Happens all the time, you let the little guy go so you can get testimony about the big fish. He has the power to make this case or make it go away, at least against Paterno. Perjury charges? You think he's going to be worried about that in a case like this?

 

Sure. You don't need to make a deal with him you have him locked in on his testimony now. That's why you don't need to make a deal with him period. He can testify whether he wants to or not. Getting Paterno is a joke when compared to getting the child molester. The number one priority should be to punish the child molester, everything else is just a side show right now.

Sure. You don't need to make a deal with him you have him locked in on his testimony now. That's why you don't need to make a deal with him period. He can testify whether he wants to or not. Getting Paterno is a joke when compared to getting the child molester. The number one priority should be to punish the child molester, everything else is just a side show right now.

 

His point was that they got the testimony by making the deal, not that it just happened. His reading of the PA law also indicated to him that the GA and Paterno both met the rule of law in reporting the incident to higher ups so they would not be charged under that statute. What happened after that would be an issue.

If some rumors wind up being true, there is a bigger entity involved??

 

Right. No matter what though if he isn't lying to the Grand Jury it was covered up and Paterno is directly involved in the cover up.

On the grounds of: he was a 28-year old man who witnessed violent sexual abuse of a child and rather than doing anything about it, he left.

 

You don't follow the "procedures you have put into place" when you see an adult man sexually abusing a child. You do what's right.

 

What he should've done was beat Sandusky to within an inch of his life, then called the police after he secured the child.

Spot on Wireman. I'm with ya on this one. I totally agree.

What I'd like to know is what Sandusky gave/promised him to keep him from talking. The report said Sandusky saw him and knew he was caught - I wonder how that all played out?

 

Sandusky was gone by that time, wasn't he? And if I'm reading it right, he did talk. I'd be more interested what promises were made by Paterno/ PA State, if any.

What I'd like to know is what Sandusky gave/promised him to keep him from talking. The report said Sandusky saw him and knew he was caught - I wonder how that all played out?

 

The interesting theory that I've heard about this (which makes the whole situation even worse) is this...

 

Paterno found out Sandusky back in the late 90's...and in turn for not being exposed, Sandusky resigned (which was pretty much out of the blue)

 

Then, in 2002, when McQuerey found out, he became a "made man" by agreeing to bury the issue as well.

 

If there's any semblance of truth to this, it really paints a picture of a HUGE coverup, with Joe Pa right in the middle as the ringleader. You'd hate to even think that this is a possibility. But, in this particular case...

The interesting theory that I've heard about this (which makes the whole situation even worse) is this...

 

Paterno found out Sandusky back in the late 90's...and in turn for not being exposed, Sandusky resigned (which was pretty much out of the blue)

 

Then, in 2002, when McQuerey found out, he became a "made man" by agreeing to bury the issue as well.

 

If there's any semblance of truth to this, it really paints a picture of a HUGE coverup, with Joe Pa right in the middle as the ringleader. You'd hate to even think that this is a possibility. But, in this particular case...

 

The only other explanation is McQueary is lying to the grand jury about what he saw.

The interesting theory that I've heard about this (which makes the whole situation even worse) is this...

 

Paterno found out Sandusky back in the late 90's...and in turn for not being exposed, Sandusky resigned (which was pretty much out of the blue)

 

Then, in 2002, when McQuerey found out, he became a "made man" by agreeing to bury the issue as well.

 

If there's any semblance of truth to this, it really paints a picture of a HUGE coverup, with Joe Pa right in the middle as the ringleader. You'd hate to even think that this is a possibility. But, in this particular case...

 

If this is true though isn't it worse that they still haven't fired him?

Too many people are downplaying that Sandusky was a family frond of McQueary. It doesn't excuse him not taking action, but it does explain it. Anyone who says they would have beat him up and called police are just hoping that's what you would do and you've had a week to think about it. I'd like to hope that's what I would do, but I can't say for certain nor can anyone else because we've never been in a situation remotely like this. The saddest part is if he was given the deal by Paterno and he knew of the cover up that he and everyone else just turned their head for the next 8 years as this continued to go on.

If this is true though isn't it worse that they still haven't fired him?

 

Rumor has it the Attorney General is trying to protect his job. Who knows how true that is. It really doesn't matter how quickly he's officially fired. He has coached his last game as a member of the PSU staff IMO.

Too many people are downplaying that Sandusky was a family frond of McQueary. It doesn't excuse him not taking action, but it does explain it. Anyone who says they would have beat him up and called police are just hoping that's what you would do and you've had a week to think about it. I'd like to hope that's what I would do, but I can't say for certain nor can anyone else because we've never been in a situation remotely like this. The saddest part is if he was given the deal by Paterno and he knew of the cover up that he and everyone else just turned their head for the next 8 years as this continued to go on.

 

Like I mentioned in the other thread, hearing Jon Ritchie talk about Sandusky's image/status/etc., he said his head probably would've exploded had he walked in on him like McQuerey did. He said he would've been in total shock, and his reaction could've very easily been the same as McQuerey's...to run. Trying to wrap your mind around someone that you a.) trust b.) idolize c.) have known personally for quite awhile...and the unthinkable images that you have just seen, would be sensory overload. It is totally different than if you walked into a public bathroom and saw a complete stranger doing the act. So, like SSC, to me it helps explain his actions right then.

 

However the following day (years)...totally unexcusable.

To me there are only two options here:

 

1. McQueary lied to Paterno or the Grand Jury.

 

2. He told Paterno and Paterno and PSU covered it up?

 

Any other options???

 

Yes. He told the truth before the Grand Jury but when he reported the incident to Paterno he used different language. "Sodomy" and "inappropriate touching" invoke different reactions. What about McQueary's father?

Yes. He told the truth before the Grand Jury but when he reported the incident to Paterno he used different language. "Sodomy" and "inappropriate touching" invoke different reactions. What about McQueary's father?

 

Was he at the meeting between Mike and Paterno the day after? If so, he's going to be the "tie-breaker", in my opinion. If he was...what "side" will he be on? His son's...or Paterno's?

Yes. He told the truth before the Grand Jury but when he reported the incident to Paterno he used different language. "Sodomy" and "inappropriate touching" invoke different reactions. What about McQueary's father?

 

In what world do those invoke different reactions when talking about a 10 year old boy? They are both "immediate call to the police" acts. Paterno did the absolute bare minimum and then turned his head and tried to forget the incident was ever brought to his attention. Despicable IMO.

If this is true though isn't it worse that they still haven't fired him?

 

Absolutely.