Jerry Sandusky says a key witness against him misinterpreted his shower with a young boy in the Penn State locker room more than a decade ago. The Today show aired an 'exclusive' interview with Sandusky on Monday which turned out to be excerpts from a documentary made about the convicted pedophile.
In the clips, the disgraced Penn State coach says doesn't understand how Mike McQueary concluded 'that sex was going on' when he witnessed Sandusky showering with a boy in 2001.
Documentary filmmaker John Ziegler conducted three-and-a-half hours of interviews with the former Penn State assistant coach, who is now serving 60 years for child sexual abuse. Sandusky maintains his innocence. Sandusky says he's not sure whether head coach Joe Paterno would have let him keep on coaching if he suspected Sandusky was a pedophile. A Paterno family lawyer says Sandusky had the opportunity to testify at trial but 'chose not to do so'.
Today aired a segment where Sandusky talks about whistleblower Mike McQueary on Monday morning. Sandusky said: 'His [McQueary] story changed a lot. I think he said some things and then it escalated on him even. There's a lot of suggestive questioning.
Later, the convicted pedophile said: 'I don't understand how anybody could have walked into that locker room from where he [McQueary] was and heard sounds associated that was sex going on.' There is then loud laughter on the tape from Sandusky before he adds: 'That would have been the last thing I would have thought abuot. 'I would have thought maybe fooling around or something like that.'
The disgraced coach, 69, was found guilty on 45 of 48 counts of child sex abuse last year
Penn State's total costs associated with the Sandusky child sex abuse scandal topped $41 million as of the end of December 2012, the university disclosed last week. Penn State released the document after it was sought by some of its critics, detailing the agreement with former FBI director Louis Freeh to investigate the scandal, a review that cost the school about $8.1 million.
The monthly financial update provided more itemization for certain costs, including the Freeh report
The update also counted the first of five annual $12 million installments - paid in December - that would ultimately cover the $60 million fine from the NCAA as part of landmark sanctions for the scandal.
Some vocal alumni had called on university leadership to release itemized costs, in part to promote transparency.
Those critics had also asked the university to release the letter of agreement, or 'engagement letter' with Freeh, that outlined the scope and responsibilities of the former FBI director in leading the internal investigation into the scandal. The letter from Freeh was signed December 2, 2011 by then-board chair Steve Garban and trustee Kenneth Frazier, who headed the trustees committee to which Freeh reported. Freeh concluded that Paterno and three school administrators acted to conceal allegations against Sandusky to protect the school's image.
The administrators have vehemently denied the findings.
Paterno died in January 2012. Last month, an exhaustive critique commissioned by his family called Freeh's findings inaccurate and unfounded, and resulted in a 'rush to injustice.'
That review raised new questions about the report and the university's handling of the findings from the alumni critics, some ex-players and a handful of trustees including the outspoken Anthony Lubrano.
In particular, Lubrano has said the school should ask for a refund from Freeh because the investigation was not full or complete.
The engagement letter outlined that Freeh's findings would cover why there were failures to report; who knew about allegations; and how the allegations were handled by trustees, administrators, coaches and other staff.
The report 'also will provide recommendations... for actions to be taken to attempt to ensure that those and similar failures to not occur again,' read the letter posted by Penn State.
The school has said the findings were used to improve Penn State operations - including how the trustees govern - and that it was not within Freeh's scope to review actions or motives of other entities. Lubrano joined the board in July, eight months after the scandal started. He praised the school for releasing the letter, but said 'In my view, pointing to the recommendations is a deflection of the real issue. 'The real issue is that Freeh did not deliver what he was engaged to deliver, what he was paid to provide,' Lubrano said last Monday in a phone interview. School spokesman Dave La Torre said the letter was released after multiple requests from alumni, and that 'the board thought it was appropriate to do so.' He declined comment when asked if the release of the letter might answer questions from critics. In a statement, the alumni watchdog group Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship said the engagement letter's release was important because it showed the Freeh team's obligation was to the trustees and not the school itself, and that the report should be reviewed by the public and NCAA in a 'far different light.' The board, as the university's governing body, brought in Freeh for the school, the school said in a statement through La Torre. They were not separate entities, and 'there is no inherent conflict of interest between the governing body of an organization and the organization itself’ the statement said.