How Could You? Hall of Shame-Part Four Jerry Sandusky UPDATED

We will continue to add a new post for every 10 updates.

Part One can be found here .

Part Two can be found here.

Part Three can be found here .

Update 30/April 12, 2012: April 5, 2012 pretrial hearing ends quickly. Judge institutes gag order. Second Mile Insurer still trying to get out of paying Jerry’s legal fees.

“Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky made a brief appearance in a Pennsylvania courtroom on Thursday [April 5, 2012], but the judge overseeing his sex-abuse case ended a pretrial hearing after less than 20 minutes because a grand jury is still investigating the case.

Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge John Cleland said it would be premature to continue the hearing. Prosecutors said they anticipated more information about Sandusky could emerge from the ongoing grand jury probe.”

“Deputy Attorney General Joseph McGettigan said the grand jury investigation could net more evidence against Sandusky, who is charged with 52 criminal counts for allegedly abusing 10 boys over a 15-year period. Prosecutors have already given defense attorney Joe Amendola “voluminous” amounts of evidence, he said

Amendola had asked Cleland in a 95-page motion filed last month to dismiss the charges against Sandusky, arguing that some were vague and others were not supported by evidence. Amendola withdrew that request but reserved the right to file it again at a later date.

Amendola also withdrew requests to ban prosecutors from using items seized during a search of Sandusky’s home, and for prosecutors to provide the defense with more details about the allegations against Joe Paterno’s former defensive coordinator. Amendola withdrew a motion to suppress evidence, agreeing that a search warrant and phone call taps were executed legally.

Sandusky arrived at the Centre County Courthouse in Bellefonte, Pa., with his wife, Dottie, and Amendola shortly before the 9 a.m. hearing began. Sandusky did not speak to the media before or after the hearing, which lasted less than 20 minutes.

Amendola said attorneys for former Penn State athletic director Tim Curley and former vice president Gary Schultz have told him that they would invoke the Fifth Amendment if called to testify at Sandusky’s trial, which is scheduled to begin on June 5. Both men have been charged with perjury and failure to report an assault of a child.”

Judge in Sandusky case cuts hearing short

[New York Daily News 4/5/12 by Michael O’Keeffe]

“The judge in the Jerry Sandusky criminal case instituted a gag order Monday, a few days after attorneys in the case took verbal jabs at each other outside the Centre County courthouse, in front of dozens of news media representatives.

McKean County Senior Judge John M. Cleland entered the order early Monday, and he said it will apply to all attorneys in the case — both prosecution and defense — as well as any investigators who currently or have in the past worked on the case.

The order follows Thursday’s brief pretrial hearing, which was followed outside the courthouse by lengthy comments by both defense attorney Joseph Amendola and Senior Deputy Attorney General Joseph McGettigan.”

“Mr. Amendola has filed a number of motions on Mr. Sandusky’s behalf, including one to dismiss the charges, based on a lack of specificity of the details of the alleged crimes.

Mr. McGettigan fired back at the defense Thursday, saying the motions have been disingenuous in that Mr. Sandusky could have received more specific information in the case had he not waived his preliminary hearing.

The prosecutor also called Mr. Sandusky’s charity, The Second Mile, a “victim factory.”

Although Judge Cleland did not acknowledge any of the specific comments made in his order, he did say it was being issued to allow for “conducting a fair, impartial and orderly trial.”

Specifically, the judge has forbidden any statement to be disseminated by direct attribution or on background, which relates to any opinion of Mr. Sandusky’s guilt or innocence, any evidence regarding specific occurrences in the case, as well as the reputation, character, credibility or criminal record of the defendant, any witness or organization, that may testify or be the subject of testimony at trial. Also forbidden are any opinions regrading the legal or factual merits of positions advanced by either side.”

Sandusky case judge institutes gag order

[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 4/10/12 by Paula Reed Ward]

“The insurance company that represents The Second Mile has been accused of not wanting to defend Jerry Sandusky for financial reasons.

Federal Insurance did not seek a court declaration that would absolve it from paying the defense costs of the former Penn State defensive coordinator to protect children, a filing by Sandusky’s attorney in U.S. Middle District Court alleges.

“Federal’s concerns are strictly financial,” the brief stated.

Sandusky’s lawyer, Brian Osias, wrote that Federal wants the court to impose a sweeping rule of general application barring any coverage for allegations of sexual misconduct involving minors, regardless of guilt or innocence, policy language and any other facts or circumstances.

In December, the insurance company filed a complaint seeking a declaration that it has no obligation to pay Sandusky’s defense costs or to indemnify him for civil and criminal claims or judgments arising from charges he sexually abused boys.

That complaint also questions whether the alleged acts occurred while Sandusky was acting as an official of The Second Mile, which he founded.

Federal acknowledges The Second Mile’s policy provides coverage for legal costs, but it contends paying them in a case arising from sexual assault, molestation or abuse is repugnant to Pennsylvania public policy and so should be barred.

Osias contends that if Federal were successful in its effort, that could impact directors and officers along with employment practices of liability policyholders in Pennsylvania with similar language.

“The court’s decision may serve as a deterrent to charitable workers, clergy, day care workers, educators, health professionals and others for fear that defending against false allegations may result in financial ruin,” the document said.

“By the same token, plaintiff (Federal) has submitted no evidence that a ruling in its favor will have any effect on the incidence of child abuse,” the brief said.

Sandusky contends the Federal policy explicitly insures the defense of criminal and unwanted sexual behavior and provides a defense for the covered criminal activity unless there is an adjudication or admission of guilt. He has maintained he is innocent of charges that allege he sexually molested 10 boys.

In March, attorney Joe Amendola said as long as The Second Mile’s insurance is paying for it, he will be able to represent Sandusky.

But if The Second Mile’s insurance ends up not having to pay, “then we might have a problem,” Amendola said.

He opposes Federal’s effort to have Judge Yvette Kane decide the issue on pleadings, rather than going through a discovery process, saying he needs discovery to present all the facts. ”

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/04/11/3158479/insurer-seeks-removal-from-sandusky.html#storylink=cpy

Insurer seeks removal from Sandusky case

[Centre Daily TImes 4/11/12]

Update 31/April 18, 2012

One ripple effect of this case is that “lawmakers in more than a dozen states, including New York, California and Pennsylvania, have introduced bills adding coaches, athletic directors or university officials to the list of “mandated reporters” of suspected child abuse or neglect. In the past month, such bills have been signed in Virginia, Washington and West Virginia, with several other states expected to follow suit. ”

Another is the following: “Background checks of potential coaches are also on the rise, as are efforts to close gaps in such inquiries. This month, the National Council of Youth Sports is expected to announce expanded and tightened criteria, specifically adding any conviction or pending charges involving indecent exposure, prostitution or a crime involving harm to a minor to a list of “red lights” meant to warn sports leagues away from questionable volunteers.

The new guidelines, expected to be used by leagues in a range of sports to determine who can coach, are meant to strengthen a set of “zero tolerance” guidelines that already list crimes like cruelty to animals and drug possession as potentially disqualifying offenses, no matter when the violation occurred.”

Coaches Face New Scrutiny on Sex Abuse

[New York Times 4/15/12 by Jesse McKinley]

“Two Penn State administrators charged with lying to the grand jury that investigated Jerry Sandusky asked a judge Tuesday for more time to make their next pretrial court filing.

Lawyers for Tim Curley and Gary Schultz told Dauphin County Judge Todd Hoover that the state attorney general’s office has not turned over promised records, and asked him to extend the due date for their responses to May 4.”

“Curley, the school’s athletic director on leave, was to file his written answer sometime Tuesday. Schultz, a now-retired university vice president, was given an April 27 deadline.

The nearly identical motions said prosecutors told them on April 3 that “substantial additional discovery” would be provided within 10 days.

“However, the commonwealth recently disclosed the discovery is not ready and will not be produced until April 18,” they wrote.

A spokesman for the attorney general’s office declined to comment.

Curley and Schultz will be responding to documents filed by prosecutors last month in which they listed dozens of statements made by Curley and Schultz that they say support the perjury allegations.

At that time, the attorney general’s office said they had presented enough evidence at the December preliminary hearing to hold a trial.

In another development, online court records indicated another judge last week denied an oral motion by Curley and Schultz to release grand jury transcripts before trial. Dauphin County court officials said Tuesday the case file that contains Judge Barry Feudale’s order was not immediately available for public inspection.

Pennsylvania court rules do not mandate disclosure of a witness’s grand jury testimony until he or she has testified on direct examination at trial, although judges have the authority to order their earlier release, as has occurred in the Sandusky case.

On Tuesday, Penn State announced it was strengthening policies about the supervision and treatment of children who take part in university programs and those who are housed on campus.

The changes, enacted in the wake of the Sandusky scandal, include background checks for anyone who deals with minors. The policies also address bullying and privacy issue. They take effect immediately.

The university also updated its Sandusky scandal-related costs, which passed $7.5 million by the end of February. Categories for the tab include the internal investigation and “crisis communications,” $5.3 million; university legal services, $1.2 million; and legal costs for Curley, Schultz and former president Graham Spanier, $339,000. Other institutional expenses have amounted to $636,000. Insurance is expected to cover a portion of the total.

Curley, 57, and Schultz, 62, both of Boalsburg, are also charged with failing to properly report suspected child sex abuse by Sandusky, the former Penn State assistant football coach who is awaiting a separate trial on charges he sexually abused 10 boys over a 15-year period. Spanier has not been charged with any crime.”

Penn State administrators Curley, Schultz ask judge for short delay in pretrial filings

[Washington Post 4/17/12 by Associated Press]

Update 32: Associate athletic director fired due to handling of subpoena documents for Curley.

“The firing of a Penn State athletics official was connected to the investigation into the child sexual abuse case at the university, said two persons familiar with the situation.

Mark Sherburne, an associate athletic director, was fired this week, said the people who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

One person said Sherburne was dismissed for failing to produce in a timely fashion documents under subpoena by the state Attorney General’s office related to its investigation into Sherburne’s boss, Athletic Director Tim Curley. Curley is on administrative leave after being charged with lying to a grand jury and failing to report an abuse allegation against retired assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.

Messages left Friday at a number listed for Sherburne were not immediately returned.

University spokeswoman Lisa Powers declined comment Friday night since the matter was a personnel issue.

The person familiar with the firing said the documents were voluntarily produced and turned over to the attorney general’s office.

It was unclear the types of documents in question, but the university has told staffers to preserve and produce documents related to the investigation.

Earlier Friday, both school President Rodney Erickson and Acting Athletic Director David Joyner declined comment, also citing a human resources issue.

Sherburne had stepped in for Curley for 10 days in November to head the department after Curley went on leave. Sherburne returned to his previous position after Joyner assumed the acting post Nov. 16.

Curley maintains his innocence as he awaits trial. Sandusky, who is awaiting trial on charges with dozens of counts of child sexual abuse, has also maintained his innocence.

A State College native, Sherburne worked in athletics since 2000.”

http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnewssports/2012/04/penn_states_mark_sherburne_fir.html

[Penn Live 4/21/12 by Associated Press]

Update 33:

“The lead prosecutor in the case against former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky filed an unusual motion in Centre County Court Friday, accusing the defense of improperly using subpoenas and violating an order that protects the names of the alleged victims in the case.

Senior Deputy Attorney General Joseph McGettigan accused defense attorney Joseph Amendola of revealing the names of people known in court records as “Victims 1 through 10 in a number of subpoenas he’s served, including to the Pennsylvania State Police, a Clinton County school district and the Penn State University police.”

McKean County Senior Judge John M. Cleland previously issued an order directing that the names of the victims identified in the two grand jury presentments against Mr. Sandusky “shall remain protected under the seal of the court and may not be disclosed by any person, except pursuant to court order or other authorization of the court.”

According to the March 13 order, subpoenas must include with them a notice, in all capital letters and at least 18-point font the following:

“The name or any identifying information of the person for whom the records or other information is sought is protected by the seal of the court. Under potential penalty of contempt of court, the person’s name or identifying information may not be disclosed to any person except as required to comply with this subpoena.”

According to the attorney general’s motion, Mr. Amendola complied with providing the required notice, yet still included the names of the victims in either the body of the subpoena, in attachments or in cover letters.

“The commonwealth need not underscore to this honorable court the spectacular irresponsibility of treating secret information in that fashion,” Mr. McGettigan wrote.

He alleges that the way Mr. Amendola handled his subpoena power is “manifestly improper.”

The defense attorney, in a written response Friday, said it would be inappropriate to comment based on a gag order issued by Judge Cleland earlier this month.

He did say, though “we deny the allegations of improper use of subpoena power made by the commonwealth in its motion.”

Mr. Amendola expects to file a detailed response next week.

Mr. Sandusky is accused of sexually abusing 10 boys over a 15-year period and is scheduled for trial on June 5.

In the motion filed Friday, Mr. McGettigan also accuses the defense of making improper requests in his subpoenas.

As part of the subpoena, Mr. Amendola tells the recipients that if the necessary documentation being sought is not provided before then, that they must appear for court at a status conference on May 16.

That’s even though, Mr. McGettigan writes, no testimony is scheduled to be taken that day.

The prosecutor asks Judge Cleland to direct Mr. Amendola to immediately cease production of the subpoenas and in the future to make him document the need for his request.

University of Pittsburgh law professor John Burkoff, who has been following the case, called Mr. McGettigan’s motion highly unusual.

Generally, if one side feels as if an improper subpoena has been issued, or that the process was flawed, it would file a motion to quash.

In this instance, Mr. Burkoff said, the prosecutor is trying to stop the defense from using the subpoenas entirely.

“If the AG’s allegations are correct, Sandusky’s defense counsel has been misusing subpoenas in a number of ways, including using them in such a way as to reveal victims’ identities,” he said.

“Whether this was inadvertent or not, it’s clearly a violation of the trial judge’s order.

“If the judge thinks they did this on purpose, he’s going to be one irritated judge.”

At a minimum, he continued, the judge would instruct Mr. Amendola to stop the behavior. At worst, he could hold the veteran Centre County defense attorney in contempt.

Mr. Burkoff questioned whether the move is a tactical one on the part of the defense, and if so if it is either sensible or ethical?

“This is a really important [order],” Mr. Burkoff said. “I don’t think a judge would take an intentional flouting of that order sitting down.”

Sandusky lawyer called improper

[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette 4/28/12 by Paula Reed Ward]

Update 34/May 17, 2012:

“New documents filed by the attorneys for former Penn State assistant coach Jerry Sandusky suggest there are at least 17 accusers in the child sexual abuse case, a much higher number than described in criminal charges.”

“The April 23 request referred to “all individuals identified as Accusers 11 through 17 as well as 18 through an unknown number.”

“The requests we made are based on what we believe should be provided, based on information we’ve received to date,” Rominger said.

A spokesman for the attorney general’s office declined to comment, citing a gag order issued by the presiding judge.”

“Another discovery request, dated March 27, sought nine documents that Amendola said were removed from football coach Joe Paterno’s office and copied by state police. Amendola wrote that the documents had undergone a “supervised review” and been protected by a “police seal of evidence.”

Sandusky Defense Filing Mentions ‘Accusers 11-17’

[ABC News 5/5/12 by Mark Scolforo/Associated Press]

“The alleged victims of the Penn State child sexual abuse scandal are finding there isn’t much in their pasts that the defense isn’t trying to find out. Jerry Sandusky’s defense team wants to know their IQs, how well they did in school and even their medical histories.In a series of discovery requests made to the attorney general’s office in recent months, Sandusky lawyer Joe Amendola has sought school transcripts, medical records going back to birth, Internet search histories, Facebook account details, employment-related documents and cellphone and Twitter records.

Prosecutors have turned over some records, don’t have others and argued that many requests are not proper under state law — a determination that will ultimately be up to the presiding judge, John Cleland.

Lawyers for Sandusky’s alleged victims are critical of Amendola’s tactics, with one accusing him of “a despicable act of cowardice.” The question of how much information the defense is entitled to will be the subject of a pretrial hearing Wednesday.

Credibility of witnesses and the reliability of their recall will likely be pivotal issues in Sandusky’s upcoming criminal trial, with allegations that go back in some cases well over a decade.

On Monday, prosecutors said they had misdated by a year one of the alleged crimes, an encounter in which an assistant coach said he saw Sandusky attack a naked boy in the shower. That disclosure prompted lawyers in a parallel criminal case — that of two Penn State administrators accused of not reporting suspected abuse — to say the charge should be dismissed because the statute of limitations has expired.”

“The range of material Sandusky has sought was reflected in 36 discovery requests between Dec. 29 and April 23 that covered 214 categories. Amendola wrote that the requests had largely been ignored by prosecutors.

Prosecutors responded this week with a point-by-point review of what has been turned over, noting in many cases they did not possess the records sought and saying dozens of other requests were not proper under court rules.

Michael J. Boni, a civil lawyer for the young man called Victim 1 in court documents, said Amendola has asked for evidence that is not admissible in court. He called a discovery requests an effort to impeach the credibility of alleged child rape victims and “a despicable act of cowardice.”

“The evidence he seeks from school records, labor records, etc., all inarguably go to reputation, which is not relevant or admissible in rape cases,” Boni said. “Talk about adding insult to injury. First the boy was raped, now Amendola seeks to besmirch Victim 1’s character in the press, no doubt to taint the jury pool. It’s all so wrong.”

Another attorney, Jeff Anderson, filed a lawsuit in November against Sandusky and others on behalf of a man who claims he was sexually abused more than 100 times and threatened by Sandusky. Anderson’s client is not among the 10 alleged victims in the criminal case.

“I think they’re trying to send a message to the victims, that if you have the courage to speak out, we’re going to get you and we’re going to out you,” Anderson said.”

Jerry Sandusky can review medical records of his alleged victims

[Chicago Sun-Times 5/8/12 by Mark Scolforo/Associated Press]

“Previously, prosecutors had filed documents, including a grand jury report, alleging that Sandusky sexually assaulted a boy in a Penn State locker room shower on March 1, 2002. But new filings indicate that investigators have now concluded the alleged attack took place around Feb. 9, 2001.”

“Lawyers for Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, two former administrators who are fighting allegations that they lied to a grand jury and failed to properly report suspected child abuse, issued a statement accusing prosecutors of filing charges before knowing the facts.

“Now, it is clear that Mike McQueary was wrong in so adamantly insisting that the incident happened the Friday before Spring Break in 2002,” their statement said. “Whether or not Mr. McQueary’s insistence was the result of faulty memory, or questionable credibility, there is no dispute that the statute of limitations has expired on (the failure to report charge), and it will be dismissed.”

The judge has issued a gag order prohibiting lawyers on both sides from speaking about the Sandusky case.”

Jerry Sandusky Sex Abuse Case: Penn State prosecutors change date of key allegation

[CBS News 5/8/12]

Defense asks for delay again.

“Defense attorney Joe Amendola argued in a 13-page motion that without more time, he was worried he would be “unable to effectively and adequately” represent Sandusky. Amendola said he was still waiting for material from prosecutors.

Judge John Cleland has previously indicated he was reluctant to push back the trial, currently scheduled to begin June 5 in Bellefonte. A hearing on defense subpoenas and pretrial discovery disputes between the defense and prosecutors was scheduled for Wednesday afternoon.[May 9, 2012]”

Lawyer for ex-Penn State coach asks for delay

[NY Daily News 5/9/12]

“Judge John Cleland said he planned to rule quickly on motions by several school districts and government agencies to quash subpoenas served by Sandusky’s attorney, Joseph Amendola.

Cleland opened the hearing in Bellefonte by noting the “trial is approaching” for the former Penn State assistant football coach, a nod to the scheduled June 5 start of the trial.”

“Amendola has made 50 requests for records or other material from the attorney general’s office and has not received a response concerning the most recent 14 requests.

In a separate motion, Amendola asked Cleland to direct prosecutors to provide paper copies of computer records he has been given, including phone records taken from the office of former Penn State coach Joe Paterno.

Amendola said in the delay request that the defense team needs more time to find and interview witnesses, and that pending criminal charges against two potential witnesses, Penn State administrators Gary Schultz and Tim Curley, have made them unavailable as witnesses in June.

Lawyers for Curley, the school’s athletic director now on leave, and Schultz, the retired vice president who supervised campus police, have indicated their clients will invoke their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refuse to testify if called.

School districts and government agencies have asked Cleland to throw out some of the subpoenas. Challenges have been filed by three central Pennsylvania school districts, two county child welfare agencies, Juniata College and three state agencies.

It’s not clear how many pretrial discovery conflicts still exist. Prosecutors on Monday filed a court document telling Cleland that much of the material sought by Sandusky has already been provided and that dozens of other requests are not subject to mandatory disclosure.”

Judge: Some Sandusky subpoenas will be quashed

[Boston Herald 5/9/12 by Associated Press]

“The judge in Jerry Sandusky’s child sexual-abuse case ruled that four central Pennsylvania school districts must turn over the behavioral and psychological records of the former Penn State assistant coach’s accusers.

Judge John M. Cleland, in a ruling filed Thursday afternoon, also ordered a child welfare agency to provide documents for him to review. He also ordered Sandusky’s charity, The Second Mile, to disclose any complaints it received about its founder.

Cleland’s decision followed a hearing Wednesday in Centre County Court, in which attorneys for 11 school districts, state agencies, child welfare departments and other organizations and individuals challenged Sandusky’s subpoenas, demanding information that his lawyer, Joseph Amendola, said is crucial to his defense.”

“Cleland ordered the Centre County Children and Youth Services Agency to provide a copy of an investigative report prepared by another county agency and a copy of foster family records from Sandusky’s foster parenting.

The judge ordered the state Department of Corrections to provide records pertaining to Sandusky’s accusers not protected by law. But he granted requests by the Labor and Industry and Public Welfare departments to quash subpoenas after hearing that the agencies have no records of fraud involving the accusers.

In addition to complaints about Sandusky, The Second Mile also must provide documents pertaining to internal investigations of his conduct and a list of guests at Sandusky’s retirement party, but not the guests’ addresses or financial information.

Juniata College, where Sandusky inquired about a coaching job after he left Penn State, must provide a copy of a pre-employment background check.

Cleland granted the motion to quash a subpoena issued to Alycia Chambers, a psychotherapist who treated the Sandusky accuser identified as “Victim 6,” after her attorney told the judge that she had destroyed his file after 14 years.

But he ordered Michael Gillum, a psychologist who treated Victim 1, to provide records containing his opinions, observations, diagnosis and treatment alternatives because those are not confidential under psychologist-patient privilege.”

Judge in Jerry Sandusky sex case orders schools to provide files on accusers

[The Morning Call 5/10/12 by Peter Hall]

Sara Ganim splices together all of the accounts of the shower incident. See it at Questioning McQueary [The Patriot News 5/13/12 by Sara Ganim]

On May 16, 2012, again the defense asks to throw out charges.

“Jerry Sandusky again asked a judge to throw out the child sexual abuse charges against him on Wednesday[May 16, 2012], arguing that some counts are too vague to defend and others involve alleged victims whose identities have not been determined.

The former Penn State assistant football coach’s trial is scheduled to get under way in less than three weeks, although the judge has not ruled on a separate motion from Sandusky asking for a delay.

In the filing, defense attorney Joe Amendola attacked the charges related to a person described in court records as Victim 2. The boy’s encounter with Sandusky in a Penn State locker room a decade ago, and school officials’ response to it, ultimately led to the departure of longtime football coach Joe Paterno.”

“Amendola also argued that that prosecutors will not be able to show there was any sexual contact with a boy labeled Victim 6. The boy showered with Sandusky in 1998, authorities said, prompting a complaint by his mother to university police that produced an investigation but no charges.

Amendola told Judge John Cleland that he does not expect prosecutors to be able to “establish that any sexual contact took place” between Sandusky and Victim 6, “and the commonwealth will not be able to establish any criminal intent.”

As for so-called Victim 8, allegedly seen in 2000 by Penn State janitor Jim Calhoun being molested by Sandusky, Calhoun suffers from dementia and is not able to testify, according to a report by the grand jury that investigated Sandusky. Amendola argued that will require Calhoun’s co-workers to testify about what Calhoun told them, which would amount to hearsay that is not allowed as evidence.”

Jerry Sandusky renews effort to have charges thrown out

[Boston Herald 5/16/12 by Associated Press]

Update 35/May 28, 2012

“Jerry Sandusky’s attorney was given approval this week to get access to some documents in the Centre County Office of Probation and Parole juvenile file for one of the alleged victims.

Centre County President Judge Thomas King Kistler authorized the release Tuesday, and the approval was filed in court Thursday.

Probation and Parole received a subpoena for the records from defense attorney Joe Amendola on April 9.

The defense can get police reports, court orders, social case histories that aren’t privileged, supervision plans, and conditions of in-home detention.

But Kistler said school records such as psychological evaluations and behavior reports, drug and alcohol treatment reports, and internal notes written by staff of Probation and Parole won’t be released.

Also Thursday, Amendola filed a brief citing case law to support motions he filed on Wednesday to throw out the case.

He’s arguing that some of the charges are too vague and there’s not enough evidence for other charges.

He’s argued the charges related to the shower incident in 2001 can’t stand alone on Mike McQueary’s testimony and that the prosecution can’t show anything sexual happened between Sandusky and the boy in 1998.

Amendola reiterated his request for a continuance filed last week that Senior Judge John Cleland has yet to rule on.

The trial is scheduled to start June 5 with jury selection.”

Sandusky defense gets OK on some probation and parole records of accusers

[Centre Daily Times 5/18/12 by Mike Dawson]

“Officials with The Second Mile this morning took the first step to disband the charity, filing legal paperwork in Centre County to transfer its assets and the programs to Arrow Child and Family Ministries, a Houston-based organization that has a presence in Altoona and a contract with Centre County’s Children and Youth Services for foster care services.”

The Second Mile, charity founded by Jerry Sandusky, to close

[McClatchy 5/25/12 by Mike Dawson/Centre Daily Times and Anne Danahy]

“A judge will soon decide the most significant pretrial issue in former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky’s child sexual abuse case: whether to dismiss charges.”

It’s a question that once again brings to the forefront “Victim 2,” a still-unidentified boy whom a witness has said he saw being molested by Sandusky in the football team showers a decade ago, drawing a response from then-head football coach Joe Paterno that ultimately cost him his job.
For five months, Judge John Cleland has issued a steady stream of pre-trial rulings. He decided that local jurors will determine Sandusky’s fate, he has refereed numerous disputes among lawyers about what documents the defense will get ahead of trial and he has kept the case on track to get under way next week.
Sandusky’s lawyer wants Cleland to throw out all 52 counts against him, arguing that some are too vague to defend, and the charges involving Victim 2 and Victim 8 — an identified boy who prosecutors say was molested by Sandusky in a university shower — can’t be proved.
The attorney general’s office argued Friday that the charges should not be thrown out because any argument, and resulting decision, could only be made based on sworn testimony already given in the case. That hasn’t happened because Sandusky waived his right to a preliminary hearing in December.
This month, Sandusky lawyer Joe Amendola sought dismissal, saying that testimony regarding Victim 2 in a parallel case by a key witness, assistant coach Mike McQueary, fell short of what would be required for a conviction. Amendola also argued that there was no evidence of sexual contact with a so-called Victim 6 and that the charges involving Victim 8 would require impermissible hearsay.

The Victim 2 allegations are among the most serious that Sandusky faces, and the fact that prosecutors haven’t been able to find him has complicated their case, as demonstrated by the recent change in the allegation’s date, from March 2002 to February 2001.
Adding to the mystery is the report by Amendola that a young man contacted him after Sandusky’s arrest to say he believed he might be Victim 2. The young man, accompanied by his mother and brother, met with Amendola, but Amendola wasn’t convinced he fit the description and the lawyer said he wasn’t planning to call him as a witness.
“I wasn’t sure” he was Victim 2, Amendola said in March. “I’m still not sure. I haven’t been able to verify it. Jerry’s very sure.”
Amendola said the young man told him Sandusky hadn’t abused him, but he later obtained a lawyer and cut off contact. ”

• During the last two years,    7909 standards were  evaluated  for compliance at this operation.
• Of the standards   evaluated 98   deficiencies were  cited”

“The weights of the standard deficiencies cited in the past two years are as follows:

27 were weighted as High

39 were weighted as Medium – High

13 were weighted as Medium

11 were weighted as Medium – Low

8 were weighted as Low”

(2) Specifics of the deficiencies

Click the 98 hyperlink  in #1 and see that some violations include lack of background checks for foster parents, lack of training for child placement workers, child allergies not listed on front cover of report, lack of foster parent training, not ensuring that children have medical checkups within 30 days of admission, “drivers and passengers must follow federal, state and local laws, including child safety systems, seat belts, and insurance”, “May not use/threaten corporal punishment, such as hitting/spanking, forced exercise, holding physical position, unproductive work.” These are quite serious.

 Update 37/June 12, 2012

(1) Full jury selected on June 6, 2012. Witness list released Jerry Sandusky trial: Full jury is selected  [LA TImes 6/6/12 by Michael Muskal]

“Four jurors were chosen Wednesday morning, completing the panel that will consider the charges against Sandusky. Nine jurors had been seated on Tuesday, the first day of jury selection in the highly publicized trial. ”

A total of 7 alternates were selected. Testimony to begin on Monday June 11, 2012.

“At least four of the first nine jurors selected had some connection to Penn State. In the latest group, all four also said they had ties to the school, located about 10 miles from the Bellfonte courthouse where the case is being tried.

Among the new jurors is a woman who said she was a full professor at Penn State, another person who said she worked as an administrative assistant in a department at the school and a dance teacher at the continuing education program at the school. An alternate described herself as a Penn State graduate.
All said that they could be fair in deciding the case.
The defense worked hard to keep the trial local, hoping to get a jury that would be more understanding of the scandal. But some of the prospective jurors said that they couldn’t put their opinions aside.
One of those, a woman in her late 20s described herself as coming from “a Penn State family.” She said she had graduated from the school and that her mother and two brothers have been students there. Her dad is a lifelong football fan.
“My kindergarten graduation picture is me wearing a Penn State cheerleader’s dress,” she said.
Asked if she had any “fixed opinions about guilt or innocence,” she replied: “I have my perceptions of things.”
Asked if she could put those perceptions aside, she said: “I’d like to say that I could, but I don’t know to be clearly honest that I could.”
She was dismissed for cause.
The defense unsuccessfully sought another delay, arguing that a television report appeared to violate the judge’s gag order. Judge John Cleland rejected the argument .”

(2)” Creepy” Love Letters Sent to Victim 4 will be evidence. “Victim 4 is set to be the first witness to testify and is also expected to  show gifts that Sandusky allegedly gave him, including a set of golf clubs.

The letters are allegedly handwritten by Sandusky and one of them entails a  story written in the third person.

Victim 4, now 28, met the coach through Sandusky’s charity, the Second  Mile.”

 

Sandusky allegedly sent ‘creepy’ love letters to ‘victim’

[Fox News 6/6/12]

(3) Judge denies all of Sandusky’s motions to dismiss charges. All 52 charges stand for the trial. “Judge John Cleland’s three-paragraph order didn’t explain why he turned down a set of defense motions.”

Judge denies Sandusky motions to toss charges just days before start of child sex abuse trial

[Washington Post 6/8/12 by Associated Press]

(4) TRIAL DAY ONE

“Senior Deputy Attorney General Joseph McGettigan III opened Sandusky’s highly anticipated trial Monday by telling jurors that the 68-year-old retired coach was a pedophile who took advantage of fatherless children or those with unstable home lives and sexually abused them for years.

 

McGettigan, apologizing in advance for what he said would be disturbing and graphic testimony, said he would prove that the abuse included oral and anal sex involving boys Sandusky met through a children’s charity and that it took place “not over days, not over weeks, not even over months, but in some cases over years.”

“Sandusky’s lawyer, Joe Amendola, said the young men who would take the stand are accusers, not victims. He said jurors may find it odd that Sandusky acknowledged showering with children, but that it was innocuous, and part of Sandusky’s upbringing.

 

“In Jerry’s culture, growing up in his generation, where he grew up, he’s going to tell you it was routine for individuals to get showers together,” Amendola said. “I suspect for those of you who might have been in athletics, it’s routine.” [Uh…no I don’t think so]

“The first man to testify will detail how Sandusky plied him with gifts and trips and coerced him into sexual contact, including dozens of liaisons in a sauna, McGettigan said.

 

The prosecutor said the same man would tell the jury about how Dottie Sandusky inadvertently interrupted an encounter in a San Antonio hotel after Sandusky brought the youth with him when Penn State played in the Alamo Bowl in December 1999 — Sandusky’s final game as a Penn State coach. Sandusky coerced him into engaging in oral sex in a hotel room bathroom, but was interrupted when the coach’s wife entered the hotel room, McGettigan said.

 

Dottie Sandusky arrived in the courtroom Monday, but left when the judge sequestered witnesses.

 

The man, now 28, will be the oldest of the alleged victims to testify, said McGettigan.

 

Sandusky, in a grey-green suit, hunched slightly in his seat at the defense table as Judge John Cleland outlined the charges to the jurors. He looked pale and blinked a lot, then he looked away after McGettigan referenced an alleged 2001 attack in a Penn State shower. During Amendola’s opening statement, he watched intently.

 

Amendola said the defense will argue that Mike McQueary, the football team assistant who reported seeing Sandusky naked in a shower in 2001, was mistaken about what he saw.

 

“We don’t think Michael McQueary lied,” Amendola told jurors. “Are you surprised? We don’t think that he lied. What we think is that he saw something and made assumptions.”

 

Cleland opted not to sequester the jury, saying he trusted the panel to avoid reading or watching reports about the case.”

“Snowboards, hockey sticks and other items described in a grand jury report as gifts lavished on one of the victims were carried into the courthouse before the start of the morning session.

 

Amendola told jurors that at least six of the alleged victims have civil lawyers, including several in the courtroom gallery on Monday.

 

“It is rare, rare, absolutely, totally unusual for an alleged victim to have an attorney, aside from the commonwealth, representing them,” Amendola said.

 

He said some maintained contact with Sandusky years after the alleged sexual abuse.

 

“These young men had a financial interest in this case and pursuing this case,” Amendola said.

 

Mindful of protecting the privacy of witnesses, officials set up a tent at the rear of the courthouse while the doors were covered to obscure views of the witness-holding areas.”

Prosecutor calls Sandusky a “predatory pedophile”

[CBS News 6/11/12]

“The first witness in Jerry Sandusky’s trial said the former Penn State assistant football coach sexually abused him as a young teenager on campus and in hotel saunas and later sent him ‘‘creepy love letters.’’

The witness, dubbed Victim No. 4 by prosecutors, said what began as ‘‘soap battles’’ in the shower escalated into inappropriate touching and oral sex.

The man, now 28, was the first of eight alleged victims expected to testify during the trial, which began Monday with opening statements.

Sandusky faces 52 criminal counts that he sexually abused 10 boys over 15 years, allegations he has denied. His arrest and the fallout led to departures of longtime football coach Joe Paterno and the university president.

The trial is expected to last several weeks.”

“Sandusky sat still as the first witness explained that he began showering with the former assistant coach in 1997. The man said he had met Sandusky through The Second Mile, the children’s charity the assistant coach had founded.

The witness spoke calmly and firmly when questioned by McGettigan. Wearing a white shirt, dark tie and dark pants, he looked straight ahead at McGettigan during questioning. He gestured at times when asked to describe interactions with Sandusky.

‘‘He would put his hand on my leg, basically like I was his girlfriend … it freaked me out extremely bad,’’ the man said, extending his right arm out and pushing it back and forth.

‘‘I pushed it away … after a little while, it would come right back. That drove me nuts,’’ he said.

Instances in the shower, the man testified, escalated to the point where either Sandusky maneuvered himself so his head would be near the boy’s genitals, or vice versa. The man testified that there were ‘‘a few occasions’’ where Sandusky ejaculated in the Penn State locker room showers.

Pictures of Sandusky and the then-boy were shown at times on a video screen. The man was asked to identify photos handed to him by McGettigan, including those with Penn State football players, but rarely looked over when the pictures were displayed on a screen large enough for jurors to see.

The man said he stayed either at his mother’s or grandmother’s home at times. He never told his grandmother.

‘‘No, no way. I was too scared to … The other things were nice. I didn’t want to lose that,’’ he testified.

A self-described college football fan, the man said he enjoyed the access to Penn State football games and facilities. At one point, the man said, Sandusky let him wear the No. 11 uniform of LaVar Arrington. Prosecutors also showed a picture of the man, as a boy, with Arrington.

The man testified that Sandusky also took him to bowl trips including the Outback and Alamo bowls. He also gave him golf clubs, snowboards, drum sets and various Penn state memorabilia including a watch from the Orange Bowl, the man testified. He said he would wear gift jerseys to school.

The man said that, as he got older and after he got a girlfriend, he was ‘‘basically getting sick about what was happening to me.’’

He testified to one alleged interaction before a bowl game banquet in Texas, in a hotel bathroom before taking a shower, that Sandusky pushed down on him in a ‘‘downward motion.’’

The man said he resisted, when he testified that Sandusky responded, ‘‘You don’t want to go back (home), do you?’’

Asked by McGettigan to clarify, the man said ‘‘that he was trying to get me to have oral sex, and threatening me if not.’’

He said about 10 seconds later, Sandusky’s wife, Dottie, called out from another room, and that an apparently surprised Sandusky left the bathroom.

Sandusky also sent thee man letters, the man testified. One shown briefly on a video screen in court was a handwritten on Penn State letterhead, signed ‘‘Jerry’’

‘‘I know that I have made my share of mistakes,’’ the letter read. However I hope that I will be able to say that I cared. There has been love in my heart.’’

The man described some of the correspondence as ‘‘creepy love letters … Others would be ‘Hey, do you want to come to a football game.’ Those kinds of things.

Defense attorney Karl Rominger questioned the relevance of the letter, leading to a conference between the judge and attorneys at the bench. But questioning continued minutes later.”

Accuser describes alleged abuse in Jerry Sandusky trial

[Boston Globe 6/11/12 by Genaro C. Armas and Mark Scolforo/Associated Press]

(5)TRIAL DAY TWO

Victim 4: “On Monday, the first person to take the stand after opening statements was a now 28-year-old man identified as Victim No. 4. He said that Sandusky routinely had the then-teenage boy perform oral sex on him while the two showered together on the school’s campus and elsewhere

“It would have to be 40 times, at least,” he said, adding that the abuse started when he was 14-years-old.

The man on the stand Monday, as well as Victim No.1, met Sandusky through Second Mile, the nonprofit group the ex-coach founded.

He described growing up without parental oversight before Sandusky took to him — playings sports with him, paying for uniforms, a snowboard and other items, taking him to Penn State games and doing other special things. Victim No. 4 said Sandusky also drove him to buy marijuana once when he was 15 or 16 and had bought him cartons of cigarettes.

Despite what he described as systemic sexual abuse, the witness said he was “scared” and reluctant to talk about it and “lose the good things I had.” But he said he decided to tell his story after hearing that “this happened over and over and over again.”

While Sandusky said he wanted him to succeed and was nice to him in public, Victim No. 4 said their relationship was different in private.

“He treated me like a son in front of other people. Outside of that, he’s treating me like his girlfriend,” he said, noting Sandusky’s habit of putting his hand on the then-teen’s thighs when they drove in a car together.”

Victim 1: “The man whose accusations of sexual abuse helped trigger a criminal investigation, upending the storied Penn State football program, said Tuesday that he stayed at Jerry Sandusky’s house more than 100 times as a boy, where the former assistant football coach repeatedly sexually abused him.

Now 18, the man identified as “Victim No.1,” said he grew up without a father, living with his mom and siblings, and met Sandusky at Second Mile, a foundation the former coach created for needy children.

“At first he would kiss me on the forehead goodnight,” Victim No.1 testified on Tuesday. “Then it was kissing me on the cheek, then rubbing my back and cracking my back.”

Sandusky’s roaming hands would later move to “rub underneath my shorts,” he said. The alleged abuse further escalated when Sandusky “put his mouth on my privates.”

“”I spaced,” the alleged victim said. “I didn’t know what to do.”

Later, the former coach allegedly told him that “it’s your turn,” he added. “He made me put my mouth on his privates.”

The man’s emotion-filled descriptions were often accompanied by tears, kicking off the second day of testimony in the high-profile child rape case.

The grand jury report cited evidence that Sandusky, who has pleaded not guilty, “indecently fondled Victim 1 on a number of occasions, performed oral sex on Victim 1 on a number of occasions and had Victim 1 perform oral sex on him on at least one occasion.”

The teenager, who transferred schools amid the fallout from the investigation, graduated from his new high school this past weekend, according to his attorney Michael Boni.

He is one of 10 boys who, prosecutors say, were sexually abused by the Nittany Lions’ longtime defensive coordinator over a span of 15 years. Sandusky’s trial on 52 charges is expected to continue for about three weeks.

The alleged victim’s elementary school wrestling coach also testified Tuesday, saying that he’d seen interactions between Sandusky and the boy and “thought it was a great thing because (the boy) needed a father figure.”

But Joe Miller recalled one day when returned to the weight room and found Sandusky and the alleged victim “laying together side to side” with his arm on the boy.

“At the point Jerry propped up and said ‘Hey there, we’re working on wrestling moves,’ ” he testified. “They were both startled that I came in.”

More on Victim 4

“Besides the alleged oral sex, Victim No. 4 detailed other instances of alleged abuse, including Sandusky trying to penetrate him in the shower, caressing him and “kissing … my thighs.”

This allegedly took place in athletic buildings on Penn State’s campus, as well as the Toftrees Golf Resort and hotels, including on trips to Florida and Texas to watch the Nittany Lions play at the Outback and Alamo bowls, respectively, Victim No. 4 testified.

Jurors were shown excerpts of letters Victim No. 4 said Sandusky wrote to him. In one, it states, “I know that I have made my share of mistakes. … My wish is that you care and have love in your heart. Love never ends.”

Defense attorneys had filed a motion earlier Monday seeking to keep out testimony involving prosecutors’ allegations Sandusky exhibited “grooming behavior,” including the letters to Victim No. 4.

The lawyers said they intend to offer expert testimony from a psychologist who “will explain that the words, tones, requests and statements made in the letters are consistent with a person who suffers from a Histrionic Personality Disorder,” the documents said.

According to the National Institutes of Health, those with histrionic personality disorder “act in a very emotional and dramatic way that draws attention to themselves.”

“The goal of a person suffering from this disorder in writing those letters would not necessarily be to groom or sexually consummate a relationship in a criminal manner, but rather to satisfy the needs of a psyche belabored by the needs of such a disorder,” the defense lawyers write in their motion.

LaVar Arrington, a former Penn State star linebacker whom Victim No. 4 mentioned, wrote in The Washington Post on Tuesday that he “knew this young man fairly well but didn’t grasp the full extent of what he was going through.”

“He always seemed mad or kind of distant,” Arrington wrote. “I remember distinctly asking him: ‘Why are you always walking around all mad, like a tough guy?’ ”

Arrington had defended Sandusky when the allegations first surfaced, but offered his apology in Tuesday’s article.

“I hate everything that has happened, and now I must admit I feel even worse, knowing what allegedly was happening so close to me, and that I was unaware,” he wrote. “All I can do is hope that Victim #4 finds this entry and can see that I’m offering my sincerest apologies. I am so sorry this happened.”

Former Penn State assistant football coach Mike McQueary also testified Tuesday, describing what he thought appeared to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in a shower inside the university athletic facilities.

He said he informed university officials of the incident, though did not use the words “anal sex” when telling the officials because he “didn’t feel comfortable.”

Defense attorney Karl Rominger cross-examined McQueary, asking the former graduate assistant about angles of his view and the date of the alleged incident.”

Alleged Sandusky victim details abuse

[CNN 6/12/12]

More on Victim 1

“For a split second, after he went back to his car and contemplated just seeing Jerry Sandusky and a boy in his son’s grade lying face-to-face on a wrestling mat after hours in a Keystone Central school weight room, coach Joe Miller hesitated.

Why would they be there? No one is supposed to be there after hours, he testified at Sandusky’s child sex abuse trial Tuesday.
“Then I thought, well, it’s Jerry Sandusky — he’s a saint,” Miller testified. “What he’s doing with these kids is fantastic, so I didn’t think anything of it.”
So he dismissed it. Never told anyone — not even his wife.
Not until that boy, now known as Victim 1 of 10 in the Sandusky child sex abuse case, came forward and made allegations, did Miller recount his story to an investigating grand jury.
He told it once more Tuesday during the trial, giving credibility to Victim 1, who emotionally testified earlier in the day and recounted that incident for jurors, too.
Victim 1 said Sandusky had brought him to the room to work out, but he wanted to climb a rock wall. Sandusky lifted him from the wall as he was climbing, and put him on the ground where they were when Miller interrupted, he testified.
He said Sandusky “jumped like a rabbit” when Miller walked in.
And when Miller testified, attorney Joe Amendola asked him if that was an accurate characterization.
Miller said yes.”

Jerry Sandusky trial: Coach says Sandusky ‘jumped like a rabbit’ when he walked in on incident in weight room

[The Patriot-News 6/12/12 by Sara Ganim]

Jerry Sandusky trial: Mike McQueary says he got ‘3 distinguishable looks’ of Sandusky in shower with boy

[The Patriot-News 6/12/12 by Dustin Hockensmith]

LEAVE IT TO THE CASEWORKER TO COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTAND JERRY’S ACTIONS

Jerry “told a caseworker that he had a three-year “relationship” with the boy known as Victim One, according to testimony today.

Sandusky denied anything sexual. But he did admit to lying with the boy and cracking his back. To kissing his forehead.

He said he was wrapped up in Victim One, according to testimony.

 

That he felt used by the boy.

He admitted to following his school bus after a fight.

To making him a homemade birthday card.

“Does that sound like a relationship between a middle-aged man and a small boy or between immature adolescents?” prosecutor Joseph McGettigan asked the caseworker, Jessica Dershem.

“Immature adolescents,” she replied.

Dershem said that Central Mountain High School, the boy’s school, did refer a case of alleged abuse to the child welfare agency, Children and Youth Services.

During cross-examination today of Dershem, defense attorney Joe Amendola pointed out that the now-18-year-old’s story started out as allegations that Sandusky was touching him over his clothing. “There’s no mention of oral sex,” Amendola said in court.

 

When he testified this morning, Victim One said he was embarrassed and scared to tell the truth about everything that happened to him over three years of hanging out with Sandusky.

He then described in detail a pattern of behavior — games and meals, back rubbing, stomach blowing — that eventually led to oral sex.”

Jerry Sandusky trial: Caseworker says relationship between coach, boy was like ‘immature adolescents’

[The Patriot-News 6/12/12 by Sara Ganim]

State Trooper Felt Enough Evidence for Investigation with Victim 1

“The state police trooper who initially handled the Clinton County case against Jerry Sandusky believed there was enough evidence from a teenage boy — now known as Victim One — to charge Sandusky with indecent assault.”

Jerry Sandusky trial: State police trooper said investigation warranted charges

[The Patriot-News 6/12/12 by Sara Ganim]

Update 38/June 15 2012

Trial Days 3 and 4

“McQueary’s father John and a young man known as “Victim 10” testified Wednesday morning. Another witness referred to as “Victim 7” took the stand Wednesday, describing “cuddling” and showers with Sandusky. He also told the court that the ex-coach provided him with PSU football tickets from 1995-2009.

A fourth man, identified 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. A janitor also testified, saying his co-worker told him he saw Sandusky performing oral sex on a young boy in a Penn State locker room shower in 2000.

A 25-year-old man known as “Victim 6,” whose 1998 encounter with Jerry Sandusky was investigated but resulted in no charges, told jurors Thursday that the former Penn State assistant football coach “bear-hugged” him in a locker-room shower. “Victim 3” testified that Sandusky touched his penis during sleepovers at the former coach’s house, but that he didn’t tell the older man not to get into bed with him because he “made me feel like part of the family.” The day ended with graphic testimony from the young man identified as “Victim 9,” who said the ex-coach raped him and he recalled screaming in the basement of the Sandusky home.

Court is in recess until Monday. Prosecutors have not yet rested their case.

Here’s a breakdown of so-called Victims 1-10, as they are referred to in charging documents, and their allegations of abuse:

Victim 1: Sandusky allegedly fondled him and performed oral sex on him multiple times, in his home and State College hotels. The boy was 11-15 years old at the time. Sandusky was barred from his central Pennsylvania high school in 2009 after the boy’s mother alerted school officials, triggering the investigation that produced charges.

Victim 2: A boy of about 10 that graduate assistant Mike McQueary has said he saw being attacked by Sandusky in the team showers. Investigators have not been able to determine the boy’s identity. McQueary reported what he saw to head coach Joe Paterno, and Paterno’s handling of it contributed to the university board of trustee’s decision to fire him shortly after Sandusky was arrested in November.

Victim 3: Sandusky hugged him in the shower and fondled him twice, according to the grand jury report. The incidents allegedly occurred between July 1999 and December 2001, at Sandusky’s home and in team showers. The boy was 12-14.

Victim 4: Sandusky is accused of repeated involuntary deviate sexual intercourse. Prosecutors say more than 50 alleged incidents occurred between 1996 and 2000, at the Sandusky home, hotels and university facilities, while the boy was 12-17. He also traveled with the Sandusky family to football bowl games in Texas and Florida.

Victim 5: Sandusky put his hand on the boy’s leg while in a car, they showered together, and he placed the boy’s hand on his genitals, according to allegations in court records. The alleged incidents occurred in August 2001, while the boy was 12 or 13.

Victim 6: While showering together in May 1998, Sandusky allegedly grabbed him and said, “I’m going to squeeze your guts out,” according to the grand jury. The boy’s mother complained when he came home with wet hair, prompting a police investigation at the time that did not result in charges. The boy was 11.

Victim 7: They showered together and Sandusky bear hugged him in 1995-96, and more than once he put his hands down the waistband of the boy’s pants, according to the grand jury. The boy was 9-11

Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify. The boy has not been identified by investigators.

Victim 9: Part of a second set of charges. Boy was subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky at the Sandusky home, a State College hotel and other locations between July 2005 and December 2008, according to prosecutors. He was 12-15 at the time.

Victim 10: Part of the second set of charges. Boy was subjected to sexual abuse between September 1997 and July 1999 at the Sandusky home and car and at an area pool, prosecutors allege. The boy was 10-12.”

Jerry Sandusky Trial: Four days of graphic testimony

[CBS News 6/15/12 by Casey Glynn]

Specifics on Victim 9

“The courtroom was once again brought to tears today as the 18-year-old known as Victim 9 said that for four years  Sandusky would come downstairs to the basement, drop his pants, and rape him and force him to perform oral sex.

“He started getting physical, like having me touch his penis and stuff,” he said. “He made me give him a, suck his penis is how you’d put it. He came in my room, pulled his pants down, laid on top of me, and kind of forced it in. What was I going to do? I mean look at him, he’s a big guy. He was bigger than me, at the time way bigger than me.”

Victim 9 said he weighed less than 70 pounds at the time and was helpless when Sandusky allegedly came for him.

“There was no fighting against it,” he said. “Sometimes (I’d) scream, sometimes tell him to get off me, but other than that, who was there?  We were in the basement, no one could hear you  down there. We were always down there.”

When asked to point out his alleged assailant, Victim 9 pointed as Sandusky without looking at him.

“Can you look at him?” the prosecutor asked. “I don’t want to look at him,” the witness replied.

Victim 9 was the eighth and final alleged victim to testify about being molested in the case against Sandusky, who is charged with 52 counts of child sex abuse. If convicted of the charges, Sandusky, 68, could be sentenced to life in prison.

The man said that his abuse by Sandusky lasted until he was about 16, in the year 2009. The timeframe suggests that Sandusky may have continued to abuse boys while under investigation by a grand jury, since the investigation was launched in late 2008.

Victim 9 said his mother encouraged him to spend time with the coach and that he spent almost every weekend at Sandusky’s house for three years, between 100 and 150 times, and the acts occurred “often.”

The man said that around age 16 he refused to go over to Sandusky’s house any more, but Sandusky called him once more in 2011 to ask him to “stick up for him” if anyone came to ask questions, he testified.

Upon cross-examination, the man admitted that he went on one more outing with Sandusky shortly before the coach’s arrest to a football game in September 2011. He said that he wanted to take his friend, who had never been to a football game, to the Penn State stadium.

“The only reason I went that time was I had a friend with me, and my friend didn’t like him anyway. If anything went down, my friend had my back,” he said.

The cross-examination was also graphic as defense attorney Joseph Amendola asked the boy repeatedly whether he bled from the anal rape and whether his mother saw blood on his underwear. He calmly responded that he had bled, but his mother did not discover it on his underwear.

“I just dealt with it. I never told anybody, I didn’t even tell my own mom,” he said. “I just deal with things in my own way.”

Victim 9 said he never told his mother or anyone until he spoke to police, and he only told prosecutor Joseph McGettigan the whole truth before his testimony today.”

“How are you supposed to tell your mom something like that?” he said. “Who would believe you? He was an important guy, a football coach. Who would believe kids?”

The defense is expected to present its case on Monday, focused on portraying Sandusky as an overly-affectionate man with childlike tendencies. The prosecution said it had no further witnesses, though it did not officially rest its case.

Two other men told the court today how as young boys they were allegedly molested by Sandusky.

More on Victim 6

Victim 6, who is now 24, said that as a young boy growing up in State College, Pa., he idolized the Penn State football team and the day he got to try on football helmets and shoulder pads from the star players, ones that “were huge for me” was a thrilling day — until Sandusky asked him to take a shower.

The man said that Sandusky bear-hugged him, tickled him, called himself the “tickle monster” and lifted him up in the shower saying he was going to “squeeze (the boy’s) guts out.”

The shower made him “uncomfortable,” but the memory of what happened stopped there. The man, identified as Victim 6, said he “blacked out” when Sandusky lifted him up in the shower, and he could not remember exactly what happened next.”

“”Then he had his hands around my waist and lifted me up to the shower head to get the soap out of my hair. I believe my chest was to his chest,” he said. “I don’t think it was touching but I remember going into the shower head and having to close my eyes so soap wouldn’t go in, and that’s the last thing I remember about being in the shower. That’s the best recollection I’ve got.

“I don’t even remember being put down,” he said. “Everything else is just blacked out. I don’t remember any more.”

The episode became the linchpin for the first criminal investigation of Sandusky as a child sex abuser, launched in 1998 when the man’s mother called Penn State campus police to report that a staff member had been inappropriately showering with her son.

That investigation came close to an arrest for Sandusky, according to testimony by the lead investigator Ronald Scheffler, who worked as a criminal investigator for the university police. Scheffler said that he interviewed Sandusky about the incident, and Sandusky admitted that he had showered with many children. But Scheffler never followed up to see how many, what activities had gone on in the shower, or how old the children were.

Scheffler told McGettigan that he believed there was enough to charge Sandusky, but district attorney Ray Gricar decided not to prosecute.

It would be 10 more years, and at least half a dozen other alleged victims, until Sandusky would be investigated once again, finally resulting in 52 counts of child sex abuse.

The episode with Victim 6 was quickly pulled apart by Amendola, who noted that though Victim 6 said he did not remember what happened in the shower, he told Scheffler in the days immediately following the incident that he was sure Sandusky never touched him sexually or asked the boy to touch Sandusky sexually.

“I could sort of feel like he kissed me once or twice on the head, like you would kiss your child, you know what I mean,” the boy said in the transcript.

“Like you would kiss a child,” Amendola repeated.”

“Amendola stressed that Gricar, a veteran prosecutor, decided not press charges because there was no evidence of sexual abuse, to which Scheffler conceded the point. Gricar disappeared without a trace in 2005, and so could not shed light on why he decided not press charges against Sandusky in 1998.”

Jerry Sandusky Trial Hear ‘Victim’ Say He Screamed for Help But No One Heard

[ABC News 6/14/12 by Colleen Curry]

More on Victim 9

“Victim 9 said he was 12 when he met Sandusky in 2005 in a swimming pool during a camp run by Sandusky’s Second Mile charity for at-risk children, through which prosecutors allege the ex-coach met all his alleged victims.

Victim 9 testified that Sandusky asked him if he would like to hang out outside the camp, so he gave Sandusky his mom’s phone number.

“He seemed nice,” the alleged victim said, adding his mother thought it was great that her son would have a positive male role model.

 

He said his mother’s attitude kept him going to Sandusky’s home for sleepovers for parts of three years — more than 50 times in all, by his estimate — even after Sandusky allegedly began molesting him.

He said he told his mom that Sandusky was “touchy, feely,” but he never mentioned the assaults. “How are you supposed to tell your mom something like that?” Victim 9 said.

Growing visibly uncomfortable on the stand, Victim 9 said the abuse began during sleepovers at Sandusky’s home, when Sandusky would roll into bed with him in his basement and caress and kiss him.

At some point, the victim testified, that escalated into Sandusky forcing him to touch Sandusky’s penis and perform oral sex. Sandusky finally began forcing him to engage in anal sex, he said.

Victim 9 said his screams went unanswered by Sandusky’s wife, Dottie, who was upstairs. He said he figured the Sanduskys’ basement must be soundproof.

Victim 9 said he hated what was happening, but found resistance to be futile.

“What was I gonna do?” he testified. “I mean look at him. He’s a big guy … way bigger than me.”

Victim 9 said he ended the sexual relationship with Sandusky when, finally mustering the courage to end the assaults, he called his mom in late 2008 and asked her to come pick him up from Sandusky’s house.”

Jerry Sandusky trial: The last of the alleged victims to testify tells of being forced into sex

[The Patriot-News 6/15/12 by Charles Thompson]

Arrow Agency will receive $2Million transfer from Second Mile

Jerry Sandusky Charity Transferring $2 Million to Christian Foster Care Agency

[Christianity Today 6/14/12 by Sarah Eekhoff Zylstra ]

Update 39/June 21,2012

(1)”Prosecutors …dropped one of the 52 counts against Sandusky because the  statute he was charged under did not apply at the time of the alleged illegal  contact.

The charge relates to an accuser identified by prosecutors as Victim 7.” This was a 3rd degree felony contact with child charge.

Defense begins presenting case in Sandusky child sex abuse trial

[Fox News 6/18/12 by Associated Press]

(2)Monday June 18, 2012

“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.”

 

One last prosecution witness called. “The mother 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.

Defense opened on Monday, June 18,2012. Testimony ended after one 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.”

“Sandusky’s lawyers called four people to the stand and all were essentially character witnesses.

Former youth counselor Brett Witmer was called to the stand to counter some of the claims from the man known as Victim 4, who testified that Sandusky took a special interest in him, wrote him letters and made him sign contracts, stalked him from school begging the boy to talk to him, and sexually abused him.

Under questioning by defense attorney Joseph Amendola, Witmer said that he worked with Victim 4 at a youth group program the boy was in during elementary and middle school. He said that the boy told him Sandusky was a big part of his life, and he often saw the two interacting.

“Jerry certainly seemed to be an important part of (Victim 4’s) life… He seemed like he had a genuine interest in making sure the kid was moving in the right direction,” Witmer, now an elementary school teacher, testified.

He relayed an incident in which Sandusky showed up at the youth center to pick up Victim 4, and the boy did not show. Sandusky and the counselor chatted on the steps of the youth center.

“He said, ‘You’ve got to understand when you’re dealing with  kids coming from difficult situations  sometimes they’re not going to want to meet with you, go with you, and other times they’re going to want to do fun things and play. You just always have to be there for them,'” Witmer recalled. “Even as I do social work now I keep that in mind.”

David Pasquinelli, a former board member for the Second Mile, the charity Sandusky helped create, said that for two years he and Sandusky would take fundraising trips together and got to know each other well.

“I saw a mutual admiration between Second Mile youth, both boys and girls, with Jerry. I saw a lot of goofing around. Jerry had a very unique way, and many of us were inspired by this, how he could relate to youth of all ages and really get to their level and communicate,” Pasquinelli said.

In addition, two former Penn State coaches who worked with Sandusky, Richard Anderson and Booker Brooks, were  called to testify about a locker room culture where showering with young boys was common.” [Oh please…locker room culture?!]

Jerry Sandusky Defense Ignores Detailed Accusations

[ABC News 6/18/12 by Colleen Curry and Beth Lloyd]

(3) Tuesday June 19, 2012

Dottie Sandusky took the stand.”She supported her husband unreservedly. She said she never knew of any inappropriate behavior by him toward any of the eight accusers. She spoke in a slightly quavering voice but remained composed throughout her 45 minutes on the stand.

Asked whether her basement — where witnesses said they were assaulted — is soundproof, she said no.

“How is your hearing?” defense attorney Joseph Amendola asked.

“I think it’s pretty good,” she said. “I hear lots of noises.”

She said her husband was often absent on trips and worked very long hours, even after he retired from Penn State in 1999 and devoted himself to the Second Mile charity.

“It was rough, it was rough, because Jerry, he was not around a lot,” she said.

She proffered negative assessments of the personalities of a couple of the accusers.

Of the prosecution witness known in court as “Victim 4,” who testified that he was abused by the defendant some 15 years ago when he was a boy, Dottie Sandusky said: “He was very demanding. And he was very conniving. He wanted his way. He didn’t listen a lot.”

Of another witness, “Victim 9,” she said: “He was a charmer. He knew what to say, when to say it.”

At the close of her testimony, prosecutor Joseph McGettigan asked whether she knew of any reason why the witnesses would lie about her husband.

She was silent for a moment and turned and looked at her husband, who sat about 15 feet away.

She turned back to the prosecutor and said, “I — I don’t know. I don’t know what it would be for.””

Two Friends Were Character Witnesses

“Jack Willenbrock, a neighbor who said his children grew up with the Sandusky kids.

“Among our children, among our grandchildren, Jerry Sandusky is a father figure,”  Willenbrock said.

Another friend, Joyce Porter, testified, “All the people I know who know Jerry think he’s a wonderful man.”

Jerry’s lawyer Amendola accuses State Troopers of persuading witnesses

“Then came the troopers. Amendola played a tape in court in which the troopers, who were investigating Sandusky before charges were filed, met with the man who would eventually become known as Victim 4.

“You’re doing very well,” trooper Joseph Leiter told him. “You have been repeating word for word pretty much what a lot of people have already told us. . . . There’s a pretty well-defined progression in the way that [Sandusky] operates and still operates to some degree.”

Leiter said other people had come forward with stories of oral sex and rape. He urged  the man to be more forthcoming and describe in graphic detail what happened to him.

Questioned on the witness stand, Leiter said his interviewing technique was professional. “Each of these accusers was very, very seriously injured and very concerned,” he said, “and we had told them, especially prior to going to the grand jury, that they wouldn’t be alone, that there were others.”

The defense also called to the stand Benjamin Andreozzi, the private attorney for Victim 4. Andreozzi was in the room during his client’s interview by the state troopers. Under extended questioning about whether a guilty verdict would have an impact on a decision to file a suit, Andreozzi answered: “It could impact. Yes, it could.”

Psychologist Testifies about Histrionic Personality Disorder

” Elliot Atkins, a psychologist, who testified that he had examined Sandusky in late May and given him a couple of personality tests. He said he had also read grand jury testimony, as well as Sandusky’s 2001 memoir, “Touched.” Atkins concluded that Sandusky has histrionic personality disorder, a condition characterized by excessive emotionality, need for attention and approval from others, and “inappropriate sexually seductive or provocative behavior.”

Atkins was permitted to testify only in a narrow sense to show that this condition explained the letters that Sandusky had written to Victim 4, who had called them “creepy love letters.”

It was unclear how the personality-disorder defense could help Sandusky when the time comes for the jury to deliberate. In his instructions to the jury before Atkins’s testimony, the judge indicated that the psychologist’s analysis should not be interpreted as excusing any behavior.

The prosecution called its own expert witness, who derided the Atkins diagnosis. John O’Brien, a psychiatrist, said Sandusky is a high-achieving person who, as a longtime deputy to the much-more-famous coach Joe Paterno, showed no sign of having a personality disorder that included an overpowering need to be the center of attention.

O’Brien said the letters written by Sandusky to Victim 4 were written in an adolescent tone. “They’re actually, in my opinion, highly manipulative,” he said of the letters.

By day’s end, with the jury gone and lawyers milling about making plans for Wednesday, Sandusky cheerfully chatted with some friends who had come to support him.

“A good day,” one of the defense attorneys said to Sandusky, who flashed a toothy smile.” [Ew!

 

Jerry Sandusky trial: Wife Dottie Sandusky defends her husband

[Washington Post 6/19/12 by Joel Achenbach]

(4) Sara Ganim, Pulitzer-prize winning reporter, Subpoenaed to testify about a text message the evening of Tuesday 6/19/12

“The Patriot-News reporter, through the newspaper’s attorney, told the presiding judge that she was willing to go to jail Wednesday to protect her sources in the ongoing child sex abuse case, and would not testify at the trial to answer a question about a text message sent to the mother of one alleged victim.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys ended up drafting a statement that was read to jurors. It said that defense and prosecutors agreed that if Ganim had testified, she would have answered “yes,” if she was asked if she sent the text message, which provided the name and number of a state attorney general investigator working on the case in 2011.

The Patriot-News was not a party to the stipulation and Ganim said she was prepared to refuse to answer the question. As The Patriot-News attorney told the judge, Ganim would have asserted her rights under Pennsylvania Shield Law and the First Amendment not to testify with respect to her newsgathering activities on this story.

She was ready to accept the consequences if the judge disagreed, she said.

Ganim did, however, send the text message in 2011, and here’s why:

In early 2011, as The Patriot-News approached the point where it had enough information to run a story that Sandusky was under investigation following allegations of child sex abuse, the paper reached out to the attorney general’s office for comment on the investigation.

The attorney general’s office said the paper could be considered obstructing justice if it did not hand over information obtained during the course of reporting.

The newspaper declined to share information with prosecutors. Instead, the newspaper decided the best course was to send a short text to the mother of one alleged victim providing the name and phone number of an investigator to let her decide if she wanted to speak with authorities.

The text message was forwarded by the alleged victim’s mother to state police, and later turned over to the defense in preparation for trial.

Amendola saw it as a part of his theory that state police pushed several accusers into making allegations of child sex abuse against Sandusky, and that accusations mounted only after news reports of the investigation went public because youths who were helped by the former Penn State coach were motivated by the prospect of civil suits.

Ganim was subpoenaed late Tuesday morning while covering the trial by defense attorney Joe Amendola.

Soon after the subpoena was delivered, The Patriot-News decided to fight it and filed papers opposing the subpoena. At a hearing Wednesday morning, the judge decided that Amendola could ask Ganim a single question about the text-message.

The judge indicated Ganim could immediately be sent to jail if she refused to testify.

When the defense indicated they were about to call Ganim to the stand, Patriot-News attorney Craig Staudenmaier told Judge John Cleland that Ganim would maintain assertion of her Shield Law privileges despite the risk of jail.

At that point, the attorneys for the defense and prosecution agreed to the stipulation, and Amendola withdrew his subpoena calling for Ganim’s testimony.”

Jerry Sandusky trial: Subpoenaed Patriot-News reporter Sara Ganim refuses to testify

[The Patriot-News 6/20/12]

(5)Wednesday June 20, 2012

“On Wednesday morning the defense attempted to undercut testimony from former graduate assistant Mike McQueary, who told jurors he saw the former Penn State assistant coach sexually abusing a boy inside a football facility shower.

Dr. Jonathan Dranov, a family friend of McQueary, said Wednesday that he spoke to McQueary the night McQueary claimed to have seen Sandusky engaging in a sex act with a boy of about 10.

Dranov testified that McQueary described hearing “sexual sounds” and seeing a boy in the shower and an arm reach around him and pull him out of view. McQueary said he made eye-contact with the boy and Sandusky later emerged from the showers, Dranov said.

That account differs from what McQueary told a grand jury that investigated Sandusky and what he told jurors last week.

McQueary testified he saw Sandusky pressing a boy up against the wall inside the shower and that he had no doubt he was witnessing anal sex.”

“Dranov told the jury that McQueary didn’t provide him with a graphic description of what he saw but described hearing sounds he considered sexual in nature.

“It just seemed to make him upset so I backed off that,” Dranov said.

When prosecutors asked Dranov to describe McQueary’s demeanor, he said the former Penn State starting quarterback was clearly upset.

“His voice was trembling. His hands were shaking. He was visibly shaken,” Dranov said.

McQueary had testified earlier that he wasn’t “over-descriptive” in his conversation with Dranov, saying he told the doctor that what he saw was sexual, wrong and perverse.

The morning also featured testimony from more defense character witnesses, including a couple of participants in Sandusky’s youth charity, “The Second Mile.” Prosecutors allege that Sandusky met his alleged victims through The Second Mile, which once was lauded for its efforts to help at-risk children.

One of the former Second Mile participants, David Hilton, who said he thought of Sandusky as a “father figure,” testified that he felt like investigators were trying to coach him into accusing Sandusky.

“When it got to the second or third time I felt like they wanted me to say something that isn’t true,” he said. “[They] asked me questions different ways to see if I would slip up.”

The defense has sought to portray investigators as planting the seeds for accusations against Sandusky by sharing details of other alleged victims’ claims.

Before the start of testimony Wednesday, a female juror was excused for an illness and replaced by an alternate, also a woman.

Prosecutors rested their case Monday after presenting 21 witnesses, including eight who said they had been assaulted by Sandusky. The identities of two other people prosecutors say were victims are unknown to investigators.”

Jerry Sandusky Trial: Defense rests without Sandusky testifying

[CBS News 6/20/12]

(6) Thursday June 21, 2012

“Three of the 51 criminal counts against former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky were thrown out Thursday morning as the lawyers prepared to turn over the child sex-abuse case to the jury.
In a morning ruling, Judge John Cleland tossed out three of the charges, leaving 48 for the jury of seven women and five men to consider. Two counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse involving the person known as Victim 4 were thrown out because he testified that Sandusky attempted to penetrate him but did not say the former coach had succeeded. The third dropped charge was a repeat of another count.
Even with Thursday’s action, Sandusky, 68, still faces 48 criminal charges of abusing 10 boys over a 15-year-period. After the Thursday action, he faces nine counts of the most serious charge, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.”

“In his closing, defense attorney Joseph Amendola said his client was the victim of accusers who had hopes of a financial gain from civil suits expected after the criminal issues are resolved. He also blamed the investigations which assumed Sandusky was guilty. Both are themes the defense sounded frequently in the two-week trial.
The prosecution has argued throughout the trial that Sandusky is a predatory pedophile. It built its case on the testimony of eight men who said they were abused as children by Sandusky. Judge Cleland on Thursday explained to the jurors that they can accept or reject all or parts of the testimony, according to media reports from the courtroom.
The defense also called on a number of character witnesses, including Sandusky’s wife, Dottie, who said they had never seen Sandusky commit an improper act with a boy. Dottie Sandusky specifically rebutted descriptions by two of the accusers. The judge told the jurors they could accept or reject what they wanted of that testimony, as well.
Cleland also explained some of the nuances the jurors should examine. For example, Cleland told the jury that an adult hugging a child or rubbing a boy’s back is not a crime. But if the intent of the adult is sexual, the act becomes criminal.
And the judge walked through the technical differences among the charges ranging from involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, through the others including indecent assault, unlawful contact with minors, corruption of minors and endangering the welfare of children.
“We all rely on your integrity and your good judgment,” Cleland told the jury.”

After 3 charges tossed out, Jerry Sandusky’s fate to be decided by jury

[Los Angeles Times 6/21/12 by Mike Muskal]

Update 40/June 21, 2012 evening

As we have predicted all along, Matt Sandusky, Jerry’s adopted son, is now saying that he was sexually abused by Jerry. Remember that Matt’s ex-wife did not want Jerry to be able to have contact with her kids after Jerry’s arrest.

This fits with the profile of other pedophiles that we have in our database.

“Matt Sandusky, an adopted son of Jerry Sandusky, said through his attorney Thursday that he was also a victim of the former coach’s sexual abuse, adding that he had been prepared to testify for the prosecution.

“At Matt’s request, we immediately arranged a meeting between him and the prosecutors and investigators,” attorneys Andrew Shubin and Justine Andronici said in a statement. “This has been an extremely painful experience for Matt and he has asked us to convey his request that the media respect his privacy.”

 

The child rape case against Sandusky, who faces accusations of sexual abuse involving 10 alleged victims, is now wrapping up and is in the hands of a jury.”

 

Attorneys: Sandusky’s adopted son says he’s also a victim

[CNN 6/21/12]