Penn State Scandal: Mike McQueary Must Set the Record Straight with Public

The Jerry Sandusky scandal spans many years and involves many alleged victims, but most of the publicity surrounds one single incident that took place on the night of March 1, 2002.

According to a grand jury report, it was on that night that a Penn State graduate assistant happened to witness Sandusky raping a young boy who appeared to be about 10 years old in the Penn State football locker room showers. The story goes that the grad assistant left the room and immediately started making calls. A few twists and turns later, and the incident was pretty much swept under the rug.

The grad assistant in this little story has since been revealed to be Mike McQueary, who up until a couple days ago served as Penn State's wide receivers coach and recruiting coordinator. He has been placed on indefinite administrative leave, and hasn't been heard from since.

Well, except for little quotes that have trickled out here and there. On Monday, we got some from McQueary thanks to an email that he sent out to former teammates. 

The big highlight of the email was this passage, which came courtesy of NBC News correspondent Peter Alexander:

The possibility that McQueary actually intervened with Sandusky back in 2002 is a new wrinkle in the case. Many assumed that he did indeed just turn and run, ultimately allowing Sandusky to stay out of handcuffs for close to a decade.

The reason many people assumed this was the case is because the grand jury report makes no mention of an intervention.

In fact, here's how the report tells the tale:

"

[McQueary] saw a naked boy, Victim 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. The graduate assistant was shocked but noticed that both Victim 2 and Sandusky saw him. The graduate assistant left immediately, distraught.

"

Presumably, the report wouldn't read that McQueary "left immediately" had he actually stepped in and done something.

Because McQueary testified as to what took place, he either neglected to mention his intervention, or he's lying about it ever taking place.

From a legal perspective, the possibility that McQueary could have intervened doesn't change much. He did what he was legally responsible to do by running the incident up the chain of command. He's a witness, but not a criminal.

However, the court of public opinion will definitely be swayed if McQueary comes out and makes it clear that he made an effort to stop the raping of a young boy. 

Doing so wouldn't completely clear McQueary's name with the public. It would, however, alleviate the accusations of cowardice that have been directed at him.

A small victory for McQueary, perhaps, but he should be eager to take what he can get at this point.

If and when he feels like speaking out, it's his call.