McQUEARY’S CREDIBILITY IN QUESTION.

Discussion in 'Media' started by LilOlLady, Jul 22, 2012.

  1. LilOlLady
    Offline

    LilOlLady Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    7,841
    Thanks Received:
    660
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Ratings:
    +762
    McQUEARY’S CREDIBILITY IN QUESTION.

    THINK. It is virtually an impossibility physically and anatomically for McQueary to imply what he said he heard to actually have happened. He said he heard a slapping sound like flesh against flesh. But did he actually see the act? If Sandusky was sodomizing a young boy with that kind of force there would have been unbearable pain and the boy would have been screaming. There would have been massive tearing, injuries and loss of blood. Internally and externally and most likely would have caused death. The physically anatomy of the anal canal of a young child would not have allowed for the act McQueary described. To witness this would have been so horrifying that a normal person would have intervened and held Sandusky and the child until law enforcement arrived.

    I have a big problem with McQueary’s statement.
    McQueary’s dad: ‘it’s eating him up not being able to tell his side’ | CollegeFootballTalk
     

Share This Page