I can't imagine any rational person believing a word of what he said. And I can't believe this guy's lawyer actually allowed the creep to do the interview!
Some say a mind is a terrible thing to waste, however, it appears that for Jerry Sandusky, his view is a Pen!s is a terrible thing to waste.
SHAME...SHAME!!
I'm not a guy and didn't play sports so I don't know but what he says about coaches not being in the shower area and not horsing around with the players sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Any guys out there who participated in sports want to comment?
I do have two sons who played some sports but haven't had a chance to ask them. It never occurred to me to ask about what happened in the locker room, in the showers. I can't say, though, that I ever saw them or any of their teammates having the type of relationship with any coach which would lead to a lot of physical "horsing around." It seems disrespectful to me.
Note to self - don't shower with kids.
That having been said, public bathhouses at lakes, beaches and parks are areas where adults and minors can be found together naked in the shower. When I was in the service, the gyms on base had no age restriction in the showers that I can recall either.
So, on the surface, this guy being naked in the shower with minors may be poor judgement but by itself isn't enough to send him up to the big house.
I really don’t like the way Sandusky is being characterized as “creepy” as if all he did was leer at a young boy or touch him inappropriately. Sandusky is a horrible criminal if he did what is alleged. You don’t call John Wayne Gacy “creepy”, you don’t call OJ Simpson “creepy”, you don’t call a rapist “creepy” either and you certainly don’t call a child rapist creepy. There is way too much sanitizing of what Sandusky did. “Inappropriate conduct” — this was rape (allegedly). Not “inappropriate” or “creepy.”
COSTAS: Yes.
SANDUSKY: Sexually attracted? You know, I -- I enjoy young people. I love to be around them. But, no, I'm not sexually attracted to young boys.
If someone said this in front of me I would kill them on the spot with whatever deadly object I could readily grab ahold of.
It's simple. Sandusky's "tales" are legion within the Penn state. They've gone viral. What potential juror in PA hasn't already heard about a lot of this? Where can he hope to find ONE who would acquit him...otherwise impossible unless he steps up now to try to create just "one" doubtful juror?
#1
Sandusky, 67, broke his silence in a telephone interview Monday night with NBC's Bob Costas and his oddly worded denials raised eyebrows. t one point Costas asked the retired coach, charged with 40 counts of child sexual abuse, if he fits "the classic MO of many pedophiles" by gaining the trust of many young people but not abusing all of them. "Well, you might think that. I don't know," Sandusky said, and then laughed, according to a transcript from the interview. "I didn't go around seeking out EVERY young person for sexual needs that I've helped. There are MANY that I didn't have -- I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways."
Source: ABCNews
Note the qualifications he gave there...
#2 Source: Sandusky interview sheds light on mindset
The voice over the phone sounded as weak and pathetic as the explanations and excuses it was trying to spread. ..Costas: Are you sexually attracted to young boys, to under age boys?
Sandusky: Am I sexually attracted to underage boys? (There was a nearly two-second pause)
Sandusky: Sexually attracted, no, I, I enjoy young people. I, I love to be around them. I, I, but no I’m not sexually attracted to young boys.
Two-second pause AFTER repeating the question so he could ponder how he would respond. It took him then 5 seconds to begin an answer and at least 6 seconds before the word "no" came out!
Excerpt cont'd:
In this very interview, even after this national firestorm, Sandusky continued to argue minor points and paint himself as confused about right and wrong. Not that he was believable. If Sandusky truly thought at the time this was even remotely appropriate, why did he continually wait until the Penn State locker room was empty to shower with the boys? If there was nothing wrong, then why not try it in front of everyone? Which brings up the second jolting passage, where Sandusky offers up an explanation for his relationship with children that sounded like something from Michael Jackson.
It is simply impossible to imagine how a grown man, when asked if he was sexually attracted to young boys, would hesitate for even a second before screaming “no.”
To try to explain it with, “I enjoy young people” and “I love to be around them,” falls to some perverse sense of entitlement, suggesting he thought he deserves those relationships no matter what everyone else is suggesting. It’s not as if Sandusky wasn’t capable of strong answers when it came to other questions. While he wasn’t emphatic in denying his sexual attractions to boys, he was when declaring that Paterno never once asked him about his behavior...
This guy deserves life imprisonment for being a bad liar.