Video: New York Times Interviews Jerry Sandusky

13 Responses

1. “That was just me, I dunno.” I think therein lies the problem, bud.

2. I truly believe something is mentally wrong with this guy. Even without knowing what he did if someone showed me this video I would of said the same thing.

3. I wish he would have defined “working them out”.

4. Agreed Kevin, he doesn’t seem to understand. I enjoy being around kids as well, but if someone asked me if I was sexually attracted to young boys the answer would be flat out no. He can’t give that answer for some reason.
   Also, this interviewer was horrible. She was trying to feed him the answers and interrupted him multiple times. She should have taken notes when Costas interviewed him.

5. would not shock me if he’s innocent

6. http://www.theonion.com/articles/nations-10yearold-boys-if-you-see-someone-raping-u,26724/

7. JS: “If I say ‘no, I’m not attracted to boys. . .’ that’s not the truth”
   WRONG. The correct answer for someone “maintaining his innocence” would be “No, I am NOT attracted to boys.”
   This is guy is clearly unable to see ANYTHING from a sane/rational perspective.

8. Interviewer and Slambuttsky both refer to the “family environment”, as if that dynamic offers some kind of innocent veneer. Haven’t either of them heard of incest? That’s the most underreported form of child sex abuse.
   Slambuttsky grew up in a recreational home for wayward boys that his own father had set up. Maybe Senior Slambuttsky is the one who set this atrocious wheel in motion. There was a front page Philadelphia Inquirer story about his background, also referred to red flags appearing in plain sight that somehow the entire Happy Valley universe missed.
   I did hear a “This American Life” episode that aired on NPR a couple weeks back. The producer returned to State College to follow up on a piece she had aired in 2009. She wanted reaction from residents, students, and faculty in light of recent developments. She reported one of the PSU university police said he had approached Slambuttsky a couple times to ask why he spends so much time with young boys, and why he was constantly touching on them, engaging in horseplay and whatnot. There was a football player who said he thought the way Slambuttsky pinched and tickled the Second Mile boys just wasn’t right, that he perceived the children’s boundaries were being violated.
   And now the creepy lawyer puts his decrepit client out there for the world to see, as if he’s on some kind of goodwill tour. I don’t know what he hopes to accomplish, at this point the only people who believe the old perv is innocent is his fellow pedos. Maybe that’s what Amendola is counting on, that he can stack the jury with a dozen aqualungs.

9. These interviews show that Sandusky has the mentality of a child. He cannot even address sex–that’s why he’s reduced to having it with children.

10. Sandusky might be a sicko whos fuck little kids but he could call 1 helleva defense

11. His creepy smerks are all the proof I need after the Grand Jury testimony/witnesses/victims. Flush this terd!

12. Sctick Coma: Couldn’t agree more…you can also tell that mentality when he says how much he likes children and old people because they speak whats on their minds and they aren’t caught up in working. The guy is clearly sick. Even the way he was acting around the dog was creepy. I hope he rots in jail where he’ll be on the receiving end in the showers.

13. I read the interview; I’m not ready to watch the video. Here are my questions: 1 has anybody checked if he did these things to his own children? 2. Did his wife never notice his odd “boyish” behavior? His verbal language, his dodges of straight forward questions as well as his admissions of touching, showering and sleeping with little boys are definitely pedophilic behavior. I think his wife knows more than she is telling.

Comments are closed.