Sandusky’s Strange Interview and More Potential Victims Step Forward
Jerry Sandusky gave a bizarre interview to Bob Costas, in which he admitted to certain acts as alleged in the grand jury testimony/evidence. He admitted to taking showers with underage boys, but claimed that he was not a pedophile or otherwise attracted to children.
BOB COSTAS: Mr. Sandusky, there’s a 40-count indictment. The grand jury report contains specific detail. There are multiple accusers, multiple eyewitnesses to various aspects of the abuse. A reasonable person says where there’s this much smoke, there must be plenty of fire. What do you say?
JERRY SANDUSKY: I say that I am innocent of those charges.
BOB COSTAS: Innocent? Completely innocent and falsely accused in every aspect?
JERRY SANDUSKY: Well I could say that, you know, I have done some of those things. I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them and I have touched their leg. Without intent of sexual contact. But - so if you look at it that way - there are things that wouldn’t - you know, would be accurate.
BOB COSTAS: Are you denying that you had any inappropriate sexual contact with any of these underage boys?
JERRY SANDUSKY: Yes, I — yes I am.
BOB COSTAS: Never touched their genitals? Never engaged in oral sex?
JERRY SANDUSKY: Right.
BOB COSTAS: What about Mike McQueary, the grad assistant who in 2002 walked into the shower where he says in specific detail that you were forcibly raping a boy who appeared to be ten or 11 years old? That his hands were up against the shower wall and he heard rhythmic slap, slap, slapping sounds and he described that as a rape?
JERRY SANDUSKY: I would say that that’s false.
BOB COSTAS: What would be his motive to lie?
JERRY SANDUSKY: You’d have to ask him that.
He also didn’t exactly give the most strenuous denial of the charges of sodomizing one child in the Penn State athletic facility that was seen by Mike McQueary, who was a graduate assistant at the time, but is now a coach with the football team.
From a legal perspective, this interview presents all kinds of problems for any kind of legal defense. Not only does it make it more difficult to believe that Sandusky didn’t carry out the acts alleged, but he doesn’t come across as a sympathetic figure. His attorney is trying to spin things claiming that showering with the children doesn’t mean that there’s criminality involved, but it certainly raises suspicions of improper conduct. It also doesn’t address the eyewitness testimony of McQueary.
His problems are also multiplying as about 10 other people have come forward claiming that they too were abused.