Friday, November 18, 2011

McQueary's 2010 Handwritten Statement Provided Attorney General Makes No Mention of Stopping Assault

In 2010, Mike McQueary Wrote a Handwritten Statement About the 2002 Shower Incident

Yesterday, Sara Ganim of the Patriot-News, who has been lauded by her stellar coverage of the PSU scandal, wrote an article that in part stated the following:

The Patriot-News viewed the handwritten witness statement that McQueary gave after he was found by agents with the state attorney general’s office in 2010. The Patriot-News verified it through a source close to the investigation.

His statement is two pages long, and it makes no mention of McQueary making a statement to police. It says nothing about stopping the assault. It is very similar to the account summarized in the 23-page grand jury presentment.

McQueary wrote that he hastily left the locker room after allegedly seeing a boy about 10 years old being sodomized by Sandusky. Sandusky and the boy saw him, he wrote, but he doesn’t think he would recognize the boy today.

The whole thing lasted about a minute, he wrote.

Neither campus nor borough police received reports from McQueary about an alleged sexual assault in 2002, the departments said Wednesday.

State College Police Chief Tom King said McQueary didn’t make a report to his department. Penn State spokeswoman Annemarie Mountz said campus police also didn’t have any record of a report filed in 2002 by McQueary.
Mike McQueary's 2010 Handwritten Statement Consistent With Grand Jury Indictment


Like Watching a Car Crash
 These statements are consistent with the summary of McQueary's testimony before the Grand Jury contained in its Indictment.  There, its is said that, upon making eye contact with Jerry Sandusly and a boy approximately 10 years-old who McQueary asserts was being sodomized in a shower, McQueary "left immediately, distraught."  
 
No mention of stopping the incident is stated or suggested in the Indictment, or in McQueary's 2010 handwritten statement.

Mike McQueary's 2010 Handwritten Statement Inconsistent With McQueary's Recent E-Mail
 
McQueary's recent e-mail, the full text of which may be found Here, states that he "had discussions" with the police about the 2002 shower incident.

So, what is going on here?

Why Would Mike McQueary Lie?

One theory:  McQueary knows that Sandusky is not going to admit he was raping the boy, who so far has not been identified and who so far has apparently not come forward.  He figures that the boy is not going to come forward.  So, he can engage in some reputation restoration by claiming he stopped the assault, without risk that he will ever be contradicted.

Bad approach, Mike, for numerous reasons.

One, in saying what you said, you should have known that you were implicitly contradicting the Grand Jury; given that the Pennsylvania Attorney General is in charge of the case, that's akin to tugging on Superman's cape.

Two, by saying what you said, you cast the entire Indictment into doubt.  Where a star witness, the most important witness for the prosecution, does that, it increases the likelihood that the alleged perpetrator will gain an acquittal.

Three, what happens if the victim comes forward, and disagrees with your account.  In addition to the major hit to your reputation, such would be devastating to your credibility before a jury at trial (see point two, above).

Thanks to McQueary, Off Media Radar - For now
Four, even if the victim does not come forward, a guilty plea from Sandusky may result in him being required, through a process called allocution, to admit in detail his crimes in open court.  Such allocution will surely include admission and detail concerning the 2002 shower incident.

Five, and finally, you should have known that your e-mail, in addition to being contradicted by the Indictment, was contradicted by your own written statement.  Not good, Mike.

As serious as the entire scandal is, the post-Indictment actions of the players are stupefying. Here are some of the most startling.

Spanier: Now Supporting From a Distance
1.   PSU President Graham Spanier pledges "unconditional support" to two high ranking PSU officials indicted for perjury and failure to report sex crimes against children.  He is fired days later.


What Did You Know, Joe?
2.    Joe Paterno claims he would have done more if he had known that the boy was being sodomized, suggesting that he did "what he was supposed to" by reporting to his superiors what he understood to be mere sexual horseplay by a naked Jerry Sandusky and a 10 year-old boy in the PSU showers, and never following up with anyone about the incident ever again.  He is fired days later.


The Right Thing, Dad?
3.    John McQueary, Mike's father, said Mike did what he was supposed to in 2002, thereby blessing his son's decision to high-tail it out of the locker room after he witnessed the rape without intervening to stop it.  In making his statement, father McQueary also blessed his own actions, which consisted of encouraging his son to flee after receiving a call from him moments after he had witnessed the assault.
Seriously, Scott?
4.    Scott Paterno, JoePa's lawyer son, said that Joe did not know about the intense, prolonged 1998 investigation by PSU Police into another shower molestation charge against Sandusky. 
5.     Scott also claims that Sandusky's sudden and surprising resignation had nothing to do with the 1998 investigation.  He has since gone radio silent.



E-Mail Can Be Hazardous
6.     Mike McQueary sends e-mail (which appeared to be intended for leak) saying he stopped assault and that he spoke to police about 2002 incident, statements contradicted by Grand Jury Indictment, police and McQueary's own handwritten statement issued the prior year.  Now he is on administrative leave, firing imminent.



Watch What You Say, Joe
 7.    Sandusky's attorney Joe Amendola tells media he has found the 10 year-old boy in the shower, and the boy denies he was raped. WOW. If I had such a star witness (whose identity is unknown to all except Sandusky), I think I would keep under wraps. And, hoo boy, I would not say or even suggest that unless I knew for sure it was in the bag. We'll see.

Sad, sad situation.

Click Here to read why McQueary's E-Mail Pitted Him in Fight to the Death With PSU Police




No comments: