Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Report: Mike McQueary sues Penn State

Mike McQueary
((ht: pennlive.com/ganim))

This is yet another offshoot of the Jerry Sandusky story that won't go away.

Mike McQueary, who may or may not still be an assistant coach at Penn State is suing the school, claiming that he's being unfairly persecuted in a "Whistleblower" case.

Yeah, it's getting strange. And McQueary wants money.

Read the story from the award winning Sara Ganim of the Harrisburg Patriot-News RIGHT HERE

PennLive.com also provides us a copy of McQueary's suit RIGHT HERE

One way or another, McQueary is going to be a key witness in the Sandusky trial, which is going to start some time later this year.

His claim that he saw Sandusky fondling or appearing to be involved in a "Sex Act" with a child back in 2001, is one of the highlights of the 50-plus charge case against Sandusky, a former Penn State assistant coach.

And oh, there are now reports that McQueary may have been mistaken on the date of the incident, that McQueary has been saying it happened in early 2002. A judge recently ruled that prosecutors can change that date...to early 2001.

Unfortunately, the lawyers are going to pick that inconsistency apart in trial.

Which is somewhat unfortunate and one of the multiple flaws in our opinion, of the legal system. Think about it. How many of you can state an exact time and date of an incident that happened 10 or more years ago? Yeah, it may have been traumatic, but who amongst you (honestly) can remember excrutiating details from events that far back? You will probably remember the major points of it. You may remember some of the details, but unfortunately, in court you are going to have be EXACT or you are going to get called out.

Don't interpret this as a defense of either McQueary or Sandusky. Unfortunately McQueary has a lot of questions to answer because his story has been wildly inconsistent. We just hope that isn't going to be the basis of Sandusky's defense because it certainly appears that there is a far deeper and wide ranging issue with him than just this "One" incident.

No comments:

Post a Comment