McQueary said that that is not what he testified to before the Grand Jury.
What he testified to in the Sandusky trial was different and the jury there made up of every day normal Americans later summarized McQueary's testimony as a grooming incident and acquitted Sandusky of the rape charge in this McQueary incident.
But please don't let the facts get in the way of your lynching.
BTW Welcome to Free Republic, Newbee!!!
From Wick Sollers:
Wick Sollers’ rebuttal to Louis Freeh:
Paterno family attorney Wick Sollers issued the following statement in response to former FBI director Louis Freeh’s comments on the Paterno family critique, released on Sunday morning, of Freeh’s report on Penn State’s handling of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse case.
“Mr. Freeh’s attack on the report this morning should trouble everyone who wants the truth on the Sandusky scandal. He criticizes a report he obviously hadn’t had time to read and consider. And he refuses to address the critical factual and procedural failures in his own report, particularly his flawed conclusions which have only added to this tragedy.
The assertion by Mr. Freeh that somehow the Paterno family declined to cooperate with his investigators is an unfortunate distortion of the truth. I personally met with the Freeh team and pledged full cooperation. Joe Paterno’s cancer diagnosis, treatment and subsequent death prevented him from being interviewed. But Jay Paterno was interviewed and I shared additional information available to me.
Being angry does not constitute a defense of poor work. A failure to consider the facts carefully is exactly the problem our expert analysis highlights. I encourage everyone, including Mr. Freeh, to take the time to study this report.”
Didn't the jury find Sandusky guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minors and endangering the welfare of a child in that "incident"?
Isn't that a fact that you continually ignore?