Why Jerry Sandusky May Be Innocent

Print More
Jerry Sandusky. Photo by Andrewstern2 via Flickr

Jerry Sandusky. Photo by Andrewstern2 via Flickr

What if Jerry Sandusky didn’t do it?  In a recent hearing, the former Penn State football coach, who was convicted on 45 counts of child sexual abuse, testified for the first time, claiming innocence.  But who is going to believe him?

I do, because many of the allegations against him are based on a discredited psychological technique known as repressed-memory therapy.

During the trial, one of the eight young men who testified was asked why his allegations had multiplied over time.

“That doorway that I had closed has since been reopening more,” Dustin Struble  told the court. [editor’s note, see p 143 in link.]

“Through counseling and different things, I can remember a lot more detail that I had pushed aside than I did at that point.”

Unfortunately, Sandusky’s trial lawyer Joe Amendola was clueless about the repressed memory issue.

During my investigation for “Victims of Memory” (1996), my book on the subject, the world’s leading memory scientists told me why Freud’s theory of repressed memories of sexual abuse was wrong.  (There are many other books on the perils of repressed memories, such as The Myth of Repressed Memory, by Elizabeth Loftus and Remembering Trauma, by Richard McNally).victims of memory

People do not forget years of traumatic events.  Yet all memory is subject to distortion, and through authoritative, suggestive influence, it is relatively easy to generate false memories of abuse – as occurred in thousands of cases during the repressed memory epidemic of the 1990s.

No one can prove a negative.  Just as no one can prove that ghosts do not exist, it is impossible to prove that repressed memories are all false.  But the concept flies in the face of science and common sense, and I could not find one convincing case.  People sometimes avoid thinking about traumatic events that happened to them, but they do not entirely forget them.

So I sought out Dustin Struble, one of the key witnesses against Sandusky.

“Actually both of my therapists have suggested that I have repressed memories,” he emailed.  “My therapist has suggested that I may still have more repressed memories that have yet to be revealed, and this could be a big cause of the depression that I still carry today.”

When I asked him in an October 2014 interview what Struble had thought of Sandusky before he went for therapy, he said that he had considered Sandusky a friend and mentor.  Before therapy, he recalled no molestation.

Sandusky’s first accuser was Aaron Fisher, “Victim 1,” who went on to co-author a book, Silent No More, with his therapist Mike Gillum.  At first, the 15-year-old Fisher said only that he and Sandusky had wrestled around, both fully clothed.

But Gillum just knew that more had occurred.

“I was very blunt with Aaron when I asked questions but gave him the ability to answer with a yes or a no, that relieved him of a lot of burden,” Gillum wrote in the book.

Gillum “just kept saying that Jerry was the exact profile of a predator.  When it finally sank in, I felt angry,” Fisher recalled.  Yet it took three years of working with Gillum before Fisher would do much more than answer yes or no questions.  For a long time, Fisher remained the only witness against Sandusky, and the Pennsylvania attorney general refused to proceed with his testimony alone.

But under Gillum’s tutelage, Fisher eventually agreed that Sandusky had forced him into oral sex.

Gillum told me that he went on to counsel at least two other alleged Sandusky victims.  One may have been Jason Simcisko, who testified about why he initially denied any abuse: “Everything that’s coming out now is because I thought about it more.  I tried to block this out of my brain for years.”  [editor’s note: It is safe to access these trial transcripts, so ignore the warning about “some files can contain viruses.”  See p. 122]

From remarks in other testimony, from police reports, and from lawyers’ comments, it becomes apparent that repressed memories or other memory distortion could underpin all of the allegations against Sandusky.

Police used overtly leading questions, telling young men that Sandusky had abused others and that they wanted to hear the same stories now.

“He took advantage of you,” they said. “We need you to tell us this is what happened.” [ed. note: see pp 80-83]

The police got “angry and upset when I would not say what they wanted to hear,” recalled one interview subject.

The police asked uncooperative interviewees to call them if they could “recall anything.”

Civil lawyers sent potential victims to therapy to help unearth memories.  As Howard Janet, a civil lawyer for an alleged Sandusky victim, explained in a CNN interview, victims could “create a bit of a Chinese wall in their minds. They bury these events that were so painful to them deep in their subconscious.”

But that’s not all.  The well-known sodomy-in-the-shower story is fictional.  When Mike McQueary went into the locker room in 2001, he briefly heard slapping sounds in the shower that he interpreted as sexual.  As McQueary later put it, “Visualizations come to your head.”

He then saw Sandusky and a boy walk out of the shower.

Nearly ten years later, when the police told McQueary that Sandusky had been accused of sexually abusing a boy, McQueary’s memory changed.  This is not unusual because eyewitness testimony is notoriously fallible, especially when much time has passed.  Our memories are influenced by our current attitudes and prejudices.

So McQueary now recalled looking directly into the shower and seeing Sandusky standing behind the boy and slowly moving his hips. [ed. note: see pp 195-197]

Allan Myers, who was that boy in the shower, emphatically denied that Jerry Sandusky had sexually abused him.  “Never, ever, did anything like that occur,” he said in a statement to Sandusky’s defense team.  He said that he and Sandusky had been slap-boxing.

But then Myers apparently changed his mind.  He found a civil attorney, joined the other alleged victims, and eventually collected a great deal of money.  Myers did not testify at the trial.  The prosecution didn’t want his statement introduced by the defense, and the defense was also afraid to call him.  So he remained the anonymous “Victim 2.”

“Victim 8” didn’t testify, not just because he was never identified, but because he may never have existed.  A Penn State janitor told the jury [ed. note: see pp 222-248] what another temporary janitor, Jim Calhoun, had allegedly told him in 2000, twelve years before.  The reason Calhoun didn’t testify is that he was allegedly suffering from dementia at the time of the trial.

Yet in a taped interview with the police, Calhoun said that Sandusky was not the man he saw abusing a boy.  Inexplicably, this tape was not used in Sandusky’s defense during the trial, probably because his lawyer was overwhelmed and never listened to it.

Then there’s Matt Sandusky, the last of the six children the couple adopted, who “flipped” to accuse his father mid-trial.  “Based upon what you’re telling me,” Oprah Winfrey asked him on camera, “you actually repressed a lot of it.”

“Uh-huh, absolutely,” Matt replied.  “The physical part is the part that, you know, you can erase…. I didn’t have these memories of the sexual abuse.”

At an interview following Sandusky’s conviction on June 22, 2012, Pennsylvania Attorney General Linda Kelly affirmed that repressed memories were key to the case, explaining: “It’s a long process…to have that many young boys come forward and say what they did and to have to unearth those memories that they buried for all those years.”

Author’s Note: This quote is from an interview with Linda Kelly by Jeremy Schaap and Roger Cossack on June 22, 2012, from an ESPN website:  It has since been removed from the internet, but there is a mention of it here.

Jerry Sandusky did take showers with boys, but that is not a crime.  He grew up in a recreation center run by his parents, where such showers were the norm.

If Sandusky were a pedophile, he would probably have molested his other four adopted sons.  Yet when I interviewed them, they denied any abuse.  “My parents gave me morals,” a son told me. “They taught me how to live my life.  They modeled things I’m striving to be as a parent myself.”  But none of the sons would allow me to use their names, for fear of reprisals against them or their families.

Sandusky founded the Second Mile program to help troubled youth.  Of the hundreds of Second Mile alums the police interviewed during the Sandusky investigation, the vast majority did not claim abuse, despite extensive pressure to do so.

“We have recently been interviewing kids who don’t believe the allegations as published and believe Sandusky is a great role model for them and others to emulate,” complained one investigator in a frustrated email to his team. [ed. note: see Appendix N in this link, p. 261]

During the June 2012 trial, alleged victims gave graphic, disturbing testimony.  While much of it had evolved and grown over time, it is not clear that it all stemmed from repressed memories. Barring a new trial for Sandusky, it is difficult to determine what had always been remembered and which memories were created more recently through suggestion.

After the explosive allegations were broadcast by the media in November 2011, and it became clear that alleged victims might make a great deal of money, financial motivations may have become more of an issue for the last two trial “Victims 9 and 10” and other anonymous claimants who then came forward.

In response to a brief filed by Sandusky’s attorneys Al Lindsay and Andrew Salemme on August 31, 2016, it appears that Judge John Cleland, who also presided over the rushed 2012 trial, may allow a hearing regarding repressed-memory therapy, the unacknowledged linchpin of the case.

Ed. note: See also: “Sandusky Wants Judge to Review Victim Therapy Records” (Centre Daily Times/September 2).

After these hearings, if Cleland refuses to grant Sandusky a new trial – despite an appallingly ineffective trial defense effort and illegally leaked grand jury information – Sandusky’s lawyers can appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior and Supreme Courts.

If he fails there, his only option will be a federal court.

Let’s hope that the justices will allow testimony about repressed memories in the Sandusky case.

Mark Pendergrast

Mark Pendergrast

Mark Pendergrast’s  Victims of Memory was one of the first investigations of the repressed memory epidemic.  He is currently preparing a book about the Sandusky case.  He can be reached through his website, www.markpendergrast.com.

36 thoughts on “Why Jerry Sandusky May Be Innocent

  1. Although repressed memory theory is adequately rebutted here, there was testimony from a young man (Asst Coach I think, maybe a player) who testified to witnessing Sandusky raping one of thes boys in a locker room shower.

    • The only mention of “rape” was made by PA AG Linda Kelly, a tool of the corrupt Corbett administration. Neither McQueary nor anyone else ever said Sandusky was seen committing a rape. Do some research.

    • The assistant coach you’re referring to never said he witnessed a rape. He said he heard sounds. He saw Sandusky and a 12-14 year old boy coming out of a shower. He saw this through a mirror. It lasted 2 seconds.

      • Actually, he never said he saw a rape, quite the opposite in fact. He said he saw a 10 yr old boy with Sandusky…who was in fact 14 at the time. He said he saw it through a mirror and around a corner, which lasted only a few seconds. The grand jury presentment that was leaked said he testified to seeing the rape, but when he went on the stand, he said he never testified to that, but that the AG had made up the story!!!

        • Exactly. The presentment poisoned the pool. Anyone who read it (i.e. America) would be absolutely convinced of Jerry’s (and others at PSU) guilt. Yet to this day nobody has been held accountable for 1) the lie that someone “witnessed anal rape” and 2) leaking this to the press. More to ponder: The graduate assistant was alleged to have been guilty of betting on games…while a player. He was also accused of having, like Anthony Weiner and Brett Favre, taken naughty pics of himself and sent them to a woman (NOT his wife). So when authorities came to visit him he had ample reason to accommodate them. When questioned by family friend, physician, and mandatory reporter Dr. Dranov, this witness stated three times that he did not witness…anything. Yet the grand jury, who interviewed the doctor, made no mention of this fact. And speaking of naughty pics, it’s worth noting that Sandusky had none on his computer (making him the only 21st century pedophile to be porn-free) even though the prosecutors’ computers were riddled with it.

    • Hello, Ray.

      The assistant coach you’re thinking about is McQueary. He also said he saw something sexual in the shower in who become known as Victim 2. It was a very important alleged victim, as it was the only actually witnessed incident.

      As it has come up during the new proceedings, the prosecutor and police now say they don’t believe the man that claimed to be “victim 2” (the one referenced in the trial and that later sued PSU for money)


      He claimed he wasn’t abused, then hired a settlement lawyer and claimed he was the worst abused of all.

      And as this was the only allegedly witnessed incident in the entire thing, and the prosecution is not even sure who they think victim 2 really was if it’s not this guy, then the rest of the case is just a lot of he said he said. And the “he saids” from not sandusky had millions to gain by their claims.

      Mark Pendergrast could very well be right here. It should go back to trial.

    • He discusses McQueary above. V2, also mentioned above, went to Sandusky’s lawyer on the day Paterno was fired to give his statement – stating that he had been questioned by police, that he thought that the police were trying to get him to say something bad about Sandusky, and that he most assuredly was not abused. McQueary did not report a rape because he did not see one…because it never happened.

    • That’s the least believable evidence. Wouldn’t a medical exam prove or disprove the possibility that a grown man had anally penetrated a young teen boy?

  2. Thank you. Interesting and thoughtful article. One thing you may want to add is the tape of a plaintiffs lawyer asking the investigator to tell a victim (I believe it was victim 4) that other witnesses has said Sandusky had done more to them. The investigator said, “sure. We do it all the time.” I believe this was played at trial.

    I believe that it is possible that repressed memories, Investigator misconduct, desire to “stop a monster” and the potential for a large payout may have influenced the testimony of many of the victims.

    I won’t go so far as to say I think Sandusky is innocent, but if he is soooo guilty, he should be able to be convicted with a fair trial.

    • Not only was that tape played at trial, but the state police officers who conducted the interview lied, under oath, about having that conversation.

  3. I sat in my office with the new lawyer Al Lindsay, who has an impeccable reputation in the legal community, and he overtly stated, “These things did not happen. I was in Jerry Sandusky’s house, and from the layout, it was impossible for him to abuse young boys without somebody hearing it.” Amendola was so far in over his head. Country bumpkin lawyer defending the “trial of the century.” Hope the appeals process works in a fair and judicious manner. Everyone wants the truth.

  4. This article brought to you by NAMBLA…..NAMBLA, where we know if we get Jerry off, it’ll be open season on our favourite toys.

    • Fred Savagery’s post is brought to you by the Nazi Party.

      Where it doesn’t matter if an innocent man was potentially convicted. The court of public opinion and social justice crusaders like Fred decide. No evidence needed.

      In Fred’s Nazi world if you protest a possible injustice and present facts then you’re a dirty je…oh wait, the Fred version is NAMBLA member.

      The evidence is building up, Fred. What kind of apology are you going to give if/when there is a retrial and the charges are dropped? At this point, would you even offer one, or would you just lurk is some dark corner of the internet in denial?

      Fred’s reaction lacking any substantive response shows he actually can’t refute any of the things said here. The best he can do is deflect and mask ignorance with raw emotion.

      • Fred’s comment is about the author being someone who has been accused of sexual abuse by his daughter(s).

        Not to mention he belongs to a group founded by someone that openly stated pedophilia was “God’s will”. Ralph Underwager was also prolific defense witness. Think about that if there’s a retrial.

        While there’s little debate about Repressed Memory Therapy being debunked, the author’s true aim is to push the False Memory narrative. It’s a defense used in court by real abusers.

        • You’re here making interesting ad hominem statements, but that doesn’t discredit the content of what he said.

          The point is what repressed memory therapy is debunked, which should cast legitimate doubt on the outcome of the verdict.

        • to truth will set you free….the author is not a member of any such group. I know him and this is not true. Would you like to be sued for slander?

    • Shame on you Fred for writing such a lie. You and people like you are the reason that Sandusky was railroaded. It was hysteria and mistaken ideas running amok.

  5. Jerry is in prison right where he belongs. Even in the small chance he is granted a new trial he will be found guilty again and spend the rest of his days in prison

  6. Thank you Mark. Not enough people ask why there’s no real evidence where there should be a ton. Truth is – a good, innocent man was turned into the most hated man in America and is now rotting away in prison. All while frauds, thieves, and scammers were awarded millions for their obviously made up fairy tales. What a messed up country we live in…

  7. A innocent good man is languishing in prison for being unjustly railroaded. This is the crime of the century and Jerry is the only victim. The facts are obvious if you read everything about the complicated case. It worries me that so many people don’t seem to care and offer uninformed comments. I just can’t stop thinking about how they would feel if this very same injustice and unfairness happened to them or someone they loved. Would they not want the truth to come out? Wouldn’t they want others to care and fight for the truth to clear them??

  8. Interesting thoughts.

    However, it still begs the question of the oversight by the Second Mile – especially since 1998 was escalated thru the system, and the 2001 incident had PSU complaining on the charity doorstep to Dr. Jack Raykovitz. To date, charity CEO Dr. Raykovitz and his equally-mandated-to-report wife, Katherine Genovese – have yet to publicly explain their failures in oversight of Second Mile clients.

    As well, there are questions that licensed caseworkers and other county & state professionals have yet to answer – as far as doing home studies, placing kids in the Sandusky home, referring kids to his charity, meeting with a (now convicted) preferential child sexual offender weekly across the conference table and applauding an offender’s work with children.

    For some reason these professionals, whom we entrust to protect and serve kids across our commonwealth, have chosen to ascribe to a Code of Silence in all this – and are all too happy to let this burn on Penn State’s doorstep – take down a geriatric football coach and 3 University admins and smear an entire community of people. Either Jerry is innocent – and we can all go home – or he’s guilty. And if guilty, then these professionals utterly ignored signs of grooming, failed to implement state mandated procedures, exposed even more kids to Sandusky, therefore enabling the abuse, and they did so for decades.

    I’d like to remark that Jerry’s interactions with teen boys – had he done this with teen girls – we would not be having this discussion. It’s a no brainer. And it shouldn’t matter whether they are boys or girls – they are someone else’s kids.

    It simply boggles the mind that someone who is the founder and face of a successful childrens charity did not take common sense steps to protect himself and his family from accusations. Working with minors is challenging enough – add in at-risk kids from dysfunctional households – then you increase that risk exponentially and an Executive Director at a charity like Second Mile SHOULD KNOW THIS. The rules are pretty simple: keep your clothes on; keep your hands, lips and body parts to yourself; no kissing or telling a youth “I love you”; no climbing into bed with a youth; no pulling that youth on top of you; no personal communications with a youth; no one-on-one time with a youth. You do this, and if a parent wanted to escalate a complaint….well…..

    I would also like to address the singular lie of “anal rape in shower” that was in AG Linda Kelly’s November 2011 presentment. A document created and approved by OAG prosecutors Jonelle Eshbach and Frank Fina for the purposes of charging. As you may know, Frank Fina has been embroiled in a hard-core pornography, ex-parte and ethics scandal that has ripped open a constitutional crisis here in our state.

    Fina culled, cached and shared on his workplace computer – during work hours and on the taxpayer dime – hundreds, possibly thousands of images of women engaged in anal sex, oral sex and group sex and having various items inserted where Mother Nature never intended. Which by law here in PA is rape. These images Fina prized were beyond the pale – especially considering who was swapping them with who and doing it across state servers.

    I am of the opinion that Frank Fina with his penchant for prurience, escalated the testimony of Mike McQueary of hearing sounds in a shower to “seeing a rape”. Fina viewed and swapped images of rape on his work computer like guys would swap photos of their fishing or golfing trips – so his “Nifonging” McQueary’s story up a notch was not a biggie for him. It would certainly anchor the public ire and media fire on the steps of Penn State, in order to carry out his planned “flip strategy” and the ultimate political assassination of Dr. Spanier – the true target of that presentment.

    Spanier was to be the trophy pelt on Tom Corbett’s wall.

    The AG’s office was very careful at that November 2011 press conference to keep Joe Paterno out of it, praising his cooperation. John Surma steps over Steve Garban’s body to ax Paterno in a late night press conference. I don’t think Fina counted on the high winds in the sports media carrying the Paterno name into a national firestorm, nor did he consider the dyfunctional PSU Board of Trustees. Corbett & Fina ran for cover, their hands still smelling of gasoline. They tried to walk it back later in a few milquetoast interviews – but by then, the damage had been done.

    If you’re Frank Fina and Tom Corbett – and you’ve just torched your commonwealth, whose constitutional rights you’ve sworn to protect – how do you walk that back?

    You don’t. You conspire with Louis Freeh to manage the message to the nation and hope for the best. Ironically, our recent interim Attorney General Bruce Castor – when asked back in the beginning of all this by prosecutor Joe McGettigan (both run in the same Philadelphia legal circles) on using Cynthia Baldwin as part of their prosecution strategy – he told them NOT to do it.

    They did it anyway. Another botched tactic in the end by Fina and gang, as Baldwin’s testimony was tossed by the Appelate Court.

    I also have to wonder about prosecutor Patrick Blessington bringing up to Harrisburg the use of his “anal rape” meme so popular with the Philadelphia Archdiocese case – which is still slogging through the Philadelphia court system.

    The irony in all this? Had Frank Fina and Tom Corbett left Penn State out of it, and prosecuted Sandusky on credible victim testimony alone, Fina would most likely have gained election points. Tom Corbett would have likely gained election points. We’d never had swept Kathleen Kane into office. Porngate and Hategate never happens.

    Everyone in public office would have WON.

  9. Another factor that was not mentioned is that Mike McQueary told his players that he had been a victim of child sexual abuse. The Sandusky jury was never told that.

    Perhaps Mike’s own abuse colored his story about Sandusky and the boy in the shower. It certainly raises a lot of questions, such as when, where and how was Mike abused and if his father, Dranov or Paterno knew about it. If Mike’s abuse happened in a shower and/or his abuser was a coach that would really raise red flags about his testimony.

    • McQueary’s statements were always framed with his self interest in mind, not the truth. When he was approached by detectives and asked about what he saw ten years prior, he had been engaging in illegal gambling and as a Penn State employee sent a shot of his penis to a coed while he was married. He had reasons to want to please the interrogators. There are many reasons to disbelieve Mr. McQueary. His story of being abused was most likely just another fabrication.

      • If Mike McQueary lied to his players about being victim of child sexual abuse, that further undermines his credibility. If he was abused, it also undermines his credibility for not revealing that to the jury.

        Two Vanderbilt football players convicted of rape had their convictions thrown out because one male juror failed to mention that he had been a victim of child sexual abuse. They had to be retried, and were easily convicted again.

  10. Mark has done a great and thorough job of sifting through the evidence and finding numerous examples of prosecutorial misconduct and attorney incompetence. His work is something that needs to surface because Sandusky was railroaded and did not get a fair trial, and I was an eyewitness, I attended every day of the trial, to that.

    Great Job Mark!

  11. The author shines a light on imbalance, both in the system and in our attitudes. Misplaced faith and unfounded fear. We have faith in the concept of our justice system, but rarely question whether the reality is living up to the promise of the concept. We can all agree that pedophilia is evil, but fear of this evil should not make us abandon the pursuit of equal justice under the law.

  12. This is amazing.

    I never followed the Sandusky case closely, and like so many others, after a barrage of news reports after the story broke, I assumed he was guilty. I didn’t know that the scientifically discredited theory of repressed memory was used. Why not use phrenology, palmistry, and while we’re at it, spectral evidence? Hell, spectral evidence worked at the Salem witch trials.

    Was there any physical evidence of anal rape? I highly doubt there could be no physical trace if a grown man raped a 14-year-old boy.

    The youths Sandusky mentored were all troubled, in need of great help, as I understand it, and could possibly have been the type to falsely accuse a man. This is understandable, given their past abuse, and the manipulations of a therapist could easily taint their testimony, as could the monetary incentives.

    I wonder if Sandusky’s adopted son was similarly vulnerable to manipulation. Maybe he feels better about being known as a victim of abuse rather than as the son of an abuser.

    I don’t know if Jerry Sandusky is guilty, but it does seem he was not given a fair trial. That he was a wealthy, powerful man, imbued with white privilege, no less, made him a less than sympathetic defendant, as did his demeanor, it seems. Many people, in a position to help him or not, would have been squeamish about coming to the defense of a supposed pedophile and molester, especially in light of the NAMBLA comments above in this thread, and the like. There’s no accusation more damning to a man than that, and who could never be accused?

    Sandusky may simply have been naive enough to be unable to protect himself from accusations. Also, he was a football coach, and although that may not have prejudiced football fans, it certainly didn’t make him an underdog, and may have hurt him with a large part of the public who have felt bullied by coaches and gym teachers in school. I fit in that latter category, but it doesn’t mean I don’t believe a man deserves a fair trial.

  13. Thanks for the facts, Mark. Do you leave room for the fact that he may have molested some of the complainants

    Besides you, is anyone supporting your thesis. Just wondering if you are out there alone in your research.

  14. Mark has done a laborius and thorough job of sifting through the evidence and finding numerous examples of prosecutorial misconduct and attorney incompetence. His work is something that needs to surface because Sandusky was railroaded and did not get a fair trial, and I was an eyewitness to that. I attended every day of the trial.

    Good Job Mark!

  15. I don’t know this case other than as presented by the media. Since so many innocent people have gone to prison on “repressed memory” evidence what Mark writes makes one sit up and take notice. I have no opinion as to innocence or guilt, but what Mark writes, and I trust him very much, certainly suggests that the courts need to take another look at the case. Innocent or guilty, Mr. Sandusky should never have had “repressed [or Recovered] memory” used against him. Any case that uses it is contaminated.

  16. I am grateful to everyone who took the time to read my article on the Sandusky case with care, and perhaps to look at some of the links from the article to court transcripts, articles, books, and legal documents. My wife and I have been on a short camping trip to Maine, so I am just getting back to my computer. For those of you who would like more information on my published books, I suggest you go to http://www.markpendergrast.com, which also features book reviews, a biography, and links to some of my singing. (Truth be known, if I had thought I could make a living as a singer, the books might not have been happened. On the other hand, I hear a singer’s hours would keep me up past my bedtime.) Or of course, see Amazon.com or other such sites.

    Some of you clearly know a lot about the Sandusky case. Others raised questions that were already answered in the article, so I suggest you go back to read it more slowly. For everyone who is interested and wants more answers, it’s probably best to wait for my book on Sandusky, which will cover this complex, convoluted case in the requisite detail.

    I am still seeking a publisher, which surprises me, since I am a well-established non-fiction author with a reputation for extremely thorough research, and I would have thought that I could easily find a major publisher for this book, which takes a controversial look at a very high-profile case, so it would almost certainly find a ready market. In my book proposal, I have recommendations for the book from heavy hitters in the memory field, such as Elizabeth Loftus and Frederick Crews, as well as sex abuse expert Fred Berlin, legal expert Richard Leo, and sports commentator Bob Costas. Yet I have yet to find a publisher. Perhaps that will change soon with the publication of this article, who knows?

    FYI, here is the bio from my website: Mark Pendergrast was born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, the fourth of seven children in a family that valued civil rights, the environment, sailing, reading, and games of chase and charades. He earned a B.A. in English literature from Harvard, taught high school and elementary school, then went back to Simmons College for a master’s in library science and worked as an academic librarian—all the while writing freelance articles for newspapers and magazines. In 1991, he began writing books full time, which allows him to follow his rather eclectic interests.

    Pendergrast’s books have been published in 15 languages. For God, Country & Coca-Cola was named a notable book of the year by the New York Times, and Discover Magazine chose Mirror Mirror as one of the top science books of the year. Pendergrast has given speeches to professional groups, business associations, and college audiences in the United States, Canada, the U.K., and Germany. He has appeared on dozens of television shows, including the Today Show, CBS This Morning, and CNN, and has been interviewed on over 100 radio programs, including All Things Considered, Marketplace, and many other public radio shows. He lives in Colchester, Vermont.

  17. Like so many others, after so many news reports about Sandusky, I assumed that he was guilty… After reading this article I wonder if he had a fair trial or even if he is guilty at all. A lot of stuff to look at, and the affirmation that anyone can be falsely accused.

Leave a Reply

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