Is it me or are the similarities in the Sandusky and Cain statements eerily similar? The justification of (denied) abuse or harassment is that “many” (Sandusky) kids were helped or “probably thousands” would say there was none of “that activity” from Herman Cain canceling out the respective reprehensible acts?
“But isn’t what you’re just describing the classic MO of many pedophiles? And that is that they gain the trust of young people, they don’t necessarily abuse every young person. There were hundreds, if not thousands of young boys you came into contact with, but there are allegations that at least eight of them were victimized. Many people believe there are more to come. So it’s entirely possible that you could’ve helped young boy A in some way that was not objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boy B, C, D, and E. Isn’t that possible?”
“Well — you might think that. I don’t know. (LAUGHS) In terms of — my relationship with so many, many young people. I would– I would guess that there are many young people who would come forward. Many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and– and what I had done for them made a very positive impact on their life
From Cain press conference addressing sexual harassment charges:
“For every one person that comes forward with a false accusation, there are probably thousands who will say that none of that sort of activity ever came from Herman Cain.”
I recognize that the question Costas poses somewhat sets up the kind of response Sandusky gave – however – there would be a million ways to answer it. First and foremost would have been to say I didn’t abuse any kids and leave it at that.