Wednesday, November 16, 2011

If Mike McQueary Told Grand Jury He Stopped Rape, Then Indictment is Grossly Unfair. If not...

Mike McQueary Claims He Stopped Rape and Spoke With Police About 2002 Shower Incident at Penn State

On November 15, an e-mail from McQueary was published wherein he stated that he stopped the rape before he left the building. Subsequent news reports suggest that McQueary has also stated that he talked to the police about the incident.

Were PSU Police Told of 2002 Incident?
If these things are true, 2 thoughts come to mind: 1) the Grand Jury Indictment should have stated that McQueary stopped the incident before departing the building. Instead, it states that after making eye contact with the victim and Sandusky, McQueary "left immediately, distraught." and, 2) either McQueary is lying or the police have some serious questions to answer.

Click Here for the full text of the Mike McQueary E-Mail.

Indictment Unfair to McQueary if He Stopped Rape

The portions of the Grand Jury Indictment suggesting that McQueary left immediately after seeing the incident led to the vilification of Mike McQueary around the World on the grounds that he left and allowed the rape to continue.

What Didn't the GJ Tell Us?
I am sure that McQueary was asked many, many questions by the Grand Jury about exactly what transpired on that night in March 2002 when he alleges that he witnessed Sandusky anally raping a boy in a PSU shower.

Is He Lying, or is Something Else Going On?
 I am equally sure that McQueary answered those questions with the most detail he could muster. Surely, he would have told the Grand Jury that the rape stopped before he left the building.

NOTE:  Even so, McQueary's e-mail explanation leaves something to be desired. What does "stopped" mean?  Did Sandusky and the boy get dressed and leave together before McQueary departed?

If he told the Grand Jury that the rape stopped before he left the building, that should have been in the Indictment.  Shame on the Grand Jury for omitting such facts if they were aware of same. Such an indictment would have been read and revised many times before it was published.  The description of McQueary's actions that night as stated in the Indictment would plainly have left anyone to conclude that his conduct, as described, would be condemned.

If he did not tell the Grand Jury that the rape stopped before he left, then something is amiss.  That is not the type of detail one leaves out when testifying under oath in such a serious matter. 

Were Police Sloppy or is McQueary Lying About Speaking With Them About 2002 Shower Incident?

The Indictment makes clear that the Grand Jury found that neither McQueary nor anyone else at PSU spoke to the police about the 2002 incident. It states further that police records were subpoenaed, and no report or information concerning the 2002 incident was produced.

Is McQueary lying, or did the police not keep records of such discussion?  Click Here to read our analysis on that potentially explosive and case-turning issue.

For the truly nefarious-minded, is it possible the police, when subpoenaed by the Grand Jury, realized they had a problem and buried the report?  It's happened before, I suppose...

Interested in our overview of the PSU Scandal? Click Here.

No comments: