Jerry Sandusky accused of child molestation (2 Viewers)

[Wrighteous Ray]

Someone please explain to me why the prosecution was unwilling or unable to use either of these unless Sandusky testified.

Somebody that does criminal law should correct me if I'm wrong about any of this, but:The adopted son sounds like he would have just been used as an impeachment witness. If he didn't have any evidence about the crime, he shouldn't be called as a witness in the case in chief. But if Sandusky testified to something that the adopted son knew was wrong, he could be called in rebuttal. It also seems possible that the son didn't want to testify and the prosecutors thought putting him on the stand might hurt their case.The Costas interview wasn't given under oath. Such out-of-court statements are hearsay and normally are inadmissible unless they fall within an exception. I think confessions usually get in as a "statement against interest" but I don't think what Sandusky said would qualify there.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Not saying this would happen but the odds of the jury NOT convicting him are pretty good, imo. Why?Unless I missed it, did the higher ups covering up this thing ever testify? Could they have if they did not?There is zero evidence, that I have seen, other than the words of the accused. They did not bring bloody underwear or pictures or anything of that order. They brought descriptions of his basement, the shower and the campus but that all seems normal with the happenings of the time. Why not call his adopted kid anyway? Why have him as a surprise if he had damning evidence? I don't know how the jury will weigh this stuff but there is no smoking gun in this case. Just throwing out the possibility of him not being convicted of anything.

But in the end, the prosecution's strongest card may well be the testimony of former Penn State coach Mike McQueary - the only independent eyewitness to any alleged abuse.It was McQueary who, in a decisive voice, told the court he saw Sandusky pin a young boy against the wall from behind - in "an extremely sexual position" - in a coach's shower back in February 2001. Despite multiple attempts, the defense appeared unable to shake the account.

Okay, but McQueary strenuously stated this. That does not make it so.I'm not defending Sandusky here, just throwing out the possibility that while there is testimony from victims, there is little to no evidence depending on which way you look at it.With this in mind... if convicted, chances of an appeal and tie this thing up in courts again is likely, no?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOnRHAyXqYY

No.

He's got a point. There's little to no evidence that Sandusky committed any crimes, unless you're counting the testimony of the eight victims and the direct eye-witness. But there's no CSI stuff, so obviously he's innocent.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Not saying this would happen but the odds of the jury NOT convicting him are pretty good, imo. Why?Unless I missed it, did the higher ups covering up this thing ever testify? Could they have if they did not?There is zero evidence, that I have seen, other than the words of the accused. They did not bring bloody underwear or pictures or anything of that order. They brought descriptions of his basement, the shower and the campus but that all seems normal with the happenings of the time. Why not call his adopted kid anyway? Why have him as a surprise if he had damning evidence? I don't know how the jury will weigh this stuff but there is no smoking gun in this case. Just throwing out the possibility of him not being convicted of anything.

But in the end, the prosecution's strongest card may well be the testimony of former Penn State coach Mike McQueary - the only independent eyewitness to any alleged abuse.It was McQueary who, in a decisive voice, told the court he saw Sandusky pin a young boy against the wall from behind - in "an extremely sexual position" - in a coach's shower back in February 2001. Despite multiple attempts, the defense appeared unable to shake the account.

Okay, but McQueary strenuously stated this. That does not make it so.I'm not defending Sandusky here, just throwing out the possibility that while there is testimony from victims, there is little to no evidence depending on which way you look at it.With this in mind... if convicted, chances of an appeal and tie this thing up in courts again is likely, no?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOnRHAyXqYY

No.

He's got a point. There's little to no evidence that Sandusky committed any crimes, unless you're counting the testimony of the eight victims and the direct eye-witness. But there's no CSI stuff, so obviously he's innocent.

It's funny that you mention CSI. Lawyers often talk about the "CSI Effect" and how it has made proving cases harder as juries almost expect that type of evidence now. I think Jerry is toast, but had there only been 1 or 2 kids and no McQueary witnessing and testifying strongly, it would be a different story.

 

[culdeus]

So only 8 victims? I thought we were looking at like 50?

 

[identikit]

So only 8 victims? I thought we were looking at like 50?

51 charges.

 

[fatness]

The jury has the case now.

McGettigan continued by saying that the defense believes there is some vast conspiracy against Sandusky. “If there is a conspiracy, it involves enough people to fill this jury box — it involves time travel as well,” McGettigan said amusingly. “This is their grand conspiracy. It requires everyone here to fooled, or corrupt, or in this together,” McGettigan continued. “Mike McQueary, he must be part of the conspiracy too. Bring us all along. Lock us all up. Lock up the lawyers, lock up the victims. We all must’ve been part of this grand conspiracy.” McGettigan put pictures of all eight victims on the projector, and said “Remember, this is about them. This is about these boys. This is about not just the known boys, but the ones who didn’t come forward too.”

“Something these victims all shared in common — fatherless,” McGettigan continued. “He was preying on them because they were the most vulnerable.”

“The Pennsylvania State University is not on trial here. Neither is the Second Mile. They’re merely context. This is the act of one sick, disturbed man,” McGettigan said. “It’s just sad…it’s cruel.”

 

[culdeus]

So only 8 victims? I thought we were looking at like 50?

51 charges.

ok. I still hope Texas can come up with something to hit the perimeter players. I guess there was not testimony of things that happened here.

 

[Chaka]

Someone please explain to me why the prosecution was unwilling or unable to use either of these unless Sandusky testified.

Somebody that does criminal law should correct me if I'm wrong about any of this, but:The adopted son sounds like he would have just been used as an impeachment witness. If he didn't have any evidence about the crime, he shouldn't be called as a witness in the case in chief. But if Sandusky testified to something that the adopted son knew was wrong, he could be called in rebuttal. It also seems possible that the son didn't want to testify and the prosecutors thought putting him on the stand might hurt their case.The Costas interview wasn't given under oath. Such out-of-court statements are hearsay and normally are inadmissible unless they fall within an exception. I think confessions usually get in as a "statement against interest" but I don't think what Sandusky said would qualify there.

Makes sense to me. Thanks.

 

[fatness]

http://twitter.com/sganim/status/215882584696168448/photo/1

 

[fatness]

“It was like meeting my hero,” he said.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/attorney_for_jerry_sanduskys_a.html

Sara Ganim ‏@sganim

Matt #Sandusky's attorney just told me that Matt, is a victim of his adoptive father

 

[badmojo1006]

Sandusky's adopted son, Matt, says he is a victim and would have testified, lawyer says

Why is this just coming out now??

 

[beer 302]

Sandusky's adopted son, Matt, says he is a victim and would have testified, lawyer says

Why is this just coming out now??

Thought that was a bit odd as well. Maybe he didn't want to deal with the media circus?

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/21/adopted-son-says-jerry-sandusky-molested-him/?hpt=hp_t1

Matt Sandusky says he was molested. No real details.

 

[Good Posting Judge]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/sandusky-angry-hes-not-going-to-be-allowed-to-tell,28631/

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Quite a conspiracy the "victims" have put together here, even getting his adopted son on-board.

 

[Joe Summer]

Sandusky's adopted son, Matt, says he is a victim and would have testified, lawyer says

Why is this just coming out now??

"My life changed when I came to live here," says Matt Sandusky. "There were rules, there was discipline, there was caring. Dad put me on a workout program. He gave me someone to talk to, a father figure I never had. I have no idea where I'd be without him and Mom. I don't even want to think about it. And they've helped so many kids besides me."

- Sports Illustrated article, 1999: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1017979/index.htm

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Sandusky's adopted son, Matt, says he is a victim and would have testified, lawyer says

Why is this just coming out now??

Because he hasn't said anything until now. He's defended him up until this point.

 

[fatness]

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/21/adopted-son-says-jerry-sandusky-molested-him/?hpt=hp_t1Matt Sandusky says he was molested. No real details.

I guess it takes awhile to screw up the courage to admit it in public for the first time?

Matt Sandusky, who has defended his father as he faced child rape charges, said through his attorneys Andrew Shubin and Justine Andronici that he met with prosecutors this week to tell them he was a victim for the first time."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," Matt Sandusky's lawyers said in a statement obtained by InSession. "At Matt’s request, we immediately arranged a meeting between him and the prosecutors and investigators."

 

[fatness]

A 30-year-old Ohio man is the first accuser of former Penn State football Coach Jerry Sandusky to speak publicly about the sexual abuse he says he endured. Travis Weaver, in an exclusive interview to be broadcast Thursday, June 21 at 10pm/9c on NBC's Rock Center, said Sandusky performed oral sex on him in the upstairs bedroom of the Sandusky home, right across the hall from Sandusky’s wife, Dottie.

Weaver has testified in front of a grand jury but was not called as a witness in the current trial. He said he is prepared to testify in the future if needed. He has spoken to both state and federal authorities.

Weaver said he had never told anyone of the abuse and had buried the memories deep down. He says he thought he was the only victim until he saw reports that Sandusky had been arrested on charges of molesting other boys last fall.

link

 

[Joe Summer]

Oh, and Matt Sandusky's ex-wife is the one who filed a restraining order to keep Jerry Sandusky from seeing his grandchildren in 2011.

Think maybe the ex-wife knew something back then??

 

[Mario Kart]

Oh, and Matt Sandusky's ex-wife is the one who filed a restraining order to keep Jerry Sandusky from seeing his grandchildren

Think maybe the ex-wife knew something back then??

Could she not be called to testify because her situation did not pertain to any of the charges?Character witness, restraining order and such.

 

[fatness]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/sandusky-angry-hes-not-going-to-be-allowed-to-tell,28631/

There are some Sandusky jokes appearing on twitter lately too.

 

[fatness]

"Love letters" released.

I know that I have made my share of mistakes.

However I hope that I will be able to say that I cared. There has been love in my heart.

My wish is that you care and have love in your heart. Love never ends. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

I believe that it can overcome all things!

With love,

Jer

 

[CrossEyed]

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/attorney_for_jerry_sanduskys_a.htmlSara Ganim ‏@sganimMatt #Sandusky's attorney just told me that Matt, is a victim of his adoptive father

I said this a long time ago. Not surprised at all. Probably the main reason he adopted his kids. Lock him up and throw away the key.

 

[timschochet]

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Perhaps worse? I've never been a big proponent of the death penalty, but this is one of those few cases where, IMO, it might actually be applicable.

 

[beavers]

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Perhaps worse? I've never been a big proponent of the death penalty, but this is one of those few cases where, IMO, it might actually be applicable.

Prison is his death penalty.

 

[-jb-]

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Perhaps worse? I've never been a big proponent of the death penalty, but this is one of those few cases where, IMO, it might actually be applicable.

Prison is his death penalty.

Hopefully. The sanctioned death penalty is far too humane.

 

[CrossEyed]

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Perhaps worse? I've never been a big proponent of the death penalty, but this is one of those few cases where, IMO, it might actually be applicable.

Not for me. I'm OK with the death penalty, but only for murder.Life in prison with no chance for parole.

 

[identikit]

per Sara Ganim (@sganim)

Crime reporter for The Patriot-News in Harrisburg:

#Sandusky jurors want to review McQueary testimony. Tape is 2 hrs and they'll do that in the morning, judge ruled

 

[fatness]

The jury asked to hear the testimony of McQueary and of Dranov. The judge will play it for them tomorrow morning (2 hours or so of McQueary, less time of Dranov).

 

[culdeus]

The jury asked to hear the testimony of McQueary and of Dranov. The judge will play it for them tomorrow morning (2 hours or so of McQueary, less time of Dranov).

No court reporter?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I can't believe this sick story is just getting worse by the day. His adopted son now? Damn it must suck to have had this done to you as a child, I hope this guy lives a long and painful prison life.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Perhaps worse? I've never been a big proponent of the death penalty, but this is one of those few cases where, IMO, it might actually be applicable.

Not for me. I'm OK with the death penalty, but only for murder.Life in prison with no chance for parole.

this is worse than murder

 

[CrossEyed]

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Perhaps worse? I've never been a big proponent of the death penalty, but this is one of those few cases where, IMO, it might actually be applicable.

Not for me. I'm OK with the death penalty, but only for murder.Life in prison with no chance for parole.

this is worse than murder

In many ways, I agree with you. I still don't think the death penalty should apply to anything but murder cases.

 

[dickey moe]

Why not have the adopted son testify regardless of whether Sandusky took the stand?

 

[cubd8]

per Sara Ganim (@sganim)Crime reporter for The Patriot-News in Harrisburg:#Sandusky jurors want to review McQueary testimony. Tape is 2 hrs and they'll do that in the morning, judge ruled

I hope the jury makes the right decision. I don't know why they need to hear more, but hopefully it's just to reconfirm something.

 

[Sea Duck]

Why not have the adopted son testify regardless of whether Sandusky took the stand?

He didn't come forward until after the prosecution rested. At that point, he could only be called to the stand to refute something that a defense witness said.

 

[fatness]

Why not have the adopted son testify regardless of whether Sandusky took the stand?

He contacted the prosecution for the first time during the proceedings. They can't just put witnesses on the stand without the defense knowing generally what's coming and having time to prepare for it.However, if Sandusky himself had testified and his adopted son could have rebutted any of his testimony, the prosecution could (and would) have put him on the stand. That is why there was a 30 minute meeting today in the judge's chambers before Sandusky decided not to testify in his own behalf. He (or his lawyers, or both) was afraid of the rebuttal testimony from his adopted son.

 

[dickey moe]

Why not have the adopted son testify regardless of whether Sandusky took the stand?

He contacted the prosecution for the first time during the proceedings. They can't just put witnesses on the stand without the defense knowing generally what's coming and having time to prepare for it.However, if Sandusky himself had testified and his adopted son could have rebutted any of his testimony, the prosecution could (and would) have put him on the stand. That is why there was a 30 minute meeting today in the judge's chambers before Sandusky decided not to testify in his own behalf. He (or his lawyers, or both) was afraid of the rebuttal testimony from his adopted son.

Really wish he had come forward earlier. That testimony probably would've been the dagger.

 

[Premier]

Good chance they'd be able to bring the son's case as a charge down the road, on the unbelievably off-chance he gets found not guilty here. Jeopardy won't attach to his case.

 

[identikit]

Six very creepy letters Sandusky wrote to victim #4:

http://www.pennlive....rosecuti_4.html

 

[fatness]

Matt Sandusky sat in the courtroom with #Sandusky family in the beginning, it wasn't until after Victim 4 testified that he disappeared.

link

 

[fatness]

Debra Long told The Patriot-News in several interviews going back to early 2011 that Sandusky stalked Matt, and that when she confronted her son, he said only, “I don’t want to talk about it.” She vividly remembers one night when Matt fled the Sandusky home during a rainstorm and hid in a relative’s house when Sandusky came to retrieve him.

Long saved notes from foster care proceedings involving herself, the state and Sandusky in Centre County Court in 1996. Those notes show she had voiced her concerns repeatedly. But Matt stayed in placement with the Sandusky’s home, even after attempting suicide with another person who was living at the Sandusky home, and even after a probation officer suggested he might not be in the right place.

The press release from attorneys Andrew Shubin and Justine Androcini was not very specific and did not detail the abuse allegations, or when they took place.

But it seemed to support testimony for a man known as Victim 4, who said that Matt Sandusky was once in a shower when Jerry Sandusky’s “horsing around” began. Victim 4 said that was usually how the abuse began. When the touching started, Matt left. He looked nervous, Victim 4 said. Victim 4 was the first accuser to testify in the trial. Matt Sandusky had been present in the courtroom for Victim 4’s testimony, even though he was sequestered as a defense witness. After that, Matt Sandusky was never seen in the courtroom again.

The disclosure from Matt Sandusky raised questions about why the attorney general’s office did not put Matt on the stand to testify in the trial. Prosecutors probably would have been barred from putting him on the stand unless Sandusky testified about his family. That would have opened the legal door for Matt to speak.

link

 

[B-Deep]

a sad story gets even sadder :(

 

[Godsbrother]

a sad story gets even sadder :(

It is going to be even sadder if/when this piece of crap walks...

 

[Bigboy10182000]

I haven’t followed this trial and just now heard they were deliberating…what’s the consensus, innocent or guilty?

 

[CrossEyed]

I'm now convinced that the number of boys Sandusky molested is most likely at or near triple digits. It looks like everything he ever did with young boys was with one purpose in mind, to groom them to become his sexual toys. He started his charity for that purpose and he fostered/adopted for that purpose.

What a vile human being.

 

[fatness]

Sandusky accusers offer glimpse of lives now

Interesting reading. I won't try to summarize.

 

[B-Deep]

I'm now convinced that the number of boys Sandusky molested is most likely at or near triple digits. It looks like everything he ever did with young boys was with one purpose in mind, to groom them to become his sexual toys. He started his charity for that purpose and he fostered/adopted for that purpose.

What a vile human being.

I'm as repulsed as you, i just don;t know what throwing things like this out there gains usit could be 50 it could be 500, we really have no way to know.