- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Growing Up at Penn State -- all you need to know about why it was kept quiet
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:03 pm to LSUnowhas2
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:03 pm to LSUnowhas2
quote:
it would raise serious questions in my mind if I wasn't invited to come along also. There is no way I would let my kid go alone with some stranger.
hence why his hunting ground, Second Mile, focused on disadvantaged kids from broken homes.
the level of evil is mind-boggling
0
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:03 pm to Sophandros
quote:
most people won't, and will probably help to cover it up
whoa, most people would cover it up? Not stopping an act is one thing, helping the person committing the act cover it up is something else entirely. Maybe he was told by Paterno they would take care of it. When was he contacted by the Grand Jury? We don't know what he was told by higher ups or when.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:06 pm to WDE24
quote:
I guarantee you if you were sitting in a bar and some dude walked in with a large mallet and started crushing skulls in, he would get through AT LEAST three people before anyone would do anything about it.
I don't understand the point of this.
People always say, "Well I would have done this or that" when told about some transgression or another, but the fact of the matter is, our brains don't handle things that are extremely shocking or absurd very well.
If you were sitting in a bar and some dude just smashed in a couple patrons' heads, you probably wouldn't rush him or actually DO anything until about the third person because your brain is still trying to process it.
In other words, when really unexpected or bizarre shite happens, our brains tend to freeze up and go WTF? until we can process it better.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:07 pm to Sophandros
quote:
I guarantee you if you were sitting in a bar and some dude walked in with a large mallet and started crushing skulls
along those lines, I've always wondered in those mass shootings how they are able to kill several people in a crowded room. I'd like to think a I'd join a bunch of people and charge at him rather than just sit and hope I don't get shot, but everythings different when the bullets start flying.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:08 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
I guarantee you if you were sitting in a bar and some dude walked in with a large mallet and started crushing skulls in, he would get through AT LEAST three people before anyone would do anything about it.
You're equating stopping a mad man with a mallet to calling the cops on a child rapist?
I'm talking about McQuery's initial reaction. He probably froze because he was overloaded with the situation. He then went to his dad, probably because that was only person he knew he could trust.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:09 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
I'd like to think a I'd join a bunch of people and charge at him rather than just sit and hope I don't get shot, but everythings different when the bullets start flying.
It's against natural instinct to run at danger like that. More than likely, you would try to hide somewhere or hope the guy doesn't kill you. That's probably how I would react.
That doesn't make us cowards, but human.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:10 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
whoa, most people would cover it up?
Look at how many schools and communities cover up arrests of their star athletes in high school. Humans are very tribal in this manner.
Look at various church scandals (not just the RCC). Look at small town corruption...
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:11 pm to Sophandros
I get that people can freeze up in situations like this, but he was watching a child be raped and he had the ability to stop it without even engaging a physical altercation (ignoring the fact that he is a large and physically strong person and the rapist was a naked old man in a shower). Even giving him the benefit of the doubt of panicking, he didn't panic for 10 years.
This post was edited on 11/9/11 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:11 pm to Sophandros
quote:
McQuery knew Sandusky his entire life. He probably idolized both him and JoePa. Taken in context, I can see how he would react as he did. I don't agree with it, but right now I (and the rest of us) have like 20/15 hindsight going on.
I get that rationale... but for the love of all things good, he walked and and saw the guy anally raping a prone 10 year old boy for fricks sake.
quote:
Ig et that people can freeze up in situations like this, but he was watching a child be raped and he had the ability to stop it without even engaging a physical altercation. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt of panicking, he didn't panic for 10 years.
exactly
This post was edited on 11/9/11 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:11 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
along those lines, I've always wondered in those mass shootings how they are able to kill several people in a crowded room. I'd like to think a I'd join a bunch of people and charge at him rather than just sit and hope I don't get shot, but everythings different when the bullets start flying.
Exactly. The crowd doesn't over take the guy until after several people have already been shot BECAUSE it takes that long for your mind to ascertain what's going on. You're in a mall or whatever, you're not expecting gun shots to start ringing out.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:12 pm to WDE24
quote:
I get that people can freeze up in situations like this, but he was watching a child be raped and he had the ability to stop it without even engaging a physical altercation (ignoring the fact that he is a large and physically strong person and the rapist was a naked old man in a shower). Even giving him the benefit of the doubt of panicking, he didn't panic for 10 years.
I said HIS INITIAL REACTION.
The rest of the time was his participation in a cover up.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:18 pm to WDE24
quote:
he was watching a child be raped
from what I've read, it sounds more like he saw or thought he saw that, that's different than watching it. By that I mean, he saw something shocking, probably in bad lighting and steam from a distance for a quick second and freaked out and left and called the person he could trust the most.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:18 pm to Sophandros
quote:
I said HIS INITIAL REACTION.
The rest of the time was his participation in a cover up.
Yeah, I can maybe, MAYBE, try to rationalize his initial reaction. Fear, confusion and disbelief were all in his mind for sure. It still troubles me that you don't stop it and sort the rest out later. Furthermore, as you said, there is no rationalizing anything else after the initial response.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:19 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:You are assuming a lot that was not consistent with his testimony. He described it graphically enough to the grand jury that I don't think his vision was impaired.
By that I mean, he saw something shocking, probably in bad lighting and steam from a distance for a quick second and freaked out and left and called the person he could trust the most.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:24 pm to WDE24
quote:
He described it graphically enough to the grand jury that I don't think his vision was impaired.
how long after the fact was the grand jury testimony? What other information did he have by the time he testified? After thinking it through, it probably seemed more clear to him. It certainly seems much more clear to us reading said testimony, but at the moment it happened, it might not have been as clear to him
Its worth nothing several studies have shown, eyewitness testimony is often unreliable.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:25 pm to H-Town Tiger
*noting
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:26 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:You have to do better than that. He wasn't identifying an unknown person in a police line up. He knew and recognized a man who was anally penetrating a boy who had his hands placed against a shower wall. He wasn't describing facial details for a sketch artist or trying to identify what color someone's hair was.
Its worth nothing several studies have shown, eyewitness testimony is often unreliable.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:26 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
quote:
I guarantee you if you were sitting in a bar and some dude walked in with a large mallet and started crushing skulls in, he would get through AT LEAST three people before anyone would do anything about it.
You're equating stopping a mad man with a mallet to calling the cops on a child rapist?
It's actually not a good comparison because even though it's worse, child rape or molestation still remains so taboo to confront in small communities or probably larger society as a whole. In a strange twist, these things were so abhorrent relatives just didn't want to confront it. I know that's maybe hard for some people to believe from afar or in hindsight but the attitude of "ignore it and it will go away" is shockingly more the norm than you think. This obviously doesn't absolve anyone but I just want to point out the reality in how these things are usually reported to authorities. It's not a coincidence that these sickos are often only prosecuted after they've had countless of victims and the ones who most often bring these things to light are complete strangers. Family rarely does - they just don't. What this article sheds light on is that Penn State reacted exactly like a family. They were too close to this to think clearly. It's a reality in prosecuting these types of crimes. Food for thought in trying to comprehend how Paterno and the administration could have failed their duty so miserably.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 12:35 pm to WDE24
quote:
He wasn't identifying an unknown person in a police line up. He knew and recognized a man who was anally penetrating a boy who had his hands placed against
he knew Sandusky for sure, what im saying is at that split second he might not have realized 100% it was a 10 year old. If you walked in on 2 grown men doing that, you'd probaly turn away pretty quick. Its easy to say you can tell the difference between a 10 y/old and an 18 y/old in normal situations, but what he saw was not normal, and he probably turned away really fast, that's all I'm saying.
I think his dad probably should have advised him to call the cops and Paterno right then and not in the morning.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News