Since when are you IN THE CLEAR, just as long as you tell your boss about it....thats it?
Second analogy of the day......so if I saw a co-worker put a body in the trunk of his car, as long as I tell my boss about it, thats it?
What a load of BS. This country started dying when common sense was thrown out the window. My opinion? Mike McQueary needs to be in jail. How many boys were taken advantage of *AFTER* McQueary witnessed (and did nothing) the shower rape?
Ken
Ken
Quote: mrjjjLet me add something, even the WIFE most likely knew what was going on in the basement but AGAIN, no investigation into the matter. What a shame !!!
Ken
I am just speculating here, but I would say that if anything in the Grand Jury testimony pointed to some kind of aiding and abetting on the part of Mrs. Sandusky, then a separate investigation would have been launched as to her role in the sordid affair. If you don't have the witness testimony, then the prosecution has absolutely no claim on her if both she and Mr. Sandusky deny any knowledge, involvement or failure to report on her part. Even though you are right that it is, "Likely," that she knew something was going on...if not exactly what (I doubt if she knew the full scope of it)...you'd have to actually have some chance of proving it. If nothing in the testimony lends itself to that conclusion, how do you prove what she knew or didn't know beyond a reasonable doubt?
I agree wholeheartedly about McQueary, coward's way out. Run home to the bathroom, puke, take five or six showers, maybe cry into your pillow a little. Perhaps belatedly wish that you were enough of a man to do something about somebody doing that to a poor defenseless boy. Wake up feeling better, eat a light breakfast, tell the boss what you saw, wash your hands.
I think he should get whatever Sandusky does on that count of the indictment.
With a few exceptions, it is not a crime to witness an apparent crime and fail to report the same. Nor is it a crime to fail to interrupt the commission of an apparent crime. The concept underlying these facts, I gather, is that the law does not wish to penalize folks who do not themselves actually commit an act designed to harm another.
Quote: WongBofailing to report a that you have witnessed a child being raped is a crime in pennsylvania
CORRECT and where is the line drawn? If I witnessed someone stealing a purse from an old lady, at minimum, should there at least be an investigation as to WHY I did not report it? I would hope so.
Ken
It appears that McQueary was not required to report it pursuant to 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. 6311 (B). That does nothing to excuse his cowardice, but he's not required to report it. I find that incredibly strange, especially compared to the Ohio law that requires one to report any felony. They'll probably be working to change that soon, if it has not already begun.
Quote: Toes14McQueary's actions have always confused me. If he truly knew what he was seeing was wrong, he should have intervened physically to separate Sandusky from the boy, call the cops immediately, and stayed with the kid until they arrived. Anything less is a cop out.
BINGO and thank you !!
Ken
Quote: WongBobut under section C, i believe he is
With all due respect, I must be interpreting section C differently.
In the first place, you have to be required to report under subsection B for subsection C to even apply. Due to the fact that McQueary indisputably is not required to report under B, he cannot possibly be required to report under C.
It also seems that the next part:
that person shall
immediately notify the person in charge of the institution,
school, facility or agency or the designated agent of the person
in charge. Upon notification, the person in charge or the
designated agent, if any, shall assume the responsibility and
have the legal obligation to report or cause a report to be made
in accordance with section 6313.
Pretty much directly states that he did what he was required to do, even if section B did apply to him, by notifying the, "Designated agent of the person in charge." That person (not McQueary) would then, "Assume the responsiblity...to report or cause a report to be made."
Believe me, I wish he were guilty of something, but under PA law, he's just not. It's wrong, it's disgusting, but that's what their law says. In Ohio, he'd be guilty as Hell, indisputably so.
You must report a felony in the State of Ohio, it's extremely simple. PA should take a page from our playbook because there's really no ambiguity there.
all 50 states have mandatory reporting laws.
i do think that you may be correct that it is limited to certain professions, in PA.
which does seem sort of disgusting.
It seems to be, that's why they would have Curley & Schultz on failure to report because they are the designated agents in charge of the institution. Furthermore, McQueary was a student/graduate aide, or something like that, unpaid position at the time it happened, I believe.
If you scroll down to the bottom, you'll see that the failure to report aspect of the claims against Curley & Schultz only carries up to 90 days and a $200 fine.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--jerry-sandusky-prosecution-jurors-strong-case-weekend-alleged-victims.html
Should we impose today's standards on a decades old event? If the standards of the day were to ignore rapists and drunk drivers why pretend that today's fad-crimes should be viewed retroactively?
And what role does money play?
Remember the Begelmann affair wherein the President of a major Hollywood corporation was caught stealing ten grand? He had made millions for the company and he didn't get fired, but some cafeteria cashier who took ten dollars got fired.
Football raises millions of dollars for a University. Millions.
Some of you may object to my use of the term "fad" in law enforcement but that is exactly what most of our law enforcement trends amount to "fads". Now miniskirts were a generally a very fine fad though one might have some reservations when women in their sixties started wearing micro-minis. So lets not say that all fads are all bad. Fashions change. Laws change.
Forty years ago rapes in an upper middle class community were rarely reported to husbands and even more rarely reported to police and virtually never prosecuted. Forty years ago rapes in the East Village were taken down as crime reports only if the rape was accompanied by torture or mutilation. Forty years ago drunk drivers were often allowed to continue driving home and police stops were rare. Forty years ago incest went unreported and families were left to solve their own problems. For most of recorded history on this continent the age of consent was eleven. Now you apparently have on trial some man who witnessed an event taking place and you expect him to have reacted according to today's fads instead of the fads of the time. Do you really think no one witnessed all those priests or that no one had grounds to suspect what was really happening?
i am pretty sure that the "standard" forQuote: FleaStiff
Should we impose today's standards on a decades old event?
forced anal rape of a ten year old boy
has not changed significantly in the time since this happened.
i would take my chances and just call 911.
i wouldn't look for someone to run and tell.
i am pretty sure that anything i did to stop him would be forgiven in court.
It was only about ten years ago that a school trip to a senior citizens home resulted in a little girl being raped and the three teachers decided to not call either the police or the girl's mother but to just let the girl cry and hope she stopped crying by the end of the trip.
We've come a long way from Colonial times wherein public masturbation was a crime only on the Sabbath and only if performed in the vicinity of a house of worship, but it still seems that boy scout troops, churches, particularly Catholic ones, have problems. I think the English Public School system is still considered a bastion of snobbery and sodomy. Rape of women is still a problem in the US military.
Quote: Gabes22When calling in the authorities to a workplace environment without an immedeate death threat, like a gun pointed as somebody is typically something that should be done by a supervisor. McQueary did what he was supposed to do by reporting it up the chain and so then did the late Coach Paterno. Workplaces have some funny rules about bringing in the cops or paramedics.
When it comes to minors all rules should go out the window.
Quote: only1choicejust asking, do you need to clarify that statement?
Why? I don't think it is beyond the realm of possibility to think your job is on the line if you call the authorities without notifying your supervisor. You have to tell them. If I was him, I personally would have told coach and said, BTW I am calling the police as well. Then again, it could have been a situation where after he told coach, what was happening had stopped.
that is just seriously f***ed up.
anybody that thinks like that gets no sympathy from me.
there is a section on how to handle witnessing a child rape.
it is not a delicate position.
when you see a crime of this magnitude,
a different set of rules comes into effect.
i do agree that sandusky is the main focus here,
but the silence and inaction allowed him
to continue to victimize with impunity.
i just think that many people would not think
about the rules if they witnessed this kind of thing.
i would like to say most people,
but i know that it is sadly not the case.
Quote: Gabes22There are definitely rules on calling the authorities. Like I said, there shouldn't be, but there are. I seem to get the impression you think I think McQueary is in the right here. I most certainly do not, my issue is more with the beauracracy of many public sector jobs and how they seem to limit free thought.
I didn't get that impression. I did get the impression that you are involved in the public sector.
then stand on his throat until the cops arrived.
but we all handle these things differently.
Quote: WongBoI would probably land a flying drop kick into the rapist then stand on his throat until the cops arrived.
And the rapist would probably allege it was a dispute over "sloppy seconds" and your name would be in all the news reports and the minimum legal fees for you would be eighty grand.
Quote: thecesspitAs a question, has a detailed testimony of exactly what McQueary saw been published yet?
Yes.....I would have to do a search to find it. Bottom line, McQueary witnessed Sandusky in the shower directly behind a young boy, slamming him.
Ken
Quote: thecesspitAs a question, has a detailed testimony of exactly what McQueary saw been published yet?
Here's the Grand Jury presentment:
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/uploadedFiles/Press/Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdf
You'll want pages 6-13, starting with, "Victim 2."
Here's the preliminary hearing:
http://www.dauphincounty.org/_files/3193.pdf
McQueary's testimony starts on Page 4. That's for the Schultz/Curley case.
Here's an article about his testimony during the Sandusky trial:
http://www.centredaily.com/2012/06/12/3226471/mike-mcqueary-takes-the-stand.html
Penn Live is following everything quite well, articles on McQueary's testimony halfway down:
http://topics.pennlive.com/tag/mike%20mcqueary/index.html
They're trying to tear up the witness, common tactic.
Pleasure to be of service.
Quote: thecesspitCheers, I hadn't bother to search as I was sure it existed. Now it does, I shall do my own reading.
Cheers, likewise.
Please tell me I would/should be charged with SOMETHING!!
"I told my boss about it" .......cant possibly hold water?
Ken
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/matt-sandusky-says-abused-father-jerry-sandusky-214145968.html
Next up....McQueary !!!!
Ken
Sandusky was immediately remanded into custody.