Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite View Article Stats
67 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Did Mike McQueary Commit Perjury?

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Valuable 4   Must Read 3   News 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H4 10/1/12
Become a Fan
  (12 fans)

opednews.com


On 12 June 2012, defense attorney Karl Rominger conducted a devastating cross examination of Mike McQueary in the course of attempting to defend the indefensible Jerry Sandusky. The actual transcript of that cross examination was not released until 21 September 2012, which explains why virtually nobody, except Barry Bozeman (See http://www.notpsu.blogspot.com/ ), has written about the deliberate deception Rominger exposed.

Mr. McQueary was the graduate assistant at Penn State who, according to the 4 November 2011 grand jury presentment, "saw a naked boy, Victim 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky" on 9 February 2001.

But, in fact, McQueary "saw" no such thing. How do we know? First, because McQueary's actual testimony to the grand jury reads: "I'm pretty sure he was sodomizing him, I'm relatively sure," Second, because McQueary later testified under oath that he never saw insertion, never saw an erection, never heard any protest, screams, shouts or cries by the boy and never witnessed any agitation or distress on the part of the victim.

McQueary envisioned sodomy and testified to being "relatively sure" of sodomy, because: (1) he heard three "skin-on-skin smacking sounds" upon entering the hallway leading to the locker room and (2) he subsequently saw Sandusky positioned behind the boy, with his arms wrapped around the boy.

Whether sodomy actually occurred is anybody's guess. But, nobody should doubt that Attorney General Linda Kelley authorized the release of a grand jury report containing the inflammatory lie that McQueary actually "saw" anal intercourse. That lie sent a shocked nation reeling.

Nevertheless, on 16 December 2011 McQueary testified that he believed Sandusky committed a crime on the night of 9 February 2001[p. 89]. But, instead of immediately reporting that crime to police, he consulted his father, John, and Dr. Jonathon Dranov.

Significantly, McQueary failed to tell them that a crime had been committed. Moreover, he repeatedly refused to answer questions by Dranov about what he saw. Unsure whether a crime had been committed, both John and Jonathon recommended that Mike report what he saw to Penn State Coach Joe Paterno the next morning.

Thanks to Rominger's cross examination, we now know that McQueary told the grand jury he reported "exactly" what he saw to Paterno, leaving out no details. [12 June 2012, p.289] However, that testimony must be false, if only because McQueary failed to include the detail concerning his belief that sodomy occurred. And although he claims not to remember telling Paterno that a crime occurred, McQueary had already left that small detail out of his conversation with his father and Dr. Dranov.

McQueary testified he told Paterno about: (1) the "rough positioning" of Sandusky and the boy, (2) the "extremely sexual" nature of Sandusky's actions and (3) the "fondling" that Sandusky engaged in. Paterno testified to being told about something sexual and fondling. (Note: Curley's attorney questioned how McQueary could possibly see fondling, if Sandusky's arms were, indeed, wrapped around the boy.)

Two questions: Why would McQueary tell Paterno exactly what he saw after refusing to tell Dr. Dranov anything that he saw? Why did McQueary wait almost ten years before telling anyone that he believed Sandusky committed the crime of sodomizing a young boy? Was it because the prospect of talking to investigators placed him under duress?

Beyond his failure to report a crime and his contradictory testimony about whether he, indeed, reported every detail to Paterno, there's also the more understandable problem of McQueary's faulty memory. He got the day, month and year of Sandusky's assault wrong, probably because he was certain -- until proven wrong -- that the assault occurred on the Friday evening before spring break. Ten years is a long time to keep memories fresh in anyone's mind.

Normally, the information provided above might cause people to question McQueary's credibility as a witness. But, up to now, it has not. The grand jury, most members of the news media, most members of Penn State's board of trustees, most Americans, the Special Investigative Counsel that issued the Freeh Report, as well as the NCAA continue to believe McQueary, and not the Penn State officials previously known to be honorable and previously held in high esteem.

But, until now, nobody but state officials knew precisely what McQueary told investigators, the office of the Attorney General and the grand jury in late 2010. But, thanks to Rominger's devastating cross examination, much of that information is now public.

Thanks to Rominger's cross examination, we now know that McQueary's testimony in 2010 differs materially from the testimony that he gave in December 2011 and June 2012.

During testimony on 16 December 2011 and during testimony on 12 June 2012 McQueary claimed that, upon entering the locker room, he glanced at Sandusky and the young boy three times. The first glance, lasting only a second or two, was through a mirror that provided a 45 degree angle view into the shower. The second glance, again lasting only a second or two, was directly into the shower.

The third glance lasted longer, but it was taken only after McQueary slammed the door to his locker. As he testified on 12 June: "I made the loud noise in an attempt, I think, to say, "Okay. Someone is here. Break it up. Please.'" When he then took that third glance, he saw Sandusky and the boy standing a few feet apart.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose work has been published in numerous publications, including The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military History, the Moscow Times and the San (more...)
 
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Grand Jury Report: Part two of "What did Joe Paterno know and when did he know it?"

Three False Assertions by the Grand Jury turned the Press and Public against Joe Paterno and Penn State

New, Previously Suppressed Grand Jury Testimony and Joe Paterno: Part four of "What did Joe Paterno know and when...

What did Joe Paterno know and when did he know it? Part One

Incompetent Journalists at the Philadelphia Inquirer Slandered Joe Paterno

Hitting Penn State's Board of Trustees Where it Hurts

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 people are discussing this page, with 67 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Walter, Some of us are just now beginning to ... by Barry Bozeman on Monday, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:27:04 PM
Barry:  I agree, Rominger could have been muc... by Walter Uhler on Monday, Oct 1, 2012 at 4:26:40 PM
Hadn't really thought about your question Walt but... by Barry Bozeman on Monday, Oct 1, 2012 at 4:31:48 PM
Actually Joe Paterno destroyed Joe Paterno. When ... by John Twinings on Tuesday, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:59:25 AM
I gotta give you credit, John, when you drink the ... by Keith Ward on Tuesday, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:30:21 AM
..is you.  The facts I stated about Joe Pater... by John Twinings on Wednesday, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:25:59 AM
..as the result of this "devastating" cross examin... by John Twinings on Tuesday, Oct 2, 2012 at 10:17:23 AM
The religion is big time sports, the denomination ... by Richard Pietrasz on Wednesday, Oct 3, 2012 at 4:47:38 AM
I always love it when I write an article about one... by Walter Uhler on Wednesday, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:02:22 AM
You seem to have missed my point so let me restate... by John Twinings on Wednesday, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:24:15 PM
Mike McQueary made an allegation to Paterno about ... by Walter Uhler on Wednesday, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:24:42 PM
I get the feeling that the jury may weigh more the... by John Twinings on Thursday, Oct 4, 2012 at 11:37:53 PM
Gary Schultz - a decade after a 10 minute meeting ... by Barry Bozeman on Saturday, Oct 6, 2012 at 4:15:20 PM
For over 20 years this man seemed to be an uncommo... by Barry Bozeman on Saturday, Oct 6, 2012 at 4:15:47 PM
I do believe the religion take is very apt. As we... by John Twinings on Wednesday, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:12:06 PM
John Twinnings, you gots them on the run, now let... by Mike Simons on Saturday, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:25:20 PM
Inaccuracy 4: Uhler has always maintained the inc... by Mike Simons on Saturday, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:29:27 PM
He would be expected to say that Mike McQueary nev... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:54:02 AM
To RussellThaks for your reply.Yes, you are spot o... by Mike Simons on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:01:42 PM
One glance, two glances, three glances. Insertio... by Mike Simons on Saturday, Oct 6, 2012 at 9:35:27 PM
But if I may be so bold as to add one more bon mot... by John Twinings on Sunday, Oct 7, 2012 at 1:11:40 AM
Thanks John for your response.I don't believe I ev... by Mike Simons on Sunday, Oct 7, 2012 at 2:22:15 AM
Thanks for "unconfusing" me!Mike... by Mike Simons on Sunday, Oct 7, 2012 at 10:38:45 PM
The curious part about Rominger's behavior during ... by Russell Zieske on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 12:24:46 PM
Three points:(1)  Did McQueary perjure himsel... by Walter Uhler on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:57:37 PM
The kind that takes place inside of a brain that i... by Russell Zieske on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:07:41 PM
My! My! What a steel trap of a mind! Penetration i... by Walter Uhler on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 7:23:46 PM
Joe Paterno's grand jury testimony renders all of ... by Russell Zieske on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 7:57:30 PM
Only a weak mind would assume that when Paterno to... by Walter Uhler on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:25:11 PM
I believe his grand jury testimony. I believe McQu... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:21:38 AM
Before you judge my emotional investment, you migh... by Walter Uhler on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:29:48 PM
Here you go.Let me guess, you thought it was PT Ba... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:56:00 PM
Look deeper.... by Walter Uhler on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:50:10 PM
"Finally, I suggest you look deeper into Mencken, ... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:14:21 PM
Were you better educated, you might have known wha... by Walter Uhler on Thursday, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:17:38 PM
Were you better at backpedaling you might have com... by Russell Zieske on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:04:17 AM
You misused the word sycophant, you erroneously "k... by Walter Uhler on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:17:46 AM
I'm sure there are some people out there who are i... by Russell Zieske on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 10:01:11 AM
1)- No, McQueary didn't perjure himself. If he's e... by Russell Zieske on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:08:12 PM
1) Your use of the term sycophant suggests you're ... by Walter Uhler on Tuesday, Oct 9, 2012 at 7:51:26 PM
To the astute Russell Zieske, did you catch t... by Mike Simons on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:47:34 AM
Was that McQueary didn't mention anything sexual. ... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:07:17 AM
I've had this argument a couple of times with othe... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:42:46 AM
I wrote this in one of my articles:  " A... by Walter Uhler on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:07:03 PM
I retract that statement about you citing Seasock ... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:22:32 PM
Is there another one of your "articles" that discu... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:46:58 PM
Schultz's testimony,...he stated that McQueary "ma... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:41:19 PM
Hi RussellYou: "When pressed at the end, Schultz s... by Mike Simons on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:19:55 PM
Hi Russell!  Curley is implicated and here's ... by Mike Simons on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:30:27 PM
The meeting that Schultz couldn't remember if they... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:22:23 PM
Hi RussellMy take on your excellent questions. Fir... by Mike Simons on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:33:15 PM
And if he does he'll be in the cell next to Sandus... by Russell Zieske on Wednesday, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:49:48 AM
Here is some of what we know about what Mike McQu... by Barry Bozeman on Thursday, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:46:50 PM
This seems very understandable. Mike walks into a... by Barry Bozeman on Thursday, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:47:57 PM
Mike McQueary took one brief glance into that mirr... by Barry Bozeman on Thursday, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:58:27 PM
and they don't know jack about Mike McQueary ... by Barry Bozeman on Thursday, Oct 11, 2012 at 3:20:36 PM
This is a massive story being side tracked by the ... by Barry Bozeman on Thursday, Oct 11, 2012 at 3:21:18 PM
Your analysis does not seem to be borne out by the... by John Twinings on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:26:07 AM
Item 1- In Curley's 1998 email about the first sho... by Russell Zieske on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:26:42 AM
Reply to Barry Bozeman:  Does now stand up u... by Barry Bozeman on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:30:25 AM
To Barry Excellent questions easily answered.... by Mike Simons on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:34:48 PM
BarryTwining's conclusions are suported by Mike's ... by Mike Simons on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:46:36 PM
YOU: "At the very least his accounts to Dr. Dranov... by Mike Simons on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:57:56 PM
Mike,You are so right in that last statement  ... by John Twinings on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 10:05:32 PM
And Uhler in his own inarticulate way also agrees!... by Mike Simons on Sunday, Oct 14, 2012 at 10:17:52 AM
Hi Barry Thanks much for your impute. Again, ... by Mike Simons on Friday, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:17:16 PM
Notice!  Notice!  Notice!  Notice!&... by Mike Simons on Saturday, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:05:08 PM