Skip to content

Report: McQueary gave another account of ‘Victim 2’ incident

Mike McQueary AP

A central figure in the allegations of sexual abuse against children against longtime Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky is Nittany Lions assistant coach Mike McQueary.

First, here’s what we know from the Grand Jury summary involving eight alleged victims of Sandusky:

McQueary, a 28-year-old graduate assistant at the time, was witness to an alleged incident of sexual abuse by Sandusky to “Victim 2” in March, 2002. The report states that McQueary heard “rhythmic, slapping sounds. He believed those sounds to be of sexual activity.” The report also states that McQueary witnessed the alleged sexual abuse between Sandusky and Victim 2, and that both saw McQueary. McQueary then “left immediately, distraught.”

The Grand Jury summary goes on to say that McQueary told his father about the incident, and that his father told him to report what he had seen to then-Penn State coach Joe Paterno. McQueary did so the following day, and the conversation between McQueary and Paterno remains a point of interest (Paterno states McQueary did not give explicit or graphic detail of the alleged incident).

As does McQueary’s ever-changing story.

According to the Harrisburg Patriot-News, there was another person who sat in on the conversation between McQueary and his father — Dr. Jonathan Dranov, a family friend and colleague of McQueary’s father. A source with knowledge of Dranov’s testimony before the grand jury said that first account of the incident by McQueary in his father’s home went as follows:

McQueary heard “sex sounds” and the shower running, and a young boy stuck his head around the corner of the shower stall, peering at McQueary as an adult arm reached around his waist and pulled him back out of view.

Seconds later, Sandusky left the shower in a towel.

In the time since the Grand Jury summary was released, McQueary has given a different explanation of what allegedly happened that evening. NBC News’ Peter Alexander obtained a copy of an email last month sent by McQueary to former teammates that stated he “didn’t just turn and run… I made sure it stopped.”

A day later, the Allentown Morning Call obtained yet another email from McQueary to a former classmate that stated “I did stop it, not physically … but made sure it was stopped when I left that locker room. I did have discussions with police and with the official at the university in charge of police …. no one can imagine my thoughts or wants to be in my shoes for those 30-45 seconds … trust me.”

The Grand Jury summary, however, states “The graduate assistant [McQueary] was never questioned by University Police and no other entity conducted an investigation until he testified in Grand Jury in December, 2010.”

statement to police by McQueary dated from 2010 obtained by the Patriot-News, claims McQueary saw Victim 2 with his hands against the shower wall while being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky. That statement, not the aforementioned emails, lines up with the Grand Jury summary, although it should be noted that summary is not a verbatim account of McQueary’s testimony.

Now, there’s yet another account of what happened by McQueary when the alleged incident was fresh in his mind.

The Patriot-News breaks it down:

  • His grand jury testimony says he heard slapping noises and saw a boy being sodomized by Sandusky.
  • His hand-written statement to police says, “I did not see insertion. I am certain that sexual acts/the young boy being sodomized was occurring.” He says the whole incident lasted about a minute.
  • In an email he sent to friends following the firing of Joe Paterno, he says “I made sure it stopped,” something not mentioned in the grand jury testimony or police statement.
  • And now Dranov’s testimony describes a new scenario.

About two months after the incident McQueary describes in March 2002, Dranov and McQueary’s father, John, both physicians, had an unrelated meeting scheduled at Penn State with Gary Schultz, Dranov told the grand jury, according to the source.

Curious about how the story ended, Dranov inquired about what ever happened to Sandusky.

According to a source with knowledge of his testimony, Schultz told him then-university President Graham Spanier had met with Sandusky.

That’s something that isn’t mentioned in the grand jury presentment.

McQueary has been placed on administrative leave in the weeks following the scandal. McQueary was not on the sidelines for PSU’s final home game of the season against Nebraska after the school cited “multiple threats” against the assistant coach.

McQueary is just part of a line of individuals who are connected to the Sandusky scandal. In addition to the alleged crimes committed by Sandusky, McQueary, Paterno, athletic director Tim Curley, PSU VP for Business and Finance Gary Schultz and president Graham Spanier have all received heavy criticism — some have lost their jobs — for their apparent inaction in the wake of child-sex allegations that span over a decade.

In an interview with Bob Costas on Rock Center, Sandusky admitted showering with Victim 2, but that no sexual activity took place.

We were showering and horsing around and he [the boy] actually turned all the showers on and was actually sliding across the floor and we were, as I recall, possibly like snapping a towel,” Sandusky said.

Sandusky also stated in an interview with the New York Times that he was never contacted by then-head coach Joe Paterno about the alleged incident. Paterno was fired just days after the scandal broke.

However, Sandusky was arrested last week on nine new sex abuse charges, bringing his count total to over 50, after two more alleged victims came forward. Sandusky posted $250,000 bail the following day.

Permalink 22 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big Ten Conference, Penn State Nittany Lions, Rumor Mill, Top Posts
22 Responses to “Report: McQueary gave another account of ‘Victim 2’ incident”
  1. rendadoll says: Dec 11, 2011 12:41 PM

    Okay so which account is the truth? He walked in and actually saw it happening?

    Or this new one coming to light. “He saw a boy look around the corner and a adult arm pulling the boy back in and later Sandusky in a towel?”

    I don’t about the Attorney’s involved, nor the Judge or the DA and prospective Juror’s but McQueary is changing his story it would seem, as I said it allegedly appears that McQueary is changing his accounts with each interview……

    I don’t about you all, but were I the Attorney for Sandusky and the DA I would toss out McQueary as a valid witness, if this is truth and he has changed his account yet again…..

    I mean Sandusky is innocent until proven guilty, I am not praising Sandusky here but something is ‘Rotten’ in Penn State if McQueary is allowed as a Valid witness if these change of story accounts are true…

  2. bigd88 says: Dec 11, 2011 12:45 PM

    So in other words, nobody knows more than 5% of what really went on and all the facts still need to be gathered through trial….
    Yet the vast majority of the media has tried, judged, and tarnished everyone involved (most notably you know who) and Penn State University on extremely limited knowledge of the facts surrounding the case.
    That’s great to know…
    I guess it’s true… Patience is a virtue.

  3. rendadoll says: Dec 11, 2011 12:57 PM


    Hey the way the New Media hypes a breaking story, it’s no wonder that everyone gets confused, I would hate to have to be the DA or the Defense in this case, since so much mis-information has been put out.

    We can only wonder what the truth is, with all these changing reports, who knows, Mr. McQueary may not have even said any of what the News is reporting, we won’t know until this case comes to trial and the evidence is heard.

    We know something bad happened, but the Media keeps on fueling the flames, can Sandusky get a fair trail? Probably not.

    Who knows?

    I feel sorry for the Victims and for their family.

  4. Tim's Neighbor says: Dec 11, 2011 1:01 PM

    @ren No offense, but leave the law process to lawyers.

  5. woebegong says: Dec 11, 2011 1:02 PM

    I would think his credibility as a witness is down to zero about now. Any prosecutor that puts him on the witness stand, knows that his story will not hold water, when he continually changes what it is. It really appears to me, that the guy dropped the ball, the day, said incident was supposed to have occurred and is just hoping to save his job. I would also think that if PSU is so adamant about saving and repairing their reputation, this guy should also be let go also.
    Oh well, I probably wouldn’t be much of an attorney or administrator for the school, I guess. Logic doesn’t appear to be a requirement for those jobs in this case.

  6. rendadoll says: Dec 11, 2011 1:05 PM

    @ Tim. I was just going over the Media articles, here. No offense but I have as much RIGHT to look at the facts allegedly as anyone.

    And I ALWAYS leave due process of law to the Lawyers. Just so YOU know Tim Neighbor.

  7. bigd88 says: Dec 11, 2011 1:06 PM

    I agree 100%. It really is sad. With social media, twitter, etc. etc. there is such a need for instant gratification with news like this that journalism becomes much more like sensationalism in a battle to “break the story first” and be the one who is “most against pedophilia” in this case etc. etc.
    The saddest part is that the insane amount of media coverage and subsequent rush to judgment may prevent a fair trial for all parties involved…. And even Joe Paterno, who isn’t being charged or accused of any wrongdoing, gets the farthest thing from a fair shake with regards to his reputation, legacy, etc. etc.

    There is a reason that the release of Grand Jury Reports like this one are banned in many states now. The reaction it incites is very prejudicial to the defendants and can prevent a fair trial.

    I pray that the truth really does come out and that everything that has happened doesn’t prevent a fair trial. The guilty parties involved should be found as such. And the innocent should not have their names tarnished and destroyed.

  8. rendadoll says: Dec 11, 2011 1:08 PM

    @Big: So do I, due process hope they can get the evidence one way or another to get the case to trial.

  9. worldwidebleater says: Dec 11, 2011 2:05 PM

    I love Joe Paterno?

  10. cowhawkfan says: Dec 11, 2011 2:35 PM

    So….maybe Joe didn’t know much and was told exactly what he said he was? Oh, well…his legacy is tarnished forever by a rush to judgement, but no bid deal right? I guess lettin him coach out the year and retire to handle his cancer might not have been auc a bad idea?

  11. cowhawkfan says: Dec 11, 2011 2:37 PM

    So….maybe Joe didn’t know much and was told exactly what he said he was? Oh, well…his legacy is tarnished forever by a rush to judgement, but no big deal right? I guess letting him coach out the year and retire to handle his cancer might not have been auc a bad idea? Nah, in this country banish the accused and figure out the facts later.

  12. burntorangehorn says: Dec 11, 2011 2:57 PM

    Those of you who stormed the metaphorical castle with your metaphorical pitchforks, calling for Paterno’s head, are looking more ridiculous by the second.

  13. rendadoll says: Dec 11, 2011 3:23 PM

    One thing the trial will give the general public will be the witnesses will have their day in court and tell what they either witnessed or what was done to them.

    And In Secession will probably air it live on TV, and HLN pick up when In Secession is not covering the trial.

    For now all we have is the news articles, and the news reports.

    And as more and more alleged victims step forward, it looks like there will be more than just one trial for Sandusky since some of the inappropriate behavior happened in other states…

  14. 10of14 says: Dec 11, 2011 4:02 PM

    The perverted old man took advantage of young BOYS, not young men in a shower at PSU. If anyone on this board thinks that is acceptable and does not draw suspicion, speak up. If you want to hide behind whether Paterno is guilty or not, I call you a chicken “shirt”. I could care less of what happens to Paterno, good or bad. However, for Sandusky; you can throw out half the evidence and still have enough to convict this dangerous piece of crap. As for McQuery; anyone else think about the movie Elf and cast McQuery as Will Farrell?

  15. ErikW65 says: Dec 11, 2011 4:13 PM

    So….maybe Joe didn’t know much and was told exactly what he said he was?

    Then why did he express regret for not having done more to help the victims at the time? He knew, and you’re in denial, still looking desperately for any shred of possible exculpatory evidence to clear your hero. Too late. It’s over. Paterno’s legacy is permanently ruined. His whole ideology of academic discipline was really nothing but a cover for a sport-dominated society that was so insular it protected a child molester.

  16. lookatthefarside says: Dec 11, 2011 4:14 PM

    Nancy Grace is drooling…..

  17. dirtyharry1971 says: Dec 11, 2011 7:42 PM

    McQueary i think is just trying to save face with his friends by saying he stopped it but if that was true he would have said that under oath which apparently he never did. There is so many people involved in this mess including administration that they should at the very least drop the football program for at least a few years

  18. deadeye says: Dec 11, 2011 10:25 PM

    “Those of you who stormed the metaphorical castle with your metaphorical pitchforks, calling for Paterno’s head, are looking more ridiculous by the second.”


    So let me get this straight, since McQueary has contradicted his testimony, that somehow lessens Paterno’s role in this tragic story? That’s a pretty stupid assertion. Look, McQueary in all likelyhood is changing his story to make himself look better. He has been having his reputation trashed (rightfully so IMO) and his sworn testimony is still the version that is most likely true. But even if one chooses to throw out his testimony, we still have Paterno’s, Curley’s, and Schultz’s testimony to go by. And all three state that McQueary informed them of Sandusky’s inappropriate/criminal behavior in the showers. According to JoePa, he was told that there had been “fondling and something of a sexual nature”. Paterno’s own testimony is the basis for the bulk of criticism against him, not McQueary’s.

  19. normswifevera says: Dec 12, 2011 2:28 AM

    The important thing to keep in mind is that Dr. Dranov testified in front of the same grand jury that McQueary did. The same grand jury that found McQueary so believable that they brought rought perjury charges against Curley and Schultz.

    So for whatever reason, it doesn’t seem like they put much stock into Dr. Dranov’s version of events.

  20. transeuropeexpress says: Dec 12, 2011 2:48 AM

    Unless I’m wrong, the very nature of grand jury testimony is that it can include information that is, on its face, contradictory; it all depends upon the questions the attorney asks. So it may well be that McQueary told the truth to the questions the GJ asks, but it was not as expansive as the information he may have offered privately or to teammates.

    Besides that, I don’t see real discrepancies between the original testimony and what he has said since then. Saying he left, distressed, and saying he made sure the sexual assault stopped are not contradictions, to my mind. YM, obviously, MV

  21. dkhhuey says: Dec 12, 2011 3:43 PM

    @trans – a grand jury is a panel of selected individuals who are there to determine whether to proceed with prosecution or not. The DA’s office presents the case and brings in witness to support it. The grand jury panel asks as many questions as they need and no topic is usually off limits. There are no defense attorney’s present. They are solely faced with determining a case’s merits. You are somewhat right that there could be contradictory information given they are interviewing many witnesses and/or experts. Obviously the more contradictory evidence they uncover, the more likely they are to not vote to proceed with prosecution.

    I have testified in several of these proceedings and I can honestly say, they are quite grueling in nature. You are also under oath while doing so.

  22. blowtorch4jesus says: Dec 13, 2011 1:12 AM

    I think this country has way too many people willing to rationalize and excuse the inexcusable in the name of stupid college and an even more stupid game.

    Seriously, if you defend Sandusky, then let him take a shower with your kid, unsupervised, No problems right?

    The sad thing is some of you would probably let him abuse your kids in the name of Pedo State football

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!