Video of NBC ‘Tape Error’ from their Jerry Sandusky Interview
Reuters reports that “Lawyers for Jerry Sandusky sought a mistrial before his conviction for child sex abuse on the grounds that prosecutors showed jurors an inaccurate version of a bombshell NBC News interview with the former football coach, and the mistake may now form part of the basis for an appeal”:
In response to a subpoena, NBC News turned over three versions of Bob Costas’ NBC News interview with Sandusky, which aired last November on different NBC shows.
One of those versions, which was broadcast on the ‘Today’ show, contained an erroneous repetition of a key question and answer – about whether Sandusky was sexually attracted to young boys, Nils Frederiksen, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania attorney general said on Sunday.
The repetition, Sandusky’s lawyers contend, made it appear to jurors that he was stonewalling.
“It wasn’t noticed by (NBC News), it wasn’t noticed by us, but it became obvious when it played in court,” Frederiksen told Reuters.
NBC News spokeswoman Amy Lynn confirmed this account on Sunday.
Before going any further, let me repeat what Ace wrote here:
First — of course Jerry Sandusky is guilty.
That’s not the point here. The point is that the prosecutors relied upon NBC to provide an accurate edit of the Jerry Sandusky interview.
They were burned on that.
The Reuters article above links to a YouTube clip of the interview and notes:
In the Sandusky interview with NBC, Costas asks, “Are you sexually attracted to young boys, to underage boys?” according to an NBC News transcript.
Sandusky responded, “Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?”
But in the “Today” version, which was played for jurors and is still available on YouTube (here), the exchange was repeated.
The interview was originally aired correctly on NBC News’ new magazine show, ‘Rock Center’ on November 14. The erroneous version that repeated the exchange aired the following morning on ‘Today.’
In a statement, NBC’s Lynn said: “Under subpoena, NBC News turned over three versions of the Costas interview to prosecutors, including the ‘Today’ version with the error in it. Prosecutors used the ‘Today’ version, not realizing it included a technical glitch, and played it for the jury.
“After court that day, NBC News executives had a series of discussion with the prosecutors, and after some internal investigation were able to determine that the glitch originated on ‘Today.’ NBC News executives explained the situation to the court, and Judge Cleland sought to remedy the situation by giving the jury instructions to regard only a transcript of the full interview that was subsequently provided to them, not any audio that was played for them by prosecutors.”
Here’s the video that Reuters links to, preceded by the logo of the person who uploaded the clip to YouTube:
If you missed the interview when it originally aired in November, it is uber-creepy. I felt like Martin Sheen in Apocalypse Now listening to Col. Kurtz’s radio transmissions. I kept waiting for Sandusky to tell Bob Costas, “I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That’s my dream; that’s my nightmare. Crawling, slithering, along the edge of a straight razor… and surviving.”
If you don’t want listen to the whole vile thing, click to about 6:40 into the video for the repeat of Sandusky’s comments, or just keep reading, as I’ve created a separate clip to focus in on the material discussed by Reuters, which appears at the top of the next page. Watching it, there’s a weird flash-frame where Bob Costas’ question to Sandusky repeats. I was curious about what the heck was in that frame, so I placed my downloaded copy of the video into a timeline in Adobe’s Premiere Pro CS6 video editing program to freeze-frame it:
At the risk of going full Zapruder, I believe what it might be is a shot of the Today Show control room or some other unlit portion of the set, with a couple of technicians in the background, and someone’s coat on a coat-rack in front of them. I’m calling it a flash-frame, but it lasts a total of six frames in the Premiere timeline. That’s much less than one second. Given that the animated Today Show lower third plays through the flash-frame, I assume that’s why NBC was so quick to determine the incident happened on their end, and wasn’t something a mischievous video clipper inserted, when he uploaded the interview to YouTube. (Update: This minor mystery solved? See update with comment from reader at end of post.)
Time for an intervention with NBC.
NBC is unraveling before our eyes. Jerry Sandusky is a convicted homosexual predator, who allegedly sexually assaulted his adopted son.
The administration at Penn State allegedly looked the other way because they wanted to handle the situation “humanely.” So much for academic diversocrats.
I do not know if he is a pederast or not-but
1/ He had an incompetent lawyer
2/ The police coached the now adult witnesses on what to say
3/ There is no forensic evidence-none
4/ There is a huge financial motive for the plaintiffs
5/ Clearly there is a pervasive problem of pederasts who exploit young and adolescent boys–
6/ This case will end the foster parenting of troubled boys and girls- they will have to go to orphanages instead-because of foster parents fear of litigation
7/ Jerry Sandusky behavior was weird and crazy – but their is no compeling evidence that he raped anyone-no forensic evidence
8/ Anderson Cooper is obsessed with this case but does not talk about the gay NAMLBA which has and does promote sexual relations between young boys and adult gay men–which is the problem–pederasty -he is trying to deflect attention from the real problem.
Whatever Jerry Sandusky actually did-this case will probably be thrown out on appeal.
Society needs to address the problem of gay pederasts, in Churches, schools, etc- and as it is promoted by Hollywood and pornography.
Victor, my compliments on your clear and (probably) well reasoned assessment. I have to say “probably” because I haven’t followed this case to any great extent. Hardly at all. in fact. But your comments and conclusions seem reasonable, and incisive, on that basis.
I am, however, curious about your singling out Anderson Cooper for special attention in relation to the Jerry Sandusky trial. Again, I’m ignorant: because the only time I watch Mr Cooper is when I’m held captive in an airport waiting lounge between flights, with no control over the TV remote. That’s the only time that CNN can add me to its dwindling Neilsen rating.
But, from your comments, I infer that Mr Cooper might be even less worthy than the standard issue CNN hypocritical hack. What is this NAMLBA thing of which you speak?
The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States that works to abolish age of consent laws criminalizing adult sexual involvement with minors…
Google these pervs yourself and check it out.
You object that there is no forensic evidence twice, seeming to imply that without it there can be no evidence at all. By this standard no rape could have been proven prior to DNA testing. It is an absurd standard. The evidence is in the eye-witness testimony and the victim’s testimony as always. The jury weighs their credibility. There is other evidence, too.
I think maybe you’ve been watching too much CSI and NCIS. (But I have no forensic evidence to prove it.)
NBC sukz.
If you get your news from NBC (Not even Barely Credible) you are mis-informed.
NBC News = Pravda and Izvestia combined.
Hi Ed! Go back to 5:34 in the long clip (0:01-0:03 in the short one) and you will see that the mystery frame is a blurred version of the picture of Sandusky entering court with his lawyers.
Note, too, that at 0:28 in the short clip Sandusky talks about, and defends, “his methods”! …Where’s Captain Willard when we need him?
How do they repair their credibility? They have nothing to work with.
NBC’s video editors, leading the Ministry of Truth’s main-stream-media pack in this respect, are now well disciplined to edit anything said by a Republican to misrepresent whatever was spoken.
Unfortunately, there is a spill-over from such intense training. In a different world, I used to know it as “collateral damage”. Now, anything that is pulped out by NBC, even if it has no conceivable party political relevance, carries a high probability of being edited to misrepresent the original content of the filming.
Winston Smith would have understood immediately. George Orwell, where are you? We need you back!
They can’t. It’s gone forever.
In the Spiegel cover story on June 11 about Obama’s presidency,which was entitle “Schade” or Too Bad, the reporters talked quite a bit about Chuck Todd. So NBC is able to get its view of the world beyond our shores. I admit having trouble reading the article closely because of blood pressure problems, but it started off explaing Obama’s lack of success on Americans who are creationists and think Obama is a Muslim. It then proceeds to talk about the impossibility of keeping up with events in the blogosphere and on Twitter. No wonder Obama couldn’t keep his promises! One more reason to thank the influence of NBC.
Ok, its NBC so of course they’re going to lie and edit things and whatever, but Sandusky really seemed guilty so why give the prosecutors fake tapes? Are the lefties at NBC so delusional, so used to the lies in the echo chambers of the NBC offices that they figures noone would notice, or care?
What’s wrong with MSM in general? It’s not like I watch alot of Fox, but when I watch MSM it’s like how I heard the general public watched news during hte Soviet Union: they knew they were being lied to and some info was being withheld, so they tried to figure out what was what was happening with what was said without actually believing it was accurate.
“what’s happened to the network’s news division as a whole, and where does it go from here?”
Nothing’s happened to it. The “credibility” that you remember is a fantasy. What you’re seeing in the MSM is what it’s always been – full of political hacks working to advance a leftist agenda. Remember… the first thing revolutionaries do when they attempt a coup is takeover the radio and TV stations. If you control the airwaves then you control the message and the MSM is all about controlling the message. Just look at F&F… oh, wait, you can’t because there’s no coverage of a government program that aided and abetted the murder of hundreds of Mexicans and at least one US citizen. Move along because there is nothing to see – literally nothing to see. You say ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NY Times, etc and I say Pravda.
TV News is not primarily news – it is drama and entertainment that uses the news as raw material. Notice that the available footage dominates and the words are timed and fit the edited footage. The footage is edited the same way dramatic film is edited – to tell a story. The question is not whether it is true or not, but is is a good story that will engage viewers emotionally. The words are used to control what the viewers will believe they witnessed. And the viewers believe they have witnessed the version of events presented because seeing is believing. TV is a perfect little la la land. Remember this the next time you find yourself reacting to any TV news story. Recognize apart from whatever the truth of a situation may be, if it is on TV the producers, editors and reporters are all working together to manipulate you.
I believe this is the third blatant editing scandal at which NBC has been caught in a very short time period. Sandusky, Mitt Romney with the touchscreen, and George Zimmerman’s head injury. I’m sorry, but any credible journalist would have given his/her resignation with the twisting and shaping of news at this level. Guess NBC is fresh out of credible journalists.
NBC should simply get out of the news business altogether. Disband the news division completely, let all of its employees go. Be an entertainment network only.
Perhaps when enough time has passed that we no longer need affirmative action – 25 years or so per Sandra Day O’Connor – NBC can put a credible news operation together again, if NBC is still around. But. Not Now. Not until everyone involved in their current news operation has left the business permanently.
The litigation partner would have reamed me six ways to Tuesday if I had used edited video in court without looking at the raw footage it was edited from.
This isn’t an NBC scandal. It’s a DA scandal.
As a former video editor for NBC but retired now for more than 15 years, let me say that I cannot fault any comment for excoriating NBC News for the eegregious behaviors described above. Unless the captive union, NABET, at NBC gave up all jurisdiction over the editing function of news video, news video segments were, in my time and I presume still are, created by a news producer and a union technician-editor. I know from my own experience that many stories aired which were bent to provide a definitely liberal angle. Most of the video technician-editors were not then liberal at all. We did as we were told or we would be forced out of news entirely. The situation created a lot of agita among the editors. My GI system improved radically upon retirement because I no longer had to work in a politically hostile emvironment. I’m sure it’s worse now. Don’t use the broad brush on the technician-editors but, instead, on the producers, associate producers, news story producers and, of course, NBC News management, that’s where the responsibility lies.
While other NBC edits appear to be based on bias, let’s not get stuck on stupid here: this one in the Costas interview – another example of his genius, however, unlovable he his;he did this live with about 10 seconds notice and it’s tough and pretty comprehensive and pretty much sinks Sandusky – is a trivial mistake analogous to a spelling typo. Yes, it’s a mistake, but there’s no real way to believe it was a doubled-down tape looping in an attempt to make Sandusky look worse than he already did (which is pretty hard to conceive).
I know little about TV video editing; but this one is a molehill, not a mountain.
come on, nbc haters, find real dumb and bad stuff to attack them about.
NBC’s new slogan: ‘Smart As A Peacock’
They edit certain things to promote liberalism. This is reprehensible but at least the purpose is clear. But why would they provide cover for a pedophile who basically admits his crimes on camera? That’s the relevant question in my opinion.
with all those witnesses to what jerry did he can appeal all he wants, he will never leave prison.
The media will do whatever it takes to blur or completely obliterate the connection between homosexuality and sexual abuse of underage boys. Whatever. It. Takes.
The first thing Cardinal Bevilaqua did when the scandal broke was crack down on the admission of active homosexuals to his Philadelphia Archdiocese seminaries. It went unpublished by the MSM but not unnoticed. It is no coincidence that he and his successors were the first chuch hierarchy targeted for incarceration.
If Sandusky said anything that might have linked his proclivities to an attraction to males, it would have disappeared on the NBC proverbial cutting room floor.