Following the Sandusky trial...new thoughts on McCleary?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I agree with you that he is less of a target/less responsible for the coverup. I am glad the higher ups are facing charges and have lost their jobs. However in my eyes as a child rape survivor, a parent of young boys and just a gal who tries to be a decent human being, McQueary is pretty dang responsible for just walking away that night. No one else saw what he saw and failed to lift a finger to help. Local PD or campus police, no matter how you dice the onion it's an emergency and immediate call, even if you are too scared or unable to personally intervene yourself. I have been in some dicey and dangerous situations and I have either called the police or become involved. I know that what people say they would do and what they do in reality are often different. But I just don't grasp the mindset that would not attempt to do ANYTHING of value that night.

 

I guess I am willing to accept MM's statement that he experienced shock and wasn't thinking clearly. It is interesting that the janitor who witnessed an assault by Sandusky in the 90s was described as looking pale and like he was going to have a heart attack. He was Vietnam vet and had seen some terrible sights in his time, and had that much of a reaction, so I can kind of see something like that happening to MM.

 

We are in very much agreement that those behind the cover up are finally looking like they may face some severe penalties, which is something I guess.

[Scarlett]

A person was being raped. A *little*, *minor* person was being raped by a pedophile. The ONLY acceptable responses are:

 

1) Stop the rape

 

and/or

 

2) Call 911

 

:iagree:

 

This is one of those times in life that you realize you should think through....what would I do?

 

So I think we can all safely say....if I walk in on a child being raped I will raise holy heck and call 911 as I beat the rapist with my purse.

[lula]

This is incorrect- he is not being charged because investigators have concluded what he did was legally sufficient since he met with a campus police officer in the room. Other people, who did not see what he saw, are facing charges.

 

And let's be clear about something. It is rape of a child. Not child abuse. If a full grown woman is forced to have sex, we always call it rape. Same thing happens to a minor and we often call it molestation and abuse. Sandusky is a rapist.

 

I'm completely clear that it's rape. Got it.

 

Sorry this line was a reminder line that I meant to add/clarify. I meant to delete this from my post after I had worked through this more clearly but I had an awake child stumble into the room. (ugh, I often post too quickly without clearly posting my complete thought. I'm actually an attorney. I don't deal with sexual crimes and children however I do deal with adult victims of violent sexual crimes so I get the legal definitions of child abuse, rape etc, got it, even without the highlighted phrases.)

 

Here is the jist what I wanted to add earlier:I wish he should still be charged because he failed to stop the crime while it was in progress, he didn't merely have the obligation to report the rape but he was witness to the actual incident and did nothing. I see these as two separate things.

 

I know he can be legally charged under PA law for failure to report and I think that's horrible.Many times there will be different standards for mandated reporters for reporting neglect or physical abuse vs. sexual abuse including rape but in PA this doesn't seem to be the case and that is why he is fine in merely reporting to his superior. In other states (like mine) he would be required to not only report to his superiors but to also report to the police including being required to give an oral report and file a statement. I question the sufficiency of his reporting given the nature of the crime. I especially question the sufficiency considering that he was a coach. Also, if he left out details then it seems that his report was insufficient. Additionally if is were to be considered a mandated or required reporter and knew that Sandusky continued to take children out alone he also failed to report that Sandusky continued to have direct supervision over children at the charity and that those children were in the presence of a person who had previously raped a child. This continued threat should to be reported.

 

If he was a considered to be at the level of a required reporter this is a major problem. To me at the least he should be held to the standard of mandated reporters in other states but obviously PA law is insanely lax in this area.

 

§ 3490.13. Reports by employees who are required reporters.

(a) Required reporters who work in an institution, school, facility or agency shall immediately notify the person in charge of the institution, school, facility or agency or the person in charge's designee of suspected abuse. The person in charge, or the designee, shall be responsible and have the obligation to make a report of the suspected child abuse to ChildLine immediately.

This is the requirement for mandated reporters for child abuse. The law in PA does not (as far as I know make an additional reporting requirement for child rape and puts it under the general child abuse reporting) So yes, he did meet the requirements of PA law for reporting child abuse including for PA law apparently, rape. But does this actually make sense to anyone? Shouldn't he have an additional reporting requirement even under PA law for reporting this? The only way to get him in trouble is if PA law requires regular citizens to also report and give a statement on child abuse and child rape to the police. (not just the people in charge of the institution he works at) This is the same ridiculous argument that the PA priests made when they failed to report child sexual abuse by priests. Their argument was that "they had no obligation to report sexual abuse to the law enforcement" and that this was told to them by legal council. Their legal council wasn't so far off. In practice there are often no requirements to report a rape to law enforcement.

 

However, should he be required to STOP the rape of a child while it is occurring? It seems to me that this is where the argument needs to lie. PA really doesn't have any way to get him trouble for this? (clearly they don't, I just find that insane but honestly, that's probably pretty standard. I worked a case where a man literally raped a woman in the bathroom stall of a full bathroom and nobody who witnessed the crime was in any trouble because they didn't actually 'know that she didn't consent and additionally they weren't obligated to go to her assistance to check or under the obligation to call 911 in such an indicent" Um, yeh, it didn't matter that she clearly verbalized her non-consent because he wasn't physically hitting her "just raping" her they didn't call the cops. (this is public record)

 

I wish that they could get him under a more stringent rule. If he knew that Sandusky was still working with children at the charity he should have had another obligation to report to the head of the institution. If he also knew that Sandusky may come in contact with any potential football player who was a minor even in recruiting he should have the obligation to report. Arguably he could have also contacted Child Protection and Social Services. Obviously, he won't be charged and he is now a key witness for the prosecution. I should have clarified my statement but instead of editing here is a quick clarification. back to my now half asleep child...:)

Edited June 14, 2012 by lula

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Why focus so much on "getting" MM?

 

If you write the law that everyone becomes a mandated, it in effect becomes unenforceable. As a college football coach, MM did not work with minors and certainly shouldn't fall any normal mandatory reporter requirements. (BTW addition, Sandusky was no longer a college football coach and was no longer recruiting players.)

 

I do agree with going after the PSU administrators who did have a clear legal obligation and not only failed to meet it, but appear to have attempted to cover everything up. Trying to construct a way to go after MM because he didn't report it the way you think it should been done/do enough afterwards just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

 

There was an interesting discussion on one of the news shows (DR. Drew maybe) last night regarding the mandated reporter laws, and the issue of broad mandated reporter laws was discussed for a bit.

[Kirch]

You know, it occurred to me that the argument/idea/whatever that none of us *really* knows what we would do for sure when faced with a situation like McQueary faced is a bit of a red herring. Even if many other people would have had a similar reaction, it doesn't make it the right or okay thing to do. It might make it easier to understand how he could see it and not intervene, but that still doesn't make it okay or excusable.

[Samiam]

So here's this: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--jerry-sandusky-janitors-costas-interview-sexual-molestation-.html

 

Another adult man, a vet no less, the janitor, witnessed a vile act, and actually stayed there while it happened from what I gather in the story. He was sickened by it, and told his co-workers/superiors. None of them followed through to report it to police.

 

Why? I would really love someone who has a some sort of phsycology (spelled wrong, I know!) training to weigh in on this. I truly think these men, this janitor and McCleary, were so shocked and horrified, that they reacted in a way that perhaps is not coherent to the rest of us who's brains are functioning clearly. Well, as clearly as I could be at 2:30 a.m. I don't think any of these men walked away because they didn't know better. I think that it was like a "fight or flight" response and considering it was "the legend Sandusky" and probably the very last thing in the world you would expect to see, the "flight" took over. Not what we would want them to do, and not what we expect ourselves to do...but sometimes the brain just doesn't always think clearly in the state of panic.

[Samiam]

I get that people are sometimes cowards and we can understand why he didn't do everything possible to stop Sandusky from abusing children. What I don't get is parents excusing his behavior.

 

I am not excusing his behavior. I do believe in giving him the benefit of the doubt that he is a human with fallacies. I believe that at the time, in the situation that he was in, for the person he was at that time, he did what he thought was best. And yes, I do feel for him. He is not a rapist. He is not a pedophile. He handled it the best that he thought he could at the time, as a young 28 year old old "living his dream coaching job at the holy-grail of his life Penn State" man, probably kind of a dense jock who lived and died Penn State football. Reported it to everyone in power at PSU. He did what he was told to do. And then he was basically steam-rolled by those powers. Looking back, we all can see, and I bet he can too, that he should have made better choices. I bet he's sick to his stomach on a daily basis now that he's grown up a bit, thinking like a almost-40 year old man and knows the reality that humans are more than just a peg in Penn State's football agenda.

 

He wasn't the police who had a report, and talked to Sandusky, who admitted some oddities, and then ignored it. Supposed to be trained in that kind of thing.

He wasn't a school counselor who talked to a victim and then poo-pooed as "not true". Supposed to be trained in that kind of thing.

He wasn't an adult janitor who witnessed it and told only co-workers, then never reported to a higher power.

The question of why the abrupt retirement, the no-job offers, the possible rumours.....the higher-ups hear those rumours too, but yet they let life continue.

 

He witnessed it and reported it. He did MORE than anyone else in that situation, except the victims themselves who reported it. And because he did, he was raked over the coals. Had he never reported it, like the others, he could go on with his life and probably still be working at Penn State. Perhaps his just punishment for not pressing further with Sandusky when he witnessed the situation, for not pressing hard on the authorities. Or perhaps he's just a human who made a mistake. I am kind of appalled that people would cluster him with pedophiles and want him punished too.

 

I do not think that he handled it right. But I can see why he did what he did, or didn't do. It's not excusing his behaviour, it's simply trying to see it from all sides since I've never been in a situation like this myself.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

So here's this: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--jerry-sandusky-janitors-costas-interview-sexual-molestation-.html

 

Another adult man, a vet no less, the janitor, witnessed a vile act, and actually stayed there while it happened from what I gather in the story. He was sickened by it, and told his co-workers/superiors. None of them followed through to report it to police.

 

Why? I would really love someone who has a some sort of phsycology (spelled wrong, I know!) training to weigh in on this. I truly think these men, this janitor and McCleary, were so shocked and horrified, that they reacted in a way that perhaps is not coherent to the rest of us who's brains are functioning clearly. Well, as clearly as I could be at 2:30 a.m. I don't think any of these men walked away because they didn't know better. I think that it was like a "fight or flight" response and considering it was "the legend Sandusky" and probably the very last thing in the world you would expect to see, the "flight" took over. Not what we would want them to do, and not what we expect ourselves to do...but sometimes the brain just doesn't always think clearly in the state of panic.

 

 

I mentioned the janitor's story above, and yes, I do believe there was something behind why two different men acted in a similar manner when they witnessed these assaults.

DH and I discussed this a bit earlier tonight, and he theorizes that had the perp been a stranger or if the attacks was somewhere else, both may have had different responses.

[Ibbygirl]

A person was being raped. A *little*, *minor* person was being raped by a pedophile. The ONLY acceptable responses are:

 

1) Stop the rape

 

and/or

 

2) Call 911

 

 

These kids were failed by so many people. :(

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree: Shame on them all who knew and did nothing to protect those children. Shame! Shame! Shame!

[FiveOaksAcademy]

:)

Edited June 20, 2012 by FiveOaksAcademy

[Scarlett]

continue.

 

He witnessed it and reported it. He did MORE than anyone else in that situation, except the victims themselves who reported it. And because he did, he was raked over the coals. Had he never reported it, like the others, he could go on with his life and probably still be working at Penn State. Perhaps his just punishment for not pressing further with Sandusky when he witnessed the situation, for not pressing hard on the authorities. Or perhaps he's just a human who made a mistake. I am kind of appalled that people would cluster him with pedophiles and want him punished too.

 

I do not think that he handled it right. But I can see why he did what he did, or didn't do. It's not excusing his behaviour, it's simply trying to see it from all sides since I've never been in a situation like this myself.

 

I too don't think he should be vilified for the rest of his life. His shame has just become very public in a way that the worst moments of our lives never do.

 

I think there is a lesson for us in all of this. I said it earlier up thread but I will say it again. THINK through what you would do if faced with a similar situation. Vow to never be so frozen in fear that you can't go to the defense of a child or report a rape of anyone to the authorities.

[Harriet Vane]

I don't feel bad for him. He caught an adult male raping a child and his response was to make noise so they would know someone was there, call a person who was not the police and in meetings where he claimed he was reporting the incident he left out details. How about grabbing the kid and driving to the nearest police station? How about calling 911? The family friend thing etc just doesn't hold up to me, this was a child and he saw exactly what was happening. Even if in the moment he didn't know what to do or was in shock he could have gone to the police after, tried to contact the child to bring him to the police etc. and all of this could be done without even talking to his superiors at the school. It would have been much harder to cover up if someone was able to medically examine the child immediately after the rape.

 

I understand that he may have been in shock but after he had time to process he needed to act. I think he would be employable if he had done something more extreme as a response. His half-action makes him unemployable.

 

I personally think he should be in jail for his inaction. I could care less about his job prospects. I also think the school counselor should have charges brought against her.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[Harriet Vane]

A person was being raped. A *little*, *minor* person was being raped by a pedophile. The ONLY acceptable responses are:

 

1) Stop the rape

 

and/or

 

2) Call 911

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[elegantlion]

Even presuming the fight or flight response was his initial reaction. Run away and report, okay. But where is the follow-up? Did he sleep well at night knowing everything had been done? That he saw a CHILD being molested and did not follow up until he KNEW that something was being done.

 

Sorry, I think it's spineless and self-serving and he was trying to protect the status quo and his own job in the good ol' boy system.

 

People often have to live with the consequences of their poor choices. He shall have to live with his. I don't feel one iota of pity for him.

[LucyStoner]

His shame has just become very public in a way that the worst moments of our lives never do.

 

The worst moment, worst decision of the average person's life is not akin to doing little to nothing in the face of a 10 year old child being raped.

 

I am not big on vilifying anyone. But I refuse to be sad that he can't be a coach anymore. I had a great high school teacher, really went above and beyond. Well sometime after I graduated it was revealed that she had long embezzled funds from the district. A lot of money. She lost her job, signed a plea agreement and now works as a very menial job and pays restitution to the district. I can't say that I am sorry she is not employed by the district anymore and unemployable by any other. It is sad that she blew her career up, but that doesn't mean she should get it back. People have to live with the consequences of their bad decisions and in his case, his decision was extra bad.

Edited June 15, 2012 by kijipt

[LucyStoner]

Why focus so much on "getting" MM?

 

 

For me it is not about "getting" him. I just refuse to feel sad that he has lost his chosen career because he failed to act.

[Tammi K]

I was a student at Penn State from 1980-1984 and I was always under the impression that Penn State cops ARE cops- real cops, not hired security. So, I did a little checking and as far as I can tell, they are sworn officers of the peace.

 

http://www.br.psu.edu/Documents/Campus_Police_Powers_and_Duties.pdf

 

See section 8b.

 

So, given that, I would say he did report it to the POLICE.

Edited June 15, 2012 by Tammi K
to correct an error of fact

[deacongirl]

He didn't do enough. Period. He saw what he saw, and then for the next 10!!!! yrs. continued to see Sandusky with kids. He didn't do enough.

[Reeciecup]

He did more than anyone else did. He reported it, and if his superiors had done their jobs then he would have been a hero. Instead, his superiors covered it up. This guy is just the scape goat.

[deacongirl]

It boggles my mind that people are defending McQueary's choice to continue to allow children to be abused. I cannot comprehend this. If Sandusky had raped your kid in the years since McQueary witnessed him raping that boy, would you still think he did enough?

[ma23peas]

He did more than anyone else did. He reported it, and if his superiors had done their jobs then he would have been a hero. Instead, his superiors covered it up. This guy is just the scape goat.

 

:iagree: now, who I would rather see charged and villified is the man who purportedly had a file on Sandusky's transgressions dating back many years and knew about it....

[hsmom2011]

I don't think we should judge until we have walked in his shoes. Everyone is not going to react the same way in a panic situation. He did what he thought was right.

[snickelfritz]

I don't think we should judge until we have walked in his shoes. Everyone is not going to react the same way in a panic situation. He did what he thought was right.

 

I wonder if he would have thought those actions were right if he walked in on Sandusky with his(McQueary's) own child? Or if he would have been propelled to a little more action, instead of making some noise, going home to sleep on it, and reporting it to his boss?

[mirth]

 

If it was your kid he had failed to help, I am sure you would feel no sympathy.

 

If Sandusky had raped your kid in the years since McQueary witnessed him raping that boy, would you still think he did enough?

 

I wonder if he would have thought those actions were right if he walked in on Sandusky with his(McQueary's) own child? Or if he would have been propelled to a little more action, instead of making some noise, going home to sleep on it, and reporting it to his boss?

 

Finally this thread is getting down to brass tacks. It is too bad we have to imagine such things happening to our kids as a litmus test for what is good enough coaching material for others'.

Edited June 15, 2012 by mirth

[snickelfritz]

I don't think he should exactly be the focus of this whole thing. Sandusky is the sicko who did all of these things.

 

That said, it's sad to know we can't count on people to look out for our kids.

 

Sandusky is the ultimate sicko. None of the blame should be taken off of his shoulders for what he did. But so many other people failed those children. They get their own blame.

[snickelfritz]

I agree. I just can't believe how long this went on and NOBODY noticed or said anything? Was that guy really that good? Ugh... It makes me want to throw up.

 

This is, almost, the part that is most disturbing. There will always be weird perverts. You just expect that if people know, they will stop them. MULTIPLE people knew and did NOTHING.

[Scarlett]

The worst moment, worst decision of the average person's life is not akin to doing little to nothing in the face of a 10 year old child being raped.

 

I am not big on vilifying anyone. But I refuse to be sad that he can't be a coach anymore. I had a great high school teacher, really went above and beyond. Well sometime after I graduated it was revealed that she had long embezzled funds from the district. A lot of money. She lost her job, signed a plea agreement and now works as a very menial job and pays restitution to the district. I can't say that I am sorry she is not employed by the district anymore and unemployable by any other. It is sad that she blew her career up, but that doesn't mean she should get it back. People have to live with the consequences of their bad decisions and in his case, his decision was extra bad.

 

I don't think he should have his job back. I am not sad about that. I agree it is a consequence of poor decision making skills and he is paying the price for his lapse in judgment. However, I DO have compassion for how he feels now. When I think of the terrible things I've done in my life I would hope people would at least remember that I'm human.

[Laurie4b]

I was a student at Penn State from 1980-1984 and I was always under the impression that Penn State cops ARE cops- real cops, not hired security. So, I did a little checking and as far as I can tell, they are sworn officers of the peace.

 

http://www.br.psu.edu/Documents/Campus_Police_Powers_and_Duties.pdf

 

See section 8b.

 

So, given that, I would say he did report it to the POLICE.

 

:iagree:Campus police are police. They are not security guards. That's why they are called police.

[Harriet Vane]

This is, almost, the part that is most disturbing. There will always be weird perverts. You just expect that if people know, they will stop them. MULTIPLE people knew and did NOTHING.

 

Unfortunately this is the sad reality. Talk to any social worker about it. There are always scores of people who knew or suspected and do NOTHING.

[Laurie4b]

I mentioned the janitor's story above, and yes, I do believe there was something behind why two different men acted in a similar manner when they witnessed these assaults.

DH and I discussed this a bit earlier tonight, and he theorizes that had the perp been a stranger or if the attacks was somewhere else, both may have had different responses.

 

This is absolutely correct. It's the shock not only of seeing the act, but of seeing someone previously trusted committing the act that puts the mind on freeze. Add to that an unclear chain of command and you get the behavior that a lot of people will exhibit. It is in fact the exception that someone takes action in the moment. Look at Kitty Genovese. Look at the experiments when normal college students continued to shock a screaming victim because the professor said to. It's human behavior. It's very uncomfortable to face that. It is a small minority of people who will overcome their shock to act in the moment in a situation such as this.

 

In the police, army, social services, etc. where people are going to be seeing shocking things, there is a very clear chain of command, which takes the confusion out when one is in shock. It is clear what to do and what to do if your superior doesn't act. McCleary actually reported directly up the organizational chain of command (to Paterno, who did likewise) and to police. Campus police are police. The whole reason for clear chain of command for people likely to be encountering such situations is that people do freeze, they do get confused what to do next, etc. When people in authority don't act, such as the DA, that really shuts down nearly everyone, unless they are an absolute crusader.

 

Add to that a social milieu in which no one else is acting. We are far more influenced by people around us than we are consciously aware of or would care to admit.

 

No one knows what they would have done unless they've already been in a similar situation and can use past history to predict their future response. To us here in the peanut gallery, both the child and Sandusky are strangers. We are not in shock. It's a psychological way to distance ourselves from the horror to say :"I would have been a hero, unlike that scum of the earth, cowardly McCleary." It makes him "other" and me the "hero" and then I don't have to deal with the uncomfortable reality. Unfortunately, it also prevents constructive thought about how to help people overcome that very human paralysis in future situations.

 

From what I've read, he reported it to the university and the police. In prior incidents, both CPS and the police knew and thought charges should be brought and the DA declined to press charges.

 

I think there is much more profit from asking what about the whole system, especially the DAs office, failed so that it can be fixed in the future. Jumping on this one man is counterproductive--it actually keeps us from considering how to prevent this in the future by labeling him "other, evil, scum, coward" and not acknowledging how many people, just possibly including ourselves, would actually do the same thing. So no need to think about how to prevent it, how to make it more likely that people will react in a productive way.

Edited June 15, 2012 by Laurie4b

[QuirkyKidAcademy]

I don't care who he told after the fact. I wouldn't care if he shouted it from the rooftops of Happy Valley for days on end.

 

The fact is he walked away from a child being raped. Nothing he did after or tries to do now will make up for that.

[Scarlett]

I don't care who he told after the fact. I wouldn't care if he shouted it from the rooftops of Happy Valley for days on end.

 

The fact is he walked away from a child being raped. Nothing he did after or tries to do now will make up for that.

 

I'm sure he feels this 1000 times more about himself than anyone else does.

[Joanne]

I'm sure he feels this 1000 times more about himself than anyone else does.

 

Really? Because he worked with and around Sandusky for YEARS after, knowing Sandusky had continual access to kids.

[Samiam]

Really? Because he worked with and around Sandusky for YEARS after, knowing Sandusky had continual access to kids.

 

No he didn't. Sandusky was retired, thus did not come in on a daily basis. He came in occasionally to show his face, get his pat-on-the-backs, and his after hours visits. McCleary testified that he made a point to leave any room or meeting when Sandusky would come in, to the point where others even commented on it. He never again participated in any Three-mile event or ant event that was Sandusky sanctioned. The one event was a Easter Seals thing and he did not know the proceeds were going to 3-mile or Sandusky was going to be there. He left the event when he found out.

[PeacefulChaos]

I have to say, even hearing the snippets of the testimonies on the news turns my stomach and makes me want to cry.

I haven't been able to pay attention to what they are saying because of that. The whole thing is just terrible. :(

[AuntieM]

No he didn't. Sandusky was retired, thus did not come in on a daily basis. He came in occasionally to show his face, get his pat-on-the-backs, and his after hours visits. McCleary testified that he made a point to leave any room or meeting when Sandusky would come in, to the point where others even commented on it. He never again participated in any Three-mile event or ant event that was Sandusky sanctioned. The one event was a Easter Seals thing and he did not know the proceeds were going to 3-mile or Sandusky was going to be there. He left the event when he found out.

 

Okay now this behavior frankly also stumps me. If I had any inkling a coworker of mine was molesting - R@PING! - children, avoiding him would be the last thing I'd do. I'd be on him like a duck on a June bug, watching for him to show his true colors so he could be busted. Heck, I'd probably get called up on stalking charges.

 

Scotty [eta Mike, not Scott. I guess the fever pitch of my outrage obscured my thinking...] turned a blind eye. I don't think he gets worse punishment than the others. But I have no pity for him, none whatsoever.

Edited June 15, 2012 by AuntieM

[tristangrace]

This is absolutely correct. It's the shock not only of seeing the act, but of seeing someone previously trusted committing the act that puts the mind on freeze. Add to that an unclear chain of command and you get the behavior that a lot of people will exhibit. It is in fact the exception that someone takes action in the moment. Look at Kitty Genovese. Look at the experiments when normal college students continued to shock a screaming victim because the professor said to. It's human behavior. It's very uncomfortable to face that. It is a small minority of people who will overcome their shock to act in the moment in a situation such as this.

 

In the police, army, social services, etc. where people are going to be seeing shocking things, there is a very clear chain of command, which takes the confusion out when one is in shock. It is clear what to do and what to do if your superior doesn't act. McCleary actually reported directly up the organizational chain of command (to Paterno, who did likewise) and to police. Campus police are police. The whole reason for clear chain of command for people likely to be encountering such situations is that people do freeze, they do get confused what to do next, etc. When people in authority don't act, such as the DA, that really shuts down nearly everyone, unless they are an absolute crusader.

 

Add to that a social milieu in which no one else is acting. We are far more influenced by people around us than we are consciously aware of or would care to admit.

 

No one knows what they would have done unless they've already been in a similar situation and can use past history to predict their future response. To us here in the peanut gallery, both the child and Sandusky are strangers. We are not in shock. It's a psychological way to distance ourselves from the horror to say :"I would have been a hero, unlike that scum of the earth, cowardly McCleary." It makes him "other" and me the "hero" and then I don't have to deal with the uncomfortable reality. Unfortunately, it also prevents constructive thought about how to help people overcome that very human paralysis in future situations.

 

From what I've read, he reported it to the university and the police. In prior incidents, both CPS and the police knew and thought charges should be brought and the DA declined to press charges.

 

I think there is much more profit from asking what about the whole system, especially the DAs office, failed so that it can be fixed in the future. Jumping on this one man is counterproductive--it actually keeps us from considering how to prevent this in the future by labeling him "other, evil, scum, coward" and not acknowledging how many people, just possibly including ourselves, would actually do the same thing. So no need to think about how to prevent it, how to make it more likely that people will react in a productive way.

 

 

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes. I'm always suspicious when righteous indignation reaches this fever pitch (i.e., "I would NEVER do what McQueary did! He was a foul COWARD but I would be a HERO in his place"). The more extreme the boasting is, the less I buy it--it's kind of fantasy talk, and betrays a very light connection with reality. If you are psychologically unable to bear to even look at the internal and external difficulties inherent in McQueary's situation, I don't see how you're going to be able to bear to overcome them when/if you are confronted by them in real life.

[TranquilMind]

kijipt: The worst moment, worst decision of the average person's life is not akin to doing little to nothing in the face of a 10 year old child being raped.

 

 

Right. Especially when you CAN overpower the attacker. This isn't a case where MM was held at gunpoint and forced to watch something awful. He was bigger and far younger than the attacker, even if it was his boss. He failed to act because he wanted to protect his job.

 

 

It is sad that she blew her career up, but that doesn't mean she should get it back. People have to live with the consequences of their bad decisions and in his case, his decision was extra bad.

 

Exactly.

[TranquilMind]

Okay now this behavior frankly also stumps me. If I had any inkling a coworker of mine was molesting - R@PING! - children, avoiding him would be the last thing I'd do. I'd be on him like a duck on a June bug, watching for him to show his true colors so he could be busted. Heck, I'd probably get called up on stalking charges.

 

Scotty turned a blind eye. I don't think he gets worse punishment than the others. But I have no pity for him, none whatsoever.

 

Me too! My sleuthing skills would be put to work. I would trap this guy one way or another if I were anywhere within his social arena.

[KnitWit]

Really? Because he worked with and around Sandusky for YEARS after, knowing Sandusky had continual access to kids.

 

:iagree: This is what I cannot get past.

[Samiam]

Okay now this behavior frankly also stumps me. If I had any inkling a coworker of mine was molesting - R@PING! - children, avoiding him would be the last thing I'd do. I'd be on him like a duck on a June bug, watching for him to show his true colors so he could be busted. Heck, I'd probably get called up on stalking charges.

 

Scotty turned a blind eye. I don't think he gets worse punishment than the others. But I have no pity for him, none whatsoever.

 

Sandusky was already banned from bringing children on campus BECAUSE of McCleary's report.

 

McClearly only occassionally saw Sandusky during work hours, and avoided him. There wasn't going to be any "events" happening at these encounters because it was all in the public eye. So it's not like he could stop anything then and there.

 

From victim testimony, most of the situations where in Sandusky's basement. There were some locker room situations, but mostly in the basement.

 

I find it unrealistic to think that you would drop your life and hang around Sandusky's basement window to catch him in the act, which is what you are insinuating that McClearly should have done.

 

Again, not excusing McClearly's choices, only trying to comprehend afterwards what difference choices he could make. It's an easy thing to do afterwards. Perhaps not so much in the moment.

[AuntieM]

Sandusky was already banned from bringing children on campus BECAUSE of McCleary's report.

 

McClearly only occassionally saw Sandusky during work hours, and avoided him. There wasn't going to be any "events" happening at these encounters because it was all in the public eye. So it's not like he could stop anything then and there.

 

From victim testimony, most of the situations where in Sandusky's basement. There were some locker room situations, but mostly in the basement.

 

I find it unrealistic to think that you would drop your life and hang around Sandusky's basement window to catch him in the act, which is what you are insinuating that McClearly should have done.

 

Again, not excusing McClearly's choices, only trying to comprehend afterwards what difference choices he could make. It's an easy thing to do afterwards. Perhaps not so much in the moment.

 

 

Well, at the risk of sounding snarky, I find it unrealistic that you continue to stretch your defense of this man. Your OP asked for opinions, and we have voiced them.

 

Do you by chance have a vested interest in the outcome of this case as it relates to McQueary's involvement? I really *don't* mean it to sound snarky, but you seem more interested in defending your stance than in taking a general survey of opinions. That just leaves me curious.

 

And yes, if "dropping my life" included taking action to possibly prevent such horrendous acts, I stand by my original assertion that that is exactly what I would do.

[LucyStoner]

Really? Because he worked with and around Sandusky for YEARS after, knowing Sandusky had continual access to kids.

 

Yup. And he mostly seems more emotional about his job situation than about anything else, including the children Sandusky was raping.

[LucyStoner]

So, given that, I would say he did report it to the POLICE.

 

The first time he talked to a campus police officer is like 11 days after. He did not contact campus police himself that night and let a rapist leave with a small child without sending any cops of any ilk after them.

[Samiam]

Well, at the risk of sounding snarky, I find it unrealistic that you continue to stretch your defense of this man. Your OP asked for opinions, and we have voiced them.

 

Do you by chance have a vested interest in the outcome of this case as it relates to McQueary's involvement? I really *don't* mean it to sound snarky, but you seem more interested in defending your stance than in taking a general survey of opinions. That just leaves me curious.

 

And yes, if "dropping my life" included taking action to possibly prevent such horrendous acts, I stand by my original assertion that that is exactly what I would do.

 

You sound snarky. We are having a conversation. It's not personal. I am explaining my opinion. You are explaining yours. It's.not.personal. I wasn't taking a general survey, otherwise I would have posted a poll. I was having a conversation.

 

No vested interested. Never met the guy. Never been to Penn State. Don't watch college football. Just think it's an interest case of human thought process. I do have empathy for McCleary today (AND MORE EMPATHY FOR THE VICTIMS, before anyone can throw that out!!). Thought we were all intelligent adults who could have a conversation, share opinions and perhaps have thoughts to ponder. Didn't realize that people would get all offended because I have a different opinion than you. Guess not all of us can have intelligent conversations if our opinions differ. That was personal.

Edited June 15, 2012 by Samiam

[twoxcell]

I'm sorry but the proper response for anyone one is intervening with physical force and/or immediately calling 911. I would expect nothing less from myself or anyone else.:ack2::cursing::crying:

[LucyStoner]

You sound snarky. We are having a conversation. It's not personal. I am explaining my opinion. You are explaining yours. It's.not.personal. I wasn't taking a general survey, otherwise I would have posted a poll. I was having a conversation.

 

No vested interested. Never met the guy. Never been to Penn State. Don't watch college football. Just think it's an interest case of human thought process. I do have empathy for McCleary today. Thought we were all intelligent adults who could have a conversation, share opinions and perhaps have thoughts to ponder. Didn't realize that people would get all offended because I have a different opinion than you. Guess not all of us can have intelligent conversations if our opinions differ. That was personal.

 

Disagreeing with you does not mean people are offended. It just means that people are passionate about an issue that for some of us, is not a what if.

[RanchGirl]

I don't think we should judge until we have walked in his shoes. Everyone is not going to react the same way in a panic situation. He did what he thought was right.

 

Respectfully, I have to disagree. This was not a danger situation for McQueary, so he can't justify his lack of action, initially or in the intervening weeks and years, with panic.

 

There are many situations where I have believed I couldn't or shouldn't judge someone. But it's completely appropriate to judge MM and every other jacka$$ who could have done something more to stop Sandusky. MM was the subject of this thread, so I'll use him as an example. He could have...

 

Called 911 right away.

Walked into the shower and stared at the evildoer until said evildoer left, without the child.

Asked the victim his phone number and called the child's mom, rode with them to the police station.

 

Police won't listen? There are still a hundred things he could have done afterward. Physically threaten Sandusky. Print up flyers and hand them out to parents in the area. Start a chain letter. I don't care what you have to do, how uncomfortable it makes you, if it makes you "unemployable". Wah. How dare he expect sympathy for that?? He should be ashamed.

Edited June 16, 2012 by RanchGirl
clarity

[elegantlion]

 

And yes, if "dropping my life" included taking action to possibly prevent such horrendous acts, I stand by my original assertion that that is exactly what I would do.

 

:iagree: Honestly, how could you sleep at night?

 

Some people have been trained to react in a split second. Don't football coaches make at the moment decisions when seconds count? Aren't football players trained to make confrontational decisions?

 

It's not like he heard about it, a rumor that this psycho like kids. He saw it happening!! It's not like it was a woman or even another man, where there could be a blip of thought of maybe it's consensual. It was a CHILD!

 

As I stated before, even if he initially walked away, wouldn't your heart be pounding knowing you should do something right then, right now? Wouldn't you turn around and find a way to intervene?

 

perhaps I don't put anyone on a pedestal so it wouldn't matter if it was my boss, my relative, my favorite celebrity, or anyone. Perhaps I have enough of a Batman-type spirit that I would make sure justice was served.

 

If at 28 he was so star struck by his position or so spineless that he couldn't do the right thing, then well, I hope he's had a lot of time to grow and change. Conviction of character is doing the right thing when no one around you is. I wonder how that child now feels about his own life, knowing that a sport he probably loved covered up this atrocity.

 

I don't think he was solely responsible, obviously. But he was in a position to stop it. If he avoided the scum for years, he knew that something was amiss. Ignoring a problem (or a problem person) doesn't make them go away.

 

I have had some IRL interaction with spineless men. They made all the right excuses for the fact they were unable & unwilling to do the right thing. They weren't reasons, they were excuses and none of them mattered to the people who were hurt in the process, which was me and my family. The sting never really goes away. I hope this victim is able to find some solace and closure during these hearings.

[Tammi K]

The first time he talked to a campus police officer is like 11 days after. He did not contact campus police himself that night and let a rapist leave with a small child without sending any cops of any ilk after them.

 

Oh, no doubt "A day late and a dollar short." I agree he was appallingly late in going to anyone in law enforcement. But, it refutes the argument that he didn't go to the police just campus security. At University Park, campus police are 'real' police.