Re: Michael Vick vs Sandusky In A Post Racial Worl *LINK*
Posted By: seshatasefekht In Response To: Michael Vick vs Sandusky In A Post Racial World *NM* *LINK* (three_sixty)
Date: Monday, 19 December 2011, at 9:38 p.m.
In Response To: Michael Vick vs Sandusky In A Post Racial World *NM* *LINK* (three_sixty)
Penn State’s McQueary Tells Court What He Saw
By PETER DURANTINE
Published: December 16, 2011
HARRISBURG, Pa. — A Penn State assistant football coach testified Friday that in 2002 he saw Jerry Sandusky sexually assaulting a young boy and that he reported it, in graphic detail, to Coach Joe Paterno and two senior Penn State University officials.
Mike McQueary's testimony was the first public recounting of a critical episode in the case where Jerry Sandusky is charged with molesting 10 boys.
“I described it was extremely sexual and that some kind of intercourse was going on,” the assistant coach, Mike McQueary, testified of the suspected assault by Sandusky, a longtime top assistant to Paterno. “There’s no question in my mind that I conveyed to them that I saw Jerry in the showers, and that it was severe sexual acts, and that it was wrong and over the line.”
McQueary testified at a hearing at the Dauphin County Courthouse for two senior Penn State officials who have been charged with failing to report McQueary’s account to the authorities and later lying under oath. The testimony was the first public recounting of a critical episode in a case in which Sandusky has been charged with molesting 10 boys over many years, Paterno has been fired, and the university’s reputation has been badly damaged.
In his testimony, McQueary described his meeting with Paterno the morning after he said he had witnessed Sandusky assaulting the boy in the showers of the university’s football facility. McQueary said he sat at Paterno’s kitchen table and told him what he had seen Sandusky — Paterno’s assistant for 32 years and an immensely popular figure on campus in State College, Pa. — doing to a naked boy.
Paterno, he said, “slumped back in his chair.” “He said: ‘Well, I’m sorry you had to see that. It’s terrible. I need to think and tell some people about what you saw, and I’ll let you know what we’ll do next.’ ”
Paterno has said that he reported McQueary’s account to the two Penn State officials who have been charged in the case — Tim Curley, the university’s athletic director, and Gary Schultz, the university official whose duties included overseeing the campus police.
It was Paterno’s failure to act more aggressively — he never spoke with law enforcement, and it is unclear whether he ever sought to learn what Curley and Schultz had done with the information — that cost him his job last month. Paterno was fired after 61 years at Penn State and weeks after he set the record for the most victories by a major college football coach.
McQueary testified that he spared no details about what he saw when he later met with Curley and Schultz. He said the men told him that they would investigate, and they called him days later to tell him that they had ordered Sandusky not to bring children onto the university campus. McQueary was also told that the children’s charity founded by Sandusky was informed of the episode.
The Pennsylvania attorney general’s office, in charging Curley and Schultz, said the men had testified under oath that McQueary had never told them he had seen anything as serious as a sexual assault, only that Sandusky might have been “horsing around” with a young boy in the shower.
Sandusky, who has been charged with 52 counts of molesting boys, has insisted that he is innocent.
The hearing Friday was held for prosecutors to persuade a judge that there was adequate evidence to go forward with the perjury cases against Curley and Schultz. When the hearing was over, District Judge William C. Wenner ordered the case to go to trial.
Caroline Roberto, a lawyer for Curley, and Tom Farrell, a lawyer for Schultz, said that their clients would be acquitted, that perjury was not just one person’s word against another, and that prosecutors lacked corroborating witnesses.
“They will never be able to reach their burden of proof at trial,” Roberto said.
Friday afternoon, the sworn testimony that Paterno, Curley and Schultz had given to a grand jury hearing evidence in the case was read aloud in court.
Paterno, in that testimony, said that he, too, made clear to Curley and Schultz that what McQueary had seen and reported involved sexually inappropriate behavior by Sandusky.
“A mature man was fondling, whatever you call it, I don’t know what the term is, a young boy,” Paterno testified.
Paterno told prosecutors that he knew Curley and Schultz well enough to trust that they would take what actions were appropriate.
Paterno, though, was also asked why he had not reported McQueary’s accusations to his superiors more quickly. Paterno seemed to suggest that he waited a day because it was a Saturday.
“I didn’t want to interfere with their weekend,” Paterno testified.
In the Curley testimony that was read aloud into the court record, he was asked by prosecutors during the grand jury hearing to describe what Paterno had told him and Schultz. Curley asked, “Am I supposed to go through the whole thing?”
Curley testified that he reported what Paterno had told him to Graham Spanier, then the university president. Curley said he then talked to Sandusky about the account, reported the allegation to the executive director at Second Mile, the Sandusky charity that was created to help disadvantaged children, then followed up by letting Paterno and McQueary know the actions he took.
In his testimony, Curley said McQueary never told him anything more serious had happened than that Sandusky and the boy were “wrestling” and “horsing around.”
Curley testified that he never reported the 2002 episode to the police, only to Spanier. Asked why, he told the prosecutor, “I didn’t think it was a crime at the time.”
McQueary, under questioning by lawyers for Curley and Schultz, was forced to explain his own behavior after witnessing the suspected assault. He said he had not initially considered going straight to the police; he thought that in speaking with Curley and Schultz, who oversaw the campus police, that he had acted adequately.
“I thought I was talking to the head of the police, to be frank with you,” he said of his conversation with Schultz.
McQueary said he, over the years, found it upsetting to continue to see Sandusky on the Penn State campus.
“I personally found it troubling and not right,” he said.
McQueary’s father also testified on Friday. He said his son had called him the night of the episode and later spoke to him in person. He said he told him of the sexual assault.
McQueary’s father, who said he had long known Schultz, candidly asserted that he thought Schultz and others had failed in their handling of the episode.
“I’m now in the position to say Gary Schultz did nothing about it,” John McQueary testified.
McQueary believes he saw Sandusky molest boy
December 16 2011
HARRISBURG, Pa. State assistant football coach testified Friday that he believes he saw former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky molesting a boy on campus and that he fully conveyed what he had seen to two Penn State administrators.
Mike McQueary, speaking for the first time in public about the 2002 encounter in a Penn State locker room, said he believes that Sandusky was attacking the child with his hands around the boy’s waist but said he wasn’t 100 percent sure it was intercourse.
McQueary took the stand Friday morning in a Pennsylvania courtroom during a preliminary hearing for university
officials Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, who are accused of lying to a grand jury about what McQueary told them.
At the conclusion of the hearing, District Judge William C. Wenner ruled that prosecutors have enough evidence to send their cases to trial.
McQueary’s story is central to the case against Curley and Schultz. They testified to the grand jury that McQueary never relayed the seriousness of what he saw. The officials, and Penn State coach Joe Paterno, have been criticized for never telling police about the 2002 allegation. Prosecutors saySandusky continued to abuse boys for six more years.
The lawyers for Curley and Schultz say the men are innocent and that uncorroborated testimony from McQueary is not enough on which to hang the case. Curley and Schultz told the grand jury that they remembered McQueary reporting only something inappropriate, like wrestling, but nothing as serious as rape.
McQueary, who was on the stand for about two hours Friday, said he had stopped by a campus football locker room to drop off a pair of sneakers in the spring of 2002 when he heard slapping sounds in a shower and happened upon Sandusky and the boy.
He said Sanduskywas behind the boy he estimated to be 10 or 12 years old, with his hands wrapped around the youngster’s waist. He said the boy was facing a wall, with his hands on it.
McQueary, 37, said he has never described what he saw as anal rape or anal intercourse and couldn’t see Sandusky’s genitals, but that ‘‘it was very clear that it looked like there was intercourse going on.’’
In its report last month, the grand jury summarized McQueary’s testimony as saying he ‘‘saw a naked boy …with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky.’’
Under cross examination by an attorney for Curley, McQueary reiterated that he had not seen Sandusky penetrating or fondling the boy but was nearly certain they were having intercourse because the two were standing so close and Sandusky’s arms were wrapped around the youth.
He said he peeked into the shower three times — the first via a mirror, the other two times directly. The last time he looked in, Sandusky and the boy had separated, he said. He said he didn’t say anything, but ‘‘I know they saw me. They looked directly in my eye, both of them.’’
McQueary said the entire encounter — from when he first entered the locker room to when he retreated to his office — lasted about 45 seconds.
McQueary said he reported what he saw to Paterno but never went to police.
He said he did not give Paterno explicit details of what he believed he'd seen, saying he wouldn’t have used terms like sodomy or anal intercourse out of respect for the longtime coach.
Paterno told the grand jury that McQueary reported seeing Sandusky doing something of a ‘‘sexual nature’’ with the
youngster but that he didn’t press for details.
‘‘I didn’t push Mike …because he was very upset,’’ Paterno said. ‘‘I knew Mike was upset, and I knew some kind of inappropriate action was being taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster.’’
McQueary said Paterno told him he'd ‘‘done the right thing’’ by reporting the encounter. The head coach appeared shocked and saddened and slumped back in his chair, McQueary said.
Paterno told McQueary he would talk to others about what he'd reported.
Nine or 10 days later, McQueary said he met with Curley and Schultz and told them he'd seen Sandusky and a boy, both naked, in the shower after hearingskin-on-skin slapping sounds.
‘‘I told them that I saw Jerry in the showers with a young boy and that what I had seen was extremely sexual and over the lines and it was wrong,’’ McQueary said. ‘‘I would have described that it was extremely sexual and I thought that some kind of intercourse was going on.’’
McQueary said he was left with the impression both men took his report seriously. When asked why he didn’t go to police, he referenced Schultz’s position as a vice president at the university who had overseen the campus police.
‘‘I thought I was talking to the head of the police, to be frank with you,’’ he said. ‘‘In my mind it was like speaking to a (district attorney). It was someone who police reported to and would know what to do with it.’’
Curley told the grand jury that he couldn’t recall his specific conversation with McQueary, but that McQueary never reported seeing anal intercourse or other sexual conduct. He said he recalled McQueary reporting wrestling or ‘‘horsing around.’’
Schultz said he remembered McQueary and Paterno describing what the younger coach saw only in a very general way.
‘‘I had the impression it wasinappropriate,’’ Schultz told the grand jury. ‘‘I had the feeling it was some king of wrestling activity and maybe Jerry might have grabbed a young boys genitals.’’
Under cross-examination, McQueary said he considered what he saw a crime but didn’t call police because ‘‘it was
delicate in nature.’’
‘‘I tried to use my best judgment,’’ he said. ‘‘I was sure the act was over.’’ He said he never tried to find the boy.
Paterno, Schultz and Curley didn’t testify, but Judge Wenner read their grand jury testimony from January in weighing the case.
Curley’s attorney, Caroline Roberto, said prosecutors ‘‘will never be able to reach their burden proof at a trial.’’
Schultz’s attorney, Tom Farrell, predicted his client would be acquitted.
He also took a shot at Paterno, saying, ‘‘I'm an Italian from Brooklyn, and he may not have called the police but he may have done what I would have done, which is get the boys in the car with a few baseball bats and crowbars and take it to the fellow.’’
Sandusky says he is innocent of more than 50 charges stemming from what authorities say were sexual assaults
over 12 years on 10 boys in his home, on Penn State property and elsewhere. The scandal has provoked strong criticism that Penn State officials didn’t do enough to stop Sandusky, and prompted the departures of Paterno and the school’s longtime president, Graham Spanier.
Curley, 57, Penn State’s athletic director, was placed on leave by the university after his arrest. Schultz, 62, returned to retirement after spending about four decades at the school, most recently as senior vice president for business and finance, and treasurer.
Messages In This Thread
Rastafari Speaks is maintained by Administrator with RastafariSpeaks.com 5.12.
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml