McQuery Placed On Administrative Leave By PSU

Submitted by mGrowOld on November 11th, 2011 at 8:46 PM

I believe our mod overlords have stated tthat starting a thread on something such as this is legal but time will shortly tell.  

Multiple media outlets are reporting that Penn State Assistant Coach Mike McQuery has been placed on paid administrative leave by the university.  ESPN is also reporting that McQuery notifiied the team tonight that he "is no longer their coach" with no further comment at this time.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7221182/penn-state-nittany-lions-mike-mcqueary-placed-administrative-leave-interim-president-says

Comments

turd ferguson

November 11th, 2011 at 10:10 PM ^

It makes NO sense that Sandusky is free on bail.  He's going to spend the rest of his life in prison for what he's already accused of, and with the death penalty irrelevant here, there would be no additional punishment for additional wrongdoing.  We already know about eight victims, and there are probably quite a few that haven't come forward.  Not that it's relevant, but he's probably a suicide threat, too.

ahw1982

November 11th, 2011 at 11:57 PM ^

In our criminal justice system, you are innocent until proven guilty.  As far as I know, the only relevant inquiry with respect to bail is whether 1) you are a flight risk, and 2) you are a danger to the public.  Nothing suggests flight risk.  As for being a danger to the public, I highly doubt that any sane parent will allow their kid near the man, and I'm sure he is under close scrutiny by law enforcement officials and the public.

stefan-nyc

November 12th, 2011 at 2:03 AM ^

With respect, you may be accurately setting forth the standard for bail determinations, but that standard is hardly applied with anything approaching equality across cases.  Would you dispute that there are hundreds of instances of bail being denied to small time drug dealers  based on the standard you cite?

Why does Sandusky not pose a flight risk?  He's facing hundreds of years of imprisonment.  If he's a narcissist (I have no clue if he is), he could feel a deep repulsion toward the prospect of being dragged in handcuffs before the public and labeled a monster.  My guess is that Sandusky made bail based on a combination of the quality of his legal representation and an unwillingness on behalf of the DA to show their cards during the early stages of a high profile case.  This is only "our criminal justice system" as it exists in practice, not some idealized theory.

As for danger to the public, you seem to suggest that Sandusky meets this requirement based on the fact that most parents and law enforcement in central Pennsylvania are aware that he is an alleged sexual predator and should know to take appropriate precautions.  Tell that to the petty criminals now sitting in jail whose cases, and indeed their very existence, are low-profile, receive scant legal representation and scant judicial consideration.  That, too, is "our criminal justice system," which is the criminal justice system of the greatest democracy in the world.

 

Mr Miggle

November 12th, 2011 at 8:43 AM ^

I think he's a huge flight risk if you consider suicide a form of flight. They needed to do a psychological evaluation before granting bail.

He's charged with attacking 8 different children. If that doesn't represent a threat to the public, few criminals do. Accused murderers may get bail, but I'd bet no accused serial killer ever has. Ordering him to stay away from children can't make parents, children, and especially his victims feel very safe. He was a better candidate for house arrest.

LSAClassOf2000

November 11th, 2011 at 8:52 PM ^

How could they, in good conscience, let him coach again? I believe they were going to let him coach from the booth initially, then the threats came. I very much doubt he enters that stadium as an employee, if ever, again. 

His Dudeness

November 11th, 2011 at 8:55 PM ^

I am in the minority here, but McQuery didn't technically break the law. I know what he did (or didn't do) was obviously a regret and a horrible misjudgement and clearly wrong, but none of us can say with absolute confidence what we would do in that situation. I mean I know I would hope that I would crush the guy and call the police, but in the moment I am not sure exactly what anyone would do and I am not sure he should be punished for something he didn't do in a highly stressful situation. It just seems weird to me to end a guys career over a crazy siuation and a regrettable moment on inaction.  

LSAClassOf2000

November 11th, 2011 at 9:01 PM ^

Not that PSU will be winning the perception war anytime soon, if ever again, but what seems like an unofficial removal of McQueary  from his position (seems likely it is made official at some point) is probably part of that. He may not be criminally liable (more familiar with mandatory reporting in Michigan, not PA), but his credibility as a coach is in Bolivia in the eyes of the school, I imagine. 

willywill9

November 12th, 2011 at 12:10 AM ^

Wait... did you just disagree with yourself?  I think i done seen it all!   But in all seriousness, I agree with you.  I'd like to think I'd break it up, then immediately call the police in that situation, but there's no way to tell how I'd react in a situation like that.  I hope I never have to find out. 

mGrowOld

November 11th, 2011 at 9:02 PM ^

Duder....

I agree with you on almost everything (shocking I know) but here we must part ways.  There is no way a person's moral compass cannot go "titlt" when witnessing a grown man raping a young boy.  The fact that McQuery did not take his 6'4", 225 pound body and stop Sandusky is something he will have to live with the rest of his life.  For all McQuery knows the raping continued that night once he ran and hid and for God knows how long afterwards.

I know he called his dad.  If one of my boys had called me in the same situation and asked what he should do I'd have said "why are you talking to me?  Why havent you stopped the rape and called the cops?"and hung up the phone.

In the most critical moment of McQuery's life he chose his career over protecting a child and he will pay for that choice the rest of his days.

 

Muttley

November 11th, 2011 at 9:15 PM ^

but said nothing?

MM should be personally ashamed of his actions.  However, I don't think PSU, fergodssakes, should be taking professional action against MM.  Giant Pot, meet Little Kettle.

But clearly it's in everyone's interest for MM to move on.

I doubt MM will ever encounter a situation of this magnitude again in his life.

LSAClassOf2000

November 11th, 2011 at 9:20 PM ^

I actually don't think PSU would have grounds to can him really (not the expert, I am  just your friendly guy who keeps the lights on), but I don't see a scenario where he can stay. I would think that the reason that he is still employed by PSU (albeit only technically now, it seems) is because they know this. He would do better to quit willingly, I would think. 

mGrowOld

November 11th, 2011 at 9:15 PM ^

I posted to that effect a couple of days ago when it seemed to me like he was getting a free pass on the whole deal.  I mean, he was the ONLY eye-witness (other than the temp janitor in 1998) so he of all people knows exactly what a monster Sandusky really is.  Everyone else (including Joepa) is getting information second hand.  Not McQuery.  He saw first hand what Sandusky is and not only allowed the destruction of a child to continue that night he looked the other way for nine more years and said nothing.

I have zero sympathy for him.  None.  Every child Sandusky assulted from 2002 until his arrest could've been avoided if he had simply called the police that night.  

GBOD79

November 12th, 2011 at 2:47 AM ^

What would you do though if you knew in 1998 a similar report was made and nothing was done of it? Maybe McQueary had knowledge of this and instead decided to tell Paterno knowing how powerful he was in the community. If the previous report had no effect because a no name janitor made the claim, then surely Paterno could make people take action. I have some sympathy for McQueary in this. I mean, sure we can all say we would have clocked the guy. However, when you grow up idolizing this man and then all of a sudden see such a horrific scene none of us know how we would react. I would love to think I would walk in that shower and beat Sandusky nearly to death, but the truth is I dont know. 

 

Regardless of what we think of McQueary and what he should have done the fact is he has to live with what he saw for the rest of his life. He has to live with the fact that he told the person he thought could stop this and they ignored him too. Now he has to live knowing people are threatening his life, while leaving the predator alone. 

I feel horribly for the boys involved in this case and hope that justice is finally done for them. However, I do feel bad for McQueary as well. I am sure that what he saw horrified him and was traumatic for him as well. Its not like he was unaffected by this. 

bjk

November 12th, 2011 at 9:01 AM ^

I scanned the comments to see if anyone would get to this.

Actually, the number I'm interested in would be five years -- the number of years that McQueary would have been on the sidelines (to 2007) and been able to observe Sandusky also standing on the sidelines parading his latest victimes, via side-line admittance passes, in plain view. McQ would have been the only one we know of with a direct image picture of what was going to happen to those additional victims after the final gun sounded.

Did he ever go up to Sandusky to say "If you touch a hair on that boy's head I will personally find you and rip your throat out with my bare hands?" Apparently not. We might wish. For allowing Sandusky to parade the continuation of his demonstrated reckless disregard for the health and well-being of children under his protection for an additional five years without any interference, I think it fair to say McQ went well into a red zone we might all hope we would never emulate.

On a lighter note, there goes the part of my childhood (I was 40) where McQ is mainly remembered as the victim of the M defense on Judgement Day 1997. Now McQ faces a whole different category of Judgement Day. He may even wish for the good old days of Charles Woodson.

Back on a more serious note, it's incomprehensible to me that McQ could watch Sandusky slap him in the face with his continued horror on the PSU sidelines for five more years and then still look the other way as the horror continued.

His Dudeness

November 11th, 2011 at 9:11 PM ^

I completely agree with you, but I am just not certain he is a horrible person and his career should be over. You know what I mean?

He is guilty of being a pussy and not doing anything... but does that make him unsuitable to coach football? That is his living and he really didn't do anything that is illegal. I am trying to take emotion out of this. It is a strange situation to say the least.  

Muttley

November 11th, 2011 at 9:27 PM ^

including who the coaches are and who gets onsite access.  He owns it and is treated/compensated as someone with that level of responsibility.

MM was the little guy at the time.  He should be personally disgraced by inaction, but it doesn't seem to me that PSU has the moral standing to take action against him when the institution itself, embodied by JoePa and the university president, did less to relay the information than MM did.

mGrowOld

November 11th, 2011 at 9:19 PM ^

I think being a father of four kids makes "taking the emotion out of it" impossible for me.  I see one of my kids being victimized by Sandusky and McQuery not helping and it makes me want to punch him as hard as I can.

I'm roughly the same size and weight as McQuery (although 15 years older) and i can tell you without a shadow of doubt I know what I would've done had I been him that night.  I would've stopped Sandusky.  One way or the other...I would've stopped Sandusky.

GBOD79

November 12th, 2011 at 2:52 AM ^

You also have the benefit of saying this without having just witnessed your coach at PSU, a mentor, perhaps an idol, raping a 10 year old. Do you have any idea how traumatic and terrifying that must have been? 

I am not equating this at all to the horror the boys faced. That is on an entirely different level. However, McQueary could very well have went into shock and just could not operate as he normally would have. I think it is awfully presumptuous of yourself to say without doubt you would have intervened. Truth is nobody knows how they would react unless they face the same set of circumstances. 

victors2000

November 12th, 2011 at 7:46 AM ^

about how much he loved and admired Jerry Sandusky, and how he wanted to grow up to be just like him. Obviously, before the situation. Even now, players are sending Sandusky money to pay for his legal defense; clearly this guy was loved/admired by the players and staff.

You probably would feel the same way about Sandusky and Paterno had you lived your whole life in Penn State just like the McQueary's have. Both Mike and his father may have only known those two (at least Paterno but Sandusky had been there for quite a while too) as coaches of their beloved Nittany Lions their whole lives. Mike dreamed of being a quarterback there, he played his high school ball in Happy Valley, and I'm sure both he and his dad were so proud to get recruited by Penn State and offered a scholarship. I'm sure Mike's dad probably met the coaches on several occassions.

So out of the blue, in the middle of the night, a proud Nittany Lion, a proud father of a former Penn State QB, you get the call. Knowing all that, perhaps you might consider you wouldn't just hang up on your son because he didn't stop the activity.

My point is Mike was torn. It wasn't black and white for him at the sudden, shocking, distraught moment he experienced this in the middle of a night. Barring information that he was actively involved in the cover up, I'm not going to condemn him.

turbo cool

November 11th, 2011 at 11:10 PM ^

Mgrowold, you've been pretty vocal against MM, in part because you're a father of 4 and also because that's how your moral compass is telling to view this guy. I'm by no means defending MM, here, but I really think we need to wait until more details and actual facts of this story surface.

It's been reported that MM has a lot of details of his side of the story that haven't been reported. And, I still don't see how JoePa or any of the other coaches and PSU officials are no worse than MM. You can't tell me that after the 1998 alledged actions, they didn't know about what Sandusky was doing. I personally think they knew and that triggered the cover-up. Then, 4 years later, MM reports to JoePa that he saw what he saw and nothing was done. MM should've done something at that moment, no doubt, but I strongly believe that those at PSU who didn't act years earlier are just as responsible.

This entire story is so heinous and disgusting and it's only going to get worse. There are just too many stories that don't add up, i.e., Sandusky retiring at the peak of his career, 1998 allegations being dismissed, PSU possibly trying to cover-up 1998 story because they were seeking booster $ for Beaver Stadium renovations at the time, DA not pursuing the case and then went missing, JoePa's apparent bitter and silent demeanor at Sandusky's retirement dinner, etc. It's awful. I cannot stop myself from trying to learn as much about this story but it's just so god damn awful. I can't imagine many other stories being worse that we'll have to learn about in the rest of our lives.

mGrowOld

November 12th, 2011 at 6:47 AM ^

Those are all good points. Well put.

Actually I read where Joepa didnt go to the retirement dinner at all which is very interesting to say the least.  FWIW my contention this entire week has been that of all the characters in this ugly play, only two - the temp janitor and McQuery - actually SAW Sandusky doing the thngs he's been charged with.   Everyone else got their information second, third or fourth hand and only the people in the room know what was actually said versus what they "heard". So McQuery bears an additional burden to act that everyone else (again except the janitor) do not hold beccause he was an eye-witness to the crime.  Put aside for a moment my well known revulsion for his inaction that evening, I still cannot come up with any reason for his lack of calling the Police afterwards.  That is until now.

You raise a VERY thought-provoking idea I had never considered before.   What if McQuery, along with a lot of other people, KNEW this had occurred in the past and KNEW it had been swept under the rug by some larger power.  In that context his not calling the police does make sense (it still doesnt answer for me why he didn't stop him in the shower but I know i've beat that one to death already), as he would think "what's the point?  They arent going to do anything anyways".

Maybe that's what "his side" is going to be.  And that would require "protective custody" given everything that contention would entail.

 

 

mGrowOld

November 12th, 2011 at 9:22 AM ^

Perhaps.  Despite being repeatidly told over the past several days I have no way of knowing how I'd react in such a complex and stressful situation the revulsion I feel is so strong I cannot accept that I would run away and hide and allow a child-rape to continue.

To paraphrase the late, great George Patton....

"Some of you boys are worried that when things get tough you'll get scared and chicken out.  That you won't be able to fight.  Well let me tell you that when you stick you hand into a pile of goo that was once your best buddies face.....well....you'll know what to do."

I think many people on the board underestimate the power of convictions and the ability of humans to think of others and not themselves when faced with a situation like McQuery.

There is a reason it's called "fight OR flight".  We have two choices, not one.

One Inch Woody…

November 12th, 2011 at 2:58 AM ^

Definitely. There is so much we don't know. There are simply too many people who would have known about this happening within the athletic department for it not to have been reported to the police without some coercion of some sort. Just speculating, but I think that the president Spanier did not want this to ruin his university, so he got rid of Sandusky and told McQueary and Paterno to be quiet or else...

I really hope the details come out and show that McQueary and Paterno are not the spineless monsters that the media has portrayed them to be. I don't believe in any way that these two could allow a crazed rapist to walk into the facilities for so long after they knew what was happening. Something is definitely fishy about this.

SysMark

November 11th, 2011 at 9:15 PM ^

Part of what you're seeing is the result of a highly disfunctional organization...one that places deference to the leader above all else and does not tolerate any negative information.  That may seem extreme but it is in fact exactly what this is.  In a healthy organization, if he doesn't have it in him to physically stop it, he is at least running screaming down the hall.

SysMark

November 11th, 2011 at 10:44 PM ^

No. In a well functioning military organization every man has his say - it may not be heeded but it is said and listened to.  Don't confuse final decision making power, which is always at the top, with valued information flow.

A case study from my MBA days...stuck with me for many years.  (Yes what is now Ross).  Horizontal vs. vertical authority in organizations.  The classic example is the aircraft carrier, the ultimate in high-level functionality where everyone is considered competent and integral, and the lowest deckhand has the authority to halt operations if he or she sees something wrong.  There is zero room for error so egos are subjugated in favor of the outcome.

The polar opposite of what we have just seen at PSU.

Muttley

November 12th, 2011 at 12:30 AM ^

Penn State the institution is the Godzilla in this situation, and MM is the ant.

Yes, a moral MM may have been able to stop Jerry Sandusky.  Maybe.

Penn State, JoePa, the University President.  That's a tremendous locus of influence.  How do we know that they wouldn't have been able to influence the police and discredit MM?

Penn State the institution acted in an absolutely despicable, systematic manner. 

gbdub

November 12th, 2011 at 11:06 AM ^

I think you hit an important point: while McQuery has more responsibility, on the one hand, as a first-hand witness, he also has less responsibility as the lowest guy on the totem pole.

The fact that he called his dad rather than the cops initially seems to indicate he was scared and/or confused. Scared of retribution maybe? If he was, that certainly had to be reinforced by the glacial pace at which JoePa and the university administration responded. What if he witnessed some stuff while he was a player? Maybe he was in shock, maybe he began to question what he really saw - the brain does weird things when subjected to trauma.

Or he could be complicit in the coverup. We don't know at this point. But I think that, ironically because his actions were so outside what we'd expect for a normal person, that there may be more going on. Maybe the BOT knows this and that's why they didn't fire him immediately.

This whole thing is so messed up that I think I need more info before I can feel certain about anything anymore.

bjk

November 12th, 2011 at 9:20 AM ^

all organizations tend to treat allegations of misdoing as threats to be destroyed. For large organizations, this is completely normal.

The Catholic Church, for instance, has been battling scandals since before the 1300's. But they never own up until they are forced to. This is overwhelmingly the rule where large organizations are involved.

I've been looking for years for a study of German labor unions in the early 1900's by a social scientist named Michel. According to what I've been told, he concluded that all large organizations not staffed exclusively by saints eventually all turn toward a system of authoritarianism cloaked by secrecy. This is what anyone with a newspaper subscription has long ago already concluded.

Gameboy

November 11th, 2011 at 9:36 PM ^

Don't speak for the rest of us.

I know for a fact that I would have done everything in my power to get that boy out of there if I ever saw something like that. At the VERY LEAST, you can call the 911 right away. The fact that he called his dad and only spoke to Paterno next day and never even bothered to find out what happened to the boy AND hung out with Sanduski while he had complete access to the facilities is not something a normal human being should do.

If that is not something that we can expect EVERY HUMAN BEING should do, then that is the real tragedy.