Skip to main content

Scumbag Jared Fogle’s Defense Team Blamed His Pedophilia on Weight Loss

He still got 15 years.

judge gavel

Jared Fogle–you know, that guy who lost hella weight eating only Subway sandwiches and was recently arrested for child pornography and attempting to elicit sex from a minor–has some of the… uh, most interesting defense lawyers in the world. They proved their “creativity” with one hell of an argument presented during the trial.

According to a forensic psychiatrist that the lawyers dug up, Fogle’s criminal behavior can be attributed to one thing: his weight loss. Oh, and what precipitated the weight loss? That’s right. Subway freakin’ sandwiches. Fogle is, in essence, blaming the sandwiches for why he did what he did.

The psychiatrist, John Bradford, specifically said, “Once he lost weight, it seemed as though in a short time he had hyper-sexuality. There are brain disorders that can be associated with sexual drive.” Losing weight makes you a pedophile. Okay, gotcha. Are all of you doctors taking notes?

He went on to totally downplay how, uh… strong? Fogle’s pedophilia was, trying to justify his feelings by saying that “16- or 17-year-olds are not pre-pubertal children.” Suddenly it’s an issue of semantics–never mind the fact that, as the Indy Star reports, these “not pre-pubertal children” now have to take “medication for sleep, depression and anxiety at age 16.” But do go on about what defines a child, please.

Fogle also reportedly broke into tears. The Indy Star describes it best:

Fogle’s voice cracked and he sobbed as he said, “Not a day will go by when I don’t think about what I did to (the victims).”

“Members of my family are also victims of my acts,” he said before noting that his wife will be a single mother.

“You gave your wife $7 million, so she’ll be OK,” the judge said, interrupting.

The judge sentenced Fogle to 15 years, 8 months in prison. It’s important to note that this is more than what the prosecution was asking for in a plea bargain. Judge Tanya Walton Pratt said that this sentence “does not sufficiently account for the defendant’s criminal conduct.”

(via Jezebel, image via Flickr/Brian Turner)

—Please make note of The Mary Sue’s general comment policy.—

Do you follow The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Filed Under:

Follow The Mary Sue:

Jessica Lachenal is a writer who doesn’t talk about herself a lot, so she isn’t quite sure how biographical info panels should work. But here we go anyway. She's the Weekend Editor for The Mary Sue, a Contributing Writer for The Bold Italic (, and a Staff Writer for Spinning Platters ( She's also been featured in Model View Culture and Frontiers LA magazine, and on Autostraddle. She hopes this has been as awkward for you as it has been for her.