[Colofornian]

"if you examine Mike McQueary’s subsequent testimony, which was given on 16 December 2011 at the preliminary hearing for Penn State’s former Athletic Director, Tim Curley, and its former Senior Vice President for Finance and Business, Gary Schultz, you’ll see that McQueary is steadfast in his assertion that he never saw “insertion.” Twice, McQueary asserted the essence of this sworn testimony: “I did not see insertion nor was there any verbiage or protest, screaming or yelling, so I can’t sit here and say that I know 100 percent sure that there was intercourse, but that’s what I said to myself and that’s what I believed was happening.” [Transcript of Preliminary Hearing, pp.13-14, p. 72] When he was asked if he saw “the look of pain on the boy’s face,” McQueary said, “no.”[p. 97]

Wow! AMPU...far from you to be introducing the thought that there's "nothing wrong" with men taking showers with boys -- with no one else around.

"Later, under cross-examination, McQueary was even more emphatic: “I have never used the word anal or rape in this—since day one.”

Tell us, AMPU: How many men are in jail -- or were placed there -- for molesting boys minus any actual rape? Why are you going to the nth degree to make distinctions without distinctions in this particular matter?

Given that you don't seem to deny that Sandusky bared himself before a boy, and that McQueary heard slapping sounds along the lines of intercourse as the two were close in a shower, is that something we as Christians should be promoting as "acceptable" in any way by defending the firsthand eyewitnesses and secondhand earwitnesses of this?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“Why are you going to the nth degree to make distinctions without distinctions in this particular matter? “

First, I am quoting what the “witness” says he saw and did not see. Since the grand jury claimed something very different than was testified to, the grand jury was giving an opinion.

None of that would justify abuse. It is, however a fact of this case and was used to draw a conclusion that was not supported by that fact.