Big Wheel Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 My point is that it's easy for us to second guess a split-second reaction from our own comfortable seats at home. Would your brain even be able to correctly process what McQueary saw? I don't have the hubris to say mine definitely would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete C Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Would your brain even be able to correctly process what McQueary saw? I don't have the hubris to say mine definitely would. What are the choices besides child molestation and assisted showering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Wheel Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Missing the point entirely. What I'm saying is that if you see what McQueary saw, all logical reasoning functions have a nonzero chance of going out the window. That kind of thing is pure emotion, fight-or-flight, adrenaline takeover territory. Not "I'm gonna think about exactly what I'm seeing" territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Where did I write anything about McQueery's reaction being out of the range of "normal" or any damn thing about "normal" whatever that is? All I said is that he saw a horrific crime going on. He knew it was terrible at that moment, because he left and called his father and broke down on the phone. He had a choice, and he chose to walk away and leave that kid to his fate, when he could have stopped what was happening right then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why do you choose to spell McQueary's name differently in every post? Are ya even paying attention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Wheel Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 The idea that McQueary is a personal failure for a split-second reaction is implying that there's some norm of human behavior that goes, "hey, you better do the right thing when you are thrust into an unthinkable situation with no warning." It's like expecting that an untrained civilian suddenly thrust into a combat situation has certain responsibilities that they morally should live up to. Have some empathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 The idea that McQueary is a personal failure for a split-second reaction is implying that there's some norm of human behavior that goes, "hey, you better do the right thing when you are thrust into an unthinkable situation with no warning." It's like expecting that an untrained civilian suddenly thrust into a combat situation has certain responsibilities that they morally should live up to. Have some empathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 The idea that McQueary is a personal failure for a split-second reaction is implying that there's some norm of human behavior that goes, "hey, you better do the right thing when you are thrust into an unthinkable situation with no warning." It's like expecting that an untrained civilian suddenly thrust into a combat situation has certain responsibilities that they morally should live up to. Have some empathy. Yes, from all I've heard, he's a good kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejp626 Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 The idea that McQueary is a personal failure for a split-second reaction is implying that there's some norm of human behavior that goes, "hey, you better do the right thing when you are thrust into an unthinkable situation with no warning." It's like expecting that an untrained civilian suddenly thrust into a combat situation has certain responsibilities that they morally should live up to. Have some empathy. You know -- I do have some empathy for the split-second reaction. I hope I would have been more of a hero in the first instance, but just am not sure. I don't have any empathy for the not following up, instead of just trusting that the higher ups would take care of things. That's where I definitely would have done things differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeline Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) I think its almost impossible to imagine what it would be like to have been in McQueary's shoes at the time he saw the assault. * for anyone who's interested, Tom Corbett (gov. of PA and former State Attorney General - on the Sandusky case for 2 years) will be speaking in a few minutes. You can watch his press conference here: http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/livenow?id=8427072 Edited November 10, 2011 by seeline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete C Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 You know -- I do have some empathy for the split-second reaction. I hope I would have been more of a hero in the first instance, but just am not sure. I don't have any empathy for the not following up, instead of just trusting that the higher ups would take care of things. That's where I definitely would have done things differently. Yes, that I agree with. Flight would be an understandable reaction, but he did realize what he saw, and did follow up, albeit ineffectually it turns out. Granted, he was young and should maybe get some slack--it's the father who didn't immediately call the police (assuming he believed his son) who's, IMO, more at fault. Instead we got a cover-up worthy of The Vatican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Dan Gould's last post has been deleted -- no "personal attacks." JETman's, too. We've been here before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 The idea that McQueary is a personal failure for a split-second reaction is implying that there's some norm of human behavior that goes, "hey, you better do the right thing when you are thrust into an unthinkable situation with no warning." It's like expecting that an untrained civilian suddenly thrust into a combat situation has certain responsibilities that they morally should live up to. Have some empathy. Yes, from all I've heard, he's a good kid. a good kid??? He was 28 at the time...Even if you suffered Rick Perry level brain freeze at that moment, You'd be sick to your stomach. You would at some point put yourself or a sibling in the place of the raped child. Even then if you did nothing at the time, you shouldn't, you wouldn't be able to sleep it would seem to me. You would keep replaying it in your brain...was he so afraid of Paterno, or of losing his job, he did the very least he could do, and passed the buck??? Like Dan said, if he had just done something...perhaps gotten someone else to see it, call security to stop it, he'd have saved untold children from being raped... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 The idea that McQueary is a personal failure for a split-second reaction is implying that there's some norm of human behavior that goes, "hey, you better do the right thing when you are thrust into an unthinkable situation with no warning." It's like expecting that an untrained civilian suddenly thrust into a combat situation has certain responsibilities that they morally should live up to. Have some empathy. Yes, from all I've heard, he's a good kid. a good kid??? He was 28 at the time...Even if you suffered Rick Perry level brain freeze at that moment, You'd be sick to your stomach. You would at some point put yourself or a sibling in the place of the raped child. Even then if you did nothing at the time, you shouldn't, you wouldn't be able to sleep it would seem to me. You would keep replaying it in your brain...was he so afraid of Paterno, or of losing his job, he did the very least he could do, and passed the buck??? Like Dan said, if he had just done something...perhaps gotten someone else to see it, call security to stop it, he'd have saved untold children from being raped... Since you're aligning yourself with Mr. Gold, I am now convinced that you're insane. What he did does not make him a bad kid (used relative to MY age) as Big Wheel pointed out (very logically, fwiw). Let's hope that you never find yourself in a similar situation, because the fact is that you'll never know what you'd do until you are. And btw, my former in-laws knew Mike McQueary very well. So in case you're wondering, THAT'S how I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son-of-a-Weizen Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 I am now convinced that you're insane. Um, JETman.....time to reign thyself in -- really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alocispepraluger102 Posted November 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 (edited) how many suicides will result from this tawdry example of what happens when good men do nothing, and the personal price of reporting sex crimes becomes prohibitive, particularly at penn state. it seems to me that reparations to these victims is mandated, even if it means raising ticket prices and paying the head coach several hundred thousands less annually. an example of pathetic damage control-- http://www.thesecondmile.org/welcome.php A Statement from The Second Mile 11.6.2011 The newly released details and the breadth of the allegations from the Attorney General’s office bring shock, sadness and concern from The Second Mile organization. Our prayers, care and compassion go out to all impacted. The most recent reports we’ve read this past weekend state that Mr. Sandusky met the alleged victims through The Second Mile. To our knowledge, all the alleged incidents occurred outside of our programs and events. However, we are encouraging anyone with information regarding this investigation to contact investigators from the Office of Attorney General at 814-863-1053 or Pennsylvania State Police at 814-470-2238. As The Second Mile’s CEO Jack Raykovitz testified to the Grand Jury, he was informed in 2002 by Pennsylvania State University Athletic Director Tim Curley that an individual had reported to Mr. Curley that he was uncomfortable about seeing Jerry Sandusky in the locker room shower with a youth. Mr. Curley also shared that the information had been internally reviewed and that there was no finding of wrongdoing. At no time was The Second Mile made aware of the very serious allegations contained in the Grand Jury report. Subsequently, in November 2008, Mr. Sandusky informed The Second Mile that he had learned he was being investigated as a result of allegations made against him by an adolescent male in Clinton County, PA. Although he maintained there was no truth to the claims, we are an organization committed first and foremost to the safety and well-being of the children we serve. Consistent with that commitment and with The Second Mile policy, we immediately made the decision to separate him from all of our program activities involving children. Thus, from 2008 to present, Mr. Sandusky has had no involvement with Second Mile programs involving children. The Second Mile was first contacted by the Attorney General’s office in early 2011. Since then, we have done everything in our power to cooperate with law-enforcement officials and will continue to do so. Our highest priority always has been and will continue to be the safety and well-being of the children participating in our programs. We encourage program participants to report any allegations of abuse and/or inappropriate sexual activity wherever it has occurred, and we take any such reports directly to Child Protective Services. We have many policies and procedures designed to protect our participants, including employee and volunteer background checks, training and supervision of our activities. The Second Mile has helped thousands of Pennsylvania’s children to lead better lives, and we remain committed to that mission. Our success is a result of the trust placed in us by the families and professionals with whom we partner, and we will take any steps needed to maintain their confidence in us. Edited November 11, 2011 by alocispepraluger102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeline Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 (edited) That statement from The Second Mile really rankles. It's so very frustrating to be here and not be able to do anything... also knowing that there are people who would happily die for PSU's football team. Which is just. so. wrong. * Edited to add: McQueary will not attend Nebraska game due to threats. It sounds like State College and University Park (the campus) are crawling with cops - state troopers, helicopters, the works. I am honestly surprised that the National Guard hasn't been called up - yet. Edited November 11, 2011 by seeline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 (edited) What sticks in my mind is that the graduate assistant had the greatest personal failure. He heard what sounded like sexual activity in the showers. But Sandusky wasn't boffing an 18 year old cheerleader, he was raping a ten year old, and the assistant could see all of these facts. How could he not physically intervene and stop it? If you physically stop the assault, restrain Sandusky and call the cops, there are no repercussions. There's no cover up. The kid is scarred for life but at least some adult stopped what was happening. But when the kid tells the cops what was done to him, and you have the physical evidence of sexual assault, its Game, Set and Match. Retaliation by anyone, including Paterno, would never happen. McCreery failed in the biggest moment of his life. Following up the day after doesn't alter that. I agree completely. I guess Jetman better add me to the insane list. Yeah, I might have shit myself and run around in circles jabbering for a bit as brain struggled to process things, but I think I would have snapped out of it and called the police, oh, at least before the month was out. I hope I would have had the good sense to grab the nearest blunt object and crack the rapist over the head rather than reporting it to my supervisor. Are you guys sure you're not disagreeing with Dan just because you always disagree with Dan? Edited November 11, 2011 by Jazzmoose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Wheel Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 (edited) There are two different decisions McQueary made that are getting conflated. 1) To bail out of the locker room. Dan thinks he can sit in his armchair and judge someone for "not doing the right thing" upon witnessing probably the most fucked-up shit he'll ever see. That's dumb. 2) To refer the matter to Paterno and leave it at that. Most of us agree that he should have pushed harder after he got home and was able to process what had actually happened. And gone to the police once it was clear Paterno wasn't getting it done. I think McQueary probably deserves most of the criticism coming his way for this, although I also think that most of the people ripping McQueary a new one aren't thinking very clearly about all the forces that were pulling at him. You've got a young guy who has no power or influence compared to Sandusky and especially compared to Paterno. He owes his entire success as an adult to Paterno. Presumably he trusts Paterno to make things right. And he probably thinks that he will be forever ruined if he stakes his reputation on a he-said, she-said kind of accusation against Sandusky and nobody wants to believe him (based on Paterno's account of the McQueary conversation to the grand jury, it sure sounds like Paterno didn't want to believe him). McQueary won't be the Hero Who Took Down A Monster. He'll be the Washed-Up Lunatic QB Who Made Shit Up. (Lest this seem like a trivial worry, keep in mind that people are threatening McQueary's life, right now, for telling the truth! Can you imagine what he'd be facing if it was widely thought he was lying?) None of that means that staying silent until a grand jury got involved was in any way acceptable. But it's hard for me to just ignore all that, too. Edited November 11, 2011 by Big Wheel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 There are two different decisions McQueary made that are getting conflated. 1) To bail out of the locker room. Dan thinks he can sit in his armchair and judge someone for "not doing the right thing" upon witnessing probably the most fucked-up shit he'll ever see. That's dumb. Let's consider this another way: "I witnessed a hideous felony committed against a child." "Did you try to stop it?" "No, I went home, consulted with my Dad, then spoke to my supervisor the next day." Seriously, I cannot remotely comprehend why we can't agree that he had a choice to stop the scum bag in the act, chose not to, and agree that wasn't the best choice. You've got a young guy who has no power or influence compared to Sandusky and especially compared to Paterno. He owes his entire success as an adult to Paterno. Presumably he trusts Paterno to make things right. And he probably thinks that he will be forever ruined if he stakes his reputation on a he-said, she-said kind of accusation against Sandusky and nobody wants to believe him (based on Paterno's account of the McQueary conversation to the grand jury, it sure sounds like Paterno didn't want to believe him). McQueary won't be the Hero Who Took Down A Monster. He'll be the Washed-Up Lunatic QB Who Made Shit Up. (Lest this seem like a trivial worry, keep in mind that people are threatening McQueary's life, right now, for telling the truth! Can you imagine what he'd be facing if it was widely thought he was lying?) None of that means that staying silent until a grand jury got involved was in any way acceptable. But it's hard for me to just ignore all that, too. And again, if he stops the pedophile in the act, there is no he-said/she-said and he doesn't become the Washed-Up Lunatic QB Who Made Shit Up. He's a hero. Instead, he missed a chance to stop a felony in progress, then he strictly adhered to the GoodSpeak Law, i.e., send it up the chain of command and then try to forget what you saw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brownian Motion Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 http://www.centredaily.com/2011/11/10/2981963/psu-creamery-discontinues-sandusky.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alocispepraluger102 Posted November 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 http://www.centredai...s-sandusky.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 Completely agree with Dan on this one. It's not like he saw someone stealing some ipods or breaking into players' lockers. He witnessed a heinous crime. Plus, who knows how long Sandusky had been doing this as he was at Penn State from the 70s I believe. The only thing that Paterno, in my opinion, thought about was protecting the brand and probably thought he could keep a lid on it. It exploded in his face and justifiably so. His legacy at Penn State has become a farce, a puddle of shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alocispepraluger102 Posted November 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 (edited) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ4pBdNDesQ Edited November 11, 2011 by alocispepraluger102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7/4 Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 Completely agree with Dan on this one. It's not like he saw someone stealing some ipods or breaking into players' lockers. He witnessed a heinous crime. Plus, who knows how long Sandusky had been doing this as he was at Penn State from the 70s I believe. The only thing that Paterno, in my opinion, thought about was protecting the brand and probably thought he could keep a lid on it. It exploded in his face and justifiably so. His legacy at Penn State has become a farce, a puddle of shame. Some call it greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts