Analysis: Spanier’s Statement Indicates McQueary Changed His Story in 2010

Spanier’s  and Dranov’s accounts of McQueary’s stories are consistent – McQueary could not see what Sandusky and the child were doing in the shower.

Dranov’s Testimony

Most informed followers of the Sandusky case believe Dr. Dranov’s version of the 9 February 2001 shower incident -- that was heard in the closest time proximity to McQueary witnessing the event --  to likely be the most accurate. 

The key aspects of Dr. Dranov’s  version are: 

“And when he came in, he heard what he described as sexual sounds”

“He looked toward the shower and a young boy looked around.  He made eye contact with the boy.”

“I asked him if the boy seemed upset or frightened.  He said no.”

“An arm reached out and pulled the boy back.”

“..and then he turned around and faced the shower room and a man came out of it and it was Jerry Sandusky.”

In Dranov’s version of the event, McQueary does not see Sandusky until he exits the shower.  That would be consistent with Sandusky using the shower stall nearest the doorway and obscured from view by a small wall.  In other words, Sandusky and the child were around a corner and out of McQueary’s view (see diagram below).

Spanier’s Statement

“More than a decade ago, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz asked to catch me after another meeting to give me a “heads up” about a matter.  Looking back at my calendar for what is presumed to be February 2001, I surmise that meeting to have been on Monday, February 12, at about 2:30PM…

..The report was that Jerry Sandusky was seen in an athletic locker room facility showering with one of his Second Mile youth, after a workout, and that they were “horsing around” (or “engaged in horseplay”).  It was reported that the staff member was not sure what he saw because it was around a corner and indirect.

Analysis

Here is the timeline of reporting:

Friday, Feb. 9:   McQueary tells John McQueary and Dr. Dranov (around a corner)

Sat, Feb 10th:    McQueary tells Paterno

Sun, Feb 11th:   Paterno tells Curley and Schultz

Mon, Feb 12th:  Curley and Schultz tell Spanier (around a corner)

Mon, Feb 19th*:  McQueary tells Curley and Schultz

*approximate

Given that Curley and Schultz told Spanier on Monday, 12 February 2001, that the incident happened around a corner and out of sight one can reasonably conclude they got the information from Paterno, who got it from McQueary.  By deduction, McQueary told Paterno the incident happened around a corner.

Changing Testimony

According to a source, Paterno, in late 2010 or early 2011, met with McQueary to refresh his memory about 2001.  It appears likely that McQueary left out the detail that he couldn't see around a corner and provided Paterno with the enhanced version that included hugging in the shower. 

So, where did this version come from?  

Most likely, is was from trooper Rossman, who interviewed McQueary in late 2010.

Trooper Rossman, and his partner, Corporal Leiter,  were caught red-handed at trial for lying about suggesting testimony to potential victims.  During the interview of Victim 4, Rossman and Leiter, left on a tape recorder during a break when Victim 4 was out of the room.  They discussed with the victims attorney, Ben Andreozzi, that they could suggest that Sandusky operated in a pattern of progression with his victims.  After the discussion with Andreozzi, they told Victim 4 that they had nine other adults who had admitted to victimization and had suffered through a progression of events.

Leiter too had made similar suggestions to the mother of Victim 6, stating that they had 10 other victims and 400 counts of abuse when he interviewed her in late 2010.  At the time, they had only two victims, Aaron Fisher, and the unidentified Victim 2.  So, Leiter was being untruthful with the mother.

Based on the modus operandi of Rossman and Leiter, it is reasonable to conclude that Rossman suggested embellishments to McQueary to enhance his story.

The $1 million dollar question is why would McQueary do this?

Developing....