Visitation rights? No way man.
“BOB COSTAS: Are you a pedophile?
JERRY SANDUSKY: No.
BOB COSTAS: Are you sexually attracted to young boys, to underage boys?
JERRY SANDUSKY: Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?
Anyone who repeats the question is either thinking of the right thing to say, or subconsciously verifying the question as truth. Who has to think about the right answer to that question, other than someone who would say yes?
BOB COSTAS: Yes.
JERRY SANDUSKY: Sexually attracted, you know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them.
Here again, he repeats the words “sexually attracted,” even adding “you know.”
But no I’m not sexually attracted to young boys.”
“Jerry Sandusky is still making headlines nearly three months after charges were filed against him for over 50 counts of allegedly sexually abusing children. As a condition of his house arrest while he awaits trial, Sandusky cannot have any contact with children, period.
This is understandable. His actions Friday, however, were not.
Sandusky petitioned a judge to alter his agreement so that he may see his 11 grandchildren under the supervision of their parents.
Considering the fact that investigations are currently underway regarding sexual abuse allegations from a member of his own family, who is under the age of 18 and likely one of his grandchildren, Sandusky’s request is ludicrous and should be promptly rejected.
In an ideal world, the public opinion regarding any defendant in a criminal case is innocent until proven guilty. Sandusky’s case, however, provides a rare exception to this rule.
At this point, we can presume guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, at least to the extent that we can justify preventing him access to children in his home while he awaits trial. Consider the evidence against him: more than 50 counts of sex crimes against children spanning decades, with victims and witnesses recounting eerily similar situations.
Now, he wants to see his grandkids, whom he may have assaulted, and he is also asking that friends be allowed to visit.
He hasn’t been convicted yet, so we cannot legally deny him certain rights, but the possibility of him spending a second with a child has horrific implications.”