website security


Penn State

Detection of Deception: Sandusky’s Jaw-Dropping Interview

His private parts may have touched her son. Wished it never happened.  Need forgiveness. Shouldn’t have showered with those kids. “Am I sexually attracted to young boys? “ He enjoys kids and loves to be around them. "I have done some of those things." What amazing statements by a man under suspicion of “inappropriate behavior” with boys who are minors!

Bob Costas’ interview last night of Jerry Sandusky was absolutely stunning.  Bob did a great job no doubt but to me, Sandusky’s responses telegraph the thoughts and behaviors of a man who knows his actions where wrong and is having trouble explaining and justifying what he is alleged to have done.

(See the video here on YouTube)

Some of my quick observations that would set off alarm bells if I were conducting a criminal interview of Jerry Sundusky:

1.    Did not touch their leg with sexual intent. Uh huh.  Why were you touching their leg while they were all nude in the shower?

2.    Told the mother of one boy he wished it hadn’t happened and needed forgiveness.  He told her he wishes he was dead. So what have you done that you feel need to be forgiven?  Why do you feel you need to die?

3.    Tells us he enjoys kids and loves being around them.  Strangely they are all young boys and always in and around showers.  I see a possible repetitive pattern of sexual fantasy going on here.

4.    Describes his actions with the boys in the showers as “just horsing around.”  Really?  How’s that for rationalizing your behavior?

5.    Another witness reported Sandusky performing oral sex on a child in the showers.  Another shower scene with Sandusky.

6.    Another witness reported Sandusky was in the shower with a young boy and he heard rhythmic “slapping sounds” that the witness called a rape. Sandusky said the boy had turned off the showers, he was sliding acoss the floor and Sandusky says he was snapping a towel.  That must have been painful for somebody in the showers.

7.    Costas asked Sandusky if he was a pedophile to which Sandusky quickly responded “No.”  But when asked if he was sexually attracted to young boys, Sandusky immediately stalls before answering which is a sign of cognitive load and that the question has created some significant stress on the part of the subject.  It means that Costas’ question was spot on. Once Sandusky starts to answer, we hear cognitive dissonance in that Sandusky’s thoughts are literally racing and he is in deep trouble trying to respond in a way that minimizes or explains away his actions.

Already there are hints of more boys who are victims.  I’m afraid the list could get VERY long.  We are ALSO going to hear of more potential victims of Sundusky's behaviors that never made it to the showers.

Authorities need to find ALL these victims and conduct extensive forensics interviews of each by trained forensic child interviewers.  Then these victims will need extensive attention and counseling.  These victims have been suffering for a long time thinking they were bad and that they were the only ones.

This case will go way beyond the confines of Penn State.  I predict that if they are disclosed, there will be many incidents not related to his time on the Penn State campus and therefore lots of other people who did not report Sandusky for his actions.

Not doubt Sandusky is to blame for his own actions but I don’t think that the administration at Penn State are the only ones who didn’t report what they knew.

PS Kudos to Bob Costas for a great interview, especially on the fly.

At least that's my opinion.

Stan B. Walters, CSP
"The Lie Guy®"