Leftist Agitator]

38. "...went to prison for life, and could never kill another human being."

I see that we're unfamiliar with how often inmates murder other inmates.

[former9thward]

47. McQueary will not go to jail because he broke no law.

He was a student at the time. He (and no one else either) is required to stop a crime. No law mandated him to report a crime. Whatever else you may wish to say about him he broke no laws. If you think he did please cite the law.