To my BSD friends: In the ongoing discussion of the culpability of AD Curley and VP Schultz it seems as if two camps have developed. This constitutes my complete argument on behalf of the beleaguered AD and VP and thus PSU based on as much evidence as is available.THE WHOLE STORY OF THE McQUEARY TESTIMONIESACCORDING TO KNOWN FACTS
Perhaps the major difference is generational in our initial reaction to the idea of man and boy in shower. Perhaps we differ in our opinion of the competence of police over university administrators. But this is a serious defense of PSU in the person of it's administrators and the reasonableness of assuming that JS should have been stopped in 2001.
Remember as you read this that Tim and Gary only met with Mike for 10 or 12 minutes over a week following Feb 9, 2001 and their Grand Jury testimony reflects a less than perfect memory of that decade old meeting. Following that meeting Tim Curley got an explanation from Sandusky. Then they questioned and informed Dr. Raykovitz and finally they informed Dr. Spanier who make the final decision.
This fanpost will consider a key part of this situation - The testimonies of McQueary - who's words misused by AG Kelly are largely responsible for the tarnish on the image of PSU and Coach Paterno
These are the central questions - what did McQueary say to Schultz and Curley? What did they do about whatever he told them? And was the decision by Dr. Spanier based on their investigation reasonable at the time?
McQueary didn’t go into "gross detail," he said – not with his father, and not with Joe Paterno. McQueary told his father, "Dad, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what’s going on."We know Mike told Paterno of seeing JS and a boy in the showers never saying rape or intercourse choosing instead to use "inappropriate" and perhaps "fondling". Paterno GJ Testimony read into Perjury Hearing transcript P 240
He told Dr. Dranov that he never said he saw a "sex act" but insisted he heard "sexual sounds" and "saw an arm reach out of the showers and draw a boy back in". "The boy was not startled or frightened" Dranov testimony at JS trial
We know he did not tell his father what he saw saying instead "Dad it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out".
We know Schultz and Curley say he did not give specifics leaving Schultz with the impression he had observed horseplay in the form of wrestling that might have involved inadvertent contact with genitals but nothing he considered criminal. It seems reasonable to me that MM did not tell Gary and Tim anything more that he told his father, Dr. Dranov, or Coach Paterno and that was not enough. See Perjury Hearing transcript p 204 thru 235
We know that the Grand Jury Presentment insisted MM's testimony was that he observed JS subjecting the boy to anal intercourse and informed PSU officials Paterno, Curley and Schultz. Presentment pages 6 and 7McQUEARY UNDER OATH - the Grand Jury, Perjury Hearing and the Trial
His perjury hearing testimony: 2 or 3 slapping sounds "rhythmic and sexual" and two 2 second glances of JS backside with no hands or genitals in view as JS stood behind a boy who's head came up to his pectoral muscles with his feet on the floor. Perjury Hearing Transcript
And finally the testimony at trial was more confident as he added that he saw subtle movement from JS midsection as he claimed certainty that he was a witness to rape. What movement can be observed or certainty established in 1 or 2 seconds? McQueary Testimony summary
The jury in deliberation asked to hear the McQueary and Dranov testimony read again. It was the only testimony they reviewed. Their verdict was "not guilty" on the count of deviate sexual intercourse so they did not believe MM and his certainty about witness of a rape. Jury hears testimony again
The defense did not use the Perjury Hearing testimony or the various versions of McQueary's statements to impeach his trial testimony about an unidentified "victim" 2. Don't expect attorneys for Schultz and Curley to be so negligent and soft on Mike. The prosecution used mannequins to illustrate the positions of the boy and JS according to the testimony.