Skip to main content

Part 2 of a series of diaries to expose a serious injustice done to Coach Joe Paterno and Penn State University by the Republican Governor and Attorney General of Pennsylvania. These in no way diminish the bulk of charges against Jerry Sandusky. I believe that eight identified victims will offer sufficient evidence to convict Sandusky and put him in prison for a long long time. But the "Victim 2" charges that have implicated Joe Paterno and Penn State presented in the Grand Jury Presentment have misled the media, the Board of Trustee's and the public in order to advance Republican political careers. The Victim 2 section of the presentment is a LIE. I am a University of Tennessee alumni with no love for Paterno or Penn State but I abhor this injustice and since the media has failed to offer the truth someone has to expose this injustice. My apologies for the length and my verbosity but this is a complex issue with many facets.

"It takes a lifetime to build a good reputation but you can lose it in a minute" Will Rogers

The Grand Jury Presentment made us think that Mike Mcqueary was EAR witness to a sex act. Mike only observed Sandusky and the boy for 1 or 2 seconds in direct view of Sandusky's backside that blocked any view of genitals or hands. So it had to be the "rhythmic slapping" sexual sounds that made him so certain of an "extremely sexual" situation did it not? How does one infer sex from a back and an embrace that could be just a hug or wrestling or an attempt to prevent a fall when there is little or no motion, unless some previously heard sounds lead one to expect sexual activity?

The Grand Jury Presentment reads:

"He then heard rhythmic slapping sounds. He believed the sounds to be those of sexual activity"

This was a key part of a 45 second locker room visit where the Grand Jury who validated the Attorney General's presentment claimed Mike "saw" a boy being subjected to "anal intercourse". We have learned that is untrue. But those Rhythmic Slapping Sounds surely must have had something to them because the actual glimpses of the Sandusky back were so abbreviated. A rhythm of slapping that could only come from sexual activity is what I first thought must have made Mike so certain. That rhythm coupled with the glances might add up to something -

but there were only 3 claps

How does one get a RHYTHM of sexual activity from 3 claps I wonder?

Some obvious questions for the Attorney General.

1) Can anyone reading this actually arrive at a reasonable understanding of how any 3 slapping sounds could become "rhythmic slapping sounds believed to be sexual activity"?
2) If anyone came to me and said they suspect a crime after a 2 second glances of a back and 3 slapping sounds and expect me to call police - would I? would you?
3) Have the Attorney General and Grand Jury overstated their case in the summary of Mike's testimony to cover up some inaction by the Governor or the Attorney General over the past three years since Victim 1 came forward?
4) Why was the Governor accepting campaign donations from Second Mile and board members in large amounts during the investigation?
5) Why aren't Second Mile officials and board members being investigated?
6) Why are you so focused on the rather flimsy victim 2 testimony when you have not found this victim (or have you and know he was not abused that night) ?

The Perjury Hearing Transcript keeps yielding little gems of misconduct by prosecutors in the inflammatory rhetoric of the (dubious) FINDING OF FACT.

This summary of his testimony had to come from a head full of hallucinogenic substances because it did not come from the substance of Mike McQueary's Perjury Hearing testimony under oath. Mike used the word "rhythmic" but what is sexual or rhythmic in 3 slaps? A 3 second glance of a back and 3 claps yield this graphic description?

He then heard rhythmic slapping sounds. He believed the sounds to be those of sexual activity. As the Graduate Assistant put the sneakers in his locker he saw a naked boy, victim 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. The graduate assistant was shocked but noticed both victim 2 and Sandusky saw him. He left immediately, distraught." "He testified in the Grand Jury in December of 2010. The Grand Jury finds the graduate assistants testimony to be "extremely credible."

If the Attorney General has no Rhythm can she dance to a conviction on misrepresentation?

The accurate way to have described McQueary's testimony is this is it not?

He then heard three claps or slaps his wild imagination thought might be sexual activity. As he put sneakers in his locker he glimpsed for 1 or 2 seconds the back of an adult male through a reflection in a mirror above the sink in a room adjoining the showers. Moving for a direct view he glanced for 1 or 2 seconds the motionless full backside of Jerry Sandusky mostly blocking the view of a young boy he estimated to be 10 or 12 years of age. Sandusky's arms were around the boy who's hands were on the wall. Both were standing up and the boy's feet were on the floor. He could not see genitals or the location of Sandusky's hands. He slammed his locker door and walked to a point Sandusky and the boy could both see him. They were stood a few feet apart and stared at McQueary. He left the boy standing in the shower with a naked Sandusky and went upstairs to an office to call his father. He did not return to the shower room to see if they were gone. He said nothing to the boy or Sandusky. He did not offer help to the boy. He did not question Sandusky. The Grand Jury found this testimony inconclusive.

Mike McQueary DID NOT SEE ANAL INTERCOURSE - we know this from his Perjury Hearing testimoy. So why did the Attorney General's office describe it that way?
Perjury Hearing Transcript - 2 glances of Sandusky's back 1 - 2 second duration each

Sandusky's Body blocking view of genitals and hands.

The more is revealed the worse the Attorney General, the Board of Trustees and the media look. Simply describing accurately the testimony of Mike McQueary would have avoided so much of the media frenzy and outrage directed at Penn State University and Joe Paterno. Truth and accuracy are always best unless one is out to tarnish well earned reputations to promote their own political ambitions or to distract public opinion from some failing on the part of the Republican Governor and Attorney General?  Governor Corbett accepted $25,000 from Second Mile while his office was investigating Sandusky and thousands more from Second Mile board members.

The Attorney General through the distorted and misleading Grand Jury Presentment along with a gullible media and the complicity of the Board of Trustees did much to destroy Joe Paterno's lifetime of well earned reputation. What about the reputations of Second Mile board members and the Governor who was investigating Sandusky as Attorney General while accepting the charitable contributions of Democrats and Republicans as campaign funds? If I had donated money to Second Mile to help underprivileged children I would not like to hear my money was paying for Corbett's campaign. And how many more boys suffered during the 3 year investigation? Is this a cover up not involving Penn State using Penn State as the cover?

Additional thoughts about the response the the rather incredible McQueary testimony

Following the March 1, 2002 incident Mike told 5 people some version of what he experienced and that was not that he "saw a boy being subjected to anal intercourse."

His father Dr. John McQueary M.D
Family friend Dr Jonathan Dranov M.D.
Head PSU football coach Joe Paterno
Athletic Director Tim Curley
Senior Vice President Gary Schultz

At minimum at least 4 different versions of Mike McQueary's statements to these 5 men have surfaced in the press. The most disturbing to thinking people is the version attributed to the testimony of Dr Jonathan Dranov M.D who was along with Dr. John McQueary M.D - Mike's father - the first to hear the story within an hour of the event.

On the night in question and in the few days that followed Mike told different stories to 5 educated and respected men in positions of responsibility and none of them thought his story worthy of being reported to police or child protective services. Why not?

With the benefit of hindsight and a 40 count 23 page summary of allegations designed to justify an indictment, some people are certain 10 years later the police should have been called? People who do not know Mike McQueary. People who did not hear his stories within minutes, hours and days of the event are certain? Have you considered the possibility that Mike's story was simply so insubstantial it did not make sense to those who heard it?

Evidently Dr Dranov upon hearing the first story advised Mike NOT to call police. Dranov asked Mike three times if he saw sexual activity and three times Mike said NO according to a source who knows Dranov's testimony before the Grand Jury. Wonder why the presentment failed to mention that?  

GOOD GRIEF - are those of you who think that these men erred by not calling the police gifted with some superior insight? Or do you think there was some common interest shared by these 5 responsible educated men that had to be protected by a cover up enabling a child molester?

Or is the simplest explanation the most credible? Mike's stories just didn't seem 'extremely credible' to the one man who knew him best or Dr. Dranov, or his head coach. So why should they have seemed credible to Curley or Schultz?

Maybe it's because 3 slapping sounds is NOT evidence of a sex act and to hold it out as that seems, well quite frankly, crazy?

Perhaps it was because a 3 second glimpse of a back is NOT evidence of a sex act?

Not one of these 5 good men thought it was advisable to contact police or child protective services. Why? Because they did not find anything "extremely credible" about Mike's suspicions

I believe that Jerry Sandusky is a clever and devious pedophile. I do not defend him in any way. I do not question the 8 victims who have come forward to bravely testify against him. I pray for them to be healed and vindicated for their bravery.

The VICTIM 2 section of the presentment is what I question based on under oath testimony by Mike McQueary and the statement of the defense that the alleged victim 2 will testify he was not sexually assaulted or molested in 2002. If he was not these victim 2 charges will most likely be dropped but not before a vast majority of the media and public decided that Joe Paterno and the people at Penn State were some kind of Pedophile enablers. Dropping those charges will not right the wrong done to Penn State and Paterno. It is this probable outcome that prompts me to write these diaries because I believe most people think Joe Paterno and Penn State guilty of some cover up. Is that correct? Is that what you believe based on what you have read?

Most of you have already rushed to judge them. But if you try to put yourself in their shoes in 2002 when Sandusky is a respected charity founder and foster father of six, before you read the Grand Jury Presentment or any of the stories in the media based on the lie about the victim 2 charges you may arrive at a fairer perception. If you do you will have to see Paterno and Penn State in a less judgmental view. Sandusky was a very clever and devious predator who covered his tracks with a reputation for good works and there is no way Paterno or PSU officials could have known that at the time.
And Mike McQueary did not see anal intercourse. as the presentment alleges. Instead he told several different stories about what he saw. You must see that lie is the initial inflammatory statement that led to the extreme vilification of Paterno and Penn State in the media.

My previous diary brought instant vilification and cries of "pervert" who "defends child rapists". This is exactly the unhinged and holier-than-thou demonizing I write to condemn. People who wrote these comments rushed to judge Joe Paterno and to condemn him and the good people of Penn State. I am still standing up for what I think is necessary and right. We are progressive Democrats - not some judgmental fear and blame Republicans. We seek the truth and justice not the lynch mob and destroyers of reputations. At least that's what I always thought. Perhaps I am wrong. Maybe we are no better than the liars who use their power to vilify and destroy.

This is the second of three diaries on the subject and you should see them all before you rush to judge the situation.
On why this Sandusky Sex Scandal became the Penn State Sex Scandal

The Words and Motives of Republican Attorney General Linda Harris will be the third.

Originally posted to aurabass on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 08:27 AM PST.

Also republished by Trolls.


Does this additional illumination of the actual varied statements of Mike McQueary cause you to reassess your view of Joe Paterno and Penn State?

13%6 votes
2%1 votes
8%4 votes
10%5 votes
2%1 votes
15%7 votes
32%15 votes
2%1 votes
0%0 votes
8%4 votes
0%0 votes
2%1 votes
2%1 votes

| 46 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  NO TIP JAR REQUESTED (0+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:

    I write these diaries to expose a possible injustice not to gain tips or recognition.

    What I have to say is very unpopular and the first of this series earned me vilification and claims of being a pervert or rapist enabler.

    These diaries are written to offer some deeper contemplation of the situation involving Penn State and Joe Paterno  I believe we should reconsider the rush to judgment

    What we believe chooses us

    by aurabass on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 08:30:44 AM PST

  •  They covered up a crime against (8+ / 0-)

    vulnerable children.

    Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.

    by Horace Boothroyd III on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 08:35:04 AM PST

  •  I will not respond to comments about (0+ / 0-)

    Sandusky in a shower with a 10 year old after 9pm

    Sandusky was known as a foster father and grandfather and founder of a charity who often brought boys to his workouts

    No one knew if this boy on Mar 1 2002 was a Sandusky foster child. And taking a shower with a foster child or grand child is not a crime in and of itself.

    While that may raise legitimate suspicion on your parts it was not that suspicious given the reputation that Sandusky had so diligently established for 25 long years since he founded his charity.

    That is what everyone thought at the time. He was almost a saint in State College

    What we believe chooses us

    by aurabass on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 08:43:20 AM PST

    •  I was not going to HR (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      N in Seattle, SoCaliana, kait

      but you seem intent on continuing the cover up of child abuse.

      This post is inflammatory as it causes those that have suffered abuse to have PTSD symptoms triggered.

      Please go crawl back into what ever hole you oozed out of.

      Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.

      by Horace Boothroyd III on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 09:01:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What a crock of crap (0+ / 0-)

        I would be quite content with an HR from people like you

        You rush to judge and condemn based on demonstrably dubious claims. Why not do the same with me?

        And you think I should care about your wholly unstudied opinion? You think far too much of yourself and far too little about the blatant lies that laid this tragedy at the feet of Joe Paterno and the good people at Penn State.

        What we believe chooses us

        by aurabass on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 09:47:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Are you being compensated for your efforts here? (5+ / 0-)
          demonstrably dubious claims
          blatant lies that laid this tragedy at the feet of Joe Paterno and the good people at Penn State

          Let me give you a clue, people that let children get molested are not good.

          You obviously have no clue as to what my intellectual prowess is.

          your wholly unstudied opinion

          Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.

          by Horace Boothroyd III on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 09:52:23 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What you have written demonstrates (0+ / 0-)

            your intellectual status.

            The point is that Joe Paterno and the people of Penn State had nothing to do with Sandusky's evil deeds.

            Don't you wonder why the people at the Second Mile Charity are not being investigated?

            Doesn't it concern you that the Governor received a
            $25.000 campaign contribution from the source of Sandusky's primary income while he was investigating Victim 1's claims for a full year?

            How about thousands more from Second Mile board members?

            The only part of this entire sordid episode that involved Joe Paterno and thus Penn State was the March 1, 2002 event that was Mike McQueary's.
            McQueary told 4 different stories to his father, Dr Dranov, Paterno and Curley and Schultz. he wrote down a different account in his written statement to the Grand Jury. He wrote and email to class mates and teammates with another account.

            We only know he told Paterno he thought he saw something inappropriate - horseplay or something possibly of a sexual nature. Paterno told his superiors as he was supposed to do. They investigated and found McQueary's account to be less than credible.

            Yet you with hindsight and a 23 page presentment are somehow certain that 10 years ago there was a cover up in which no one told McQueary to keep his silence and none of the principals involved even got their stories straight together when they were called to the Grand Jury?

            What we believe chooses us

            by aurabass on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 11:38:43 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  HR for being a child rape apologist (7+ / 0-)

    Born & raised in PA, and know that to many in PA Joe Pa is the closest thing to God Almighty Herself; however there is no excuse!!!!

    Economic Left/Right: -8.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.54 Normal ain't anything but a setting on a washing machine. It isn't for humans by any stretch of the imagination

    by triciawyse on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 09:12:31 AM PST

  •  For sobbing out loud... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, ursoklevar, Ahianne, skohayes

    ...even Paterno admits he should have done more:

    The beloved 84-year-old Paterno has been engulfed by outrage that he did not do more to stop Sandusky after a graduate assistant came to Paterno in 2002 after allegedly having seen the former assistant coach molesting a 10-year-old boy in the Penn State showers.

    "This is a tragedy," Paterno said in a statement. "It is one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more."

    Given the format of your presentation, let's call this a "statement against penal interest" and stop dismissing child rape and the cover-up of same, shall we?

    Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

    by wiscmass on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 09:25:51 AM PST

  •  Please leave the planet. n/t (3+ / 0-)

    "Republicans are poor losers and worse winners." - My grandmother, sometime in the early 1960s

    by escapee on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 09:49:34 AM PST

  •  I think you should post several more diaries today (5+ / 0-)

    explaining your thoughts on this story.  Please.

  •  O goodness. Not you again! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ursoklevar, SoCaliana
  •  You don't NEED to SEE genitals/hands/penetration (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brown Thrasher, Ahianne

    to credibly allege you have witnessed rape.  Geez.  

    1.  McQueary didn't JUST hear slapping sounds.  But he did hear them.  The fact that the sounds all sounded alike and were sequential in a short period of time is itself rhythmic.  Three notes was often enough to Name That Tune; if you know what something sounds like, you know what something sounds like.
    2.  He SAW Sandusky in the shower, nude, hunkered over a child, nude. The reasonable explanation for a naked man, hunkered doggie-style with a naked child, is sexual assault.  Yes, I know there might conceivably be exceptions, (though I can't think of any right now) but I said reasonable, not only.
    3.  The demeanor of Sandusky and the child, as described by McQueary, both during the event and afterward is consistent with sexual assault.  Other victims have described the same showering, doggie-style MO.  That is a signature.
    4.  TAKEN TOGETHER, Sound, Sight, and Demeanor add up to sexual assault, whether completed or attempted.  The other victims verifying the signature just add credibility.  Taken together, there is no reasonable explanation for what McQueary saw, other than sexual assault.  With no other reasonable explanation, there is no reasonable doubt.
    5.  Would I call the cops in a similar situation?  Hell, yes. I like to think I would have intervened personally.
    6.  Are you saying that Paterno shouldn't have been blamed for not recognizing the problem?  Maybe in good faith he didn't recognize what was going on, but the fact is that he was in charge.  Plenty of others have lost careers and reputations because of the actions of their underlings - it happens all the time.

    Getting all worked up about Joe Paterno because his assistant of 32 years victimized children for decades right under his nose isn't likely to persuade very many people, whether you think they're liars or character-flawed, or whatever.

    Which side are you on?

    by wiseacre on Fri Dec 30, 2011 at 01:37:05 PM PST

    •  of course the unreliability of eye witness (0+ / 0-)

      testimony has not been brought up but it is an issue in reasonable doubt.  The jury has to judge the credibility of each witness and to base their view of his testimony upon that judgment.

      Given that, juries often give disproportionate weight to eyewitness testimony and expect entirely too much from forensic evidence and circumstantial evidence.  From the two diaries on this topic, I am unconvinced that there has been a grave injustice against Penn or Paterno.  I can remember the day when rape victims were grilled over their dress, their behavior, their sexual habits, and how many partners they had had, all with a view towards prejudicing the jury against the victims.  

  •  Your obsession with whether or not (2+ / 0-)

    ... McQueary witnessed anal intercourse may reveal far more about you than it reveals about this case.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site