Again, I know I said I was out of here but also again I asked this guy a question and I felt his response deserved an answer and that a follow-up is required as well. Plus I may change my mind and hang around for a while anyway as I’m not feeling as burned out today as I was yesterday.
No, I’m afraid it’s you who are wrong here, Loach. For some reason people seem unable to separate my own conclusions from the jury’s ruling. To the best of my recollection I have never said the jury backs up the conclusions I arrived at myself regarding the physical possibilities of the rape. Where I’ve said the jury agrees with me is in concluding that a determination of rape cannot be drawn from Mike McQueary’s testimony. Period.
It seems you’ve come into the thread late and either jumped to some erroneous conclusions or have been misled by nonsense posted by someone else. A great many things have been discussed and suggested in this thread in a lot of different contexts. In certain discussions and in regard to certain circumstances I’ve suggested that there could be an innocent explanation for a man and boy to be found in that position in a shower that had nothing to do with sex. With regard to this specific incident I’ve said repeatedly – including at least twice since the thread has started up again – that something of a sexually skeevy nature was probably going on.
Man, you are new to the thread, aren’t you? I had already long been passionately accused they thread’s early hysterical nitwits of pedophilia, of being a pedophile enabler, of being a throwback to the 50’s when child abuse was tolerated and people looked the other way, of taking up for Paterno because he was a conservative and putting my love for a fellow conservative ahead of any concern for children being ass-raped, etc., etc., etc., for page after page after page before I ever even began to look at the measurements and mechanics of what was going on in the shower room. You have a quite undeservedly high opinion of the character of most of the posters in this thread.
No, I was talking about physics in the sense of shifting weights and balance and thrusting mostions and so forth. Physiology comes into play as well, but when you’ve heard someone referring to me as having spoken of physics, those are the things I was talking about.
Well, Sandusky’s “moving” as observed by McQueary seems only to have made its appearance at trial, and as I’ve mentioned already there is reason to suspect McQueary may have been embellishing his testimony, at least to a point (i.e., he apparently was still unwilling to state flatly that what he saw was intercouse).
Then you have to consider that for purposes of this thread we are limited to what the parties involved say, and looking to averages attempting to draw conclusions for things their statements leave unanswered. So, given the fact that McQueary pegged the boy as being 10-12 years old (IIRC for most of the thread, including the suggested paper towel tube experiment, the meme was that he was ten) we have to presume there was nothing unusually large about his physique or McQueary would have pegged him as being older.
Another element that has played into my belief that rape was not occurring was McQueary’s grand jury testimony that Sandusky and the boy turned to look at him in the 45 degree mirror as he was standing at his locker. One would expect that if he were to describe what he saw in that much detail he would also have mentioned it if the boy’s expression were one of distress, pain, embarassment or anxiety. But he said nothing about any of that, only that they looked at him.
In regard to the boy’s being in the “assume the position” posture, to me this is indicative of the sort of crime Sandusky actually was convicted of in this case but not anal rape. “Assuming that position” does not elevate a person’s physiognomy.
As I have been given to understand, at the time of the shower room incident a decades-long protocol was in place, instituted in cooperation with the local police department, that reports of crime occurring on campus be reported to the campus authorities, who were then to investigate and contact the local police if necessary (given that Penn State university maintains a fully accredited police force of its own) should someone need to be jailed. This policy was instituted to prevent the local police from having to field multiple calls regarding the same crime. Again, this policy had been standard operating procedure for decades at the time McQueary reported the shower incident to Paterno and as a result I would imagine Paterno’s reporting the incident as he did came automatically and without a moment’s thought that he should report it somewhere else instead. In fact no one else ever thought a thing about it until some local police official puffed up his chest and tried to insinuate that had Paterno called the cops, by golly they would have done something about it!
Look, Loach, in finding out you’re a cop and in reading more of your posts I’ve come to take you more seriously than the average bear in this thread and to have developed a certain amount of respect for you as well, so don’t take this the wrong way but there is just all sorts of wrong going on in that last paragraph that shows you’ve soaked up a lot of bad information on this subject. First of all, Sandusky wasn’t hanging out in Paterno’s locker room for 10 years after the incident, or at all. Sandusky was no longer a part of Penn State’s football program and had not been for several years at that time. Paterno was not his boss, had no regular contact with him, and had not for years. Further, two years prior to this incident Sandusky was reported to the actual police for hugging a kid in the shower. They investigated and found no serious wrongdoing and the matter was dropped. Would you have had Paterno endlessly enquire about it also? As far as he knew, this was just another case where an investigation determined that Sandusky hugged a kid in the shower and someone misconstrued it into something sexual when it wasn’t. Further, he said before his death that he didn’t want to ask questions or offer input so as not to have any influence on the case. So from his point of view, it was out of his hands, it involved a person no longer in his employ, and was most likely just another case of a hug in the shower blown out of proportion. I imagine after the first few weeks he rarely gave it another thought.
