Bob Costas landed a phone interview with former Penn State coordinator and alleged child rapist Jerry Sandusky that aired on last night’s “Rock Center,” and all I can say is WOW Sandusky should NOT be giving interviews. He folded like a cheap suit.
Costas: Mr. Sandusky, there is a 40-count indictment, the grand jury report contains specific details. There are multiple accusers, multiple eyewitnesses to various aspects of the abuse. A reasonable person says, “Where there is this much smoke, there must be plenty of fire.” What do you say?
Sandusky: I say that I am innocent of those charges.
Costas: Innocent? Completely innocent and falsely accused in every aspect?
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 legs, without intent of sexual contact. But, um… uh … So, if you look at it that way … uh … there are things that … that … uh … wouldn’t … uh, you know, would be accurate.
Even worse is how long it took for Sandusky to say that he’s not sexually attracted to young boys. It’s barely even a denial.
Costas: Are you sexually attracted to young boys? To underage boys?
Sandusky: Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?
Costas: Yes.
Sandusky: Sexually attracted? You know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them. I … but, no, I am not sexually attracted to young boys.
Well done, Jerry. Nailed it.
You now, Bob Costas gets a lot of crap from the blogerati for being a smug leprechaun, but he handled that like a pro. He asked tough questions without being accusatory, and he got through the whole thing without shivering in disgust or gagging at the thought of this guy raping young boys, which is better than I did just watching it.
[full transcript at WWTDD]
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/226/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/both-the-great-gatsby-movies-combined-nbcs-she-ra-other-mashups-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/the-office-series-finale-recap-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/20-the-office-series-finale-gifs-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/rainn-wilson-tears-up-in-this-farewell-from-the-cast-of-the-office-150x150.jpg)
The way Bob Costas’ eyes subtly went bug-eyed when Sandusky admitted to enjoying young people, sealed the whole thing.
It was “horseplay”, not molestation. And you know how horses love sodomizing children.
I saw about a minute of this interview last night. When he said, “I shouldn’t have showered with those boys.” I had to shut it off. It was just too uncomfortable.
“Are you sexually attracted to young boys? To underage boys?”
Does this question really require any thought whatsoever? I’m fairly certain the answer is “No”, perhaps even “Hell no” or “Fuck no, are you sick?”. Not a pause, a tap dance and then a denial.
Oh, god. Can we have Corgi Friday early this week? I could really use some Corgi Friday right now.
Sandusky’s lawyer should be fired, either for approving this interview or failing to physically prevent Sandusky from giving it.
Very painful to watch, but not as painful as last nights MNF game or the halftime show..
Seriously, when he said “You know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them.” I got chills and not the good kind.
Everything that Sandusky mentioned as having done with those boys is the same stuff I’ve done for years. However, I am serving multiple life sentences for rape. So, there’s that.
Unless Sandusky is trying to lay the ground work for an ineffective assistance of counsel appeal.
I’m with Patty. What with this video, Community, Occupy Wall Street AND the NBA…we need corgis and Alison Brie gifs now more than ever.
Sandusky should have said, “YOU’RE ATTRACTED TO YOUNG BOYS” and then hung up.
Maybe hes going for the insanity defense? Because he’s obviously a delusional/
Was the Rowdy Roddy Peeper expose on after the Sandusky interview?
Can we take a moment to talk about how phenomenal of a job Costas did. There was no mincing words, he didn’t let Sandusky get away with BS answers, and he kept at it until the true colors of the man were revealed. Well done, Bob.
There can be a separate thread for all the different possible (outlandish) defenses Sandusky is trying to generate here. I can see him arguing he can’t get an unbiased jury after everyone sees this. If this isn’t a hail mary defense generator it is one of the worst moves by a defendant ever.
Costas did an excellent job, and I don’t mean to take anything away from his interview , but I’m willing to bet he thought he would have to do more than just ask the question twice. If Sandusky takes the stand, this is going to be the shortest trial ever.
@Trent: If he takes the stand I have to imagine he subconsciously wants to get caught but can’t bring himself to confess. Nobody should take the stand in their own trial, let alone this guy.
Sandusky likes to be around young people the way OJ just loved Nicole Brown Simpson too much.
Let’s see Mr Sandusky, we have eye witnesses, we have the victims, we have you admitting it, and you say you’re innocent?
Sandusky: Horseplay!
Everyone: Horseshit!
Sandusky at first tried to Ruxin the shit out of that last question, so you know he’s lying. Well, that and all the other reasons we know he’s lying.
This is why Rock Center belongs in the middle of the NBC Thursday night lineup. Comedy gold.
@Double Dewayne Bowe, agreed. I’m not really a Costas fan, but he handled this about as well as anyone could have. His statement to Sandusky that (paraphrasing) “if all these allegations are false then you’re the most persecuted and wrongfully-accused man in history” was devastating.
Sandusky didn’t say anything that won’t be revealed in court, so his interview won’t really be used against him legally. I don’t agree with him doing the interview because it made the whole saga even more creepy. A typical tactic in denying wrongdoing is to confess to less appalling actions, which is basically what Sandusky did last night. He just sealed the deal as a pederast in the court of public opinion.
Couldn’t watch the whole thing. Get a rope.
Now it has come out that his lawyer had sex and impregnated a 16 year old client while she was trying to get emancipated from her parents while he was 49. Great choice for a lawyer there Jerry…
Jumpin Jesus on a Pogo Stick. Just shoot me in the face. One for making Costas look good and two for making me shower with Janitor in a Drum just to feel clean again after listening.
Horseplay?!? Horseplay. Horse. Play. Play. Play. Horse. Horsing around. Horseplay?
I’m going to go put my head in an oven now.
Seriously, when he said “You know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them.” I got chills and not the good kind.
Yeah, that was when I pictured myself caving his face in with a baseball bat.
8 year olds, Dude.
Need Zsasz from Arkham City to pay him a visit.
/nerd
@Alcoholics: The big problem with this interview from the defense side is it confirms a bunch of facts that the state would otherwise have to prove. The Defense can no longer start sowing the seeds of doubt about eyewitness identification. Also, by giving what otherwise could have been a silent mug shot/guy at the defense table in a nice suit with a pained, disgusted look on his face during witness testimony a voice, a creepy creepy voice, it makes it a lot harder for jurors to presume innocence.
He is (probably) going to jail for a loooooong time*
*Or he may get shived the first day.
I’m guessing his only defense is going to be to the effect of “did my client molest and anally rape all these young men. Sure. But did he also help win hundreds of college football games without incurring any major NCAA violations? Absolutely. Case closed.”
Its probably his best shot in the state of Pennsylvania.
@ numbersix – I’d imagine that’s the only person that would want to take on this case. Someone else who’s a creepy sick fuck. And not to split cunt hairs here, but she was 17. either way, not right.
“The big problem with this interview from the defense side is it confirms a bunch of facts that the state would otherwise have to prove.”
Nah, they don’t have to prove that he was in a shower with a young boy or “horse playing” with boys because it’s what witnesses/victims have already reported. The state will have to prove the crime – which is rape and whatnot. I heard some lawyer talking about it this morning on ESPN radio. It’s the basic Michael Jackson defense – I’m a creep, but not a rapist.
Let’s agree that he should be shived on day one. High five!
@Alcoholics:
Those witnesses are what the state would use to prove the fact, and without his confirmation the defense could have tried to cast all that into doubt, particularly given the amount of time that has elapsed and the emerging science discrediting eyewitness accounts. I’m not saying they would have succeeded but it was something, as it is his only defense is the MJ you mention, which is not likely to fly.
If he is guilty, and gets shived, my ACLU member bleeding heart self will have a lot of trouble caring.
@tacos- you do realize that his lawyer impregnated a 16 year old and then married her when she turned 17 (he was 49, I think).
@Bob: Sandusky may not have the best taste in lawyers…or shower partners.
You know that scene in Boondock Saints with the cue ball? And Rocco just starts wailing on the guy screaming “YOU SICK FUCK!”
Just came to mind.