Posted on 12/11/2011 6:18:26 AM PST by FlJoePa
STATE COLLEGE -- Minutes after Mike McQueary says he stumbled upon something between Jerry Sandusky and a boy in a Penn State shower in 2002, he went to his father’s State College home seeking advice.
There, Dr. Jonathan Dranov, a family friend and colleague of McQueary’s father, sat with the then 28-year-old graduate assistant and listened to his very first account of what he had seen, a source told The Patriot-News.
According to the source with knowledge of Dranov’s testimony before the grand jury, it went like this:
McQueary heard "sex sounds" and the shower running, and a young boy stuck his head around the corner of the shower stall, peering at McQueary as an adult arm reached around his waist and pulled him back out of view.
Seconds later, Sandusky left the shower in a towel.
That account is different from the hand-written statement obtained by The Patriot-News that McQueary provided for investigators when he was interviewed in 2010.
It’s also different than the summary of his grand jury testimony in the 23-page initial grand jury presentment.
In both of those accounts, McQueary says he witnessed Sandusky sodomizing a boy as he stood with his hands against a shower wall.
McQueary says the pair turned and looked at him before he left.
However, Dranov told grand jurors that he asked McQueary three times if he saw anything sexual, and three times McQueary said no, according to the source.
Because of that response, the source says, Dranov told McQueary that he should talk to his boss, head football coach Joe Paterno, rather than police.
The next day Paterno and McQueary talked, and Paterno’s response to the conversation was widely scrutinized when the grand jury presentment was made public in November.
Paterno said graphic detail, such as rape, was never mentioned to him. But public outcry led to his firing five days after Sandusky was charged.
But more importantly than public opinion, Mike McQueary’s story is a key element to all the criminal cases involved in the Sandusky scandal.
His witness testimony was the only evidence of an assault in 2002 presented to grand jurors, and his detailed account is the reason that perjury charges were filed against two ousted Penn State officials. Both said they were told only about horseplay that made McQueary uncomfortable, while McQueary testified he told them explicit details about a rape.
Repeated attempts to reach McQueary over the past month for comment have been unsuccessful. McQueary was placed on leave after receiving death threats as a result of his testimony about allegations against Jerry Sandusky from people who believe he did not do enough to stop the alleged assault.
Friday, former Athletic Director Tim Curley and Vice President Gary Schultz will face a preliminary hearing on charges of perjury and failure to report a crime.
The case against them is dependent on the premise that McQueary’s testimony is more credible than theirs. Saturday, attorneys for Curley and Schultz issued this statement in response to Dranov’s testimony:
"We have not seen the grand jury transcript, so it would be imprudent to comment on its content. But, if this information is true, and we believe it is, it would be powerful, exculpatory evidence, and the charges against our clients should be dismissed."
His testimony might also be important on Tuesday to the case against Sandusky.
Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Enlarge ANDY COLWELL, The Patriot-News Former Penn State football defensive coordinator Jerry" Sandusky, right, leaves the office of Centre County District Justice Daniel A. Hoffman under escort by Pennsylvania State Police and Attorney General's Office officials in Bellefonte, Pa. on Thursday, Dec. 7, following a grand jury investigation related to numerous child sex charges. ANDYCOLWELL for The Patriot-News Jerry Sandusky is arraigned on new child sexual abuse charges gallery (10 photos)
Jerry Sandusky mug Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges
Vowing to prove his innocence, Sandusky and his attorney, Joe Amendola, are sure to point out the inconsistencies in McQueary’s statements at a preliminary hearing in Bellefonte. Sandusky has been charged with more than 50 counts and maintained his innocence.
Since charges were filed Nov. 4, several variations of McQueary’s story have come out publicly.
His grand jury testimony says he heard slapping noises and saw a boy being sodomized by Sandusky. His hand-written statement to police says, "I did not see insertion. I am certain that sexual acts/the young boy being sodomized was occurring." He says the whole incident lasted about a minute. In an email he sent to friends following the firing of Joe Paterno, he says "I made sure it stopped," something not mentioned in the grand jury testimony or police statement. And now Dranov’s testimony describes a new scenario.
About two months after the incident McQueary describes in March 2002, Dranov and McQueary’s father, John, both physicians, had an unrelated meeting scheduled at Penn State with Gary Schultz, Dranov told the grand jury, according to the source.
Curious about how the story ended, Dranov inquired about what ever happened to Sandusky.
According to a source with knowledge of his testimony, Schultz told him then-university President Graham Spanier had met with Sandusky.
That’s something that isn’t mentioned in the grand jury presentment.
Spanier, who was forced to resign the same night Paterno was fired, testified before the grand jury that he had signed off on a decision to ban Sandusky from bringing children to the locker rooms in the future; however, Spanier, Curley and Schultz all deny they were ever informed a sexual assault occurred that night.
Attempts to reach Dranov were unsuccessful.
Sandusky, through Amendola, has offered yet another version of what happened in the showers. He doesn’t deny there was a boy showering with Sandusky that night, but Amendola says the child was surfing in the shower — horsing around — and never saw McQueary come into the locker room.
Instead, Amendola says, a few days later Sandusky was contacted by Curley, told that someone felt uncomfortable about what they’d seen, and Sandusky gave the name and phone number of the boy to Curley to help clear up the situation.
The grand jury report points out that no effort was made to contact the boy.
this hearsay argument has been discussed endlessly on these Penn State threads.
The rules of hearsay are rules of evidence for the courts - not for reporting child abuse in the first place.
The police, the lawyers, and the judges are the ones that make determinations about rules of evidence.
Ordinary citizens who learn of child rape are morally obligated to seek help for that child.
An eyewitness to child rape described what he SAW to JoePa - on JoePa’s own turf.
It isn’t that JoePa could possibly have felt powerless.
We’ve already learned what he can do when he doesn’t like an administrator...when he wanted that woman fired, he threatened Spanier he would stop fundraising if she wasn’t dismissed.
If only he had gotten that upset and angry over child rape.
“I’ve read JoePa’s version of the events.”
I’d like to see a link to those quotes. There is ONE quote from Joe out there - that “in hindsight, I wish I had done more” (in hindsight, we ALL wish we had done more).
Thats all - there are no quotes from Joe in the GJ Presentment. He has held no press conferences. He has conducted no interviews.
Where prey tell, have you read his version of the events? Or maybe, you just THOUGHT you read his version of the events. Or maybe...just maybe, your mind was made up before hearing Joe’s version of the events. Because he hasn’t GIVEN IT TO ANYONE YET. PERIOD.
BTW, here’s the AG’s office’s take on Joe’s firing:
“We have a cooperating witness [Paterno], an individual who testified, provided truthful testimony,” Hagen-Frederiksen told ABCNews.com, “but two others who were found by a grand jury to commit perjury whose legal expenses are being paid for university. One is on administrative leave. Very interesting development.”
“It’s certainly curious and [has] not been explained yet,” he said. “Speaking as a prosecuting agency, we have a cooperating witness who has not been charged, while two individuals accused of committing crimes continue to be affiliated.”
The Grand Jury report stated the Paterno met the legal obligation under the Pennsylvania State Code, in fact, the law did not require Paterno to do more what he did.
You say that “Ordinary citizens who learn of child rape are morally obligated to seek help for that child.” I agree with this statement. However, what is the moral metric that you have now invented to judge whether someone has acted morally and should we apply to everyone now for every crime?
What if Joe called the police and the dispatch at the police taken down the information. Has the moral metric been met, or does Joe have to commandeered a squad car and personally arrest Sandusky? This is why we have laws in the country.
Apparently Paterno informed Curely. This was also in the Grand Jury report.
If you've read every article on this case, your reading comprehension stinks.
This is a flat out bold faced lie. MM did NOT tell Joe Paterno that he witnessed a rape. Even MM admits that.
This is straight from the GJ Presentment that you claimed you friggin' read. What, did you skim it?
The mob has spoken, move on.
Preferably with a large massive convict who knows someone who was the victim of something similar.
I’m tired of these people misrepresenting opinion as fact when it comes to Joe. Of all the people who at least deserve to be heard before such judgement, he should be at the top of the list.
espn and the media have given critics unceasing free shots at the JoePinata all in the name of profit. Just like he delivered the television ratings with this team all those years, his name makes them money.
How do they thank him? By dragging it through the mud convincing the casual observer that he covered up this whole scandal.
The truth couldn’t be further from that. If he was involved in a coverup, why did he turn the matter over to the University administration?
He’s the ONLY ONE in this whole mess that DID do what he was supposed to do for crying out loud. When will these morons see this?
There will never be another like Joe. The sucking sound you hear is the rush to fully discredit the man while he is still alive. Measured deliberation seems to be missing.
There will never be another like Joe. The sucking sound you hear is the rush to fully discredit the man while he is still alive. Measured deliberation seems to be missing.
There will never be another like Joe. The sucking sound you hear is the rush to fully discredit the man while he is still alive. Measured deliberation seems to be missing.
The grand jury presentment says MM told JP what he saw.
They leave the details out.
As has been discussed in other Penn State threads - this could be a courtesy to JoePa, as he will be called to testify in the future.
If you are referring to what JoePa claims he was told - you are correct.
The presentment describes the details of what MM told his father. What he told Curley (rape), what he told Schults (rape), and yet when it comes to the details of what he said to JoePa? - MM told JoePa what he saw.
As far as JoePa’s own admission - at the very least he describes sexual abuse, which is still a crime that needs to be reported to the police
“The Grand Jury report stated the Paterno met the legal obligation under the Pennsylvania State Code, in fact, the law did not require Paterno to do more what he did.”
I understand that. Hopefully this case will highlight a need for that “legal obligation” to require more of adults who, sadly, should have known better.
” However, what is the moral metric that you have now invented to judge whether someone has acted morally and should we apply to everyone now for every crime?”
Why is this so difficult? Why is it so hard to expect people to pick up the phone, dial the police, and say, “hey, I’ve got an eyewitness to a terrible crime here in my office. Could you come on over?”
Up to that point - MM had received terrible advice from 2 men who should have known better.
JoePa could have done alot right then and there to help the boy. He did not. He punted to Curley - but only after waiting until the next day.
You do understand why that alone is a terrible thing?
The faster the police can get to a rape victim, the better the quality of the evidence against the rapist.
And after telling Curley? The next meeting did not occur until a full week later.
“What if Joe called the police and the dispatch at the police taken down the information. Has the moral metric been met,” Yes.
“or does Joe have to commandeered a squad car and personally arrest Sandusky? “
I haven’t seen anyone anywhere make that claim. Have you?
It is not Joepa responsibility to the call the police, it McQueary’s. Again, Joepa did not see what happened.
if it was me, i would like to think i would have confronted sandusky on the spot and asked him WTF? and then insisted on having the parent come in and relate it to them, in front of sandusky if he insisted. if he pushed back on that, then i would call the police on the spot.
as for Paterno, there was a lot of gossip for many years, and if there was no crime, why was Jerry “banned” from the campus with young kids? so Paterno knew or had reason to suspect and know. for that, he loses all my respect, and even not technically a criminal, he is an enabler to the subsequent assaults on young men.
As someone who has JoePa’s “Football My Way” book - plus his biography.
And didn’t mind my household was full of JoePa worshippers,because I thought he was an excellent role model. A humble catholic, and a downright great guy - I expected so much more from someone who taught so many others to go “above and beyond”
You say it wasn’t his responsibility?
The articles have said it is not his “legal” responsibility.
He certainly failed in a moral capacity at this point.
Yes - McQeary should have called the police, but his negligent father sent him to JoePa instead.
JoePa had the eyewitness right in his office.
I would hope that JoePa would have been horrified that Sandusky would rape a child in the football facilities.
I would suspect anyone on this FReeper board would have reacted differently and picked up the phone.
JoePa didn’t even tell McQueary to call the police. He told McQueary he would report it to Curley.
Yay for JoePa!
“forget about the Police.”
ummmm....let’s not.
The nature of the crimes pretty much rule that out.
” at least tell the boys parent(s). would everyone agree you have at least that much responsibility?”
That would be nice. The only one who knew the identity of the boy and his parents would be the rapist himself.
If the police had been called, they could have found the family. They could have taken the boy to the hospital and started gathering crucial evidence.
not sure what you mean.
obviously the boy himself knows his own parents. the parents should have been called immeadiately by McQ, with or without sandusky present.
With the technical problems earlier, I missed reading this post.
from page 6 of the presentment...
“Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant’s report at his home on a Saturday morning....”
it goes on to describing the sequence of events where JoePa called Curley the next day.
“...Paterno called Tim Curley, (”Curley”),...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...”
I don’t know about you, but from where I come from...when an adult showers in the nude with a child and sexually assaults him...that is a crime that should be reported to the police.
how would McQueary even know who the boy was? He most likely was, like the other victims, a Second Mile kid.
As far as I can tell...no one tried to locate the boy.
I’m still waiting for the link to “Joe’s version of the events” that you read. If you could find that, that would be a real game changer.
As to why it took over a week for the Curley/Schultz meeting - it was spring break. The campus was completely shut down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.