<p>LaMas, that article is kinda scary. I mean I’m an elementary teacher and I enjoy being with kids, but that doesn’t mean I’m a child molester. I’d never do anything sexual (ewww), but I enjoy kids. In fact, I can’t imagine any teacher denying they enjoy being with kids. I mean, it’s extremely hard to say that the lines aren’t kinda hazy.</p>
<p>Elementary teachers work with vulnerable kids. Sometimes they look for help and support. Geez, they sometimes need a hug and they certainly do a fair amount of hugging themselves. The difference is oh-so-subtle. For one thing, I’m never alone with a student. Then again, I’d never get naked and take a shower with them (eww). That’s just weird.</p>
<p>The thing that makes McQueary’s testimony believable is that it so against his own interests. There is no getting around that. His life is upside down because he told this story. He didn’t have to. He could have just lied. There is no one to contradict him. He would be nuts to make this up. He is probably thinking he is nuts right now. What he is going through is not conducive to others telling what they know. Anyone watching who knew anything will see that they will be vilified if they speak up.</p>
<p>I completely agree and I think he is very believable. But under cross examination, he is going to look bad. The good expensive PSU lawyers are going to find an angle to attack his motive. McQ already released inconsistent information with the email and why did he continue to associate and mingle with Sandusky not so long after the incident? How do you convince a bunch of jury to send people to jail with such problems and question marks?</p>
<p>Right. Power in numbers. It is not surprising to see victims coming forward from the 1970’s and I wouldn’t be surprised if they go back even further.</p>
<p>As for McQueary, IMO, his inconsistencies are due the fact that he is trying to save face very late in the game by claiming to have reported it to the police. He is either lying about that or the police buried the report. I don’t think it will fool the juror. Again, why would he make the eyewitness report up in the first place. That would make no sense at all.</p>
<p>I think McQ is one of the most credible so far among the GJ report. As was stated, it was and IS so against his interests and as he had predicted, he is going through agony and death threats for finally coming forward. I suspect the death threats may well be by PSU folks who don’t want PSU exposed, but probably there may be some by folks who wanted him to do more to protect kids vs. Sandusky. If it’s for the latter, why aren’t others complaining about receiving death threats too? Death threats don’t often explain WHY or WHO they are in any case. Have not read about others receiving death threats, but who knows?</p>
<p>Accused child molesters go to trial guilty until proven innocent. I think we’ve all proven that. I think McQueary will be rehabilitated and, after Sandusky’s interview, the jurors will likely be dying to find a way to believe McQueary. I still think Sandusky will plead. </p>
<p>The civil cases against PSU will be a different kettle of fish.</p>
<p>Catera45: Yep, the standard in a civil case is preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. So all those miserable excuses for human beings will be paying through their nose</p>
<p>The grand jury found McQueary to be “extremely credible” and Curley & Schultz so not-credible that they’ve been charged with perjury. Much will depend on whether the trial jury makes the same determination.</p>
<p>ETA – One way I look at credibility is: what does the person have to gain by telling the truth versus lying? McQueary’s testimony to the grand jury did not benefit him in any way and, in fact, has probably changed his life forever, for the worse. Why in the world would he have told that particular story if it weren’t true?</p>
<p>This piece tells of the far-reaching effects of child sex abuse. It particularly focuses on boy victims, and how in some ways they react differently than girls. It is even harder for them to come forward for a myriad of reasons, one of which is that they fear they won’t be believed. I’ve seen a few defense attorneys and PSU apologists in the media scoffing at the number of Sandusky victims who are now coming forward, years after the abuse. They need to read this.</p>
<p>Lasma…I think that we will see more abused from other instances (Like Syracuse) come forward as well. They will find strength from those that have already stepped forward. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, there will be some false accusations as well, and those will destroy people and institutions.</p>
<p>Not sure about the race angle but, I must say, I have lived in this country my entire life and yet, amazingly, not one of you 300 million inconsiderate bastards thought to welcome me to my own country; until mini did it 16 times in this thread. For the first time, the very first time, I feel at peace and at home. Rejoice (by which I mean go to happy hour tonight and have a few Heinekens, its Friday).</p>
<p>Any place with sinning and beer is likely a high match for me (as long as it is in NYC, not sure what lies on the other side of the Hudson, but it scares me - it appears, when the moon is just right, to be New Jersey).</p>