Posted on 11/11/2011 1:27:08 PM PST by Second Amendment First
If any normal person saw a child being raped and just walked away, it would haunt them for the rest of their life. Actually, anyone who saw a child being raped and just walked away is not normal. Andyone who doesn’t try to stop it is not normal. McQueary is not normal. There’s something wrong with his moral compass.
Yep. And I say so (I said he was culpable), earlier in the thread.
But what some don't realize is that while you guys are beating him up relentlessly and theorizing that "Victim #2" is dead, there would be no "Victim #2" or, most likely, no prosecution at all without McQueary. Don't you realize that?
No, he didn't do what he morally should have done, but he did do something. That doesn't get him off the hook at all, but it should be noted.
Would you rather he be indicted and have his attorney tell him to clam up? There goes his testimony.
Really??!!
It's now been one hour since I courteously asked you four -- NRG1973, hellbender, TomB, Two_Sheds (post #252) -- what you would do if you walked into the shower room and saw a homosexual predator savagely rape a 10-year-old boy in front of your eyes... and I get this?
Silence?
SILENCE?!!
Jim Robinson and the admin moderator: please check this thread out. We have 4 FReepers here who are vigorously defending a 28-year-old man who walked in on the savage homosexual rape of a 10-year-old child and who then ran away without rescuing the child.
Little Jeremiah: Good to see you here. I wonder if Jim Robinson would be interested in this thread... and the Viking kitties.
He did NOTHING! NOTHING!!!!!
After witnessing one of the worst possible things that could ever happen to an innocent child, he RAN AWAY!
That night he called his dad -- his dad -- while some other's father's son was being raped!
Then, 24 hours later he talked to Joe Paterno.
That 10-year-old boy could have been my grandson!
You are the most vile POS I've ever encountered on Free Republic.
If you're not zotted, I hope you rot in hell with all the other moral cowards who do NOTHING while children are raped!!!
Thanks, but I was reading the whole thread so I didn’t see your replies until I got here already :)
http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bcs_explained.html
makes it look like the Rose Bowl would have to extend an invitation.
http://sports.wnur.org/?p=486 makes it look like so long as there are 5 Big Ten Teams less than two games behind Penn State then no bowl would *have* to issue a bid.
Right now PSU 8-1 (If they lose the Big 10 title game they will finish no better than 11-2), Mich St Neb Mich and Wisc at 7-2, Ohio St Iowa Illinois at 6-3.
Sure, he did do something. Not much, but something. That’s not what people are condemning him for. Speaking for myself, I’m condemning him for not doing enough. Simply telling Joe Paterno, and then clamming up while you know that the crimes are continuing unabated for 8 years is not enough.
I’m not going to applaud him for doing the bare minimum to assuage his conscience. I can’t really believe that he was successful in assuaging it, but then again, I don’t know what the state of that man’s conscience is.
I pray that’s not the case here, but I wouldn’t be surprised. Like you said, there aren’t a lot of pedophiles that get away with this many crimes for this long without having to shut up witnesses, one way or another.
I haven’t speculated that victim 2 is dead, I have no idea and haven’t read all the Grand Jury stuff anyway.
Telling his fahter was tantamount to doing nothing, it was an almost useless token. What is the purpose of “doing something” when another human being is being violated - especially a child? The purpose is simple:
To protect the person being so violated. And secondarily, to bring the violater to the attention of law enforcement.
Since what McQueary did neither protected the child, nor did anything to bring Sandusky to the attention of the law (other than bringing a bit of info years later), his small token “doing something” did basically squat.
And since he is and was a large young man, he could very easily have stopped the incredibly disgusting attack on the small boy. I hope McQueary never has a sound night’s sleep for the rest of his life and what little sleep he has is haunted by nightmares.
It is absolutely mind boggling what some people on FR are saying. I agree with you 100%.
Anything you want, ping me to - my computer is acting up and I can’t spend much time catching up, so I appreicate pings.
The wife calls, however. She's "demanding" I get off the computer and get to bed. Lol.
All the best to you and goodnight!
www.firemikemcqueary.com
I agree, but the fact is the situation is such that they are going to suffer for the crimes of their coaches.
One other possibility: Penn State could decline the invitation. I recall Notre Dame going 6-5 way back when and the team voted to not go to a bowl.
However the comments from current players I have seen were generally supportive of Paterno.
I was rather hoping to see Paterno’s statue toppled like Lenin’s or Saddam Hussein’s....but I don’t think that’s going to happen.
I can tell you what this 59 year old 5’4” half serb woman would have done. I would have closed the door, called 911, then opened the door and kicked that old perv’s ass, saying “the police are right behind me” before I hit him with whatever I could find.
Mike McQueary Assistant Coach Football 207 Lasch Building mjm229@psu.edu 865-0411
It won't happen in the near future, but if more facts come to light that show Paterno covered these crimes up, it will be removed.
As for the Bowl games,I don't think any Bowl will invite them.
Penn State is the most hated institution in the U.S. today.
I have already addressed this issue. A mind this depraved and savage could VERY likely use the little boy as a shield. Only a concealed expert marksman-sharpshooter can settle such an event.
Rushing would have to be CONCEALED until the very last-second. Not likely if McQuerey was spotted.
Next, using the boy as a shield, he threatens to crush the boy or such (”Dog Day Afternoon”) he orders the pursuer down to the floor or much much worse. A very dim scenario.
I repeat: only a concealed expert marksman-sharpshooter can settle such an event.
If McQuerey had NOT been spotted, he THEN could have cell-phoned (perhaps even photo-sent..still needs to be concealed to protect the boy,) and then positioned sharp-shooters brought in.
The guy was a dirty old pervert, naked in the shower, in the middle of a sex act. Your speculations that he could be hiding a weapon are ridiculous. Where, in his bum?
As for using the boy as a shield, etc, it’s just inane speculation that doesn’t fit at all with what we know about Sandusky and how he responded to similar situations. The man was caught in the act of molestation three times. In two of those instances, he knew he was spotted, but the witness didn’t confront him, but in the third he was confronted, but he managed to talk his way out of it. He had also been able, apparently, to successfully talk his way out a prior police investigation. Therefore, his behavior demonstrates that if McQueary had confronted him, he probably would have tried to talk his way out of it again, instead of using the terrorist/bank robber tactics you are speculating about.
Sure, McQueary was in no position to know that about Sandusky, so maybe he would think Sandusky would hurt the child if confronted. However, Sandusky was already hurting the child, and by walking away, McQueary pretty much guaranteed that nothing would stop Sandusky from doing further harm to the child that night. So, he chose to allow that harm to continue instead of making even the slightest effort to stop it.
If that qualifies as a smart decision, it can only be viewed as a smart decision regarding McQueary’s self-interest, and even then, knowing what we know now, it was extremely stupid in the long run.
You might want to try some decaf.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.