Attorney Fail

I'm not really going to comment on the Jerry Sandusky pedophile cases.  The evidence looks pretty damning at this point but I'll let it play out in the courts.

But guilty or innocent, how could his attorney possibly have let him do a TV interview with Bob Costas the other day?  The interview has spurred new victims to come forward.

But beyond that, given that he insisted on going on TV (I suppose clients can ignore good advice), how could his attorney have allowed him to be so unprepared?  I did not watch the interview (I am not big on these select legal cases we like to try in the press), but I heard excerpts on ESPN.  The guy was not prepared to answer the simple and obvious question "are you a pedophile."  He hemmed and hawed and babbled and kindof said yes and no.  It was the worst, dumbest interview by an alleged criminal I have ever seen, and if you ever wonder why folks facing criminal or civil charges never jump into the media fray to defend themselves, go watch this interview.


  1. tomw:

    I think the interview by Glenn Beck of the NY congressman, where Glenn gave him the whole show to defend himself was worse.
    At least the Costas interview was done via telephone.
    Either way, ugh.

  2. TJIC:

    People don't understand that the law and society are two different things, and attempts to help your reputation in society (not that this was even a barely competent attempt) can be damning in the court of law.

    The one time I was in the public gaze, I deleted my twitter record, shut down my blog, refused to talk to the press, and turned off all the lights in my house (yes, literally - there was a TV news crew on my front porch, and I had all the lights off and was peaking out at them from between the slats in the blinds from another window. Fun times!)

  3. andre:

    I'm not a lawyer. The only real-life legal matters I deal with are in the real-estate area, and that is only as much as affects me as a land surveyor.

    Giving this guy (and his lawyer), the benefit of the doubt and assuming that they are not completely stupid, the only thing I could begin to imagine was that they are trying to "pollute" the potential jury pool - "let's get everyone that is remotely aware of their surroundings and knows what planet they're on totally biased, so the jury will consist only of complete blithering idiots who couldn't connect getting wet with the rain even if it was diagrammed for them."

    Either that or they figure their best shot is a mistrial, so they're trying to set up for that.

  4. orion:

    Rumor has it he was trying to intimidate other victims and prevent them from coming forward. Jury pollution is also a reasonable bet. Guess it didn't work, more new victims are popping up left and right now.

  5. Sean:

    I think this whole escapade with the interview is just a side show that will make prosecution easier later on. The story that needs to be pursued is how the guy could get let go from being a coach 10 years ago because of his shenanigans and show up working directly with children instead. Climate Audit has another incidence of a Penn State Faculty member in the geo-sciences area who left and went to Yale and was caught there as well. It seems the priority of Penn State is first and foremost to protect the reputation of the elite self important institution. So if there is little publicity, handle things quietly and move the perpetrator along. If there is a lot of publicity, offer up a sufficiently large sacrifice as public atonement. This story is sounding more and more like the pedophile priests and the Boston Archdiocese all the time.

  6. Dan:

    I heard the interview and I was surprised, too, to see how he hemmed and hawed when asked if he was sexually attracted to young boys. He didn't directly answer the question at first. If I were him (and thank goodness I'm not), whether I was guilty or innocent, my reply to that question would have been, "Hell no!"

  7. Invid:

    The jury pool is already polluted - he's already been convicted by public opinion and good luck finding many people who haven't heard about this.

  8. caseyboy:

    He was confused about the "pedophile" question because he didn't know what it meant. I think he was a scholarship athlete himself.

  9. marco73:

    I think Sandusky and his lawyer are going with the Gomer Pyle defense. "This guy is so stupid he doesn't even know what pedophilia is!"
    The attorney himself was in a radio interview describing Sandusky as "just a big kid."
    Sandusky earned a 4 year degree from Penn State, then coached at 2 other colleges before returning to Penn State to rise to the position of defensive coordinator. He was essentially the second in command at Penn State, under Paterno, for 20 years.
    Say what you may about scholarship athletes, but big time college football is a high pressure industry. It just isn't believable that Gomer Pyle intelligence is going to survive at a top program for 20 years.
    I think Sandusky thought that, as an ex-jock, he could play the jock card with Costas and answer some softball questions. But Costas just calmly asked some standard interview questions, and Jerry crumbled.

  10. deos son of eros:

    When we find out the school profited from all of this, and it ties into the "kids for cash" scandal, and that it is an interstate operation, it will go down the memory hole.

    Those Nittany Truthers...

  11. Noumenon:

    TJIC, how much longer is it going to be before your case is concluded and you can express yourself again?

  12. Noumenon:

    Longer than this, apparently.