According to an email from a week ago, McQueary says he did go to the police. You can’t take that at face value but it certainly bears looking into. That would add a whole new dimension to this scandal if it’s true.
Do you have a link to some story about that? I never heard it before your post.
The tone was wrong, the affect was wrong, it was just stupid.
Not a shred of remorse, naturally. I think the sociopath has talked himself into believing his own crap. Horseplay. Touching boys on the leg (WTF?) but not in a sexual way.
From the tone of the interview, though, those (self included) who have been speculating (hoping?) that he might solve the problem for us may have a long time to wait. He’s apparently made up his mind that playing the doddering misunderstood grandfatherly patsy who doggone it just wanted to horse around a little, he loved being around kids and their energy so much, is the route to go. Not much of a card to play, but it seems like he’ll play it for the long haul.
Exclusive: Mike McQueary says he stopped attack on child and told PSU police of Sandusky sex abuse allegations
This case is turning into a ratings game:
Off to watch…
I think possibly there’s a relationship between the word ‘horseplay’ and the phrase “hung like a horse”.
That a huge pieve of information that directly contradicts the grand jury report, which say McQueary never spoke to the police about it.
I just saw the CBS news report and there was nothing at all about this claim, and frankly nothing at all of interest. It couldn’t even be properly called an interview. It seems maybe McQueary has a smarter lawyer than Sandusky.
Re: CBS. Well…that was, um, nothing.
Still, if he did go to the police…who is left out of this mess? 
Or a smarter agent. Ten bucks he does a Letterman Top Ten List before month end.
I’m wondering if McQueary is re-writing history in order to look better.
It might be far fetched, but I also wonder if he’s made up these new items to destroy the credibility of his own testimony. OTOH, he apparently never intended this email to be made public – so maybe he was just bullshitting a friend trying to save face.
I’ll take that bet.
That would be a great way to invite a charge of obstruction of justice or perjury. The grand jury said it found him “extremely credible” (I think that’s an exact quote), so, all carping aside, he probably comes off relatively well compared to Paterno and Schultz and Curley. It’s possible he’s full of crap and it’s possible he really did try to get the police involved, but I don’t think he would be stupid enough to try to cast doubt on his own testimony.
It’s called Covering Your Ass and it looks like the Penn State football staff is quite adept in it.
Please insert tasteless joke(s) here.
I just saw another blurb on TV which suggests that McQueary may have thought that reporting to VP Gary Schultz, who oversaw the campus police, was the same as reporting it to the police. I don’t have an exact quote, but supposedly the email refers to talking to the head of the campus police. Which, in an org chart sense, is what Schultz was.
Until I hear from someone other than a fragment of McQueery’s e-mail, that interpretation may be the one I stick with. So far I see no new facts about what he actually did, and the “left immediately” in the GJ presentment seems pretty straightforward.
http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-penn-state-scandal-mcqueary-20111115,0,1687969.story
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
If I am to be tormented by this, I’m not letting the rest of you off the hook!!!
Ever since this story broke, the recurring admonition from this classic cartoon has been REPEAT AND REPEATING IN MY HEAD AND IT WON"T STOP!!!
You got a cite for either of those claims? Either way, that has nothing to do with you claim. You said the following:
That is complete bullshit and you know it. Now, you have softened and twisted the claim to the presence of a Penn State football player made kids more likely to join the program. Even that has not been proved at all. You have not demonstrated that kids knew of the connection, that said connection was the impetus for their working with Second Mile, that Sandusky actually recruited kids himself, or that Paterno encouraged anyone to do anything. The claim you made is just pure speculation based on a misinterpretation of something one person supposedly said.
No, it’s not. You don’t even know the capacity in which some of the players volunteered. You don’t even know that they were working directly with kids, or if they were volunteering as football players.
All of which does nothing to support your earlier claim.
Now it’s PS and Second Mile. Before you just said PS. Either way, I acknowledge that both associations likely facilitated his abuse, but neither was a necessary condition.
Nonsense, he would have just glommed on to some other entity or charity or job to get access to kids. Or he would have just used the kids he had associations with in his normal life, as most other pedophiles do. My point is that fancy associations were not a necessary condition for the abuse. Acting as though kids would be safe from Sandusky absent his connection to PS of SM is missing the point.
I acknowledge that pedophiles glom on to organizations and other entities to gain more access to kids. I also contend that organization are numerous, and pedophiles are persistant, so focusing on one particular organization absent some tacit approval of abuse is a red herring.
No its not. Of course the term doesn’t allege any specific actions, but it does have a pretty clear definition. Either way, take up your concerns with the people who allege there was one, not me.
If one is alleging a cover-up involving Paterno, of course they are saying (at the very least) Paterno agreed to keep quiet. Otherwise, there would be no cover-up.
So, if McQ did, in fact, stop the rape, I’ll assume that he:
Immediately secured the safety of the child.
Called the “Big Boy” police and/or an ambulance and/or the child’s parents and/or took the child to a hospital.
Like any decent human being would.
Surely there would be a record of such things. Where are they?
Friends, I’m very tired due to extensive traveling and I’m reading this after a very long day.
That being said, can any of this get any more absurd?
-
Jerry Sandusky gives an interview to Bob Costas? Is he out of his mind, without legal representation, or both?
-
McQueery says he did notify the police. Police who? This should be pretty easy to track. McQueery sounds like he has all the spine of an overcooked strand of angel hair spaghetti.
-
Even if McQueery is telling the truth on that account (long stretch) what does that say about the police?
Now, with everybody in Happy Valley trying to cover their sorry asses is there anything we should believe to be noble about the sordid place? What else is going on in the hellhole? Does anyone there have any character and ethics? Maybe Happy Valley is why Napalm was invented. (Yes, I know about collateral damage. GWB and Chaney didn’t give a shit about collateral damage, have them convince me.)
Hey baby, want to go back to my place and horse around?