New denials from Sandusky, outrage from others

For the second time in a month, Jerry Sandusky has publicly declared he never molested boys, stirring new controversy in a case that lacked little.

Lawyers for alleged victims on Saturday expressed outrage over Sandusky's latest denial. Legal experts debated the wisdom of his speaking out.

And Sandusky's lawyer said the interview, with the New York Times, was necessary to counter what he called an avalanche of unfair claims against the former football coach.

"His case almost from the outset has been so one-sided," lawyer Joseph Amendola told The Inquirer. "Everything was [about] the victims, the victims.. . . Everyone just assumed that this was a done deal, and Jerry had done these crimes."

Amendola's comments followed a Times report in which Sandusky proclaimed his innocence and accused prosecutors of distorting his tenure as an assistant to coach Joe Paterno at Pennsylvania State University and as the founder of a charity for needy children.

"They've taken everything that I ever did for any young person and twisted it to say that my motives were sexual or whatever," Sandusky told the Times. "I had kid after kid after kid who might say I was a father figure."

Sandusky told the newspaper he considered many of the children he mentored to be "extended family" and called his interaction with them "precious times."

He gave a similar but shorter interview to NBC News last month, when he was first charged with sexually abusing eight boys between the mid-1990s and 2008. He faces a preliminary hearing on the charges in Centre County on Dec. 13.

Nils Frederiksen, a spokesman for the state Attorney General's Office, declined to comment on Sandusky's remarks except to say the grand jury's presentment speaks for itself.

But the ex-coach's denials sparked outrage from his accusers and their lawyers.

"His words were: 'It just makes me furious,' " said Minnesota attorney Jeff Anderson, describing the reaction of his client, a 29-year-old man who last week filed a lawsuit alleging Sandusky had molested him more than 100 times.

Andrew Shubin, a State College lawyer who represents an alleged victim in the criminal case, called Sandusky's interview "an entirely unconvincing denial and a series of bizarre explanations."

Michael Boni, a Bala Cynwyd attorney hired by the family of a Clinton County teenager whose allegations sparked the criminal investigation in 2008, said the boy's mother was distressed by Sandusky's denial.

"It's another punch in the stomach," Boni said. "She says, 'Here we go again.' "

Amendola said he believed some of the accusers were motivated by money - particularly the prospect of suing the largest college in the state - and said he intended to question their credibility at trial. He said law firms had been advertising for Sandusky victims to come forward.

"It's incredible," Amendola said. "They're inviting people, in my opinion, to fabricate allegations."

In the Times interview, Sandusky said that Paterno, the legendary head coach, never questioned him about his activities with children or two instances cited in the grand jury report last month.

The report said university police investigated Sandusky in 1998 after a boy's mother complained about Sandusky's showering with her son. The second incident occurred in 2002, when a graduate assistant coach allegedly saw Sandusky sexually assault a boy in the locker-room showers and told Paterno.

The coach and former university president Graham Spanier have denied being alerted about a child sexual assault. Both were fired by the school's trustees last month.

Sandusky's interview with the Times occurred over two days at Amendola's house. A video posted on the newspaper's website showed Sandusky, 67, dressed in a white sweater and seated in an oversize armchair. Some of his replies were spirited and direct; others seemed tentative or to drift off.

On the video, the reporter asked about a memorable moment in Sandusky's NBC interview, when he paused after being asked if he was sexually attracted to young boys.

"What in the world was this question?" Sandusky said, explaining his pause. "If I say, 'No, I'm not attracted to boys,' that's not the truth, because I'm attracted to young people - boys, girls.. . ."

Then, from across the room, his lawyer, Amendola, interjected: "Yeah, but not sexually. You're attracted because you enjoy spending time with young people.. . ."

"Yeah, that's what I was trying to say," Sandusky said, according to the video. "I enjoy spending time with young people. I enjoy spending time with people."

Amendola said Sandusky would not speak publicly again before his hearing. "Probably after that," he said, "we're going to hear a lot more from Jerry."

The decision to let Sandusky sit for open-ended interviews with reporters has stirred debate and criticism.

"It is an unusual thing to do, there's no doubt about it. But this is an extraordinary case," said Richard Friedman, a University of Michigan law professor on the American Bar Association's criminal-procedures panel. "The usual advice is just keep your mouth shut."

Mark Geragos, a Los Angeles attorney who defended Michael Jackson against molestation charges, said letting a client speak publicly before trial was an unorthodox strategy but not unprecedented.

Geragos noted that actor Robert Blake gave ABC's Barbara Walters a detailed interview before his 2004 trial on charges that he killed his wife. Blake chose not to testify at his trial, but the interview, which included his denials, was played for jurors.

He was acquitted.

Geragos said Sandusky's prosecution was what he called "a supersized case," one with an incessant and oversize media spotlight. Because of that, he said, the public unfairly makes up its mind before a single piece of evidence has been introduced.

"Clearly this has been about as quick a media lynching as I've seen," Geragos said. "He has been convicted beyond reasonable doubt in the court of public opinion already."