McQueary out for Nebraska game

[ctchamps]

I believe that I read that PSU police have the same authority on the Penn State campus that say a Pittsburgh cop has on the streets of Pittsburgh. That wouldn't be unusual for a large campus. UCONN police for example have authority comparable to any other municipal police force in Connecticut.

They do have the legal authority. The question is, why they didn't do anything about 2002. And why Paterno didn't press them to do anything about it.

Schultz's position included the oversight of the PSU police department. I take it that he has no authority in criminal matters. Am I correct?

 

[upstater]

One thing I have to mention: Schulz is not a sworn law enforcement officer. He is not sworn to protect in the way police are (though I can tell you as a university employee that I have to take an oath to protect my students, etc.). Schulz is an administrator in charge of Campus Police. There is a difference in reporting to the Chief of Police and reporting to Schulz.

 

[upstater]

In life, we sometimes are put in a situation where we have to make a decision of doing what we know is right, altruistic or punting. It is not easy and nobody said it would/will be. One only has a split second to make the decision that perhaps he has to live with the rest of his life. Sometimes the witnessed event is so horrific that you just cannot walk away and still call yourself a civilized human.

My belief is this is one of those times. I believe that most men would have stopped this. How else could you live with yourself from that point forward?

Maybe he couldn't live with himself? Maybe he came forward many years later without telling Curley and Schulz and Paterno?

That would explain why 2 have been indicted for perjury and he hasn't.

As for civilized humans, you had a bunch of people sitting around that ESPN table with Jon Ritchie this morning, and when he said he might have walked away, no one seemed to test that statement. Could be that all four of them are not civilized humans.

 

[upstater]

Schultz's position included the oversight of the PSU police department. I take it that he has no authority in criminal matters. Am I correct?

Yes, exactly. Correct. He's an administrator. The only thing I would add though is that he was the one to whom the shower hug in 1998 was reported, and that's when the law enforcement investigation began.

 

[storrsbred1]

Maybe he couldn't live with himself? Maybe he came forward many years later without telling Curley and Schulz and Paterno?

That would explain why 2 have been indicted for perjury and he hasn't.

As for civilized humans, you had a bunch of people sitting around that ESPN table with Jon Ritchie this morning, and when he said he might have walked away, no one seemed to test that statement. Could be that all four of them are not civilized humans.

Yes, it could possibly be that none of them would have measured up. It is possible that none of those four has been put to the test and they don't know how they would have reacted and that was the reason for not contesting the statement by Ritchie. No one knows until they are placed into a situation that requires action.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

In life, we sometimes are put in a situation where we have to make a decision of doing what we know is right, altruistic or punting. It is not easy and nobody said it would/will be. One only has a split second to make the decision that perhaps he has to live with the rest of his life. Sometimes the witnessed event is so horrific that you just cannot walk away and still call yourself a civilized human.

My belief is this is one of those times. I believe that most men would have stopped this. How else could you live with yourself from that point forward?

Not true. Most men would not have stopped this. It would have taken phenomenal courage for McQueary to do anything. We all wish he had shown that courage, but I am not surprised in the least that he did not stop it. Was he really going to get into a physical altercation with someone who had the ear of God? McQueary had to think that if it got down to he said/he said, Sandusky was going to win and McQueary's football coaching career would be over for making such a slanderous accusation.

Even by Internet standards, the bluster around "what I would have done in this situation" is amusing. How many of you have reported a manager for inappropriate comments about or otherwise harrassing a female coworker? How many of you have reported a manager who was abusing his expense account, or getting verbally abusive with another employee, or otherwise acting inappropriately? To be honest, the only times I have seen this kind of behavior reported is when the whistleblower either didn't appreciate the risks that she was taking by reporting it or had nothing to lose. Now everyone on this board is claiming that if it was them, they would be willing to risk the wrath of a coaching legend and the most powerful man at Penn State? The reality is very few of you have ever done anything that took remotely that much courage. McQueary's life could have been ruined if this went another way.

I respect him enough for going to Paterno. I bet that there are other people who witnessed Sandusky in action and didn't tell a soul. Where I lose respect for McQueary is when he takes the payoff of an assistant's job to keep quiet.

 

[storrsbred1]

Not true. Most men would not have stopped this. It would have taken phenomenal courage for McQueary to do anything. We all wish he had shown that courage, but I am not surprised in the least that he did not stop it. Was he really going to get into a physical altercation with someone who had the ear of God? McQueary had to think that if it got down to he said/he said, Sandusky was going to win and McQueary's football coaching career would be over for making such a slanderous accusation.

Even by Internet standards, the bluster around "what I would have done in this situation" is amusing. How many of you have reported a manager for inappropriate comments about or otherwise harrassing a female coworker? How many of you have reported a manager who was abusing his expense account, or getting verbally abusive with another employee, or otherwise acting inappropriately? To be honest, the only times I have seen this kind of behavior reported is when the whistleblower either didn't appreciate the risks that she was taking by reporting it or had nothing to lose. Now everyone on this board is claiming that if it was them, they would be willing to risk the wrath of a coaching legend and the most powerful man at Penn State? The reality is very few of you have ever done anything that took remotely that much courage. McQueary's life could have been ruined if this went another way.

I respect him enough for going to Paterno. I bet that there are other people who witnessed Sandusky in action and didn't tell a soul. Where I lose respect for McQueary is when he takes the payoff of an assistant's job to keep quiet.

I can't say any more other than no one knows what they would do until they are placed into a situation that requires action. My belief is still that most would have tried to stop it in some way.

The examples you give are not remotely close to this alleged event. Risking the wrath of Paterno? You mean the guy that already knew about Sandusky's proclivities?

 

[ctchamps]

Yes, exactly. Correct. He's an administrator. The only thing I would add though is that he was the one to whom the shower hug in 1998 was reported, and that's when the law enforcement investigation began.

Thanks for the answers.

If Shultz was the contact person in the 98 investigation and he reported matters to the police, and if PSU protocol was to contact Schultz, then Paterno and McQuaery followed protocol. We also don't know if Paterno and McQueary followed through with Shultz. Nor do we know, if they did, what answer he might have given them.

So I'm wondering if you know whether it was PSU official policy in criminal matters to contact Shultz.

 

[upstater]

Thanks for the answers.

If Shultz was the contact person in the 98 investigation and he reported matters to the police, and if PSU protocol was to contact Schultz, then Paterno and McQuaery followed protocol. We also don't know if Paterno and McQueary followed through with Shultz. Nor do we know, if they did, what answer he might have given them.

So I'm wondering if you know whether it was PSU official policy in criminal matters to contact Shultz.

I don't know if it was official policy. The only one who would be expected to know that would be the AD Tim Curley. He's an administrator who is in position to understand the administrative hierarchy. That being said, there was absolutely nothing wrong with Paterno and McQueary contacting the chief of police immediately. They could have done that as well.

 

[ctchamps]

I don't know if it was official policy. The only one who would be expected to know that would be the AD Tim Curley. He's an administrator who is in position to understand the administrative hierarchy. That being said, there was absolutely nothing wrong with Paterno and McQueary contacting the chief of police immediately. They could have done that as well.

You have to wonder why they went to Curley and not the COP. I don't think they were trying to cover up the story. Just dumb decision making or bureaucratic thinking.

 

[upstater]

You have to wonder why they went to Curley and not the COP. I don't think they were trying to cover up the story. Just dumb decision making or bureaucratic thinking.

Paterno went to both. The three of them discussed it. McQueary went to Paterno. Subsequently, Curley and Schultz met with McQueary.
Much of this boils down to what was actually said in those meetings.

 

[ctchamps]

Paterno went to both. The three of them discussed it. McQueary went to Paterno. Subsequently, Curley and Schultz met with McQueary.
Much of this boils down to what was actually said in those meetings.

COP meaning Chief of Police. But I agree a lot has to do with what was said in those meetings. And we'll never know. This is a hot potato, because the crimes are so horrific, because they occurred from such a long time, and because there were many opportunities missed in which the crimes could have been stopped.

 

[BugsyCT]

All things considered, it's hard to believe that McQueary couldn't or didn't accurately convey what he saw in the shower that night, or how it could possibly get misconstrued if that's their argument. And after all was said & done with that incident, whether he even questioned Sandusky's presence on that campus in later years. The whole thing stinks rotten.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Even by Internet standards, the bluster around "what I would have done in this situation" is amusing. How many of you have reported a manager for inappropriate comments about or otherwise harrassing a female coworker? How many of you have reported a manager who was abusing his expense account, or getting verbally abusive with another employee, or otherwise acting inappropriately?

Comparing what McQueary saw to the scenarios you described is patently absurd.

 

[ctchamps]

All things considered, it's hard to believe that McQueary couldn't or didn't accurately convey what he saw in the shower that night, or how it could possibly get misconstrued if that's their argument. And after all was said & done with that incident, whether he even questioned Sandusky's presence on that campus in later years. The whole thing stinks rotten.

It stinks rotten.

Human behavior is unpredictable. We should all be thankful we don't find ourselves in a situation such as those poor kids or even the people who witnessed the crimes.

I'm not sure how I would react if I were in McQueary's or the janitors position. I would like to believe I would have done more. But I honestly don't know.
I'm not the only one who thinks this way. Others have stated this. And those people who make claims differently from me have no proof they would have acted the way they claim.

I would venture to say that some of the charge we are directing to McQueary is because we want to convince ourselves we are not like McQueary. We don't need convincing that we are not Sandusky. That's because none of us comes close to identifying with Sandusky's behavior. Hence the outrage towards Sandusky has been relatively minimal compared to McQueary.

I'm not defending McQueary. Rightly or wrongly his life will be ruined. But the more I know about human behavior the more I realize that self deception and denial is a strong component of human behavior. If you're interested I can relate a fascinating case study that demonstrates the extremes the human mind can take under extremely stressful situations. It offers a potential explanation for McQueary's behavior years after what he witnessed.

 

[upstater]

All things considered, it's hard to believe that McQueary couldn't or didn't accurately convey what he saw in the shower that night, or how it could possibly get misconstrued if that's their argument. And after all was said & done with that incident, whether he even questioned Sandusky's presence on that campus in later years. The whole thing stinks rotten.

That part of the issue is only relevant in the mind of the old guard. "He told me it was fondling, I didn't know it was anal rape." That's not a defense. So it seems irrelevant.

 

[metsfan2323]

All things considered, it's hard to believe that McQueary couldn't or didn't accurately convey what he saw in the shower that night, or how it could possibly get misconstrued if that's their argument. And after all was said & done with that incident, whether he even questioned Sandusky's presence on that campus in later years. The whole thing stinks rotten.

They had to cover up what McQueary saw in 2002 because they were already knee deep in a cover-up since 1998. It's like running a Ponzy scheme, it might start out small but keeps getting worse and worse.

I also just had a creepy thought because i'm going to see the J Edgar Hoover movie tonight. What if Paterno and Sandusky were like Hoover and Clyde Tolson (if you know what I mean), it would explain alot.

 

[upstater]

They had to cover up what McQueary saw in 2002 because they were already knee deep in a cover-up since 1998. It's like running a Ponzy scheme, it might start out small but keeps getting worse and worse.

I also just had a creepy thought because i'm going to see the J Edgar Hoover movie tonight. What if Paterno and Sandusky were like Hoover and Clyde Tolson (if you know what I mean), it would explain alot.

How was 1998 covered up?

 

[metsfan2323]

How was 1998 covered up?

Seriously? You are in that much denial? Why was Sandusky asked to retire?

 

[ctchamps]

Comparing what McQueary saw to the scenarios you described is patently absurd.

The degree of the crimes are not remotely equal.

The outrage to all these incidents is justified. The crimes were horrific, the duration of time was extraordinary especially considering there were many opportunities to end it sooner.

But nelson does have a point. We don't get involved in crimes. And that is condemning.
Part of our reaction to McQuaery isn't just his inaction at the shower or going to the police. Part of it is our attempt to convince ourselves we aren't like McQuaery. None of us has the slightest fear we behave like Sandusky. But we aren't sure if we were confronted with witnessing a horrific act, one which we were not prepared for ahead of time, we would act just act like McQuaery. This is why, imo, there aren't nearly as many posts attacking Sandusky, the real "villain" in this story, compared to the posts attacking McQuaery.

nelson's argument about crimes which many of us witness but don't take action is an indictment against our behaviors. There is a part of many of us that observe outrageous behaviors in other people to help us feel better about ourselves. We wouldn't do that makes us feel better about what we did.

 

[HuskyNan]

McQuery is now on an administrative leave of absence.

Article from USA Today

 

[Chin Diesel]

I go back to a great lesson I learned last year. My Commanding Officer was holding non judicial punishment on three Sailors over an unbelievably dumb choice they made. He said something that gave me perspective. As a CO he is basically judge and jury. His opinion of the facts is absolute. Unless a Sailors wants to appeal the decision to a court martial there isn't much remedy.

He said he was disappointed and hurt by what happened. But as the head of the organiztion he has to accept people making poor choices. He said when they slept on ot and still failed to notify anyone that's when it became criminal.

To me same thing applies here. Internet tough guy or not, I'm holding McQueary and anyone else who knew specifically what happened and failed to fully and accurately report and prosecute fully accountable.

 

[upstater]

Seriously? You are in that much denial? Why was Sandusky asked to retire?

What are you talking about? I'm asking you how it was covered up. There was a full blown police investigation and a sting. Did you read the GJ report? It contains all the information about the investigation and how that case ended. There was no cover-up.

 

[upstater]

I go back to a great lesson I learned last year. My Commanding Officer was holding non judicial punishment on three Sailors over an unbelievably dumb choice they made. He said something that gave me perspective. As a CO he is basically judge and jury. His opinion of the facts is absolute. Unless a Sailors wants to appeal the decision to a court martial there isn't much remedy.

He said he was disappointed and hurt by what happened. But as the head of the organiztion he has to accept people making poor choices. He said when they slept on ot and still failed to notify anyone that's when it became criminal.

To me same thing applies here. Internet tough guy or not, I'm holding McQueary and anyone else who knew specifically what happened and failed to fully and accurately report and prosecute fully accountable.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you as to what McQueary's responsibilities were. The discussion is about McQueary's immediate devcisions when he saw the rape.

 

[metsfan2323]

There was no cover-up.

You're right. There is no cover-up. Nothing to see here.

I'm half expecting that any day now we will see Al Cowlings driving Joe Paterno around in a white Bronco.

 

[upstater]

You're right. There is no cover-up. Nothing to see here.

I'm half expecting that any day now we will see Al Cowlings driving Joe Paterno around in a white Bronco.

You clearly are not following the case. You're the only one so far that has claimed there was a cover-up in 1998. unless you have something new to add about what went down then, it's pretty clear that everyone is on the record about 1998.

 

[Chin Diesel]

And that was the point I was making. As much as I want to believe I would react affirmatively right away I have to realize there can be confusion right away. But after sleeping on it McQueary still punted.

 

[businesslawyer]

Let me ask a question. How many on this board saw a guy pick up a drunken out of her mind girl at a frat party where it was possible the girl didn't have the legal capacity to consent to sex at the moment? Such that the sex they had was arguably date rape. Now, how many of you called the police that night so your friend couldn't take advantage of any other drunk girls in the future?

That is obviously a rhetorical question. But my point is that if we start with moral outrage for everyone who thinks they may be seeing a crime but doesn't report it, there may not be many people left with jobs by the time we're done.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Bizlaw-

I think you and many others are missing the point. This wasn't an 18 year old drunk frat boy. It was a 10 year old kid.

A more accurate analogy would be - you're hanging out at a frat party and one of the brothers is screwing a 10 year old in the shower. What do you do?
For me, I may look the other way when 2 adults engage in stupid and risky decisions. They are adults. It's entirely different when a 10 year old is involved

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Bizlaw-

I think you and many others are missing the point. This wasn't an 18 year old drunk frat boy. It was a 10 year old kid.

A more accurate analogy would be - you're hanging out at a frat party and one of the brothers is screwing a 10 year old in the shower. What do you do?
For me, I may look the other way when 2 adults engage in stupid and risky decisions. They are adults. It's entirely different when a 10 year old is involved

No, I think you are missing the point.

All the Internet tough guys on this board have most likely chosen to ignore situations where the personal consequences for intervening were limited, yet claim moral outrage because McQueary didn't put himself in great career and potentially legal risk.

McQueary is getting death threats. The message to any potential hero is clear. If you see a powerful man doing something bad, no matter how bad it is, keep your mouth shut.