Disturbing Story out of Penn State

[okeydokey]

Originally Posted by happygirl

I don't blame him one bit. Do you think the big wigs were very kind to him after he blew the whistle on Sandusky? Do you think they made his job very easy on him. NO. I'm sure this guy took tons and tons of heat over his actions

He didn't blow the whistle. He watched a young boy being anally raped and turned and walked out. He walked out and left that poor baby there.

I just can't ever get past the fact that he walked away.

[cabanafrau]

Sadly it looks like the UK & the BBC are grappling with a case very analogous to the Sandusky Penn State ugliness in many ways. A revered public figure now deceased, knighted by the queen no less, hero for his charitable work, has been accused by several victims of sexual assaults dating back decades. There is talk that this has been openly rumored for decades as well, including allegations involving attacks at the BBC, sometimes with celebrities partaking. A BBC news program was investigating the situation but dropped the project several months ago & that decision is being questioned also.

The best result to come out of the Penn State mess, and the BBC case also if proven to be true, would be to review any & every detail possible to determine the facts of what happened, how the culture of fame, wealth & power may have helped the assaults to continue, put the information out into the public domain & seek ways to number one convince the public to speak out loudly if they see or hear anything and number two, look for ways to make it more appealing for cogs in the machine to speak out rather than keep quiet.

[Deb in IA]

Originally Posted by happygirl

I don't blame him one bit. Do you think the big wigs were very kind to him after he blew the whistle on Sandusky? Do you think they made his job very easy on him. NO. I'm sure this guy took tons and tons of heat over his actions

He never blew any whistle.

Under subpoena in a Grand Jury investigation, he finally came clean after keeping quiet about it for all these years.

[castleview]

Originally Posted by happygirl

I don't blame him one bit. Do you think the big wigs were very kind to him after he blew the whistle on Sandusky? Do you think they made his job very easy on him. NO. I'm sure this guy took tons and tons of heat over his actions

Seriously? Walk away then. Go get another job if your soul is being sucked by the lack of inaction. How you can defend him is just ridiculous.

[happygirl]

Originally Posted by castleview

Seriously? Walk away then. Go get another job if your soul is being sucked by the lack of inaction. How you can defend him is just ridiculous.

That your opinion.

[Sanchez]

Originally Posted by happygirl

That your opinion.

Opinions should be grounded in fact. It does not appear that yours is when you refer to this guy as a whistleblower.

[wvjules]

Originally Posted by happygirl

That your opinion.

That reply doesn't even make sense.

[crashbb]

Originally Posted by Sanchez

Opinions should be grounded in fact. It does not appear that yours is when you refer to this guy as a whistleblower.

True.

One can have an opinion on whether or not he should have blown the whistle (though I have major trouble seeing how anyone could argue that he shouldn't have), but you cannot have an opinion on whether or not he did blow the whistle. That is a fact (and he didn't).

[Deb in IA]

Originally Posted by happygirl

That your opinion.

I think it would all help us out if you could explain, happygirl, just what Mike McQueary did that, in your eyes, makes him a whistle blower?

[christineann]

He saw a child being brutally raped and did nothing to stop it. I can't imagine any adult with an ounce of compassion would even think for a second about whether to stop the attack. Job or no job and even out of concern for one's own personal safety, I would think that instinct would kick in to save the child immediately (and that doesn't include making noise so the rapist would know someone was there).

[WebmasterAlex]

Originally Posted by Deb in IA

I think it would all help us out if you could explain, happygirl, just what Mike McQueary did that, in your eyes, makes him a whistle blower?

He testified in front of the Grand Jury and because of that a lot of the media is calling him a "whistle blower" and saying he filed a "whistle blower lawsuit"
Obviously one can argue whether or not that makes him a whistleblower but everyone else lied
I think a lot of people are letting the fact that he witnessed a rape and did NOTHING, an absolutely disgusting act color their view of the entire situation. There are a lot of sub plots here. Is there a possiblity he was punished by the school for telling the truth on the stand? Sure but he'll have to prove it.
Here's a quote from a reporter covering the trial:

"And at the Sandusky trial, he never overstated what he witnessed. The jury found McQueary so believable they convicted Sandusky of four of the five charged counts, specifically, following McQueary’s testimony. It was his word that even led to the acquitted charge, which would’ve required proof of actual penetration, something McQueary repeatedly said he didn’t see

No, Mike McQueary didn’t do enough to stop Jerry Sandusky. No, he didn’t scream loud enough about what he saw. What he did though was more than any other person at Penn State did for a long time. While McQueary ranks extremely low on the list of victims of the Sandusky case, he was affected.

He’s out of work. He’s out of money. He’s out of his career. He’s out of Penn State’s support system even as the school pays for the defense of Curley and Schultz.

He alleges, in his whistleblower suit, that Spanier’s publicly and privately stated “unconditional support” for Curley and Schultz essentially branded McQueary a liar and ruined him. It claims his employer picked sides and killed his career and reputation. All he's ever done, he said, was tell the truth. And now he's paying for it. "

[Deb in IA]

Originally Posted by WebmasterAlex

He testified in front of the Grand Jury and because of that a lot of the media is calling him a "whistle blower" and saying he filed a "whistle blower lawsuit"
Obviously one can argue whether or not that makes him a whistleblower but everyone else lied
I think a lot of people are letting the fact that he witnessed a rape and did NOTHING, an absolutely disgusting act color their view of the entire situation. There are a lot of sub plots here. Is there a possiblity he was punished by the school for telling the truth on the stand? Sure but he'll have to prove it.
Here's a quote from a reporter covering the trial:

"And at the Sandusky trial, he never overstated what he witnessed. The jury found McQueary so believable they convicted Sandusky of four of the five charged counts, specifically, following McQueary’s testimony. It was his word that even led to the acquitted charge, which would’ve required proof of actual penetration, something McQueary repeatedly said he didn’t see

No, Mike McQueary didn’t do enough to stop Jerry Sandusky. No, he didn’t scream loud enough about what he saw. What he did though was more than any other person at Penn State did for a long time. While McQueary ranks extremely low on the list of victims of the Sandusky case, he was affected.

He’s out of work. He’s out of money. He’s out of his career. He’s out of Penn State’s support system even as the school pays for the defense of Curley and Schultz.

He alleges, in his whistleblower suit, that Spanier’s publicly and privately stated “unconditional support” for Curley and Schultz essentially branded McQueary a liar and ruined him. It claims his employer picked sides and killed his career and reputation. All he's ever done, he said, was tell the truth. And now he's paying for it. "

Thanks, Alex, for answering for happygirl.
I know the facts of McQueary's role, but I don't see his actions to be that of a whistleblower.

As others have pointed out, he could have physically stopped an ongoing rape - and he did nothing.

A true whistleblower would have gone, on his own, to the authorities after being initially stymied by Curley, Schultz and Paterno, instead of just going along with the code of silence.

A true whistleblower would have acted out of his conscience - not only when under oath in a grand jury investigation.

In that respect, he is just as guilty as Paterno/Curley/Schultz for keeping Sandusky's actions unreported for such a long time, and allowing him to continue to molest, over and over and over.

[christineann]

DebinIA, I agree totally.

A witness for the prosecution? Okay.

A "whistleblower?" No.

[WebmasterAlex]

Well there's the moral definition and the legal one

In 1986, the Pennsylvania Legislature enacted Pennsylvania’s “Whistleblower Law,” declaring it unlawful for any employer to “discharge, threaten or otherwise discriminate or retaliate” against an employee in compensation or in terms or conditions of employment because the employee has made, or is about to make, a good faith report to the employer or to an “appropriate authority” about an instance of “wrongdoing or waste.” The Act, codified at 43 P.S. § 1421, et seq., also renders it unlawful for an employer to discriminate or retaliate against an employee because he or she has been requested by an appropriate authority to participate in an investigation, hearing or inquiry regarding the employer’s alleged wrongdoing or waste.

[Wadecool]

This guy truly is the devil incarnate.

Sandusky's statement:

http://deadspin.com/5950202/evaluate...his-sentencing