LMAO @ MikeandMike

[TheVictors]

So after going on a rant about former PSU Grad Assistant last week, now they're backpedaling and blaming the AG for not including additional detail in the original GJ presentation vs Sandusky

 

[Michchamp]

So after going on a rant about former PSU Grad Assistant last week, now they're backpedaling and blaming the AG for not including additional detail in the original GJ presentation vs Sandusky

wait, what?

they don't understand how grand juries work

 

[lostleader]

Its all fucked up. I want to believe Sandusky, when he says this is not as it seems and he didn't do anything. However, I don't think he is innocent.

 

[Michchamp]

going out and trying this in the court of opinion like that is a bush league move.

it's kinda disgusting how brazen Sandusky is. Even looking at his actions, going into the locker rooms while staff was there (!)... this is a guy who either wanted to get caught, or wanted to flaunt his belief that he could get away with it.

the timing in all this is strange, given that the grand jury has been around for some time, and Sandusky has been aware of the charges; guessing he really believed it would stay buried, and only now that it hasn't been, he's going public.

and the judge that set his bail much lower than what the prosecution asked for was a member of the Second Mile, I think on the board of directors.

and according to some news reports, his attorney, Amendola, fathered a child with a girl who was 17 at the time. he later married her. he was allegedly representing her for her emancipation proceedings (i.e. to be declared a legal adult, free of parents) when she became pregnant. the article said that he refused to comment.

 

[cmrlily]

and according to some news reports, his attorney, Amendola, fathered a child with a girl who was 17 at the time. he later married her. he was allegedly representing her for her emancipation proceedings (i.e. to be declared a legal adult, free of parents) when she became pregnant. the article said that he refused to comment.

Wow!
I guess he wasn't listening during that ethics seminar where they clearly state "Don't have sex with your clients." Lots of filth in that courtroom.

 

[Michchamp]

and according to some news reports, his attorney, Amendola, fathered a child with a girl who was 17 at the time. he later married her. he was allegedly representing her for her emancipation proceedings (i.e. to be declared a legal adult, free of parents) when she became pregnant. the article said that he refused to comment.

Wow!
I guess he wasn't listening during that ethics seminar where they clearly state "Don't have sex with your clients." Lots of filth in that courtroom.

maybe the Pennsylvania Bar never adopted ABA Model Rule 1.9?

there's a loophole in the rule for relationships that existed prior to the attorney-client relationship... which I guess, given her age here, is not going to help his cause.

 

[TheVictors]

My OP came from MandM having Roger Cosack on to talk about the Sandusky interview and some developments, including an email from McQueary to former teammates where he says he did in fact intervene. Based on this development, you could sense the embarrassment (esp from Golic) coming from going off last week about being a man, being a coward ...how it was inconceivable for McQueary to abandon that Victim ..... ALL OF WHICH CAME FROM TAKING THE GJ PRESENTATION against Sandusky as being exhaustive testimony. And instead of admitting to being overreactive or misinformed, Weenieberg goes on about why or how an DA would omit facts about McQueary's story in order to prevent being convicted in the Court of Opinion and being subject to death threats....


So, what MikeandMike were saying is, "We feel a bit guilty about flaming the fires around McQueary by assuming events took place as we interpreted them to be from the Grand Jury report available on the internet ...to the extent that we helped create an environment where this guy became as guilty as Sandusky and was already GUILTY of not stopping the abuses, therefore aiding."

But maybe he did stop Sandusky ...maybe all the other things about McQueary weren't detailed because the GJ was about whether or not to pursue charges against Sandusky ....

I'm no lawyer, but I've seen A LOT of Law & Order ..... And Golic was one of many on ESPN, all tough former athletes, who proclaimed they'd have exacted justice on Sandusky right then and there and that by not (Assumption), McQueary was just as bad as Sandusky.

But now it's the DA's fault for not including details immaterial to the investigation on Sandusky in terms of whether or not to bring charges.....?



Right ....

 

[redandguilty]

I figured some parts of the story had to be portrayed wrong. There's probably more still to develop. This looks worse for Paterno since it makes it even more unlikely that McQueary failed to properly convey what happened...but we'll see how things shake out. As bad as it looks, it's still difficult to believe that Paterno just let this sort of thing continue.

 

[Michchamp]

well... the timeline here is pretty damning to McQueary.

incident happened in 2002. He testified to the GJ in Dec. 2010.

8 years.

even allowing Paterno & Co. time to investigate, corroborate, etc. at some point you figure he should have gone directly to the police, or resigned. Staying on at PennSt makes it appear he was more concerned with his career than doing the right thing. But, as Mike and Mike learned, all we have is a public record containing some of the facts, not all of them. almost no physical evidence here, so much of the public record contains hearsay and personal opinions & perceptions. maybe some other evidence will emerge that will exonerate McQueary (I can't even begin to think of what that might be, but still).

 

[wlvrnstlr4life]

There is one fact for sure..........everyone knew about Sandusky. That much is a given. How much and how far did they go for a coverup? We'll all find out. I really think Paterno's goose(image) is cooked.

 

[wlvrnstlr4life]

And you know who else was coaching long enough at PSU to know about Sandusky? Tom Bradley
We'll see where that one goes in the off-season.

 

[silverbullet97]

well... the timeline here is pretty damning to McQueary.

incident happened in 2002. He testified to the GJ in Dec. 2010.

8 years.

even allowing Paterno & Co. time to investigate, corroborate, etc. at some point you figure he should have gone directly to the police, or resigned. Staying on at PennSt makes it appear he was more concerned with his career than doing the right thing. But, as Mike and Mike learned, all we have is a public record containing some of the facts, not all of them. almost no physical evidence here, so much of the public record contains hearsay and personal opinions & perceptions. maybe some other evidence will emerge that will exonerate McQueary (I can't even begin to think of what that might be, but still).

No no no. We do not do the Due Process thing around here! I saw it on ESPN and that is all I need to know!

 

[TheVictors]

Well as an attorney, isn't it true that if you're in the DA's office and you're seeking to bring charges on an individual, all that would pertain to the Sandusky case would be (yet another) eye-witness account to corroborate others? That what exactly McQueary did besides WITNESSING what he did is irrelevant as to whether you charge Sandusky or not?

So many people just assumed McQueary did nothing and got a cushy coaching job to keep him quiet. That's clearly a reach based on the 26pg indictment, though may prove true at some point.

And by the way, I am in no way defending anyone involved in this, just find it hypocritical for those contributing to the media circus acting as if the circus is the fault of the DA's office for NOT including details that sports radio talkers would have needed in order NOT to jump to conclusions and villify someone for the better part of a week's airtime.

 

[redandguilty]

Could be a misread, but now the email from McQueary says he did go to police.

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-penn-state-scandal-mcqueary-20111115,0,1687969.story

 

[wlvrnstlr4life]

And now the police say he never did. Actually, city and campus police both say he didn't come to them. This situation is getting wierder by the minute and now Paterno sells his house to his wife for a $1 back in July or June is it. That dude already knew there would be fallout.

 

[Michchamp]

at this point, none of the parties involved - including the police - have any credibility as far as I'm concerned; all have incentives to lie to protect what's left of their reputations given the fact that they sat around while Sandusky continued to prey on kids.

but in this case, as far as we know, McQueary's testimony to the grand jury did not include the fact that he went to the police, since it was not included it in their findings, even though the report stated they found his testimony credible.

the GJ findings + the police statement regarding a lack of any contact w/McQueary outweighs his claim in my mind.

I think McQueary is basically a typical dumb former jock football coach. He had the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time... and he handled it just about the way you'd expect a typical dumb former jock football coach concerned about his career to handle it. If his superiors let him down (and they did), it still doesn't excuse the fact that he remained there for EIGHT YEARS while nothing was ever done about it.

in my experience, when absolutely cornered and having their reputation shredded in public, most people - especially dumb former jocks with a lifelong sense of entitlement, including relying on others to clean up the messes they make, will lie through their teeth to get out of an unpleasant situation. that's what McQueary is doing here.

 

[zyxt9]

Yeah...ummm...I still think that McQueary failed by not contacting the police IMMEDIATELY so they could arrest Sandusky that day and collect all available evidence at the scene of the crime. That falls squarely on McQueary. He could have had a 911 tape of his contact with police available as proof he contacted the police instead of him claiming he contacted them and the police denying it. He obviously did NOT contact the police at the most appropriate time, if ever. If he had, all of this would have been handled correctly with the repurcussions still pertaining to the admins at PSU, but not the football program. By that I mean, the janitor who reported the 1998 incident and lack of follow up by his boss and the PSU admins and police...all of that would have exploded, but Paterno would still be coaching today (barring any damning evidence that he was somehow knowledgeable or involved).

I just cannot put myself in McQueary's place and believe his actions were justifiable. Sandusky would have been in jail then, Second Mile would have had the negative press at that time, and who knows how many boys would have been protected by him bashing Sandusky's skull in at that moment or at a minimum calling 911. That is the thing he still doesn't get. The MINIMUM that should have been done upon witnessing that incident was to immediately call 911.

 

[hungry]

Well, supposedly there was an email at the time from McQueary to a friend that he put in there that he had contacted the police. This isn't just something he is changing his story to now that everyone is attacking him for doing nothing. We don't really know if he told the truth in this old email, but the email is supposedly from at the time he supposedly walked in on this thing.

Like I said before, though. This is all alleged. Now i'm fairly certain that Sandusky did some things that he wasn't supposed to. What he did, I do not know. What McQueary and Paterno did, said, didn't do, didn't say, or knew at the time is all in question. Its really weird. Some of the people that I know who are all about 'innocent until proven guilty' have already convicted McQueary and Paterno of crimes.

 

[Michchamp]

Well, supposedly there was an email at the time from McQueary to a friend that he put in there that he had contacted the police. This isn't just something he is changing his story to now that everyone is attacking him for doing nothing. We don't really know if he told the truth in this old email, but the email is supposedly from at the time he supposedly walked in on this thing.

Like I said before, though. This is all alleged. Now i'm fairly certain that Sandusky did some things that he wasn't supposed to. What he did, I do not know. What McQueary and Paterno did, said, didn't do, didn't say, or knew at the time is all in question. Its really weird. Some of the people that I know who are all about 'innocent until proven guilty' have already convicted McQueary and Paterno of crimes.

It's almost like "hot potato." My understanding is that PA law requires educational institutions to report incidents like these to law enforcement. McQueary and Paterno essential passed the "hot potato" up the chain. At some point, someone had a duty to report it, and it looks like that duty was not fulfilled. The question is now where that duty lies; as of now, the DA has concluded it was with Curly and Schmidt, or Schultz, or whatever his name is.

but as we've said, while McQueary & Paterno may have done their legal duty, they (assuming all the allegations & record in the grand jury findings are true) failed a greater moral duty.

 

[hungry]

Well, supposedly there was an email at the time from McQueary to a friend that he put in there that he had contacted the police. This isn't just something he is changing his story to now that everyone is attacking him for doing nothing. We don't really know if he told the truth in this old email, but the email is supposedly from at the time he supposedly walked in on this thing.

Like I said before, though. This is all alleged. Now i'm fairly certain that Sandusky did some things that he wasn't supposed to. What he did, I do not know. What McQueary and Paterno did, said, didn't do, didn't say, or knew at the time is all in question. Its really weird. Some of the people that I know who are all about 'innocent until proven guilty' have already convicted McQueary and Paterno of crimes.

It's almost like "hot potato." My understanding is that PA law requires educational institutions to report incidents like these to law enforcement. McQueary and Paterno essential passed the "hot potato" up the chain. At some point, someone had a duty to report it, and it looks like that duty was not fulfilled. The question is now where that duty lies; as of now, the DA has concluded it was with Curly and Schmidt, or Schultz, or whatever his name is.

but as we've said, while McQueary & Paterno may have done their legal duty, they (assuming all the allegations & record in the grand jury findings are true) failed a greater moral duty.

Unless McQueary actually did contact the authorities. Obviously, there's still the issue that the authorities didn't do anything, but what do you do in a situation like that, tell them again? If McQueary told Paterno about the incident and then told Paterno that he already contacted the campus police, then should Paterno again contact the campus police? How detailed was the report that McQueary allegedly supplied to Paterno? These are things that we do not know and that without this knowledge, I find it difficult for me to convict these people beyond a reasonable doubt. I'm not going to be on any jury, though. I just can't say that I know exactly what happened at any of these levels that things were supposed to happen. What if the police just would not cooperate? Then what?