Jerry Sandusky Scandal: Mike McQueary's Testimony Threatens Charges of PSU Execs
The sex abuse case against former Penn State football defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky continues to experience twists and turns as the credibility of witness Mike McQueary has been called into question once again.
According to Sara Ganim of The Patriot-News, the prosecution has new evidence that contradicts the Penn State assistant coach's assertion that he saw Sandusky assaulting a boy in 2002. The Penn State assistant, who is currently on leave, originally reported that he had seen Sandusky sexually assaulting a boy in the shower before spring break in 2002. However, there is now evidence that suggests the alleged incident took place on Feb. 9, 2001.
Do you believe McQueary's initial account was accurate?
McQueary's credibility has continually been attacked by Sandusky's legal team, particularly attorney Joe Amendola. Not only does this new revelation possibly bode well for Sandusky's defense, but it could also help former Penn State executives Tim Curley and Gary Schultz come one step closer to escaping punishment.
Both Curley, the former Penn State athletic director, and Schultz, a former university vice president, are being charged with perjury and failure to report a crime. If the alleged assault took place in 2001 rather than 2002, though, the statute of limitations would be up on at least one of the charges against them, according to their lawyers.
McQueary has been much maligned throughout this entire process, and it is possible that his waffling has bolstered the cases of all of the former Penn State administrators currently facing legal action.
Sandusky still has plenty of accusers, and both Curley and Schultz have charges to deal with, but inconsistency with evidence is working in their favor.
There is still a long way to go in this saga, and there is no guarantee that McQueary's initial account was wrong, but the seed of doubt has been planted. It certainly has to give every defense team some degree of hope in this case.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?