McQeary Testifies...

[Cajuncowboy]

McQueary said he reported what he saw to coach Joe Paterno.

He said he did not give Paterno explicit details of what he believed he'd seen, saying he wouldn't have used terms like ****** or anal intercourse out of respect for the longtime coach.

He said Paterno told him he'd "done the right thing" by reporting what he saw. The head coach appeared shocked and saddened and slumped back in his chair, McQueary said.

Paterno told McQueary he would talk to others about what he'd reported.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/12/1...cials-eager-to-confront-charges#ixzz1giV2jCTA

 

[The30YardSlant]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, this whole thing stinks to high heaven. Not one single person has told the full truth IMO.

 

[Doomsday101]

He said Sandusky was behind the boy and the boy was up against a wall. He said he believes Sandusky was sexually molesting the boy but he did not see insertion and did not hear protests. He said he believes the two were engaged in intercourse but he cannot be sure.

I don't think this helps the prosecution

 

[Stautner]

He said Sandusky was behind the boy and the boy was up against a wall. He said he believes Sandusky was sexually molesting the boy but he did not see insertion and did not hear protests. He said he believes the two were engaged in intercourse but he cannot be sure.

I don't think this helps the prosecution

Penetration doesn't have to occur for it to be molestation.

 

[Dallas]

Could we get some type of warning on the thread about what is being discussed in it? Your sitting here discussing a detailed rape of a child in the shower. Some of us really don't want to have to read all of that.


Pretty disgusting and a nice little RAPE warning in the thread title might help some of us avoid it next time.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Could we get some type of warning on the thread about what is being discussed in it? Your sitting here discussing a detailed rape of a child in the shower. Some of us really don't want to have to read all of that.


Pretty disgusting and a nice little RAPE warning in the thread title might help some of us avoid it next time.

I'm curious, what did you think McQueary was going to be testifying to?

The amount of snow fall in the Himalayas?

 

[Doomsday101]

Penetration doesn't have to occur for it to be molestation.

I'm not saying that what I would point to is when McQueary said he "believes the two were engaged in intercourse but he cannot be sure."

Defense in a court of law is about putting doubt in the minds of the jury. I'm not trying to claim innocent but fact is preception is not going to win the case for the prosecution no more than it did in the Casey Anthony trial. I think I saw this, leave the possiablity that what you think you saw and what was going on is not the same.

I could have sworn up and down Anthony would go to jail for killing her daugther but the defense put enough doubt in the minds of the jury that it did not happen.

 

[Dallas]

I'm curious, what did you think McQueary was going to be testifying to?

The amount of snow fall in the Himalayas?

As a grown man. I can discuss the details w/o going into the details in a very very public forum such as CBZ.

Its all in the delivery.


Maybe its a knack only a few have?

Appears so.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

As a grown man. I can discuss the details w/o going into the details in a very very public forum such as CBZ.

Its all in the delivery.


Maybe its a knack only a few have?

Appears so.

I didn't write the story. It is on a news site. I will repost it here for your delicate constitution.....

*** ****** ***** ********* **** ***. ********* **** ********** *** ******* ********** ***** ***,******* the ********* **** ****** ***** Paterno ******, ******** ******** *******.

**** *** ***** ** ****** ****** ******** **** ******** ***** *** ***** ***'* reported.


Just ignore the first post.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Could we get some type of warning on the thread about what is being discussed in it? Your sitting here discussing a detailed rape of a child in the shower. Some of us really don't want to have to read all of that.


Pretty disgusting and a nice little RAPE warning in the thread title might help some of us avoid it next time.

Complaining for the sake of complaining

 

[Stautner]

I'm not saying that what I would point to is when McQueary said he "believes the two were engaged in intercourse but he cannot be sure."

Defense in a court of law is about putting doubt in the minds of the jury. I'm not trying to claim innocent but fact is preception is not going to win the case for the prosecution no more than it did in the Casey Anthony trial. I think I saw this, leave the possiablity that what you think you saw and what was going on is not the same.

I could have sworn up and down Anthony would go to jail for killing her daugther but the defense put enough doubt in the minds of the jury that it did not happen.

Sure this can put doubt in the juries mind about penetration, but it leaves little room to say there was no molestation. Of course, if this were the only thing the prosecution had to hang its hat on it would be a little worrisome, but you have to remember this is just the incident that pushed the case in front of the public, but there are other incidents with other kids as well.

 

[Dallas]

I didn't write the story. It is on a news site. I will repost it here for your delicate constitution.....

*** ****** ***** ********* **** ***. ********* **** ********** *** ******* ********** ***** ***,******* the ********* **** ****** ***** Paterno ******, ******** ******** *******.

**** *** ***** ** ****** ****** ******** **** ******** ***** *** ***** ***'* reported.


Just ignore the first post.

Don't get all stir-crazy on me. I am just saying you can discuss the testimony w/o all of Harlequin novel romance added.

I thought thats how one would typically want to publicly discuss this vile act.

I don't need to actually be placed into the shower stall w/ Sandusky and the child. I guess thats all Im saying.

 

[Dallas]

Complaining for the sake of complaining

You dont have a child bro. Its completly over your head and again your post is completly irrelevant because of that fact.



My boy is the same age as these victims so yeah...it probably bothers me more than it would say, you.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Don't get all stir-crazy on me. I am just saying you can discuss the testimony w/o all of Harlequin novel romance added.

I thought thats how one would typically want to publicly discuss this vile act.

I don't need to actually be placed into the shower stall w/ Sandusky and the child. I guess thats all Im saying.

Well, I just posted the exact text from the news story. And since there was some debate over what McQueary told Paterno, seemed fitting that the testimony would be posted as well. that's all.

 

[Doomsday101]

Sure this can put doubt in the juries mind about penetration, but it leaves little room to say there was no molestation. Of course, if this were the only thing the prosecution had to hang its hat on it would be a little worrisome, but you have to remember this is just the incident that pushed the case in front of the public, but there are other incidents with other kids as well.

again I'm not saying he is innocent I do know public opinion trial is over and he is guilty as charged. Where have I seen this before? Oh yeah Anthony, Micheal Jackson and OJ trials.Looking at this strickly from a court room prespective this is not a good start when a key wittness says "he thinks he saw that but is not sure"

And you are right it does not prove molestation did not take place it also does not prove it did. Again only looking at this from a trial prespective.

 

[Stautner]

again I'm not saying he is innocent I do know public opinion trial is over and he is guilty as charged. Where have I seen this before? Oh yeah Anthony, Micheal Jackson and OJ trials.Looking at this strickly from a court room prespective this is not a good start when a key wittness says "he thinks he saw that but is not sure"

And you are right it does not prove molestation did not take place it also does not prove it did. Again only looking at this from a trial prespective.

I never thought you were saying he was innocent. I'm not one of those that jumps to wild conclusions - I know you were just talking about things from a trial perspective.

And I understand what you are saying in terms of this affecting the prosecution ability to claim Sandusky raped the boy, but I don't understand your thought that it affects their ability to prove molestation. McCleary only said he couldn't be sure about penetration, right? As long as he was sure he saw a naked boy leaning against the shower wall with a naked man pressed against him from behind and thrusting his hips then there is no uncertainty as to molestation.

 

[Doomsday101]

I never thought you were saying he was innocent. I'm not one of those that jumps to wild conclusions - I know you were just talking about things from a trial perspective.

And I understand what you are saying in terms of this affecting the prosecution ability to claim Sandusky raped the boy, but I don't understand your thought that it affects their ability to prove molestation. McCleary only said he couldn't be sure about penetration, right? As long as he was sure he saw a naked boy leaning against the shower wall with a naked man pressed against him from behind and thrusting his hips then there is no uncertainty as to molestation.

Because it could have been horse play. Inappropriate? Yes, molestation? no. I'm sure this is what the defense will claim

My view is he is likely guilty just based on what I have read up to this points but if innocent or guilty was based on things said before the start of a trial then we would have no need for courts

The defense job is to raise doubt the prosecutions job is to eliminate that doubt.

 

[Stautner]

Because it could have been horse play. Inappropriate? Yes, molestation? no. I'm sure this is what the defense will claim

My view is he is likely guilty just based on what I have read up to this points but if innocent or guilty was based on things said before the start of a trial then we would have no need for courts

The defense job is to raise doubt the prosecutions job is to eliminate that doubt.

I think the defense would have a hard time characterizing sexual thrusting motions while pressed against a boy's backside as horse-play. I assume they might try to do that, but as long as McQueary is firm on his story I have a hard time believing the jury would by it. The thing is, you don't even have to prove Sandusky's intent with that. The mere action is illegal, and the adult is presumed to know that.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Well, I just posted the exact text from the news story. And since there was some debate over what McQueary told Paterno, seemed fitting that the testimony would be posted as well. that's all.

Actually, in your OP, there really wasn't any description of the rape in there at all. If he followed the link, that's another thing, but you didn't post the details of what McQueary said in your post at all. It could have been much more graphic had you included McQueary's details.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think the defense would have a hard time characterizing sexual thrusting motions while pressed against a boy's backside as horse-play. I assume they might try to do that, but as long as McQueary is firm on his story I have a hard time believing the jury would by it. The thing is, you don't even have to prove Sandusky's intent with that. The mere action is illegal, and the adult is presumed to know that.

McQeary walked in after hearing something this is what he saw what was taking place prior? where they wrestling or what? I just think it is not a great day when a witness says he was unsure, if you are unsure about this what else may you be unsure of? Inappropriate behavior maybe so, molestation? Maybe so.