Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

Posted on: December 11, 2011 11:48 am
Edited on: December 11, 2011 11:55 am
 
Posted by Jerry Hinnen

The Harrisburg Patriot-News reported Sunday that the grand jury in the Jerry Sandusky case has heard a second, different version of what Penn State then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary witnessed in his 2002 encounter with Sandusky and a young boy in a PSU locker room.

McQueary has reportedly told the grand jury that he saw Sandusky and the boy engaged in a graphic sex act. But according to a source quoted in the Sunday Patriot-News report, the grand jury has also heard conflicting testimony from McQueary family friend Dr. Jonathan Dranov.  Per the source's account of Dranov's testimony, Dranov was present at the McQueary home when McQueary returned from the incident to discuss it with his father.

Dranov reportedly told the grand jury that McQueary's account that evening included seeing the boy and an adult sharing a shower stall and Sandusky leaving the showers (amongst other details), but not the graphic act of his earlier reported testimony. Dranov then advised McQueary to discuss the matter with Joe Paterno rather than go to the police, according to the Patriot-News source.

The precise nature of what McQueary told Paterno in their ensuing discussion has been the center of much of the outrage surrounding Paterno's and the PSU administration's inaction.

McQueary was placed on administrative leave from his coaching duties November 11 amidst threats to his safety.
Comments

Since: Dec 20, 2006
Posted on: December 12, 2011 2:34 am
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

@FootballSavant, I second that and really have been saying that all along. No one, other than those directly involved, knows what went on. Not saying we shouldn't care but I don't believe we should be on a witch hunt either.




Since: Apr 17, 2009
Posted on: December 12, 2011 2:12 am
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

Aren't we a bit more intelligent than this?  We are getting information 10th person or worse.  People are writing stories based on their perception of what someone is speaking of in accounting a situation more than 10 years ago.  Is Sandusky a pig, it would sure seem that way.  He admits, so the stories go, that he showered with boys and that in itself is gross.  But who writing these stories was there the day that McQueary told Jo Pa?  If the later reports are true, then why didn't Mcqueary do something?  He was a grown man, and a big man at that and he is saying he had to run home to daddy and then slept in his nice warm bed that night before strolling to Jo Pa's house to tell him he just witnessed rape of a child?  If that's true, he should be in jail with Sandusky...that's equally gross!!  I have no idea what was said to Jo Pa, and neither do you.  Someone does, and hopefully it will come out but until then, how about we calm the lynch mob and act like intelligent people.  How about we read the stories and wait to bash Jo Pa until after the full story is heard.  How about we stay neutral and not persecute an innocent man (Jo Pa) nor exonerate a guilty one.



Since: Feb 13, 2010
Posted on: December 12, 2011 12:15 am
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

The whole thing is just gross.  The new grand jury report especially.  The evidence says JoPa, the most powerful man in PA, knew and protected his guy, the program, something and this continued.  The creaky, nearly dead old football coach went from a Medal of Freedom nomination to nearly dead and disgraced for all time.  THIS IS THE LEGACY HE HAS LEFT.



Since: Nov 28, 2010
Posted on: December 11, 2011 11:54 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

It seems more an more like McQuearry is trying to muddy the waters after the fact. My guess is he testified truthfully about what he saw. People were bashing him and were highly disgusted when we learned that he did nothing to stop the rape in the shower. Once he realized how he looks like a coward he changes his story and acts like he didn't really see a rape so as to justify his omitting to act.



Since: Mar 9, 2007
Posted on: December 11, 2011 11:37 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

notorious,

I'm not really sure, at this rate, that anything is out of the realm of possibility.


If you ask any level-headed Nittany Lion fan, they will say, "If Joe Paterno was proven negligent in his handling of the situation, then, yes, burn him at the proverbial stake." But the problem with all of this (and the whole moral argument) is no one knows what was said to him, the manner it was said, who said it to him, and the situation of the matter. Unless anyone including ESPN was there and witnessed it and has physical evidence, then how can we be judge, jury, and executioner since we don't know? So, yeah, I'm going to support Joe until he's proven negligent. If you want a completely different spin on Joe Paterno (since we've heard nothing but negatives about the man)... 

As far as supporting the University and making it look good, it's very divided here. It all depends on how you perceive "making the University look good." From a students perspective, there are so many positives at Penn State that these allegations will never be able to tarnish ie: THON () or finding a potential cure for breast cancer (). We're angry about how the Board of Trustees has handled it, first and foremost. They have done everything that is in the best interest of the Board, NOT the University as a whole... And to an outsider, it would definitely be viewed as something that would be considered "grasping for straws." 

The biggest problem is that no one knows the truth. There are a whole lot of opinions and not too many facts. No one will ever know what REALLY happened except the victims and Jerry Sandusky.  



Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: December 11, 2011 10:44 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

It doesn't matter anymore at this point. McCreary will never be able to coach again and may even need to change his name. There are still victims coming forward and testifying. McCreary's testimony will be a small part of the evidence against Sandusky when all is said and done. Anyone involved in the obvious coverup needs jail time. 



Since: Jun 3, 2011
Posted on: December 11, 2011 10:40 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

McQueary needs to understand that even if he did the right thing, the attempts to spin the situation to make him look bad and a liar will continue to protect JoePa.  If Paterno knew any of this was going on and kept quiet or was told by administration to keep quiet his legacy is ruined, he needs a scapegoat.  Must feel good to know the guy you idolized growing up and lived your dream of playing for is driving the bus that is running over you and your integrity.



Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: December 11, 2011 10:34 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

Isn't it intriguing how this new account parallel's Joe Paterno's? 

But in all honesty, who am I kidding? The media wants you to believe it's all Joe's fault... 
Isn't it intriguing how Penn State and Joe Paterno apologists will grab onto anything they can that may make Paterno or Penn State look better in this situation.  Even going so far as to rely on an unnamed source who claims he knows what Dranov did or did not testify to the grand jury.  Of course, an unnamed source is unverifiable and Dranov isn't allowed to discuss what he did or did not testify to and, beyond that, Dranov may be playing up his involvement (if what the unnamed source says is even true.)  And let's not leave out the fact that Dranov works at Penn State, has known Paterno for years, and could have been coached in order to keep Paterno's name clean.

Am I being cynical?  Certainly, but that doesn't mean it is out of the realm of possibility.  --notorious98

Yes, you are, understandably so. That said, I've thought from early on that MacQueary's end of the deal probably DID happen much as Dranov (perhaps) testified. Child molesters who fit the seducer profile hone their technique over time, always in control, no matter how outrageous their behavior is otherwise. Fuel his fantasy with "horseplay" in a public shower, you betcha. Lose control and put his games and his personal liberty at peril? Very, very unlikely.

So, no actual rape occurs, but the thing is what it is, so maybe MacQueary's been beating himself up over it from jump street, convincing himself that his committing perjury back then would've saved a lot of heartache. Over time, misplaced guilt and a weak mind change the facts around in the guy's own mind. Now, he believes that to which he never could or would have sworn back in the day. Even in situations far less fraught with consequence, eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, some more so than others. People can and do come to believe all manner of nonsense with all their hearts and souls.

Now, I know full well that I'll never convince those who are bound and determined to think the worst of either the "high and mighty" in general, or Joe Paterno in particular, that things weren't deliberately and callously swept under the rug. (After all, the Catholic Church hierarchy did just that for decades, putting the welfare of the sheep dogs ahead of that of the flock.) Nor will I or any of the rest of us ever know for sure who did or didn't have "guilty knowledge", but, were I a betting man, I'd lay odds that it went down more or less as Dranov says.

Where some insist that Paterno's distancing himself from his old friend "proves" that he helped "cover up" a crime, I think it fits much better with this altered tale. Assuming that where there's smoke there's fire is prudent, but it doesn't give us cause to take an axe to the doors and flood the house with water on account of some guy three blocks over having MAYBE having smelled smoke when he was walking by the house two days prior. Even "short-eyed" pervs have rights under the law.

The "word" obviously was circulated, because Sandusky never did get another job in the field. The FOOTBALL people closed ranks against Jerry, although it seems apparent that it never became an item of general gossip, unsurprising given the nature of the men involved. More interesting truths beg to be told, I suspect, about the behavior of the NON-FOOTBALL people, who clearly DID drop the ball, especially in light of their own reporting responsibilities under Pennsylvania law. Given that we are talking about school administrators and politicians, I expect the moral cowardice that has long infested the former group so widely, along with the moral plasticity and obtuseness which always infests the latter sort.



Since: Aug 13, 2007
Posted on: December 11, 2011 9:50 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

you must have gone to pitt core.    are you still mad at penn st not wanting to play your team anymore.   they play enough patsies so get over it.   mcqueary knows what hew saw.   nothing that penn st  will do will be enough for you.   maybe you are one of sanduskys boys.  collect your money



Since: Aug 13, 2007
Posted on: December 11, 2011 9:47 pm
 

2nd version of McQueary 2002 account goes public

piss off core.    you probably went to pitt and still are mad because we did not want to play another patsy school.    get on the bandwagon pal.   maybe you can hire a lawyer and said sandusky did you too.     moron 


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com