Jon Stewart On Jerry Sandusky
I thought this was hilarious! Thanks, Ralph, for sharing.
Mariah Yeaters Drops Suit Against Bieber
Whose surprised?
You can read my original thoughts on Mariah here.
Now it appears they are in private negotiations…
Jerry Sandusky’s Conversation with Bob Costa
Here are my thoughts of the interview:
Bob Costas: …what do you say?
Sandusky: I say that I am innocent of those charges.
BC: Innocent? Completely innocent, and falsely accused in every aspect?
Sandusky: Well…. I could say that I have you know, I’ve done some of those things. I have horsed around with kids, I..I have showered after workouts, I…I have hugged them and I’ve..I have touched their leg without intent of sexual contact, but um, uh …uh…so if you look at it that way, there are things that …that ah, wouldn’t ah, you know, would be accurate.
1. Notice Sandusky does admit to inappropriate behavior when he says, “some of those things”.2. He doesn’t deny he is completely innocent. He doesn’t give us an unequivocal “yes” when asked if he is completely innocent.3. Sandusky says, “Well, I could say…” We don’t want to hear what he “could say”. We want to hear the truth!4. When people are deceptive, science has identified that they have a lot speech errors, and we clearly see that with Sandusky throughout his entire interview.
BC: Are you denying you had any inappropriate sexual contact with any of these under age boys?
Sandusky: Yes, I am. Yes, I am.
BC: Never touched their genitals? Never engaged in oral sex?
Sandusky: Right.
BC: 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 10 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.
Sandusky: I would say that that is false.
The words “would say” stand out to me. Why doesn’t he just say, “It’s false! It’s a lie!”
BC: What would be his motive to lie?
Sandusky: You’d have to ask him that.
BC: What did happen in the shower the night that Mike McQueary happened upon you and the young boy?
Sandusky: Okay, we were showering and horsing around, and he actually turned all the showers on and was ah… actually sliding across the uh floor and um, and we were… as I recall possibly like snapping a towel or horseplay.
1. If you notice Sandusky is talking in present tense. When we remember something, we typically talk in past tense. This is a red flag.
2. He says “possibly like snapping a towel or horseplay.” The words “possibly like” are huge red flags. He is suggesting this is what they might have done, not what they did.
BC: In 1998, a mother confronts you about taking a shower with her son and inappropriately touching him. Two detectives evasive drop on her conversations with you and you admit maybe your private parts touched her son. What happened there?
Sandusky: I can’t exactly recall what was said there, ah, in terms of um… what I did say… was that… if he felt that way than I was wrong.
1. When people hesitate in their speech as Sandusky does here, speaking and pausing, it shows what I call thinking-on-his-feet behavior. When people honest, they don’t have the think, the truth flows.
BC: During one of those conversations, you said I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness now speaking with the mother. I know I won’t get it from you. I wish I were dead. A guy falsely accused or a guy whose actions have been misinterpreted doesn’t respond that way, does he?
Sandusky: I don’t know. I didn’t say… to my recollection… that I wish I were dead….uh…I…I was…hopeful…that …..we could reconcile things.
1. Notice the speech hesitations?
2. He says “to my recollection”. This is a red flag. People often do this when they are lying so if they are held accountable in the future, they can claim they didn’t remember.
BC: Shortly after that in 2000, a janitor said that he saw you performing oral sex on a young boy in the showers in the Penn State locker facilities. Did that happen?
Sandusky: No.
BC: How can someone think they saw something as extreme and shocking as that when it hadn’t occurred and what could possibly be their motivation to fabricate it?
Sandusky: You’d have to ask them.
BC: It seems that if all of these accusations are false, you are the unluckiest and most persecuted man that any of us has ever heard about.
Sandusky: (laughter) oh, I don’t know what you want me to say. I don’t think …these have been the best days of my life.
1. Notice the lack of hesitation when he answers here in what we can be pretty confident is a true statement.
Attorney speaks….
BC: (6:09) To your knowledge, did Joe Paterno have any information regarding objectionable activities on your part prior to that report in 2002?
Sandusky: My…I can’t …totally answer that question….my answer would be …no.
1. Notice the speech hesitations again?
2. We also see what is called “false starts”. He starts to say something, and then stops himself. Why? When we are honest, our words flow…
3. Why are his thoughts all over the place? Why can’t he answer that question?
4. His answer “would be” no? Why doesn’t he say “No!”.
BC: Did Joe Paterno at any time ever speak to you directly about your behavior?
Sandusky: No.
BC: Never?
Sandusky: No.
BC: He never asked you what you might have done.
Sandusky: No.
BC: He never asked you if you needed help…if you needed counseling.
Sandusky: No.
BC: Never expressed any disapproval of any kind?
Sandusky: No.
1. When Sandusky says this, the word “no” is said differently than previous times, and I hear a bit of surprise in his voice suggesting Paterno never did express any disapproval. I found this notable and likely true.
BC: How do you feel about what has happened to Penn State and Joe Paterno and to the Penn State Football program, and your part in it?
Sandusky: Well, how do you think I would feel about a university that I attended, about people I have worked with, about people that …I care so much about, uh, how do you think I would feel about it? I feel horrible.
1. Notice the lack of hesitations in what is likely a true response.
BC: You feel horrible, do you feel culpable?
Sandusky: I’m not sure I know what you mean.
1. Notice the lack of hesitations in what is likely a true response.
BC: Do you feel guilty? Do you feel as if it is your fault?
Sandusky: No, I don’t think …it’s my fault … I’ve obviously played a part in this.
1. If you are innocent, would you ever say you played a part in it?
BC: How would you define the part you played? What are you willing to concede that you’ve done that was wrong and you wish you had not done?
Sandusky: Well, in retrospect, I… you know….. I …I…shouldn’t have …showered with those kids, you know, so…
1. Speech hesitations again…
2. What adult man who is not a sexual pervert would want to shower with young boys? Most adult men want their privacy. This is very odd and suspicious behavior as well as highly inappropriate.
BC: That’s it?
Sandusky: Yeah, well, that’s what hits me the most.
1. The most? This is suggestive there is more.
BC: Are you a pedophile?
Sandusky: No.
BC: Are you sexually attracted to young boys—to under aged boys?
Sandusky: Am I sexually attracted to under aged boys?….Sexually attracted? You know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them, uh, I…I…but no, I’m not sexually attracted to young boys.
1. If you notice Sandusky repeats the question here. I call this parroting. It’s a red flag. He needs time to think of an answer.
2. I am struck that Sandusky doesn’t immediately deny this. If you were accused of this, and you weren’t, you’d be firm and adamant in your response. Sandusky clearly is not. It’s notable.
3. Look how he stutters for words (hesitates) when he gets to saying “no”.
BC: Obviously you are entitled to a presumption of innocence and you’ll receive a vigorous defense. On the other hand, there is a tremendous amount of information out there, and fair-minded common sense people have concluded that you are guilty of monstrous acts, and they are particularly unforgiving with the type of crimes that have been alleged here, and so millions of Americans, who didn’t know Jerry Sandusky’s name until a week ago now not only regard you as a criminal, but I say this in I think a considered way, some sort of monster. How do you respond to them?
Sandusky: I don’t know what I can say or I could say…. that would ….make… anybody feel …any different now. I would just say that…. if somehow ….people could hang on… until ……my attorney has a chance to fight….you know, for my innocence. That’s …that’s about all I can ask right now…I…. Obviously, it’s a huge challenge.
Where is Sandusky’s anger? When people are wrongly accused, they show negative emotions. The fact that Sandusky doesn’t have any and appears to be simply sad doesn’t fit with an innocent person being accused of a serious crime.
Do I believe Sandusky? I do not.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
