Jerry Sandusky Case

[peterd]

If proven guilty, he should fry for his actions.

[Arethusa]

Yesterday at the Sandusky trial in Bellefonte, PA saw the testimony of former Nittany Lions Assistant Coach, Mike McQueary, which was reportedly unwavering on the subject of his having witnessed a sexual assault of a child by Jerry Sandusky in the team's locker room in 2002.

McQueary testified that he had told his father about what he had witnessed and received the advice to notify Joe Paterno. It was Paterno's inaction beyond mere reporting an adumbrated version of what he'd been told that led to his and PSU President, Graham Spanier's, dismissal by the Board of Trustees.

Additional dramatic testimony was presented from one of Sandusky's alleged child victims who sobbed on the stand when giving his version of Sandusky's conduct.

Today's report on yesterday's trial proceedings in the case comes from Foxsports.com:

McQueary Details Scene in Shower

AP Feed to Foxsports.com
June 12, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. - A former Penn State assistant coach who was a central figure in Joe Paterno's downfall testified Tuesday that he heard a ''skin-on-skin smacking sound'' in a campus locker room one night in 2001 and saw something that was ''more than my brain could handle.''

Jerry Sandusky was standing naked in the showers behind a boy, slowly moving his hips, Mike McQueary told the jury.

McQueary, one of the star witnesses in the child sexual abuse case against Sandusky, said he had no doubt he was witnessing anal sex. He testified that he slammed his locker shut loudly as if to say, ''Someone's here! Break it up!''

Then, he said, he went upstairs to his office to try to make sense of what he had seen.

Sandusky, 68, is on trial on charges he molested 10 boys over a 15-year period. Authorities say he abused them in hotels, at his home and inside the football team's quarters. The former assistant coach and founder of an acclaimed youth charity has denied the allegations.

Paterno was fired last fall, shortly after Sandusky's arrest, when it became known that McQueary had told the head football coach about the shower episode a decade ago. Two months after his dismissal, Paterno died of lung cancer at 85.

McQueary was composed during his testimony, and when asked if he knew Sandusky, he looked right at him with a sharp glance that Sandusky returned.

McQueary's account differed little from the one he gave in December at a preliminary hearing for two Penn State administrators charged with failing to report the shower episode to authorities. One difference: He said it took place in 2001 instead of 2002.

Sandusky attorney Karl Rominger pressed McQueary during cross-examination about discrepancies in his estimate of the boy's age.

McQueary replied: ''If (you) want to argue about 9, 10, 11, 12 ... the fact is he had sex with a minor, a boy.''

Testifying on Day 2 of Sandusky's trial, McQueary said that he went to the football team building one night and walked into the support staff locker room to put away a pair of new sneakers. As he entered the locker room, he said, he heard a noise.

''Very much skin-on-skin smacking sound,'' he said. ''I immediately became alert and was kind of embarrassed that I was walking in on something.''

He said that he glanced over his shoulder at a mirror at a 45-degree angle and saw Sandusky ''standing behind a boy who was propped up against a wall.'' He estimated the boy to be 10 to 12 years old. He said that the boy's hands were up on the wall and ''the defendant's midsection was moving'' subtly.

''The glance would have taken only one or two seconds. I immediately turned back to my locker to make sure I saw what I saw,'' he said.

He said he wasn't sure whether Sandusky saw him. After slamming his locker to make some noise, he left. . .

Link for the rest:

msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/jerry-sandusky-child-sex-abuse-trial-day-2-061212?ocid=ansfox11


Additional coverage of yesterday's trial events:


Witness Weeps as He Testifies to Abuse

WaPo
June 12, 2012

www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/jerry-sandusky-trial-witness-weeps-as-he-testifies-to-abuse-in-coachs-home-basement/2012/06/12/gJQASQDcXV_story.html

****

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

The prosecution offered testimony from another of Jerry Sandusky's alleged victims and hearsay testimony from one of the janitors reported to have seen Sandusky in a locker room shower with a young boy.

The witness who testified said that one of his co-workers, now hospitalized with dementia, had imparted to him that he had seen Sandusky performing oral sex on a young boy, known as "Victim 8."

In addition, the prosecutor replayed for the jury a recording of the interview Sandusky gave to Bob Costas in November of last year.

According to this report from CBS News, Judge Cleland noted his impression that the prosecution's side of the case would conclude as early as this Friday.


Jerry Sandusky Trial: Janitor and "Victim 5" testify about alleged shower assaults

CBS/AP
June 13, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. - Testimony in the Jerry Sandusky sex abuse trial ended today with the judge allowing hearsay testimony from a janitor who said his co-worker told him he saw Sandusky performing oral sex on a young boy in a Penn State locker room shower in 2000.

Judge John Cleland also told the court that he anticipated the prosecution would wrap up its case by Friday.

On Wednesday afternoon, a fourth man, known as "Victim 5" testified that when he was 12 or 13, Sandusky exposed himself to him in a Penn State locker room sauna and sexually assaulted him in the shower right afterward.

The man said he met Sandusky through his charity, The Second Mile, when he was in the fifth grade. He testified that he was referred to in order to gain English skills because his family did not speak English at home. At first, the man testified, he didn't think Sandusky's attentions - like putting his hand on the boy's knee in the car - were inappropriate.

"My father used to squeeze my knee, so it was nothing unusual," he testified.

The man testified that Sandusky called his home in 2001 and asked his mother if he could go work out with him. He said the two went to the PSU gym and it was there that Sandusky exposed himself in the sauna.

Afterward, he testified, the two went to the showers where the witness chose a spigot at the far end and tried to face the wall but that he felt Sandusky watching him.

"I noticed that his penis was enlarged but I didn't understand the significance of it back then," he said, sniffling.

"He threw some soap at me and started lathering my shoulders," he continued. " I think he crept forward a little bit more. I felt his body on my back and kept lurching forward. I felt his penis on my back and I kind of turned away and I felt his arm move on me. He touched my genitalia. He took my hand and he placed it on his."

The witness testified that Sandusky was "upset with me" and drove him home. He said he kept silent about the incident until telling a girlfriend last year.

After Victim 5 testified, the prosecution played a recording of a Bob Costas interview of Sandusky which aired on NBC's "Rock Center" in November 2011.

In the interview, Sandusky denies sexually abusing the boys, saying, "I enjoy young people, I love to be around them. No, I am not sexually attracted to young boys."

The final witness to testify was Ronald Petrosky, a Penn State janitor, who told the court that he was doing his nightly cleaning when he saw "two pairs of legs" in the shower. He said he waited for them to leave to finish cleaning and was then approached by his co-worker, Jim Calhoun.

According to PennLive.com, Calhoun is currently in the hospital suffering from dementia and thus unable to testify. After some back and forth between the prosecution and the defense, Judge Cleland allowed Petrosky to testify as to what Calhoun told him he saw that night.

"I could tell he was upset," testified Petrosky. He told the court that Calhoun told him he had seen Sandusky performing oral sex on a young boy, known as "Victim 8."

Petrosky also told the court that he saw Sandusky and a boy leave the locker room the same night, both with wet hair, reports PennLive.

Tom Kline, the lawyer for one of the alleged victims, told reporters outside the courthouse: "It's just remarkable how many children one man can shower with."

Link: www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57452695-504083/jerry-sandusky-trial-janitor-and-victim-5-testify-about-alleged-shower-assaults/

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

Today, the Jerry Sandusky trial in Centre County, PA saw testimony from the last prosecution witness in the case.

Judge Cleland declared a three day recess in the proceedings with trial resuming on Monday, June 18th.

Sandusky's attorneys are expected to introduce what I call a "designer neurosis" defense of histrionic personality disorder. Here's a link for the criteria for HPD from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) IV:

web4health.info/en/answers/border-histrionic.htm

To be clear, there is no insanity plea here to excuse the conduct with which the Defendant has been charged for an inability to comprehend what he was doing or that what he was doing was wrong.

Sandusky apparently is intending to show that any seductive and sexually suggestive behavior that may have been perceived as such by these children, while inappropriate, led to nothing physical and that testimony to the contrary is financially motivated.

Nevertheless, and at long last, the decision as to what Sandusky did or did not do to his alleged victims and how it may have been perceived by them will be made by a jury composed of adults.


Final prosecution witness testifies Jerry Sandusky forcibly raped him

By Kim Kaplan, NBC News and M. Alex Johnson, msnbc.com
June 14, 2012 - Updated at 5:12 p.m. ET

BELLEFONTE, PA - The final prosecution witness in the child sexual abuse trial of former Penn State University assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky testified Thursday that Sandusky forcibly raped him on several occasions.

The testimony came on the fourth day of Sandusky's trial on 52 counts alleging that he sexually abused 10 boys over 15 years.

Two grand jury reports accused him of having used his connection to one of the nation's premier college football programs to "groom" the boys, whom he met through his Second Mile charity for troubled children, for sexual relationships. Sandusky has pleaded not guilty.

The 18-year-old man, identified in the indictment as "Victim 9," testified that he cried out for help as Sandusky raped him in the basement of the Sandusky home, but no one came to his assistance. He said he believed that the basement was soundproofed and that Sandusky's wife, Dottie, couldn't hear his pleas.

It was the most graphic and dramatic testimony so far at the trial in Bellefonte, Pa. Afterward, Judge John Cleland announced that the prosecution had concluded its case and that the defense would begin Monday after a three-day break.

The man said he stayed overnight at Sandusky's house between 50 and 100 times. He said Sandusky began forcibly raping him beginning when he was "maybe 13."

On some occasions, he said, the assaults were so forceful that he would bleed from his anus. He said he didn't seek medical attention; instead, "I just dealt with it."

"What was I going to do? I mean, he was a big guy," the man said. "He was bigger than me at the time, way bigger than me."

The man said he told no one about the abuse — even police when they began investigating — because he thought no one would believe him.

"He's an important guy — he's a football coach," he said. "Who would believe kids?"

On cross-examination, the man acknowledged that despite the "horrible" things Sandusky did to him, he continued to accept tickets to Penn State football games from the defendant as recently as last November. He said he did so "because I had a friend with me" who "had my back at the time.". . .

Link for the rest and internal links to sites providing additional information:

usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/14/12220622-final-prosecution-witness-testifies-jerry-sandusky-forcibly-raped-him?lite

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

Before the defense presented four character witnesses today, signaling its primary trial strategy that will include the presentation of supportive testimony from the Defendant's wife, the prosecution presented the testimony of the mother of one of his alleged victims who testified tearfully that she never understood why she could never find her son's underwear after he returned home from visits with Sandusky.

There was commentary from Judge Cleland outside of the hearing of the jury that he had doubts about the strength of the prosecution's case, but at this point in the trial is convinced that there is enough credible evidence that the charges should go to a jury.

He also cut the trial proceedings short early this afternoon on grounds of "technical issues" surrounding the presentation of witnesses.

This could mean no more than the failure to round up equipment to present videotaped testimony or possibly the inability of a witness to get to the courthouse.

Most crucially, Judge Cleland announced that the defense side of the case and prosecution rebuttal testimony would conclude on Wednesday and closing arguments will be presented Thursday of this week.


Jerry Sandusky Defense Ignores Detailed Accusations

By Colleen Curry and Beth Loyd
ABC News
June 18, 2012

BELLEFONTE - The withering allegations of sex abuse from eight accusers in the Jerry Sandusky trial were largely ignored today by Sandusky's legal team as the defense began telling their side of the story.

The defense's first day of testimony ended abruptly only an hour into the afternoon session as Judge John Cleland told the jury that "technical issues" with some of the witnesses would keep court adjourned until Tuesday morning. But he laid out a schedule that indicates Sandusky will offer few witnesses on his behalf.

Cleland would not explain what the problems with the witnesses were today, but said only that he expected the defense to rest Wednesday. He said the court would hear a rebuttal from the prosecution on Wednesday afternoon, and told the attorneys to be ready to give closing arguments on Thursday.

The judge informed the jury that they will be sequestered once they begin deliberations.

****

Before the defense began its case, the prosecution presented one last emotional witness.

The mother [of] Victim 9 testified through tears that she felt responsible for pushing her son to spend time with the coach because "he was Jerry Sandusky. He was an important guy."

The woman said that she never asked her son, who testified last week that he was raped by Sandusky, what exactly happened to him in Sandusky's basement during the sleepovers he said he had every weekend for nearly four years.

On Thursday, Victim 9, who is now 18, said that he was repeatedly forced to perform oral sex on Sandusky and be sodomized by Sandusky in the coach's basement. The testimony followed seven other witnesses who said they were sexually abused by Sandusky.

"I just can't imagine what happened to him," the mother said today through sobs.

"Do you feel responsible?" the prosecutor asked.

"Yes I do," she said.

The mother said that her son called her once from Sandusky's house asking her to pick him up immediately because he was feeling sick. In his testimony Thursday, Victim 9 said he called his mom for help once when Sandusky was sexually abusing him, but did not tell his mother the reason for the call.

Victim 9's mother testified that he suffered medical problems during ages 15, 16, and 17 when he had severe stomach problems and trouble going to the bathroom. She said he also never put his underwear into the laundry, always telling his mother that he had an accident and threw them out.

On Thursday, Amendola questioned Victim 9 about rectal bleeding and stains on his underwear. The boy said his mother never saw stains and that he "just dealt with it."

The trial began today with a surprising statement from Judge John Cleland saying he had doubts about the strength of the prosecution's case, but at this point in the trial is convinced that there is enough credible evidence that the charges should go to a jury. His comments were made while the jury was out of the courtroom.

Cleland's statements of doubt about the state's case contrasted with his consistent dismissal of motions by the defense to have charges dropped against Sandusky.

Since Sandusky's arrest in November, Amendola has repeatedly complained to Cleland that the charges against his client were too broad and too vague to be defended in court. Cleland dismissed Amendola's complaints repeatedly, but said today even he wondered whether the alleged charges were too vague.

"I've been concerned about this since the beginning," Cleland said. "There were very broad representations made by the Commonwealth on the bill of particulars. Since then, the Commonwealth has submitted an amended bill of particulars, and amended their information, which I believe now meets the standards of due process. Although early on I certainly was not persuaded that that was the case."

Cleland's statements followed a morning of legal wrangling over whether some of the counts of sex abuse against Sandusky should be tossed today, as the prosecution wraps up its case. The prosecution is expected to rest following one additional witness, who will take the stand at 10 a.m.


****

Defense lawyer Karl Rominger said that the counts of indecent assault from the man known as Victim 2, whom assistant coach Mike McQueary allegedly saw in the shower with Sandusky, should be dismissed because McQueary did not actually see a sexual act taking place, and there was no direct evidence that a sexual act occurred. The victim in that alleged assault has never been identified.

Cleland sided with the prosecution, however, saying that the jury could decide if McQueary's account was strong enough to prove a crime was committed.

Link: abcnews.go.com/US/jerry-sandusky-trial-defense-ignores-detailed-accusations/story?id=16593410

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

Jerry Sandusky's defense team was hard at work today providing the jury with character witness testimony, including his wife Dottie's.

Shrinks for both sides presented their views of Sandusky's "I'm just a neurotic attention hog" theory.

And the defense team presented a secret tape recorded conversation from 2011 between Centre County police detectives and an attorney of one of the alleged victims in which the police admitted that they had prompted additional complainants to speak by telling them what the other alleged victims had reported about Sandusky.

Interestingly, since society is in deep denial about any public figure committing the monstrous acts alleged here, the defense may be relying on Sandusky's benign smiling visage, a show of humor that the case should be referred to by the name of the soap opera, "All My Children", and the community's regard for Penn State to cast an aura of deniability that he could be guilty as charged.

It had been rumored that Joe Paterno's family members could be called to testify to mine any ill feeling among the jurors regarding his dismissal for failure to pursue Sandusky following the shower incident report of Mike McQueary back in 2002.

However, since Sandusky had been forcibly "retired" from his position with the school in the late '90's based on the Gricar investigation that led to his admission of showering with the son of a complainant, testimony from the Paternos could open the door to inferences that Sandusky's alleged transgressions could span additional decades than the one in issue here.

In any event, the defense needs only one juror to refuse to convict on a myriad of charges that rely on avowals by disadvantaged kids that Coach Sandusky molested them. As seen in the Casey Anthony trial, if jurors don't want to convict, they will invent a standard that goes far beyond a reasonable doubt that hasn't ever existed.

Anthony, however, admittedly killed only her own child. Sandusky has had, and will arguably continue to have contact with many, many more children. Will the jury speak for the people in refusing to take the risk?

Or, like the Catholic Church, will it shun the responsibility and leave it to God to punish the perp?


Jerry Sandusky's defense bolstered by tape establishing police led an accuser's statement

By Dan Wetzel
Yahoo Sports
June 19, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. – For 16 minutes the tape rolled, apparently unknown to two state police officers investigating Jerry Sandusky and the defense attorney of Victim No. 4 during an April 2011 meeting.

It's turned into the strongest evidence yet that could create reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors about the guilt of Sandusky, who is facing 51 counts of child molestation. That all all played out Tuesday morning at Centre County Courthouse.

The afternoon session featured dueling psychologists whose testimony mostly cancelled each other out about whether Sandusky suffers from a personality disorder, the mostly I-saw-nothing testimony of wife Dottie Sandusky and an attempt by the defense to compel a local newspaper reporter to testify about emails she sent to an alleged victim's mother that the defense said encouraged the mother talk to police.

None of it was as compelling, or potentially important to the jury, as the surprise tape recording.

During the 2011 interview with police, Victim No. 4 was on a break and not in the room. The tape was left on and recorded a candid conversation between police and Victim No. 4's attorney.

Sandusky's defense attorneys, and even Judge John Cleland, suggested Tuesday that it may call into question whether police led witnesses in their lengthy investigation.

"The issue is whether or not seeds were planted by the officer," Judge Cleland said during a procedural argument with the jury present, inadvertently giving the defense the ultimate line to build its case around.

From the start, the Sandusky defense has alleged the former Penn State defensive coordinator was subjected to an overaggressive investigation that targeted him for years.

On the recording, state police corporal Joseph Leiter and Victim No. 4's attorney, Ben Andreozzi, discuss the case. At that point, Victim No. 4 had not detailed the full extent of Sandusky's alleged crimes, which would later include multiple accounts of forced oral sex in Penn State locker room showers.

Leiter tells Andreozzi about incidents with other alleged victims that police had uncovered.

"Oh, you're kidding, the time frame matches up?" Andreozzi said. "Can we at some point say to [Victim No. 4], 'Listen, we have interviewed other kids, other kids have admitted that there was intercourse. And they've admitted. Is there anything else you want to tell us?' "

Leiter acknowledged they could and that doing so isn't unusual.

"Yep, we do that with all the other kids, 'Listen, this is what we've found … This is what we found, this is how he operates. … This has happened and this has happened and that has happened," Leiter said.

The conversation continued for 16 minutes until Victim No. 4 returned to the room and was given a Sierra Mist to drink.

Leiter then addressed Victim No. 4.

"You're not the first," he said. "I've interviewed probably nine kids, nine other adults. And you're doing very well. It is amazing. If this was a book, you'd be repeating word for word what other people told us. And we know from these other young adults who talked to us that there is a pretty well-defined progression that he operated and he still operates to some degree.

"Often this progression goes on into a long period of time leading into more than just touching, there's been actual oral sex that's taken place by both parties and it is classified that an actual rape has occurred. I don't want you to feel that again.

"I don't want you to feel ashamed. You are a victim in this thing. What happened, happened. These types of things happen. We need you to tell us what happened. Again, we're not going to treat you any differently … You are a victim of this crime.

"We need you to tell us as graphically as you can what took place. I just want you to know that you are not alone in this … I just want you to understand your not alone in this. By no means are you alone in this."

Victim No. 4: "I understand."

Leiter: "OK, we're going to restart the recording. It is now 12:37. Again, we are going to continue the recording."

Sandusky's attorneys hammered Leiter and fellow state trooper Scott Rossman on Tuesday for potentially leading the witness and describing specific acts when they thought the tape wasn't running.

They noted both officers previously testified they hadn't done such a thing and that they never discussed specific acts with any of the 40 to 50 children they interviewed during the course of the investigation.

When recalled as witnesses, both had to acknowledge that in this case there had been discussion, although both officers declared it proper police tactics.

"Were there any other victims, witnesses, people that you interviewed that you would go off tape [with]," defense attorney Karl Rominger asked Leiter.

"Not that I remember," Leiter said.

"Not that you remember, but you can't say for sure," Rominger said.

If anything, the defense was bolstered by a comment from Judge Cleland. In open court, with the jury seated and listening, the two sides argued to the judge how much of the tape should be allowed to play.

That's when Cleland first said, "The issue is whether or not seeds were planted by the officer."

He later said the issue was actually whether the officers' testimony may not have been accurate when they said they never discussed specifics with witnesses. He used that reasoning to rule the prosecution couldn't play more of the tape.

What effect the tape could have on the verdict is unknown. It was the first strong bit of evidence presented by a defense that otherwise has mostly relied on character witnesses for Sandusky. It goes to the heart of one of the key defense arguments.

And it may have been the judge that offered the best summation of what the defense was trying to accomplish.

It goes to the heart of one of the key defense arguments, that authorities were convinced Sandusky was guilty and crafted a case backward around that premise.

It's even led the defense to subpoena Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot News reporter Sara Ganim, who won a Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of the scandal. The newspaper filed a motion to squash the subpoena, leading to a brief, late afternoon hearing in front of Judge Cleland.

Defense attorney Joe Amendola said he wanted to call Ganim to the stand to verify a March 31, 2011, story about Sandusky being investigated by a grand jury, whose work is supposed to be secret. He also wanted to go over alleged emails between Ganim and the mother of Victim 6.

"Essentially the email said 'I'm suggesting you contact a certain investigator if you want your case to go forward,' " Amendola said. "There are a lot of forces at work pushing this [investigation of Sandusky] forward."

The matter is expected to be resolved prior to the 9 a.m. start to court Wednesday.

On a day featuring a parade of character witnesses for Sandusky, the most anticipated came last, his wife of 45 years, Dottie. She said she knew little, other than to refute an earlier assertion that their basement is soundproof.

The most problematic issue for the defense remains this: Why and how would eight separate alleged victims, a former assistant coach and a group of janitors all come together to lie about Jerry Sandusky's alleged molestations?

Joseph E. McGettigan III is the state's special deputy attorney general. He's also worked in Hollywood, written television scripts for crime dramas and has a brother-in-law that composed the familiar theme song for "Law and Order."

He knows drama and it showed as he wrapped up a cross-examination of Dottie Sandusky by asking her what motivation all of these people she knew would have to make up such terrible stories about her husband.

"I, I, I don't know," Dottie said. "I don't know what it would be for."

McGettigan let it sit out there for a beat and then closed like he was on TV.

"I have no further questions, your honor."

Link: sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--jerry-sandusky-trial-defense-testify-tape-victim-police.html

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

Today saw the completion of evidentiary and testimonial submissions in the CW v. Sandusky trial with the defense resting following an in camera meeting between the Defendant, his attorneys and Judge Cleland, but not the prosecution team, that ended before lunchtime.

Prior to that meeting, a friend of Mike McQueary's had taken the stand to say that, although McQueary looked visibly shaken and upset on the night he claimed to have witnessed the Defendant assaulting a child in the PSU locker room shower, McQueary had not told him that he'd seen an incident of that nature.

Sandusky himself did not testify despite tantalizing noises made by his defense team that he wanted to do so.

Today's business additionally included the replacement of a juror who had become ill with an alternate.

Closing summations by the prosecution and defense are scheduled for tomorrow and will be followed by the Court's instructions to the jury who will be sequestered throughout their deliberations.


Jerry Sandusky trial: Defense rests without him taking stand

Staff Report
Sporting News
June 20, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa.—Jerry Sandusky's defense has rested its case in the child sex abuse trial without calling him to the stand following a closed-door meeting involving defense attorneys, the former Penn State assistant football coach and the judge.

Court had been scheduled to resume at 11 a.m. ET after a break, but the meeting lasted past 11:30. Prosecutors did not participate in the closed-door meeting.

Sandusky’s attorney, Joe Amendola had been expected to rest his case today or Thursday. The prosecution rested its case Monday. The case is expected to go to the jury Thursday.

In the first part of the morning session today, defense attorneys sought to undercut testimony by former assistant Mike McQueary that he saw Sandusky sexually abusing a boy of about 10 in a football facility shower.

A family friend of McQueary says the one-time graduate assistant spoke to him the night he claimed he saw Sandusky pressing a boy against a wall in the shower room. Dr. Jonathan Dranov says McQueary gave him a different description of the events.

Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse trial is entering its final days. Dranov says McQueary was "visibly shaken and upset" but McQueary did not specifically say he witnessed an assault.

ABC News had the original report that Sandusky would not testify, although according to an ESPN report he had wanted to but his attorneys decided against his taking the stand.

Neither Sandusky nor Amendola would comment when entering the courthouse this morning, but Amendola had said earlier in the proceedings to "stay tuned" when asked if Sandusky would testify in his behalf.

Meantime, in another development, one of the jurors in the trial was excused for an illness on what was the final day of testimony.

The juror was excused at the start of this morning's session and was replaced by a female alternate.

Link: aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2012-06-20/jerry-sandusky-trial-testimony-sex-abuse-trial-defense?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl18|sec3_lnk1%26pLid%3D171496

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

Breaking news: Citing a potential need for reversal of a guilty verdict on 3 of the 51 Counts against the Defendant, J. Cleland dismissed these charges because he felt them to be unsupported in the trial evidence.

The case is expected to go to the jury later today following closing arguments by the prosecutor and defense counsel and the judge's instructions to the jury.


Judge throws out 3 of 51 counts against Sandusky

By Genard C. Armas and Mark Scolford
AP Feed to Yahoo News
June 21, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. (AP) — The judge overseeing Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse trial has thrown out three of the 51 charges in the case, leaving the former Penn State assistant football coach facing 48 counts.

Judge John Cleland has dismissed two counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse related to the alleged sexual abuse of an accuser known as Victim 4. Cleland says the charges did not bear out what testimony revealed.

In his ruling, released Thursday morning, Cleland says he would have been required to set aside any convictions on those counts, because "the verdict was not supported by the evidence."

He also dismissed a count that he says was the same as another charge.

Cleland also ruled against a defense motion to dismiss five counts related to a boy who was allegedly seen with Sandusky by a janitor.

Link: news.yahoo.com/judge-throws-3-51-counts-against-sandusky-133915952--spt.html

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

This article was written by a sportswriter and not a veteran trial observer, as can be seen by the kudos given to defense counsel for portraying Sandusky as more victimized than his accusers.

There are also plenty of props for the prosecutor who reminded the jurors that their job was to weigh the evidence against Jerry Sandusky without being blinded by the distracting externals promoted by the defense.

Interestingly, defense counsel harped on no accusations of child molestation having been made against Sandusky until he was in his fifties, but apparently did not mention the theory that it's okay for an old guy to hop in the shower nekkid with child after child after child.

In any event, here's the report of what was said today in the courtroom before the jury was sent out to do its work. I'll be back to let you know about any news occurring between now and when they return with their verdict.

And afterward, of course.


Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse case goes to the jury after both sides make final arguments

By Dan Wetzel
Yahoo Sports
June 21, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. – For 72 minutes Thursday morning, defense attorney Joe Amendola paced in front of the jurors' box and accomplished what many thought impossible: make an impassioned and purposeful case that Jerry Sandusky was innocent of child abuse charges.

He invoked Mother Teresa and Joe Paterno. He directly attacked some of the state's strongest evidence against his client, including Sandusky's stumbling interview with NBC. He painted the picture of overaggressive cops, social workers and even a newspaper hell-bent on getting the former Penn State defensive coordinator.

And he consistently challenged jurors to consider the totality of the circumstances, that no one ever alleged anything against Sandusky until he was in his mid 50s, that the police didn't arrest him on numerous previous accusations and that Sandusky couldn't have had the time to commit all these crimes. He concluded that this was the work of a vast conspiracy driven by money from potential civil suits.

"Folks, do we have to get hit in the head with a brick to figure this out?" Amendola said before pointing at Sandusky seated at the defense table. "This man's life is at stake."

Amendola maximized what was the limited amount of material the defense had to work with. If Sandusky beats the long odds of earning an acquittal or even if the jury comes back hung, then it's because of this closing argument, far and away the defense's best moment of the nearly two-week trial.

Of course, nothing may be enough to save Sandusky from 48 counts related to sexually abusing 10 boys over a 15-year period. . . During the trial, the state presented waves of emotionally powerful testimony, devastated witnesses and Sandusky's own bizarre behavior.

Deputy attorney general Joseph E. McGettigan III followed Amendola with his own summation, which was halting and not nearly as strong but mocked the vast conspiracy theory that would require compliance from hundreds of participants over decades.

"It's not about conspiracies, it's not about time-travel conspiracies, it's not about people making financial fortunes," McGettigan said. "… It collapses under itself.

"… This is about what happened to those boys," he said as he pointed at the boyhood pictures of eight of the alleged victims.

The jury received the case at 1:12 p.m. ET and will be sequestered during deliberations. Sandusky, who has maintained his innocence, faces as many as 400 years in prison.

The case against him is strong, with McGettigan using Amendola's own words from his opening statement by reminding the jury that it was the defense that stated, "The Commonwealth has overwhelming evidence against Mr. Sandusky."

No matter the outcome, no matter which way you fell on Sandusky's guilt, what Amendola pulled off was some tremendous lawyering. He's been oft-criticized for his tactics since the Sandusky scandal went national in November, but he delivered on his reputation as a fine attorney Thursday morning in a warm, crowded courtroom.

His strongest arguments were pointing out that Sandusky was never accused of anything until the mid-1990s.

"So out of the blue, when he is in his mid 50s, he decides to be a pedophile," he said. "Does that make sense?"

He tried to destroy the testimony of former Penn State assistant Mike McQueary, who alleges he walked in on Sandusky engaging in anal sex with a boy in a locker room shower. He noted that McQueary didn't stop this crime and didn't call the cops. McQueary did tell five men, including his father, Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno and university officials, and none of them believed it was worth arresting Sandusky at the time.

That, Amendola said, suggests McQueary didn't see what he now says he saw because there's no way they wouldn't have reported it.

"You all have common sense," he said. "Does that make sense?"

He later asked why the police didn't arrest Sandusky in 2008, when Victim No. 1 came forward with considerable accusations.

"They could have arrested him in 2008 if they thought he was such a monster," Amendola argued. "Jerry's a monster. If he's such a monster, why didn't they arrest him in 2008?"

He harped on police who coached alleged victims and said the boys are financially motivated to accuse Sandusky. Amendola even tried to blame the conspiracy for besmirching the reputation of Penn State, the fallout of which included firings of good men and even "a dead coach," a reference to the iconic Paterno.

Later, McGettigan scolded Amendola for pulling Penn State into this case.

In his best and most dramatic moment, McGettigan closed his presentation by walking directly behind the seated Sandusky and telling the jury that while they can't erase the horrible acts committed on the children, they can help make things right.

"What you can do, should do, must do is come out and say the defendant, that he molested, abused and hurt these children," McGettigan said. "You can't give back those souls, those pieces of the souls he took.

"You can acknowledge it and give him the justice he deserves, find him guilty of everything."

In a case where the defendant has acknowledged that he regularly laid in bed with boys and hugged, wrestled and tickled boys in the shower, there wasn't much room for the defense to work with.

Amendola's argument, at the very least, could play well to any juror that may distrust authorities or see Sandusky as a railroaded former local hero.

Considering many thought Sandusky stood little chance, Amendola at least gave him hope.

McGettigan didn't let up, though. He went, again, through the brutal details of Sandusky molesting the boys, pounding home each act and playing on the state's great advantage: the alleged victims' testimonies. It's one thing to allege a giant conspiracy, it's another to cause jurors to forget about the often-powerful personal testimony of anguished accusers and witnesses.

He defended McQueary, the police investigators, the children's youth services staffers and the host of others who testified against Sandusky. He asked that if nothing happened in the shower the night McQueary walked in, why didn't Sandusky bring forward the boy today to say it was an innocent event? Today he's a grown man who has not been identified and did not testify.

McGettigan also took time to rebut a number of Amendola's assertions that weren't factually correct. He lacked the flair of the defense attorney, but he had a mountain of evidence and facts on his side.

The prosecution also brought in three of the alleged victims and their families to sit in the first two rows of the gallery, near the jury. The alleged victims spent McGettigan's 64-minute long closing argument looking directly at jurors.

On the other side of the court, Dottie Sandusky sat with four of her and Jerry's adopted children – three sons and a daughter. One of their children, Matt, who was on the witness list but did not testify, was not present.

Judge John Cleland gave jurors detailed jury instructions and then reminded them that "you must decide those charges on the evidence."

After they shuffled out to Courtroom No. 2 to get to work, Amendola expressed that he was "tired."

"We faced such an uphill battle, it was like climbing Mt. Everest from the foot of the hill," he said. "We just tried to get to an even playing field."

Just a few feet away, Sandusky stood with his hands in his pockets. He visited with family as his wife gently rubbed his back and arm. His fate would be determined just down the hall.

Link to this article containing an internal link to Sandusky juror profiles showing that most of the seven women and five men have Penn State ties:

sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--jerry-sandusky-closing-arguments-jury-joe-amendola-joseph-mcgettigan-.html

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

It didn't take long for additional news to break in this case, however, the jury won't be hearing it if the bailiffs are conscientious in honoring their duty to keep them sequestered.

There is no indication in this report as to the status of the Matt Sandusky investigation and whether or not charges will be brought as a result of these new allegations.

There will undoubtedly be elaboration on this new development as time goes on.


Matt Sandusky says he was abused by father, Jerry Sandusky

By Mike Krumboltz
Yahoo News
June 21, 2012 - UPDATE: 6:10pm

According to NBC News, Matt Sandusky was prepared to take the witness stand against his father. NBC News reports that Jerry Sandusky decided against testifying on his own behalf after the defense got word that the prosecution had plans to call a surprise witness, Matt Sandusky.

.........

Jerry Sandusky's adopted son, Matt Sandusky, said that his father abused him. Matt Sandusky released a statement through his lawyers, Andrew Shubin and Justine Andronici.

"During the trial, Matt Sandusky contacted us and requested our advice and assistance in arranging a meeting with prosecutors to disclose for the first time in this case that he is a victim of Jerry Sandusky's abuse. At Matt's request, we immediately arranged a meeting between him and the prosecutors and investigators."

The statement continued: "This has been an extremely painful experience for Matt and he has asked us to convey his request that the media respect his privacy."

In the past, Matt Sandusky has defended his father over allegations that he abused young boys. Jerry Sandusky is on trial for multiple charges of child abuse. The jury is currently deliberating.

The AP reports that following Jerry Sandusky's arrest in November, 2011, Jill Jones, the ex-wife of Matt Sandusky, went to the police to obtain a restraining order to keep her former father-in-law from hosting sleep-overs with Jill and Matt's three young children.

The AP also reports that Matt Sandusky attempted suicide back in 1995, several months after he went to live with the Sanduskys.

When Victim 4 testified, he said that Matt became visibly nervous when Jerry Sandusky tried to engage in a "soap battle" with the boys in the shower. Victim 4 testified that Matt Sandusky shut off his shower and went to another locker room.

From combined staff and wire reports.

Link: news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/matt-sandusky-says-abused-father-jerry-sandusky-214145968.html

Arethusa

[101ABN]

I'd say he's toast.

[Arethusa]

Jun 21, 2012 20:40:41 GMT -8 101ABN said:

I'd say he's toast.

Yes, Grizz - especially if it's true that the Centre County and PA state authorities have cases to prosecute on behalf of additional alleged victims who came forward after the grand jury report about these cases came out.

That's why I thought it was dangerous for Sandusky's lawyer to crow that the first time his client was accused of molesting children was when he was in his fifties.

Pedophiles generally start offending at a much younger age, and it is easily inferred that Sandusky structured his entire adult existence around enabling himself to meet and seduce young children with gifts, trips, the whole nine yards.

The purpose behind all of it is now for the jury to decide.

Here's the latest from Bellefonte, PA with a recap of the evidence the jury is in the process of reviewing and what it has asked to look at again.


Jerry Sandusky jury rehears Penn State assistant testimony

By Genaro C. Armas and Mark Scolforo, Associated Press
Los Angeles Daily News
June 22, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. - Jurors in Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse trial listened again to testimony from a key prosecution witness Friday as they began their second day of deliberations in the former Penn State assistant football coach's high-profile case.

The jury deliberated for more than eight hours Thursday before adjourning at the end of a long session that featured dueling portrayals of Sandusky as a "predatory pedophile" or the victim of a conspiracy between investigators and his accusers.

Sandusky is accused of sexually abusing 10 boys over a 15-year period, using his charity for at-risk youth, The Second Mile, as a source of victims who would be dazzled by gifts, grateful for his attention and - perhaps most importantly - unlikely to speak up.

Sandusky has repeatedly denied the allegations. The defense portrayed him as the hapless victim of a conspiracy to convict him of heinous crimes. They explain the 48 charges against him as the result of an investigatory team out for blood and accusers who willingly played along in hopes of securing a big payday.

Judge John Cleland said jurors would take a couple of hours Friday to listen again to testimony from Mike McQueary and Dr. Jonathan Dranov. The testimony was being read out loud from transcripts.

McQueary told the court he saw Sandusky engaging in a sex act with a young boy in a Penn State shower in 2001. Dranov later testified that McQueary told him a different version of the story that didn't include the then-graduate assistant seeing sexual contact. However, McQueary testified that he hadn't told Dranov all that he saw.

Shortly after the jury began deliberations Thursday, attorneys for Sandusky's 33-year-old adopted son, Matt, dropped a bombshell, saying he'd been sexually abused by the former coach and had been prepared to testify against him if called to the stand.

Sequestered during deliberations, the jury was under orders from Cleland to ponder only the case placed in their hands.

The jury heard from eight accusers who claim Sandusky engaging in sexual contact ranging from kissing and fondling to forced oral or anal sex.

One testified he felt at times like Sandusky's son, at others his "girlfriend."

A second accuser - a foster child at the time authorities say he was abused - said Sandusky threatened he would never see his biological family again if he told anyone he was forced to perform sex acts but later took it back and claimed to love him.

One accuser testified to receiving what he called "creepy love letters" from Sandusky. "I know that I have made my share of mistakes," read one handwritten note. "However, I hope that I will be able to say that I cared. There has been love in my heart."

The defense said the longwinded letters were simply the manifestation of a personality disorder characterized by excessive emotionality and attention seeking.

Two people who prosecutors say were sexually abused by Sandusky haven't been identified. McQueary's testimony is the basis for charges involving one of those alleged victims.

It was also McQueary's testimony that touched off the massive scandal that rocked Penn State and forced a re-examination of the role of college administrators in reporting abuse allegations.

Sandusky has denied the allegations, but did not testify in his own defense. Jurors are aware, however, of the denials he gave "Rock Center" just after his arrest. In it, Sandusky seemed to stumble at times and struggled to give direct answers to questions about his conduct.

Asked if he was sexually attracted to boys, Sandusky told NBC's Bob Costas: "Sexually attracted, you know, I, I enjoy young people. I, I love to be around them. ... No, I'm not sexually attracted to young boys."

Senior Deputy Attorney General Joseph McGettigan III seized on that in closing arguments, saying: "I would think that the automatic response, if someone asks you if you're a criminal, a pedophile, a child molester, or anything along those lines, would be: 'You're crazy. No. Are you nuts?'"

Prosecutors said Sandusky used gifts and the allure of Penn State's vaunted football program to attract and abuse vulnerable boys who came from troubled homes, often ones without a father figure in the house.

"What you should do is come out and say to the defendant that he molested and abused and give them back their souls," McGettigan told jurors. "I give them to you. Acknowledge and give them justice."

Defense attorney Joe Amendola argued that Sandusky was targeted by investigators who coached accusers into making false claims about a generous man whose charity gave them much-needed love.

"So out of the blue (after) all these years, when Jerry Sandusky is in his mid-50s, he decides to become a pedophile? Does that make sense to anybody?" Amendola asked rhetorically.

The jury, which includes nine people with ties to Penn State, had already begun deliberating when Matt Sandusky's attorneys issued a statement alleging that Sandusky abused one of his six adopted children.

"During the trial, Matt Sandusky contacted us and requested our advice and assistance in arranging a meeting with prosecutors to disclose for the first time in this case that he is a victim of Jerry Sandusky's abuse," Andrew Shubin and Justine Andronici said in the statement. "At Matt's request, we immediately arranged a meeting between him and the prosecutors and investigators.

"This has been an extremely painful experience for Matt and he has asked us to convey his request that the media respect his privacy. There will be no further comment."

Matt Sandusky went to live with Sandusky and his wife as a foster child and was adopted by them as an adult.

Shortly after Jerry Sandusky's arrest, Matt Sandusky's ex-wife went to court to keep her former father-in-law away from their three young children. Jill Jones successfully obtained a restraining order forbidding the children from sleeping over at their grandparents' home.

Around the same time, details emerged that Matt Sandusky had attempted suicide just four months after first going to live with the couple in 1995. He had come into the home through The Second Mile.

Shortly after the suicide attempt, Sandusky's probation officer wrote, "The probation department has some serious concerns about the juvenile's safety and his current progress in placement with the Sandusky family," according to court records supplied to The Associated Press by his birth mother, Debra Long.

Despite those concerns, probation and child welfare officials recommended continued placement with the Sandusky family, and the judge overseeing his case agreed.

During testimony last week, an accuser known as Victim 4 said Matt Sandusky was living at the Sandusky home at the time he stayed there overnight and testified that Jerry Sandusky came into the shower with the two boys and "started pumping his hand full of soap." Matt Sandusky shut off the shower and left, appearing nervous, the witness said.


Link: www.dailynews.com/news/ci_20915680/jerry-sandusky-jury-rehears-penn-state-assistant-testimony?source=rss

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

Gone forever are the anxiety and the worry in the hearts of those exploited by Jerry Sandusky in the most horrific manner for a child as to whether anyone would believe their stories.

Last night, the jury that heard them tell them convicted Sandusky on 45 counts of child sexual abuse.

A sentence that could consume the remainder of his natural life - probably in solitary confinement circumstances - will be imposed by Judge Cleland in about 90 days.

This piece by Dan Wetzel gives brilliant voice to and eloqently describes the feelings of those who have felt a growing sense of outrage since hearing of these charges nearly a year ago upon learning the jury's judgment against Jerry Sandusky.

A line in his article that said much to me was that, when Sandusky's wife heard the cheers rising from the courthouse steps outside as news of the verdict got there, her head snapped back suddenly.

Hers is the denial of women and mothers down through the ages who've allowed abuse of vulnerable and helpless children under their own roofs at terrible cost for reasons peculiar only to them.

With this verdict ripping her world wide open, I wonder if the sentence Dottie Sandusky will be serving for the rest of her natural life will be much crueler than her husband's.


Jerry Sandusky the monster is held accountable and his sex abuse victims are heroes for testifying

By Dan Wetzel
Yahoo Sports
June 23, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. – Juror No. 4, the foreman, gray-haired and middle-aged, stood high in the back row of the jurors' box, looked down at some sheets of paper, then at Jerry Sandusky and began to deliver a verdict a long, sad time coming.

Guilty. Guilty. Guilty.

Of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse. Of indecent assault. Of endangering the welfare of children.

Guilty. Guilty. Guilty.

Of terrorizing the poorest and most vulnerable of this area's youth. Of abusing his fame as a former Penn State defensive coordinator. Of conducting a charade of charitable work to supposedly help children.

Guilty. Guilty. Guilty.

Forty-five times it rang out. Juror No. 4 hammered each one home with the independent force each one deserved.

There were just three charges Sandusky escaped on. After each of those not-guilty counts, it seemed that the foreman raised his voice as he returned to this parade of guilty verdicts.

He seemed to make sure each count was granted its own moment to linger, to emphasize the torture and pain and shattered innocence it produced. Oral sex. Anal sex. Fondling. One despicable act worse than the next.

This here was a night of redemption, a predator laid bare with nowhere to hide, with no more lies to tell, with no one left to save him.

"Mr. Sandusky," Judge John Cleland said when this dramatic, nearly eight-minute condemnation was finally, fully read, "you have been found guilty by a jury of your peers."

Sandusky, clad in slacks and a brown sport coat, stood mostly motionless throughout, looking up at Juror 4 as the truth was slammed down onto him, as the light was finally and irrevocably cast on his behavior. His left hand was placed casually in his pocket while behind him his wife, Dottie, three adopted sons and an adopted daughter either shook their heads at the jury or openly wept.

Moments later, Sandusky gave a quick wave to his family as he was led out by sheriff's deputies. Judge Cleland will formally sentence him in about 90 days.

The 68-year-old faces up to 442 years behind bars, or what might as well be forever and ever and ever some more. His defense attorney, Joe Amendola, hinted at an appeal, but it likely would be fruitless.

On the other side of the courtroom, Victim No. 6, who as an 11 year-old in 1998 was abused by Sandusky in a Penn State locker room shower, an act that was investigated but never prosecuted, laid his head on the top of the bench in front of him and sobbed uncontrollably. He was soon hugging family members who had joined him.

"I'm just overwhelmed," he said, now a grown man, strong and no longer timid in the face of an old pathetic coach.

Soon reporters were racing out of the courthouse, set to break the news of the guilty verdict to a huge throng that had gathered on the steps. Dottie Sandusky was kneeling by then in front of her family, trying to provide comfort when the word of the verdict hit the masses.

The roaring cheers and screams of joy swept right through the courthouse door, up the stairs and into the second-floor courtroom. They startled Dottie, whose head snapped up at the noise and then sunk down as she realized the people of Centre County were celebrating her husband's demise.

Sandusky will be held at the local jail until he can be evaluated by the state prison system and assigned accordingly. He is expected to wind up in protective custody, away from the general population, for his own protection. That likely means 23 hours a day in a 6-by-8-foot cell. In other words, a concrete box of hell.

"He was prepared to go to jail tonight," Amendola said. "Mentally prepared. He's not scared. I think given the circumstances of the case and how the trial was going, he knew this was coming.

"This is not a surprise. This is what everyone expected."

Amendola said Sandusky's one regret was not being able to "tell his story" from the witness stand. His 33-year-old adoptive son, Matt, determined during the trial that Jerry abused him as a child. He made himself available as a prosecution witness. Matt couldn't be called, however, unless the state had introduced the incidents on a cross-examination of Jerry Sandusky. It was too much for the defense to risk.

"Even though Jerry, Dottie and the other kids deny Matt's allegation, it would've been explosive," Amendola said. "There was no way Jerry could testify without Matt being called."

They walked Sandusky out the back door of the courthouse and to a waiting sheriff's vehicle, just 50 yards downhill from where they used to hang criminals in the courtyard of the old county jail.

Back then they'd invite as many people as they could fit to ring the gallows and bear witness. Those that couldn't gain admission would climb the roofs of local houses to watch the execution from high above in this old tightly packed, Victorian downtown.

That was the 1800s, but things haven't changed so much; just five miles from here, at the Rockview prison, is the state's execution chamber. And in Bellefonte tradition, a crowd gathered to jeer and scream Friday night behind the courthouse, to let their venom ring around Sandusky's head for eternity.

Happy Valley, indeed.

The verdict ended the fallacy that this was an area too devoted to Penn State football to render a fair and proper judgment. The anger at Sandusky was deeper than the outside world could fathom. There may have been a conspiracy to protect Sandusky in the highest levels of Penn State. That will be played out in legal proceedings against university officials, an independent investigation set for release next month and the inevitable slew of civil cases to come that will seek to tap into the school's $1.8 billion endowment.

None of that represents the rank and file here, not the good people who never hesitated to see Sandusky as a monster and were pained when he seemingly dragged the entire region's reputation down with him.

For at least 15 years Sandusky quietly stalked this idyllic, Rockwellian community, preying on its most susceptible boys. Using his Second Mile charity to meet at-risk kids, he often fostered relationships with the poor, the fatherless, the troubled or even simply the bored.

In one haunting bit of testimony, Victim No. 4 recounted that he compartmentalized the sexual abuse from Sandusky and endured teasing from classmates who suspected something inappropriate because he had so few positives in his life. The chance to leave his little town and troubled home for afternoons hanging around the Penn State football program were enough, he testified.

"I thought, 'I didn't want to lose this. This is something good happening to me,' " he said.

This, time and again, is whom Sandusky chose to target, to trick, to molest, to injure forever. Under the camouflage of mentoring, he stripped them of their innocence and left them in a confused heap in an empty locker room or alone in a dark basement, used and discarded on some creepy waterbed.

During this trial a parade of victims overcame their own fear and embarrassment to detail, often with chilling testimony through sobs and gasped breath, what Sandusky did to them. They uncovered a hidden side to this bucolic region, where not everyone is wealthy and educated and as pure as Penn State's famous white uniforms.

They also cried about regret. Victim No. 4, now 28, said he wished he'd summoned the courage to come forward sooner and save the younger victims. Victim No. 9's mother wept at the memories of sending her son, against his wishes, to stay with Sandusky because she believed he needed a positive male role model.

Former Penn State assistant coach Mike McQueary noted that he didn't punch out Sandusky when he discovered him in a shower abusing a boy in 2001 and instead let his university bosses handle the case. Which they didn't. A former Penn State police detective conveyed his frustration at not being able to convince the then-district attorney to charge Sandusky in 1998.

On and on it went. Years and years and years. Incident after incident after incident.

Until finally, deep into a warm Friday night, Juror 4 stood up in that box, representing 11 other citizens that had poured over each and every allegation during 21 hours of deliberation, and read from those papers.

Finally, it was over for Sandusky. Finally, the deception and protection were gone. Finally, this once hulking man, backed by the prestige of Nittany Lion football, propped up by the illusion of charitable work, had nowhere to run, no tale to tell, no one capable of keeping him from facing the awful truth of his life.

Guilty. Guilty. Damn, Damn Guilty.

Link: sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--jerry-sandusky-guilty-verdict-victims-heroes-penn-state-civil-suits-.html;_ylt=AruuAE89X2j_gXBn54vLbJ3O7ux_;_ylu=X3oDMTVkODJmZ2lwBGNjb2RlA3ZzaGFyZWFnMnVwcmVzdARtaXQDTWl4ZWQgTGlzdCBOZXdzIEZvciBZb3UEcGtnA2YwZTkzMmZhLWRkNDUtMzVlYy1hYTBhLWIxZjcxNzlmMzQxNARwb3MDMgRzZWMDTWVkaWFCTGlzdE1peGVkTmV3c0ZvcllvdUNBVGVtcAR2ZXIDZTgyZjNlMjEtYmQwMi0xMWUxLTlmZWItZTg0NjE1NDVhMThl;_ylg=X3oDMTJ2OWxmcWNyBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDN2I5YTFjMTctNmI2ZS0zMjJkLTkyOGQtZmEyMDcxN2EwYzcyBHBzdGNhdANob21lfGV4cGVydHMEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=3

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

There's been some news made since the jury hearing the Sandusky case rendered its verdict on Friday night.

The defense lawyers have been making noises that they didn't have adequate time to prepare to defend him in the seven months since his arrest and the commencement of the trial.

The writers of the piece note that "experts" have said this is a very short amount of time, but the Amendola crew is complaining that one of their number was busy with something else and there wasn't time to read everything from the grand jury file.

They've also said that they consulted with not only the trial judge, but the PA Superior and Supreme Courts on this matter as well. However, if the latter two courts (that must hear any appeals in the case), didn't give a continuance when initially asked, it's doubtful they'd renege on that decision in an appeal.

When courts deny a plea for delay, they're not going to cave to an excuse that the defense attorneys are "too busy to do this job right now" inasmuch as other attorneys can be hired by the firm to help out, or those already on staff - but not that busy - can be drafted to do what needs to be done.

Moreover, in the absence of reiteration of what the supposed "experts" have said, there is a very prominent countervailing Constitutional principle mandating that every criminal Defendant has the right to a speedy trial on the offenses charged.

Even Jerry Sandusky.

As for using anything the jury related after the verdict was handed down as grounds for an appeal, the law in PA is that a losing party (or a winning one appealing for some reason) may not go "inside the mind of the jury" to use their personal thoughts as issues to overturn a verdict.

The coming civil litigation in the cases we know of already will be hitting the headlines soon. PSU has put together a trust that's been collecting interest since last November in hopes it can buy off some of the potential litigants who want to end this nightmare ASAP.

Their lawyers, however, having seen the alacrity with which this jury deliberated and rendered its decision may be seeing visions of zillions of dollars for any negligence verdicts in their favor in Bellefonte, PA, compared to Philadelphia, for instance, with an arguably more jaded population where big money awards is concerned.

There's more in this piece from Yahoo News. And yes, although the federal courts have restored some discretion to sentencing courts regarding the term of incarceration to be imposed, in PA, there are sentencing guidelines that apparently mandate that Sandusky be confined to the tune of some 400 years.

Not nearly long enough for me and a lot of other people.


Sandusky lawyers raise appeal issue on timing

By Genaro C. Armas and Mark Scolforo
Yahoo News
June 24, 2012

BELLEFONTE, Pa. (AP) — Jerry Sandusky's lawyers said they tried to quit at the start of jury selection in his child sex abuse trial because they weren't given enough time to prepare, raising an argument on the trial's speed that could become the thrust of an appeal.

And one of the jurors who convicted Sandusky of 45 child sex abuse counts said Saturday he was swayed by the "very convincing" testimony of eight accusers who said the retired Penn State assistant football coach molested them for years.

"It's hard to judge character on the stand, because you don't know these kids," juror Joshua Harper told NBC's "Today" show. "But most were very credible — I would say all."

A day after Sandusky's conviction, his lawyers disclosed Saturday they felt too unprepared to adequately defend him because of how quickly the case was brought to trial. Experts have said the seven months between Sandusky's November arrest and trial was fast-paced by Pennsylvania standards.

"We told the trial court, the Superior Court and the Supreme Court we were not prepared to proceed to trial in June due to numerous issues, and we asked to withdraw from the case for those reasons," attorney Joe Amendola told The Associated Press.

The issues included a scheduling conflict with a defense team member and the need to read a cache of documents produced by a lengthy grand jury investigation. Judge John Cleland denied their request.

The attorneys raised other issues that could be part of the future appeal, saying a mistrial was sought and denied over a repetition at trial of a brief part of a November interview Sandusky had with NBC's Bob Costas.

Jurors in the two-week trial convicted Sandusky of 45 of the 48 counts against him, meaning Sandusky, 68, likely will die in prison.

Harper said the accusers who testified one by one of horrific abuse at Sandusky's hands were each believable, "but then also the fact that we saw this corroborating story between all of them. It was very convincing."

Then Sandusky's impassive face when the verdict was read was confirmation for the jury, he said.

"I looked at him during the reading of the verdict and just the look on his face. No real emotion," he said, "because he knew it was true."

Harper said jurors had some issues with the testimony of Mike McQueary, a then-assistant who said he saw Sandusky assaulting a boy in the Penn State showers in 2001; jurors acquitted Sandusky on one count relating to the incident.

The case is poised to move to an investigation of university officials' role in reporting the charges; two ex-school administrators face trial on charges they didn't properly report McQueary's account of the suspected abuse in 2001.

Almost immediately after the verdict, Penn State President Rodney Erickson signaled an openness to quickly settle potential civil lawsuits arising from the convictions, saying the school "wants to provide a forum where the university can privately, expeditiously and fairly address the victims' concerns and compensate them for claims."

The university recently reported a $1.8 billion endowment. But both sides have reasons not to want to go to court, said Jason Kutulakis, a Harrisburg-area lawyer who specializes in child welfare and juvenile law. Victims are reluctant to get on the stand and have their credibility attacked, he said.

But "Penn State's got so much egg on their face, they probably just want to make it all go away," he said.

For now, the school is facing one lawsuit from an accuser, Travis Weaver, who was not among those represented in the criminal case against Sandusky.

Lawyers for McQueary, who testified against Sandusky, have signaled their intent to sue, along with a lawyer for one accuser, so-called Victim 5.

Jeff Anderson, who represents Weaver, said that he represents more victims of Sandusky's and that he will ask the court to allow him to begin seeking information from Penn State in Weaver's case.

The next step is to determine the extent of Penn State's culpability, lawyers say. In part, that means finding out who in the university's upper ranks knew Sandusky was preying on boys and could have stopped it.

The former Penn State officials facing charges, athletic director Tim Curley and retired vice president Gary Schultz, are charged with lying to a grand jury about what they knew of a 2001 incident in which McQueary said he saw Sandusky assaulting a boy in a football team shower.

A separate investigation by ex-FBI director Louis Freeh, who was hired by Penn State's board of trustees to investigate the university's handling of the Sandusky allegations, is due later this summer.

Hall of Fame coach Joe Paterno was fired for a failure of leadership for not going to the police after McQueary told him about that incident. The scandal also caused the departure of university president Graham Spanier.

Philadelphia-based lawyer Fortunato Perri Jr., who followed the trial, said the jury's dismissal of the charge involving the 2001 shower incident could help Curley and Schultz' defense.

"You've now had a jury kind of preview your case with respect to the credibility of McQueary, and they didn't believe him," Perri said. "Who knows if the next jury would believe him or not believe him?"

But the administrators' attorneys would probably be precluded from introducing the acquittal evidence at the separate trial, Perri said.

Sandusky's sentencing is expected to occur in about three months; an exact date hasn't been set. Because of the severity of the charges and mandatory minimum sentences, he faces an effective life sentence.

Until his next court date, Sandusky is one of 272 inmates at the Centre County Correctional Facility, seven miles from the Penn State campus. He was kept under watch overnight and is allowed access to some personal items including a prayer book, and can get visits from family, friends and attorneys.

Rominger said he planned to visit him on Sunday.

___

Link: news.yahoo.com/sandusky-lawyers-raise-appeal-issue-timing-230448892--spt.html

Arethusa

[Arethusa]

The report will be released at 9:00 a.m., EDT today with a press conference with its author, former FBI Director and U.S. Federal District Court Judge, Louis Freeh, following at 10 a.m., EDT.

I'll be looking for the information that the University had last November that led to the summary dismissals of its President, Graham Spanier and legendary football coach, Joe Paterno, that happened so quickly, it made everyone's head spin.

The dismissals were credited in the press to revelations published in the PA state grand jury report.

Nevertheless, the alacrity with which these firings took place gave rise to suspicions that the Sandusky cover-up was old news to the in-crowd, and that, if PSU didn't want to be tarred with the foot-dragging rep of the Catholic Church, it had better take dramatic action and pronto.

It must also be said that it was well known among members of University governance circles that the Board of Trustees had tired of Paterno and had tried to engineer his departure for a number of years, with the wily Jo Pa outwitting them with such stratagems as a timely $2 Million donation to the University library.

When this scandal broke, Paterno went to the press in a ham-handed, arrogant effort to undermine the power of the Board of Trustees to dismiss him by announcing his intention to retire.

He was gone within hours.

I'll post coverage of Freeh's report when it becomes available, or not long thereafter.


Ex-FBI chief to release report on Penn State sex abuse

By Dave Warner
Reuters feed to Yahoo News
July 12, 2012

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Former FBI director Louis Freeh is due to release a report on Thursday on an eight-month probe into how Penn State University handled the case of assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, convicted last month of sexually abusing 10 boys.

Pennsylvania State University's trustees hired Freeh and his law firm to investigate the school's handling of the explosive allegations involving Sandusky, the defensive coach who helped turn Penn State into a perennial powerhouse under late head coach Joe Paterno.

The findings could influence Penn State as it prepares for potential civil lawsuits. The university has already invited victims to try to resolve claims against the school. The report could also shed light on any criminal liability for two university officials charged with perjury and failing to report what they knew about Sandusky. Both have pleaded not guilty.

"There are high expectations for the report," said Thomas R. Kline, a lawyer in Philadelphia representing one of the victims. He said the findings would "serve as a guideline and a road map" for the potential lawsuits.

The report was due to be published online at 9 a.m. EDT, and Freeh scheduled a news conference at 10 a.m. EDT in Philadelphia.

Sandusky, 68, was convicted of 45 counts of child molestation involving 10 boys over 15 years and awaits sentencing, facing up to 373 years in prison.

The grand jury charges against Sandusky last November prompted the firing of university President Graham Spanier and Paterno, the legendary "JoePa" who won more games than any other major college football coach. Paterno died two months later of lung cancer at age 85.

At the heart of the Freeh probe is how Paterno and other Penn State officials reacted to the story of Mike McQueary, a graduate assistant who told them in 2001 he had seen Sandusky in a sexual position with a boy in a football locker room shower. Neither police nor child protective services were informed.

Former Athletic Director Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, a former university vice president, face charges of perjury and failure to report suspected abuse in the case.

Leaks Alleged

The probe had been marked by "a virtual torrent of leaks," with the release of "select emails intended to smear Joe Paterno and other former Penn State officials," his family said in a statement that questioned the fairness of the investigation.

An email, written by Curley and provided to CNN, appeared to suggest Paterno had urged his colleagues not to report the incident to Sandusky's charity or to the Department of Public Welfare.

The Paternos denied Joe Paterno had told Curley to cover up the incident. They said they welcomed meeting with Freeh to review the findings and respond to them.

CNN reported last month that emails among Spanier, Curley and Schultz showed they feared they could be "vulnerable" for failing to report the incident.

Spanier's attorneys, Peter Vaira and Elizabeth Ainslie, said on Tuesday that he had denied knowing about the 2001 incident when Freeh's team interviewed him on Friday.

The online publication will be the first time anyone outside the probe has seen the report, including Penn State trustees, Freeh said in a statement.

Freeh was a U.S. District judge when former U.S. President Bill Clinton named him to run the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 1993, remaining in the post through 2001.


Link: news.yahoo.com/ex-fbi-chief-release-report-penn-state-sex-050125233--nfl.html

Have a great Thursday,

Arethusa