McQueary's testimony, however, did not withstand cross-examination. First, Rominger showed McQueary the notes written in late 2010 by Trooper Scott Rossman, the first person to interrogate him. Trooper Rossman's notes state that McQueary mentioned only two glances. [June 12, p. 230]
Second, Rominger reminded McQueary about the written statement he had given to the Office of the Attorney General in 2010. It mentions only two glances. [Ibid. p. 232]
Third, after prodding by Mr. Rominger, Mr. McQueary agreed that his grand jury testimony mentioned only two glances. [Ibid. p. 233]
After establishing that McQueary told the grand jury that he took two glances, not three, Rominger quoted McQueary's testimony about that second glance from page 9 of the grand jury transcript: "I looked into that shower again and the young boy saw me. He was again in that position, but kind of -- I think he knew someone had come into the locker room. He saw me, kind of looking over his shoulder and saw me." [Ibid. p. 273]
According to that same transcript Mr. McQueary then told the grand jury: "I walked out, directly out, as fast as I could, to be honest with you, when they were still in that position and he was turned." [Ibid. p. 276]
According to that transcript, McQueary also explained why he walked out, rather than doing anything to stop the molestation: "I was nervous and flustered, so I just didn't do anything to stop it." [Ibid. p. 285] Wow!
Here's where we are: If we believe: (1) what McQueary told Trooper Rossman, (2) what he put in his written statement and (3) what he testified to the grand jury, then we must conclude that McQueary took only two, not three, glances into the shower and fled the scene after that second glance.
Thus, there was no slamming of the locker door and there was no separation of Sandusky from the boy. Sandusky and the boy did not turn around and they did not look directly into McQueary's eyes. In fact, as Rominger noted during his cross examination, the actual transcript of McQueary's grand jury testimony contains no mention of slamming a locker door.
Looking at the evidence, we see that, on three occasions in late 2010, McQueary testified to taking only two glances into the shower and to fleeing the scene without making any effort to stop Sandusky. But, on 16 December 2011 and on 12 June 2012, McQueary testified that he took three glances, slammed the locker door after the second glance and then saw Sandusky and the boy separated on his third glance.
Why the change in testimony? Undoubtedly, he changed his testimony because he had been under withering criticism from people who suspected that he did nothing to stop Sandusky from raping the young boy.
Evidence of such criticism can be found in an email written by McQueary and published on 15 November 2011 by the Associated Press. In the email, McQueary claimed he "was being hammered for handling this the right way."
But, in that very same email, McQueary emphasized: "I did stop it, not physically"but made sure it was stopped when I left that locker room""
Consider this timeline: Up until his 15 November 2011 email about being hammered, McQueary's sworn testimony mentioned only two glances into the shower. After his 15 November 2011 email about being hammered, McQueary's sworn testimony mentions three glances.
The timeline suggests motive. But, did public pressure motivate McQueary to suddenly remember that he had taken action to stop Sandusky, notwithstanding what he previously said under oath to the grand jury? Or did public pressure motivate McQueary to lie in his email and then embellish that lie -- during sworn testimony on 16 December 2011 and 12 June 2012 -- with supporting lies under oath about slamming a locker door and taking of a third glance into the locker room?
Dictionary.com defines perjury as, "the willful giving of false testimony under oath or affirmation, before a competent tribunal, upon a point material to a legal inquiry."
Americans should decide whether Mike McQueary committed perjury. But, after they decide, they also should make their decision known to the Attorney General. members of the news media, members of Penn State's board of trustees, other Americans, the Special Investigative Counsel that issued the Freeh Report and the NCAA.
1 | 2