er contacted her office. His emotional safety? Maybe. Not his physical safety.Both Penn State and McQueary were widely believed to be headed to a settlement

BELLEFONTE, Pa. -- Former Penn State?assistant football coach Mike McQueary, on the first day of his whistleblower civil trial against the university, said through his attorney Monday that he was forced to cash out his 401(k) after being unable to find a job due to being ostracized and marginalized by Penn State.He is seeking more than $4 million in compensation for defamation, misrepresentation and lost wages as a result of the university wrongly refusing to renew his contract. Since his severance ran out in 2013, McQuearys attorney said, he has earned less than $10,000.McQueary was placed on administrative leave in November 2011, shortly after it became public that he spotted retired football assistant Jerry Sandusky molesting a 10- to 12-year-old boy a decade prior and reported it to his superiors. He did not inform police.You dont put someone on administrative leave unless theyve done something wrong, McQuearys attorney, Elliot Strokoff, said during opening arguments. And this is the cloud that hangs over his head today.The university countered the first of McQuearys allegations Monday by saying he was put on leave for his own safety. Former associate athletic director for football, Fran Ganter, testified that he advised McQueary to get out of town for the safety of his family.The defense produced a number of lewd emails made at the time against McQueary, one of which threatened his life. Enjoy hell, one read. If you have children, we pray theyre are violently raped, said another. I want to kill you, you f---ing piece of s---, another read.But the first witness of the trial, former state prosecutor Jonelle Harter Eshbach, testified she did not take those threats seriously.I really was not in fear for his safety, Harter Eshbach said, adding the university never contacted her office. His emotional safety? Maybe. Not his physical safety.Both Penn State and McQueary were widely believed to be headed to a settlement prior to trial Monday, as no civil case involving a party with direct ties to Sandusky had gone to trial. The university has paid $92.3 million to 32 men who said they were sexually abused by Sandusky.An anonymous email in November 2010 first led investigators to approach McQueary. In 2001, he later testified, he saw Sandusky engaging in a sexual act with a young boy. He said nothing to Sandusky or the boy, instead calling his father who told him to come home. A day later, he contacted head coach Joe Paterno before reaching out to his superiors.Penn State attorney Nancy Conrad said any stain on McQuearys reputation is a result of him not doing more at that time.McQueary has been under fire for not stopping the alleged rape and going to Joe Paterno instead of the police. Right there, it couldve stopped, Conrad told the jury, which consisted of nine women and three men. But he walked away. McQueary failed to act like a responsible human being.McQueary remained silent during the first day of the trial, which is expected to last about two weeks. Even during the afternoon break, McQueary stood against the jurors bench and fiddled with his cell phone while his attorney scribbled notes and handled papers.He and his lawyers contend that several Penn State administrators, such as former athletic director Tim Curley, wrongly led him to believe they considered his 2001 allegations a serious matter. Because they didnt, the lawsuit claims, McQueary has been labeled and branded as being part of a cover-up.McQueary has also taken exception to a 2011 news release issued by then-university president Graham Spanier, which expressed unconditional support toward Curley and senior vice president Gary Schultz, despite both being criminally charged for not reporting the abuse claim. McQuearys attorneys believe Spaniers comments suggested McQueary was lying to the grand jury.Still, McQueary played an important role in the conviction of Sandusky. His testimony kicked into high gear the investigation, according to Harter Eshbach. Sandusky was convicted in June 2012 on 45 of 48 counts, including four that involved the incident McQueary witnessed.Sandusky is currently serving a 30- to 60-year sentence in Greene State Prison, where he has been largely segregated from the prisons general population out of concerns for his safety.McQueary was a Penn State graduate assistant in the early 2000s, before serving as the wide receivers coach from 2004 to 2011. He did not interview for his coaching position following the 2011 season, and first-year coach Bill OBrien opted to hire former Buffalo Bills receivers coach Stan Hixon as his replacement.OBrien initially wanted to clean house and hire all new coaches, Ganter testified, but players requested that defensive assistants Larry Johnson Sr. and Ron Vanderlinden remain on staff. Players made no such overtures regarding McQueary.Its not the action of the university, Conrad said, explaining why McQueary hasnt yet found a job. McQueary failed to develop a network.The trial resumes Tuesday morning at the Centre County Courthouse Annex Building.The Associated Press contributed to this report. Swell Flaske Butikk . Gerald Green and Miles Plumlee? Green had bounced around the NBA when he wasnt playing overseas. The Pacers gave up on Plumlee after just one season. Now Green and Plumlee are key cogs in the Suns surprising breakout season. Swell Traveler Mug .com) - Christian Ponder will get another chance to prove himself for the Minnesota Vikings, with head coach Leslie Frazier announcing Wednesday that the struggling quarterback will start this weekends game against the Green Bay Packers. http://www.swellflaskenorge.com/swell-flaske-marmor.html .5 million, one-year contract on Friday. Hawkins, who turns 41 in December, will compete with Rex Brothers for the closers role at spring training. Swell Flaske . Pedro scored from a pass by Lionel Messi in the 33rd minute and added two more goals in the 47th and 72nd after Valdes saved his second penalty in four days following his stop in Wednesdays 4-0 over Ajax in the Champions League. Swell Flaske Marble . The Vancouver coach and an announced sellout crowd of 18,910 watched in dismay as the Canucks lost 7-4 to the New York Islanders on Monday night by squandering a 3-0 lead in the third period. Following the Supreme Courts warning to the BCCI to fall in line and follow the directive to implement the Lodha Committees recommendations, the boards defiance seems to have given way to a mixture of anxiety and uncertainty a day before its crucial special general meeting on Friday in Mumbai.The agenda for the SGM, the BCCI had pointed out last week, would be to consider directions of Justice (Retd) Lodha Committee in connection with the formal adoption of the new Memorandum of Association and Rules for the BCCI.The court asked the BCCI to respond within a week to the status report submitted by the Lodha Committee on Wednesday. If the BCCI fails to adopt the new Memorandum of Association and Rules at Fridays meeting, the board risks facing further flak from the court. The BCCI could wait for the court to issue a directive based on the boards response to the status order, but either way there were not many options left for the BCCI, keeping in mind the two sets of timelines drawn by the Lodha Committee, the first of which will expire on Friday, September 30.A number of board members ESPNcricinfo spoke to admitted to being clueless about the BCCIs next course of action, and said it would be chalked out by president Anurag Thakur and secretary Ajay Shirke at the SGM. An experienced administrator termed it a crisis, but said it was not the end of the road for the BCCI. He felt if the court did not budge, it was time for a new wave of administrators to take charge.A BCCI office-bearer said the board was looking to drag things for as long as it could. You should understand one thing: whatever needs to be done, well do it, he said. The affidavit [filed by the BCCI] is just to prolong things as far as possible.Some members were, however, wary of the aggressive stance taken by the Lodha Committee and the Supreme Court. The president of a south zone association said the BCCIs response had to be measured, and people needed to be careful about what they said.Another office-bearer of the board, meanwhile, faulted the confrontational approach adopted by the BCCI so far, and said the members of the board were not apprised of relevant developments. Nobody is kept in the loop. Only president and secretary know whats happening, he said. Thhe BCCI has always been [president and secretary-centric]; thats the problem we have.dddddddddddd All the members could have actually interacted individually with the Lodha Committee, but that was denied. From the beginning itself it has been derailed and we have never got an opportunity to put it on track. From there on, things are messed up.Ever since the court approved the Lodha recommendations on July 18, the BCCI has resolutely opposed them. The main recommendations the BCCI does not agree with are the cooling-off period after a three-year term, imposing an age cap of 70 for administrators, and having an official of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the proposed Apex Council. The proposed Apex Council is itself contentious as it would replace the existing, and powerful, working committee and the one-state-one-vote proposal, which would bring Mumbai, Maharashtra, Vidarbha. Gujarat, Saurashtra and Baroda under one cluster and limit their voting power to just one vote by rotation.Most state associations, too, have continued to wait for the BCCIs direction on amending their constitutions. So far, only the Vidarbha Cricket Association has decided to put to vote whether the Lodha recommendations can be adopted by the September 30 deadline set by the committee in its first set of timelines.From being unresponsive at the beginning to openly critical of the Lodha Committee, the BCCI has pursued a combative strategy. Last week, it asked three former India captains, Ravi Shastri, Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev - all hired by the board as television commentators - to back its stance and ask the Lodha Committee to modify some of the recommendations through a dialogue.However, RM Lodha, the chairman of the Lodha Committee, made it clear that there cant be any dialogue.Our recommendations have merged with the July 18 judgment after the Supreme Court accepted them and ordered their implementation, Lodha told the Times of India. The recommendations are part of the judgment. Any attempt to impede implementation of the reform recommendations would be construed as non-implementation of the judgment itself. ' ' '