Jerry Sandusky: Weird and Wacky but not Wonderful, ever.

1 Flares Twitter 1 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 StumbleUpon 0 Pin It Share 0 1 Flares ×

Not a whole lot has developed over the last 24 hours in the Jerry Sandusky sex abuse scandal, but there have been a few blips that are worth mentioning.

An Atlanta news station conducted a voice analysis of Jerry Sandusky’s interview with Bob Costas. The result? He’s a liar.

No way!

Voice Analysis is an investigative tool that analyzes the frequency of someone’s voice. It is not the equivalent of a polygraph and the individual does not need to be hooked up to a machine. It is not used to pronounce guilt and is not admissible in court (shoot!) but the company behind the technology claims that it is 95% accurate and that law enforcement agencies do use the tool.

Back to Sandusky.

"Jerry Sandusky Mugshot Arrest"

In his interview Monday night with Bob Costas, Jerry Sandusky claimed that all he was doing in the shower during the 2002 incident (that Mike McQueary claimed was a rape of a young boy) was “snapping a towel.” The Voice Analysis showed “high risk.”

High risk means false statement. Low risk, obviously, is the truth.

The “horsing around” comment registered as medium to high risk, which might indicate that there was horsing around in addition to the sodomy.

The president of Voice Analysis Technologies, Lynn Robbins, who did the analysis, said that Sandusky also did a lot of something referred to as “SOS,” or Say or Stop. All those pauses in Sandusky’s answers? That’s SOS. That is an indicator that an individual is hiding something or holding something back.

Like rape and being sexually attracted to young boys, for instance.

When he denied performing oral sex on a young boy in 2000? High risk.

The worst portion for Sandusky? When Bob Costas asked, “Are you a pedophile?” Sandusky said no. The Voice Analysis picked up that not only was that answer high risk, or false, it was an SOS statement, which meant he was holding something back as well.

Two other significant high risk responses were biggies; that he was not sexually attracted to young boys and that…hold on to your hats, folks…Joe Paterno had never spoken to him about his behavior. Good gravy.

Needless to say, this was a bad move for a man accused of 40 counts of sexual abuse of children. Plain and simple. But for the public (and prosecutors, no doubt) watching Bob Costas interview Jerry Sandusky was possibly one of the most interesting 10 minutes of TV I’ve ever watched (which, admittedly, should have never happened, if Sandusky had an attorney whose law degree was worth the paper it was printed on).

As hard as it was, Costas maintained a professional and respectful attitude — regardless of the subject matter, the question he posed, or Sandusky’s ridiculous, unbelievable, and far-fetched answers. Sandusky probably needs a new lawyer or a PR guy (or both). Don’t get me wrong — I would like nothing more than a huge Sandusky media blitz (I sure was riveted when Charlie Sheen was self-destructing before our eyes) but I probably won’t get that lucky.

In Happy Valley news, the Berkey Creamery, an ice cream shop in State College, has ice cream named after Jerry Sandusky. It’s called the Sandusky Blitz. OK, that makes sense.

It features banana ice cream. OK, that’s still OK. Just because an actual banana has phallic connotations does not mean we have to scream out that this is evidence that everyone “knew,” including the ice cream shop. However, there is a photo that is making the rounds that purportedly shows the Sandusky Blitz, and it’s just ridiculous. Ridiculous if it’s true, that is. The middle scoop is topped with a pointed cone, and there is a scoop on either side.

Come on, man. Can that really be true? Really? I would probably change the channel if I were watching such a ridiculous movie. The Sandusky Blitz, however, was removed from the ice cream shop as of Monday.

Remember that “Angels in Adoption” award that Rick Santorum presented to Jerry Sandusky in 2002? Yeah, they took it back. Oops.

In other “hmmm” news, it was reported that Joe Paterno transferred full ownership of his home to his wife Sue back in July for $1 plus love and affection. That’s…odd. The house, which reportedly has a fair market value of almost $600,000 (what?!?!), was jointly owned by the couple prior to the transfer.

Before you jump to conclusions, Paterno’s attorney, Wick Sollers said (via e-mail) that the couple did this as part of a “multiyear estate planning program,” and that the transfer “was simply one element of that plan.” Sollers claims that the real estate transfer has nothing to do with the Sandusky scandal.

Well, of course it doesn’t! Because, if it did, then that would mean…Paterno knew. He knew that there was a massive storm brewing that had validity and that he would be at risk. And none of that is true, of course. So, this whole real estate transfer is just an unlucky coincidence. Yep, that’s it.

However, one law professor pointed out that it would be one way that Joe Paterno might try to protect his assets if there is a civil lawsuit. Maybe.

Lastly, Mike McQueary, the grad student who testified that he saw Jerry Sandusky raping a young boy in a locker room shower, has broken his silence. Kinda. He reportedly emailed his former teammates (weird) to let them know that a) he stopped the rape, although not physically and b) he did tell university police. Penn State has reported that they have no record of McQueary telling police.

Stay tuned, folks. I’m sure something will happen in the next 24 hours…it has to.

I can’t take credit for all this research today. A big thanks goes out to Schmidty, a reader who shared much information with me…as he’s just as intrigued as I am, apparently.

1 Flares Twitter 1 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 StumbleUpon 0 Pin It Share 0 1 Flares ×


  1. Mary Beth Elderton says

    Okay, the Voice Analysis has confirmed my own BullS**t detector–Sandusky (and his lawyer!) are liars. Nothing in the interviews you posted yesterday rang true. As mystifying as it was for the lawyer to encourage Sandusky’s interview, the lawyer himself came across as a lousy liar. Maybe that’s the explanation–the lawyer himself is such a lousy liar that he has no idea how obvious Sandusky is as a liar.
    As for Paterno’s “estate planning”–I’m thinking it is a**-covering for the sh** storm he KNEW was on the way.

  2. Jayne Townsley says

    Every time I look at that man’s picture I become physically ill. I actually feel the same way when I look at JoePa because I know that I know that I know that he knew what was going on.

    • Jayne Townsley says

      And the ice cream thing is disgusting. To make light of such a serious situation where CHILDREN were harmed is horrible.

  3. Schmidty says

    Yes Kristin, I am intrigued by this story, especially the apparent long and widespread coverup. What would compel an entire university and community to turn a blind eye to what we are seeing unfolding? Why is protection and succor given to the perpetrators and those complicit in the coverup instead of to the victims?

    Thanks for the shout out …I’ll send along anything that pops up in my travels.

    (I’m a she.) :)

  4. says

    Thanks, Schmidty…I wasn’t sure if you were a he or a she, and went with the old fall-back, since I am from Philly and Schmidty to me always conjures up images of Mike Schmidt. Oops!

    I think it has a lot to do with the cult of JoePa and the whole fanatical obsession with Penn State. It is really, REALLY a big deal. It’s hard to wrap my head around, trust me.
    Kristin recently posted..Eat Cheerios. Spread the Cheer.My Profile

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge
This blog uses premium CommentLuv which allows you to put your keywords with your name if you have had 3 approved comments. Use your real name and then @ your keywords (maximum of 3)