epocSoN Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think the entire department will get wiped clean. And depending on how deep the cover up goes (paying off the police/DA's office) the entire school will be in deep deep sh#t. Quote Link to comment
Paul in WI Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 McQueary may not have been terminated because the attorney general's office doesn't want to lose him as a cooperative witness. They could have requested that Penn State not alienate him by firing him. He might also have immunity for his cooperation and further testimony. Quote Link to comment
Judoka Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Would a whistle-blower law apply in his case? Quote Link to comment
NoKoolAidForME Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Would a whistle-blower law apply in his case? I would assume that it depends on what kind of documentation they have. The fact that he is a witness to the event and has not faced any legal persecution for inaction. I would have to assume that there in enough information to corroborate his testimony and the fact that he did tell his superior. Also to our knowledge, He didn't go outside of organization to report. (Media, police, abuse hotline). He just followed chain of command. So technically he wouldn't face persecution from his employer or the D.A. The only thing he would have to deal with is if he lied to the Police or Grand Jury when questioned. Quote Link to comment
Landomatic Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Maybe McQueary knows a lot more than he has said and PSU doesn't want him to say more? Keep him close, keep him happy, keep him employed and he can help carry the torch on the company line. Piss him off and he may turn against you with what he really knows. Quote Link to comment
NoKoolAidForME Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 That my usually l Maybe McQueary knows a lot more than he has said and PSU doesn't want him to say more? Keep him close, keep him happy, keep him employed and he can help carry the torch on the company line. Piss him off and he may turn against you with what he really knows. That's my usually line of thinking. Most of the time I am viewed as going overboard with my conclusions but in cases like this I am never in the minority with people taking jumps and trying to connect the dots. Quote Link to comment
huskerscott Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 IMO. Since JoePa got canned without so much of his side of the story, then McQueary needs to be gone too. Quote Link to comment
NU41SB Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not enough. If Penn State is going around and firing everyone related to the incident and who did not tell, then they should ask McQueary to step down as well. Otherwise, they shouldn't have fired Paterno, Spanier, etc... Now let me take some time to maybe throw this "non-reporting" thing into perspective. And also let me put a disclaimer out right now so I am not jumped for what I'm about to say: I am NOT CONDONING anything that happened in Happy Valley. What transpired was an awful act and all those involved deserve what they are getting, even Joe Paterno. That said, what happened was a classical case of a "diffusion of responsibility". Regardless of the crime, a diffusion of responsibility occurs as more people become involved. They pass off the responsibility of reporting on the premise that, "certainly somebody else will report this." The best chance of this scandal coming to light faster would have happened if McQueary called the police right away. But that sounds a whole lot easier for us to say than for us to do given we be put in the same situation--it is a self-serving bias; "I would've called the authorities right away." But none of us are certain what we would've done in the same situation. Certainly there is a lot of shock value in seeing one of your idols, a man you respected, committing such a heinous crime. One wouldn't know what to think, or what to do. I mean after all, the guy is/was your longtime friend. That being said, I once again want to say I am not condoning what Sandusky did or what everyone else didn't do. All I'm trying to do is shed light on the circumstances. I agree, it's called the bystander effect. People naturally don't want to be the whistle blower, there have been a ton of social studies on this. That being said, its still not a reason to take any blame away from the people that knew. (Not saying you are advocating that) What you said reminded me of this. Quote Link to comment
It'sNotAFakeID Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 It's interesting trying to understand exactly why those who knew didn't tell. Here's what's very difficult to understand though. Telling the authorities what happened carried absolutely no risk at all. It would've made sense from a decision making standpoint for McQueary, Paterno, or Spanier to tell the cops. Unless of course there was an unknown risk say from the boosters. Makes me think that they've only sniffed the surface of this scandal. Quote Link to comment
EbylHusker Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 IMO. Since JoePa got canned without so much of his side of the story, then McQueary needs to be gone too. "Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant's report at his home on a Saturday morning. Paterno testified that the graduate assistant was very upset. Paterno call Tim Curley ("Curley"), Penn State Athletic Director and Paterno's immediate superior, to his home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy." That's a summary of Paterno's side of the story, as told to the grand jury. I'd say he got to tell his side of the story just fine, and it tells of a man who should no longer be the head coach at PSU. And so he isn't. Quote Link to comment
HuskerCarter Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 McQueary will be in the booth coaching, not on the field due to concerns about his safety during the game. Quote Link to comment
huskerscott Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 IMO. Since JoePa got canned without so much of his side of the story, then McQueary needs to be gone too. "Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant's report at his home on a Saturday morning. Paterno testified that the graduate assistant was very upset. Paterno call Tim Curley ("Curley"), Penn State Athletic Director and Paterno's immediate superior, to his home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy." That's a summary of Paterno's side of the story, as told to the grand jury. I'd say he got to tell his side of the story just fine, and it tells of a man who should no longer be the head coach at PSU. And so he isn't. Thanks. I got so confused reading so much about the story, that I didnt realize JoePa actually testified to the grand jury. I thought the above quote was from McQueary or was just presumed. Quote Link to comment
Comish Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Latest rumor is that McQuery will NOT be coaching on Saturday................ Quote Link to comment
True2tRA Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 I think what this McQueary did could be considered as quite a bit more offensive than what Paterno is guilty of. I mean, both guys deserve to be fired, but hell, this McQueary guy witnessed this disgusting act actually happening and ran out of the room like a pathetic little girl. What kind of coward piece of garbage doesn't get in there and beat the piss out of that 60 year old perverted filth excuse for a human being. I have to be honest with you all, I'd like to strap on the 4 oz. gloves and step into the octagon with these a$$hole$ for a round. Quote Link to comment
HUSKER FREAK Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 I wouldn't need the gloves, but I totally agree with you. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.