I don’t see how that’s actually any better.
It’s kind of like asking whether it’s worse to be killed by a fetishistic serial killer or in a massive Columbine type kill-spree.
Either he targets any/all boys with whom he’s gotten close.
Or he targets certain boys over others for what will almost certainly be sick, perverse reasons.
Wow, can this guy’s defense any more inept? Their witnesses are saying it was routine for not only Sandusky, but for they themselves to shower with kids.
Here is information from the Costas interview that was cut from the original airing:
Costas then challenged Joe Paterno’s one-time defensive coordinator, saying: "But isn’t what you’re just describing the classic MO of many pedophiles? And that is that they gain the trust of young people, they don’t necessarily abuse every young person. There were hundreds, if not thousands, of young boys you came into contact with, but there are allegations that at least eight of them were victimized. Many people believe there are more to come.”
“So it’s entirely possible that you could’ve helped young boy A in some way that was not objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boy B, C, D and E. Isn’t that possible?” Costas asked Sandusky during the interview.
Sandusky gave an unusual reply.
"Well – you might think that. I don’t know. In terms of – my relationship with so many, many young people. I would – I would guess that there are many young people who would come forward. Many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and – and what I had done for them made a very positive impact on their life.”
“And I didn’t go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I’ve helped. There are many that I didn’t have – I hardly had any contact with who I have helped in many, many ways," he added.
Read more: Prosecutors want damning Sandusky interview footage NBC didn't air | Fox News
There’s also this from Penn State assistant coach Booker Brooks:
I’m not sure what to make of this. In fact, the coaches are right. Men and boys do shower together although, “at the same time” sounds much better. Things might have changed since the 70’s when I grew up but my dad would take me to the gym and afterwards, we took showers. There were always men there that I didn’t know. What are they supposed to do, wait until the boys are done? Obviously this is different from molestation and rape but just the act of showering at the same time isn’t necessarily offensive. At least, it wasn’t when I was growing up. Times might have changed.
I think the issue here is that he was alone with the kid, as opposed to being part of a crowd using the shower.
But the real point is not whether it is or is not offensive. It’s whether this shows that he is a pedophile. You can do things that are offensive and unwise without being a pedophile, and if Sandusky’s lawyers can convince the jury that non-pedophiles in Sandusky’s circles commonly did this, then they can possibly convince them that the showers themselves were not evidence of anything else.
The naked bearhug issue remains a problem, of course. But the bigger problem for Sandusky is the fact that six victims are testifying against him, plus a couple of other witnesses. So I don’t know if the shower issue is that big in the scheme of things.
There’s a difference between people showering at the same time and a man taking a shower with a boy he isn’t related to.
Do you mean anything different than my first sentence?
No, that was a simulpost. I was responding to Nars Ginley.
This is one of this things (showering at the same time as boys) that isn’t necessarily wrong. But given the circumstances, and society’s general prudishness toward nudity, this testimony isn’t doing Sandusky any favors.
And, regardless, the bit about Brooks showering with his granddaughter at the YMCA is just creepy.
Playing keepy uppy with soap, giving showering lessons or some playful wrestling.
It is in context, but my uncle showers with my 2 year old cousin. He says it saves time and I believe him. I doubt he’d use that fact as political capital though.
Yeah, I’m totally willing to give him a pass on showering together. Right up until he fucked the kid.
Uh…I didn’t click on the link, but why was this cut from the broadcast? This is the very definition of WTF.
I’m just wondering if the defense is scoring any points with the jury. Yes, men and boys shower together sometimes. Maybe some people don’t know that?
I think most people might be able to call up a childhood memory of showering with a parent (or a memory of showering with their own child). Showering with someone else’s child is another story - and we’re also talking about boys who are old enough that they would not want to shower with another man. In any case this shower thing is not the whole issue. The prosecution called one witness who said he’s throw away his underwear after Sandusky had sex with him (because he would bleed afterward) and his mother corroborated that story by saying she often noticed his underwear wasn’t in the wash. Arguing about the nature of the shower won’t make that go away. They have to hope the jury doesn’t believe it at all.
When we say “men showering with boys” are we talking about the stereotypical locker room shower, the giant room with 10 to 12 shower heads around the perimeter? If so, I can see a situation where people are coming in an out and there may be a time when it is only one man and one boy there. That is a situation that was common when I was growing up.
Are we talking about 1 man and 1 boy together in a residential shower? Then I agree with most of the posters here.
But otherwise, I agree with** Nars Glinley**. Locker room showering with men and boys mixed together was (is?) common place and certainly nothing sexual. I’m not suggesting that was what Sandusky did, but the blanket statement that a man and a boy in a locker room shower is inappropriate is something that I have never heard until this case.
Based on the testimony, this is probably the situation.
Of course, based on the testimony, Sandusky insisted that at least one of the boys switch from a shower across the room to a shower right next to him. And they were the only ones using the facility at the time. That’s not illegal by itself, I guess, but I’ve never heard of locker room etiquette where it was anything less than full on weird and squicky to directly ask an unrelated male to make such a switch, much less a weekend “personal” training session where you hit the showers after 20 minutes. It smacks of prison shower scenes, actually.
The other coaches also seemed to indicate they meant typical locker room showers, though it’s not clear from what little I’ve read of their stuff that they meant they were ever alone with small boys with nobody else in the facility.
It would be different, of course, if we were talking about a traditional Turkish bath. (Tellak being, in effect, Turkish for “boy handjob-whore.”)
The Fox article that Magiver linked to says in the second-to-last paragraph that Sandusky is “expected to take the stand this week.” Is that true? I have seen a bit of speculation about this that I interpreted as wishful thinking. Does anyone seriously expect this jerk to actually testify?
His lawyer has said he may testify but I don’t think anyone has been more specific than that. Remarkably, even under the circumstances he found a way to make a tacky joke and remind people that he is approximately as digusting as his client:
The judge said the jury will probably start deliberations by Thursday, so this probably won’t last much longer.