I haven't read where anyone denies that he reported something. Those reports engendered the discussions to which you alluded. Believe people are questioning whether he witnessed anything, whether it was something that was criminal, or anything at all. That is a legitimate questions. Unfortunately, only McQeary and Jerry can answer that and I don't believe either of them.
SIAP: McQuade drops whistleblower suit
- Thread starter LurkerLazarus
- Start date
I haven't read where anyone denies that he reported something. Those reports engendered the discussions to which you alluded. Believe people are questioning whether he witnessed anything, whether it was something that was criminal, or anything at all. That is a legitimate questions. Unfortunately, only McQeary and Jerry can answer that and I don't believe either of them.
I'd go a step further suggest that McQueary is simply a liar and saw nothing. Don't think that's the case since he doesn't demonstrate the creativity to make up a story like Jerry "horsing around" with a kid in the shower after hours. That said, there were rumors about Jerry, so that may have been his inspiration.
There would have been no motive for him to do so (make up a story)--at the time. Just the opposite. Embellishing later?? Sure.
@Chris92 - where exactly was this statement by Mike found? I do remember it - but not exactly sure where it was stated. Can you provide a link to the document? Thanks.
On Zig's latest podcast, he says JS has never thought the 2/9/2001 date is correct. JS doesn't know the date, but believes it was much closer to the time he didn't get the UVA HC job(December of 2000). Zig believes MM might have been right in that the campus was empty that night, because the incident happened over winter break.
JZ also says new info will come out soon that will back SuePa's version and will further discredit MM. The podcast also has an interview with Mark Pendergrast, as his book is coming out in the days ahead.
JZ also says new info will come out soon that will back SuePa's version and will further discredit MM. The podcast also has an interview with Mark Pendergrast, as his book is coming out in the days ahead.
It's from the JS trial testimony, page 203:
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/sandusky_061212_ JT.pdf
It wasn't addressed in the podcast. If memory serves, I believe Sue said the bit about not coming over if it's about a job part never happened.
Unless he was covering up why he was there. As I indicated, I'm skeptical, but it is plausible.
Thanks for the link. That still brings me back to the question I was asking above...if Mike didn't witness the incident on Feb 9 2001, what are all those subsequent emails about? Or is it being suggested Mike witnessed the incident much earlier and only alerted PSU about it on that Feb 9 weekend? (Ziegler is suggesting the latter)
It should be noted that the emails Freeh published were a small part of a larger sample of related emails. According to the OAG discovery there were 19 pages of emails from February 12 to June 5, 2001 involving that subject. Any attempt to unravel what's going on requires the public release of those emails.
Were those emails, in total, provided to Freeh? Are they part of the Freeh materials? Can the A9 review discuss whether they were or not (not asking to disclose their contents...just that they are part of the Freeh material)?
Last edited:
Mike definitely saw something. What's really being questioned now is when he saw it. If he sat on the info for 4-6 weeks, that's the issue.
Last edited:
If that was known in Feb 2001, then it may explain the lack of urgency by those who he reported it to.
Zig podcast with new info points to the MM incident happening on Friday, December 29th, 2000.
Thanks @Chris92
Someone needs to convince me that "February 9th" really happened on February 9th. We have been lied to on so many occasions - and someone needs to independently corroborate for me that Mike was actually in Lasch that evening.
Sorry - not taking any family member's word at this point. The office of attorney general is to blame for my not believing Mike. Everything & everyone the OAG has touched is poison at this point - which includes what Mike has to say. You can blame Fina & Eshbach for this.
And I still have to ask - if Feathers is on the phone with Dr. Dranov end of January 2011 - and they determine the February 9th date because of Dranov going to a medical conference - then why the hell does Sassano go thru the gyrations of his bullshit TV Guide "Rudy" story to determine the date?
Don't these guys compare notes?
Interesting that Sue says this meeting with Joe only lasted about 3 minutes.
And I recall Zig stating that he has on video that Mike mentioned to another player after Joe's memorial service that he was suprised that Joe kicked his story upstairs to Tim & Gary.
So many lies. So much self interest. So much corruption. If it had only stayed in the 814.
Alas.
If Zig is right, they are going to have to give Sara Ganim's Pullitzer Prize to him.
Nobody seems to know for sure what day, month or even freakin’ year this “event” happened, and the victim is only known to God. Yet several convictions on this “event” later and PSU is out a quarter billion $. Only in the great state of Pennsylvania.
Last edited:
What transcript of Sue's might be coming out soon that would reference the quick three minute meeting?
And why no one would cross examine him is mind boggling.
don't forget that the initial March 2002 date was cynically determined by the OAG in order to charge Curley and Schultz within the statute of limitations on some of the charges.
When the date was later "changed" to Feb 2001, the OAG came up with a more cynically creative argument to move the "date" of the crime to 2007, when the law actually changed.
you know, Zig comes up with a great point, which dispels most of the argument made by the relentless trolls:
The troll narrative is that Curley/Schultz/Spanier/Paerno were so callous they did not bother to find out the identity of the "boy in the shower". That PSU assumed liability because they failed to call DPW.
buuuuuut . . . knowing what we now know about V2, it seems that if they HAD contacted him, or called DPW, AM would have said nothing happened. and this all would have been another big nothing burger
The troll narrative is that Curley/Schultz/Spanier/Paerno were so callous they did not bother to find out the identity of the "boy in the shower". That PSU assumed liability because they failed to call DPW.
buuuuuut . . . knowing what we now know about V2, it seems that if they HAD contacted him, or called DPW, AM would have said nothing happened. and this all would have been another big nothing burger
But, if that was known in Feb 2001, why did those who he reported it to not state that? Seems to me that if C/S/S (all or any one of the three) knew that, they could've cast tremendous doubt on the whole story by just stating that they knew MM didn't report it for 4-6 weeks.
I have no idea what Zig is referring to. I've asked about it. And for that matter, do we know Joe actually said to Mike "if it's about a job, I don't have one for you" (or something to that effect) - is that yet another lie by Mike that's now become an urban legend?
Zig is blaming Tim Curley for not picking up the phone and speaking with Allen Myers.
I have to blame Jack Raykovitz for not picking up the phone, once Tim is meeting with him about the flagrant out of program contact with a Second Mile minor, and asking the parents of this Second Mile youth what was going on to have PSU bounce all kids from being in campus buildings with Jerry. That's a pretty significant thing to consider if you're the CEO of a kids charity and kids are no longer welcome on the campus of the entity you have a parasitic relationship with.
I mean Sweet Jeezus - having your chairman naked with a youth is NOT a good look for ANY kids charity.
Jack could have easily determined the actual date of the incident, documented who/what/when/where in a file and we would not have been where we are today. One would think the CEO of a kids charity might want to document, at least for insurance reasons, his charity chairman being with a Second Mile youth outside of his prescribed role with the program. Swim trunks or not.
Instead - we have Gary's particular notes on Mike's meeting with him and Tim conveniently missing from his not-so-secret-secret file, and what clearly seems to be the OAG going out of their way to corruptly prosecute this case without a care in the world as to whether Mike's stories ever added up.
I still can't believe Louis Freeh and his crack team of former FBI agents, law enforcement and investigators didn't do that Google thingy and try to get a better idea of what the hell was going on up on campus that fateful evening - considering his team "found the most critical evidence" in the case.
ASSHATS
Last edited:
Gary says that they all assumed Mike was reporting an incident that had happened when Mike said it happened. I am still baffled as to why, after all this time, not a single lawyer or private investigator has not independently constructed a timeline as to what everyone was doing that infamous evening - and independently corroborated it. This is the linchpin event to the state's case against the PSU3.
Or am I missing something?
1.Regardless of when Mike encountered JS in the shower......whenever he discussed it with Dr. Dranov, the doctor heard nothing that moved him to call, report or recommend such to police or CYS.
2.MM didn't decide to talk to JVP about the incident until news that Kenny Jackson was leaving became known.
3.We now know that MM was "surprised" JVP reported the incident to Tim and Gary.
4. If MM was surprised that JVP reported, its not hard to imagine that he (MM) had very little of substance to report. This confirms Dranov's testimony and explains why MM never objected to the steps that Tim and Gary took.
This is a case of investigators cobbling together half truths and MM swearing to it. Evidence of a political assassination perpetrated against Spanier, his administrators and PSU.
Is it conceivable that Spanier was the target and everyone on the "inside"(Corbett and posse) were astounded at how the incident became nuclear......but could not control it and had to just "let it ride?"
I've got to believe when this case was passed to the desk of that geek Shapiro.....he didn't want to touch it with a 10 ft pole......but....the beast must be fed.
2.MM didn't decide to talk to JVP about the incident until news that Kenny Jackson was leaving became known.
3.We now know that MM was "surprised" JVP reported the incident to Tim and Gary.
4. If MM was surprised that JVP reported, its not hard to imagine that he (MM) had very little of substance to report. This confirms Dranov's testimony and explains why MM never objected to the steps that Tim and Gary took.
This is a case of investigators cobbling together half truths and MM swearing to it. Evidence of a political assassination perpetrated against Spanier, his administrators and PSU.
Is it conceivable that Spanier was the target and everyone on the "inside"(Corbett and posse) were astounded at how the incident became nuclear......but could not control it and had to just "let it ride?"
I've got to believe when this case was passed to the desk of that geek Shapiro.....he didn't want to touch it with a 10 ft pole......but....the beast must be fed.
Maybe Dr. Jack did document the particulars of the incident, thus the mandatory meeting with the shredder truck. One cannot have documentation that contradicts the fiction.
and also explains notes missing from Gary's "secret file. My guess is Gary's notes identified the "caller" to CYS.
Anyone else remember this? I do not. I've been following this stuff pretty closely, but maybe I just missed it?
Also, I was thinking about this the other day--does anyone remember the story that came out saying that Mike told the team shortly after the shit hit the fan that HE was a victim of child sex abuse? Did that end up being just a rumor, or was there something to that? And by "something to that", I'm asking if he actually told the team that.....I'm sure Mike was never an abuse victim.
Is it possible that Mike is the biggest liar on the planet?
I recall the story MM allegedly told his position players about abuse....
When the full truth comes out, and we learn how MM lies caused all the damage.... can't wait for GMJ11 to blame Paterno for MM being recruited and playing "on his watch".
If Joe hadn't called for mcqueary's touchdown throw against rutgres, none of this would have happened.
Blah blah blah, none of this stuff matters. The narrative is what it is and it never will be corrected.
That’s the entire point genius. Had they made sure someone followed up and spoke to the kid we wouldn’t be here one way or the other.
Here’s an idea, instead of going over MM’s story for the 10,000th time looking for a new way to question it, why not look at reasonable explanations based on facts rather than speculation?
For instance, what could have happened for Tim Curley to change his mind on February 27th? Was there a specific event that could explain deciding not going to DPW?
As it turns out something did happen on February 27th:
Legislators Join Fray On Penn State Sex Faire
February 28, 2001|By Thomas Fitzgerald INQUIRER HARRISBURG BUREAU
HARRISBURG — The furor over an explicit student-run sex-education fair in State College - a furor ignited by Rep. John Lawless (R., Montgomery County) - overwhelmed the normally wonkish annual discussion of Pennsylvania State University's budget yesterday.Lawmakerswanted to know what university president Graham Spanier knew about the sex conference, when he knew it, and what he intended to do to keep it from happening again.
"I hope you're embarrassed, because I'm angered and embarrassed," said Rep. Samuel Rohrer (R., Berks). "This incident was reprehensible . . . debauched . . . wrong."
After taking a beating from the state House Appropriations Committee, Spanier said that his administration already had begun to tighten up its oversight of student activities on campus. From now on, he said, all banners that go up in public places will have to be reviewed, approved and hung by the university.
"This will allow us to screen words that might not meet community standards," Spanier said.
Lawless was outraged by a feminist rally last November that was named for an obscene term for women's genitalia. The word was prominently displayed on posters and banners around campus.
Spanier said that Penn State was considering other changes, such as requiring student groups to reserve space in university buildings and to disclose the content of their events in advance. Some programs also should be confined to students with I.D., to avoid exposing youngsters to offensive material, he said.
"I am confident we can, with a few policy changes, put this behind us," Spanier told lawmakers considering the university's $362 million budget request. "I am very sorry for the consternation, confusion and anger that this has caused many individuals."
But more than a few legislators on the appropriations panel were not willing to let go.
Lawless, who is seeking to suspend Penn State's funding, confronted Spanier with two e-mails he had received from students.
One called him an "ass" who was too dim to go to Penn State. Another writer said Lawless was a "selfish bastard" and made fun of his eyes. Lawless had surgery for a brain tumor 15 years ago that left him slightly disfigured.
At that point, Lawless broke down and said: "I'll get to my further questions as soon as I get myself together."
Spanier looked down at the witness table in front of him. The room fell silent.
The hearing began with a screening of a video that Lawless had made while visiting the Sex Faire. Among other things, the tape showed a risque bingo game, a woman talking about marital aids, a catalog of sex toys and anatomically correct gingerbread cookies at a table of "erotic foods."
Since the hearing was broadcast live on Pennsylvania Cable Network, it was probably the only legislative proceeding ever to carry a parental warning label.
Taking the microphone before the tape began, one lawmaker urged people watching at home to change the channel if children were present.
Questions about budget matters - funding for the medical school, the racial makeup of Penn State's student body, the rising cost of tuition, and retirement funds for university employees - broke up the sex talk. But then, Sex Faire and the earlier feminist rally would come back up again, and Spanier and another legislator would spar.
At one point, Rep. David J. Mayernik (D., Allegheny) bored in, trying to get Spanier to denounce the Sex Faire.
"Was it wrong, yes or no?" he asked.
Spanier demurred, saying that portions of it were inappropriate.
"Former President Clinton went through this with what the meaning of 'is' is," Mayernik said.
"I'm not trying to be evasive, but to give an honest answer," Spanier said. "I'm not understanding what you mean by 'wrong.' "
Finally, the university president said, "I don't think my personal view of morality should be the subject of this appropriation hearing."
Countered Mayernik, "I find it odd, Mr. President, that you want to wash your hands of this."
Spanier said that balancing the free-speech rights of students with diverse viewpoints at a large university "is always a very difficult line to walk."
Other lawmakers came to Spanier's defense, in what became a lively debate on constitutional law.
Rep. Dan Frankel (D., Allegheny) praised his "measured and restrained" response to the issue.
"In the marketplace of ideas, sometimes you have to tolerate these things," Frankel said.
This is something that actually happened and could easily explain Curley’s actions. It also kills the narrative that Joe had anything to do with Curley’s decision to alter the plan.
There’s little doubt those same politicians would use a report of suspected sexual abuse on campus to go after Spanier and Penn State again. If Curley was unsure about what MM saw in the shower it’s not a stretch to believe he would take a different course of action based on this.
But you guys keep chasing shadows. I’m sure Ziegler will find that crucial piece of evidence to prove MM really saw Sandusky and the kid fully clothed playing cards.
That’s the entire point genius. Had they made sure someone followed up and spoke to the kid we wouldn’t be here one way or the other.
Here’s an idea, instead of going over MM’s story for the 10,000th time looking for a new way to question it, why not look at reasonable explanations based on facts rather than speculation?
For instance, what could have happened for Tim Curley to change his mind on February 27th? Was there a specific event that could explain deciding not going to DPW?
As it turns out something did happen on February 27th:
Legislators Join Fray On Penn State Sex Faire
February 28, 2001|By Thomas Fitzgerald INQUIRER HARRISBURG BUREAU
HARRISBURG — The furor over an explicit student-run sex-education fair in State College - a furor ignited by Rep. John Lawless (R., Montgomery County) - overwhelmed the normally wonkish annual discussion of Pennsylvania State University's budget yesterday.Lawmakerswanted to know what university president Graham Spanier knew about the sex conference, when he knew it, and what he intended to do to keep it from happening again.
"I hope you're embarrassed, because I'm angered and embarrassed," said Rep. Samuel Rohrer (R., Berks). "This incident was reprehensible . . . debauched . . . wrong."
Sex Faire, sponsored by a student group called Womyn's Concerns, was held Feb. 3 in the commons of the Pollock Hall dormitory. Sponsors said that they had hoped to educate students about date rape, healthy sexual relationships, and reproductive health.
After taking a beating from the state House Appropriations Committee, Spanier said that his administration already had begun to tighten up its oversight of student activities on campus. From now on, he said, all banners that go up in public places will have to be reviewed, approved and hung by the university.
"This will allow us to screen words that might not meet community standards," Spanier said.
Lawless was outraged by a feminist rally last November that was named for an obscene term for women's genitalia. The word was prominently displayed on posters and banners around campus.
Spanier said that Penn State was considering other changes, such as requiring student groups to reserve space in university buildings and to disclose the content of their events in advance. Some programs also should be confined to students with I.D., to avoid exposing youngsters to offensive material, he said.
"I am confident we can, with a few policy changes, put this behind us," Spanier told lawmakers considering the university's $362 million budget request. "I am very sorry for the consternation, confusion and anger that this has caused many individuals."
But more than a few legislators on the appropriations panel were not willing to let go.
Lawless, who is seeking to suspend Penn State's funding, confronted Spanier with two e-mails he had received from students.
One called him an "ass" who was too dim to go to Penn State. Another writer said Lawless was a "selfish bastard" and made fun of his eyes. Lawless had surgery for a brain tumor 15 years ago that left him slightly disfigured.
At that point, Lawless broke down and said: "I'll get to my further questions as soon as I get myself together."
Spanier looked down at the witness table in front of him. The room fell silent.
The hearing began with a screening of a video that Lawless had made while visiting the Sex Faire. Among other things, the tape showed a risque bingo game, a woman talking about marital aids, a catalog of sex toys and anatomically correct gingerbread cookies at a table of "erotic foods."
Since the hearing was broadcast live on Pennsylvania Cable Network, it was probably the only legislative proceeding ever to carry a parental warning label.
Taking the microphone before the tape began, one lawmaker urged people watching at home to change the channel if children were present.
Questions about budget matters - funding for the medical school, the racial makeup of Penn State's student body, the rising cost of tuition, and retirement funds for university employees - broke up the sex talk. But then, Sex Faire and the earlier feminist rally would come back up again, and Spanier and another legislator would spar.
At one point, Rep. David J. Mayernik (D., Allegheny) bored in, trying to get Spanier to denounce the Sex Faire.
"Was it wrong, yes or no?" he asked.
Spanier demurred, saying that portions of it were inappropriate.
"Former President Clinton went through this with what the meaning of 'is' is," Mayernik said.
"I'm not trying to be evasive, but to give an honest answer," Spanier said. "I'm not understanding what you mean by 'wrong.' "
Finally, the university president said, "I don't think my personal view of morality should be the subject of this appropriation hearing."
Countered Mayernik, "I find it odd, Mr. President, that you want to wash your hands of this."
Spanier said that balancing the free-speech rights of students with diverse viewpoints at a large university "is always a very difficult line to walk."
Other lawmakers came to Spanier's defense, in what became a lively debate on constitutional law.
Rep. Dan Frankel (D., Allegheny) praised his "measured and restrained" response to the issue.
"In the marketplace of ideas, sometimes you have to tolerate these things," Frankel said.
This is something that actually happened and could easily explain Curley’s actions. It also kills the narrative that Joe had anything to do with Curley’s decision to alter the plan.
There’s little doubt those same politicians would use a report of suspected sexual abuse on campus to go after Spanier and Penn State again. If Curley was unsure about what MM saw in the shower it’s not a stretch to believe he would take a different course of action based on this.
But you guys keep chasing shadows. I’m sure Ziegler will find that crucial piece of evidence to prove MM really saw Sandusky and the kid fully clothed playing cards.
Yeah they immediately changed course and decided not to report suspected child sexual abuse because of that! Meanwhile Mike McQueary, Dranov, JM, Raykovitz (who they told themselves) etc, etc. or the “victim” himself all supposedly knew and could have decided to report it at any time. Brilliant hypothesis.
Seems like it's close to a lock that McQueary is lying about something regarding his report of the shower incident between Jerry and "Victim 2", Allan Myers.
Mike's first account had the event happening on March 1, 2002. That was debunked.
The next accepted account, and the one that was cited in the trial, was that the incident happened on Friday, February 9, 2001. Paper trails between Joe, Curley, and Schultz would back that up because they started discussing the incident in February 2001. However----
When did Mike meet with his dad and Dranov to discuss what he'd witnessed?
Mike's first account had the event happening on March 1, 2002. That was debunked.
The next accepted account, and the one that was cited in the trial, was that the incident happened on Friday, February 9, 2001. Paper trails between Joe, Curley, and Schultz would back that up because they started discussing the incident in February 2001. However----
- McQueary testified that on the day of the incident, campus was deserted, and students must have been on break. He remembered it was a Friday. But we recently learned that there was a concert at the BJC the night of Friday, February 9. Therefore, there would be a lot of cars and activity around Lasch that night.
- Jerry has maintained that he thought the incident happened earlier than that, linking it with a book signing he did along with learning about not getting the UVA coaching job.
- UVA announced that Al Groh would get the UVA head coaching job on December 30, 2000.
- Jerry had a book signing in Washington, Pa on Friday, December 29, 2000. He returned back to State College that evening. Allan Myers was with him.
- December 29 was during winter break. Campus around the Lasch Building certainly would be deserted.
- Mike didn't tell Joe about the incident until February 10.
- Kenny Jackson left PSU and it was announced the wide receivers coaching job was open on February 8, 2001.
When did Mike meet with his dad and Dranov to discuss what he'd witnessed?
Last edited:
Good summary. Thanks for doing that.
Here's a question for the board. Who did Al Groh hire as his DC in January 2001 to put this very board in meltdown mode?
