E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe jurors in the sexual abuse trial began their deliberations Thursday after hearing vastly different portrayals of the former Penn State assistant football coach. Jerry Sandusky's attorney told jurors there was "not one piece of physical evidence," while prosecutors asked that Sandusky receive "the justice he really deserves." NBC News' Michael Isikoff reports from Bellefonte, Pa.
Updated at 9:24 p.m. ET: Jurors in the child sexual abuse trial of former Penn State University assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky deliberated for more than seven hours Thursday without reaching a verdict.
Deliberations were scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. ET Friday in Centre County Court in Bellefonte, Pa., where Sandusky is charged with 48 counts alleging that he abused 10 boys over 15 years. Three other counts were dropped early Thursday.
Judge John Cleland said the jurors had asked to rehear the testimony of two key prosecution witnesses: former Penn State assistant coach Michael McQueary, who testified that he overheard Sandusky having sex with a young boy in a football locker room shower, and Jonathan Dranov, a family friend who testified that McQueary told him about incident. Those arrangements were to be worked out Friday morning.
The jury began its deliberations about 1:30 p.m. ET and worked straight through the afternoon and early evening, for nearly 7½ hours, following closing arguments in which they heard two starkly different descriptions of the case against Sandusky.
The prosecution and the defense clashed over defense attorney Joseph Amendola's suggestion that the entire case was a conspiracy among police, prosecutors and the alleged victims and their lawyers, in hopes of a big payday in future civil trials.
"The system" prejudged Sandusky and "set out to convict him" even though the case against him makes no sense, Amendola said.
But Deputy Pennsylvania Attorney General Joseph McGettigan, the lead prosecutor, argued that it defied common sense to believe the police and court systems would have conspired to bring down a figure as beloved in the community as Sandusky, the former longtime defensive coordinator for Penn State's nationally famous football team and founder of the Second Mile charity for troubled children.
"What would we gain?" he asked.
Sandusky, 68, was charged in two grand jury indictments that accused him of having used his connection to one of the nation's premier college football programs to "groom" the 10 boys for sexual relationships.
Eight of the 10 alleged victims testified during the trial. Another whom the jury never heard from was Sandusky's adopted son Matt, whose lawyers said Thursday afternoon — after deliberations had begun — that he, too, had been abused by Sandusky.
Sources told NBC News that Matt Sandusky's potential rebuttal testimony was why Sandusky chose not to testify in his own defense. (NBC News and msnbc.com generally do not identify victims of sexual assaults, but Sandusky chose to identify himself in a public statement released through his attorneys.)
Sources: Adopted son as possible witness helped keep Sandusky silent
Legal analysis: Sandusky's attorney hits home run in closing argument
"No one wins in this case. This is awful no matter what happens," Amendola said during the closing defense argument. "If Jerry Sandusky did this — if he did this — he should rot in jail. Bless his heart, that's my feeling.
"But what if he didn't do this? His life is destroyed."
Amendola repeated the phrases "it doesn't make sense" and "does that make sense?" like mantras throughout his 75-minute closing statement, highlighting what he said were inconsistencies and logical impossibilities in the evidence against Sandusky.
"All these alleged charges only go back to the mid-'90s, so out of the blue, after all these years, when Mr. Sandusky is in his mid-50s, Mr. Sandusky decides to become a pedophile? Does that make sense to anybody? Does that make sense?"
Amendola accused the eight men who testified that Sandusky had abused them as children of seeking to cash in on eventual civil trials against his client.
"We can understand these kids now want to be compensated — the lawyers want to make all these dollars — but it still doesn't mean Mr. Sandusky did this," he said.
Amendola also accused investigators of having coached the alleged victims to say what they wanted to hear because they had already decided to ignore possible evidence that Sandusky was innocent.
Ghosts of Sandusky's dreams haunt home where charity was born
Full coverage of the Jerry Sandusky trial
"The system decided Mr. Sandusky was guilty, and the system set out to convict him," he said, focusing on the testimony of two state investigators whose testimony appeared to be contradictory.
But McGettigan contended that the holes the defense poked in the case were, in fact, proof that there was no collusion.
"Everybody would have had to have been on the same page. Not so," he said.
McGettigan said it was easy for the defense to claim a conspiracy when "you don't name them. You just say 'the system.'"
But he said "the system" is made up of real people, in this case dozens of them who all wopuld have had to be in collusion for the last 15 years: the 10 alleged victims, the 24 grand jurors, the investigators, the arresting officers, corroborating witnesses like Sandusky's former colleague Michael McQueary, social services professionals, and McGettigan and his co-prosecutors themselves.
"If you conclude there's a conspiracy, someone bring handcuffs in for me and ... anyone else involved," McGettigan said, before concluding:
"What you should do is come out and say to the defendant that he molested, abused and assaulted (the alleged victims). He knows he did it, and you know he did it.
"Give him the justice he really deserves. Find him guilty of everything.
Three more charges dismissed
Sandusky originally was charged with 52 counts, but Cleland, who had previously dismissed one of them, threw out three more Thursday morning.
Two were charges alleging involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with one of the 10 alleged victims, which Cleland said the evidence didn't support. Had the jury convicted Sandusky on those two counts, Cleland said, he would have been required to set the convictions aside.
The third count was a duplicate of another count, he ruled.
Sandusky made no comment as he arrived at court Thursday morning with his wife, Dottie, who testified Tuesday that she never heard or saw her husband engage in any inappropriate behavior with children during their 45 years of marriage.
Sandusky had been widely expected to testify Wednesday before his lawyers abruptly rested their case after a lengthy conference in the judge's chambers.
A source close to Sandusky said "there was no one factor that led to the decision," but NBC News reported Thursday that Sandusky decided not to testify after his lawyers were warned that prosecutors would call his adopted son, Matt, as a rebuttal witness if he did so. The sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, told NBC News that Matt Sandusky was prepared to deliver damaging testimony about his father.
NBC's Savannah Guthrie discusses why the prosecution didn't call Jerry Sandusky's adopted son as a witness if he was able to provide damaging evidence.
In his final instructions, Cleland told jurors that they had great leeway in determining whether Sandusky's alleged behavior, while possibly troubling, may not have been criminal.
For example, he said, "it's not necessarily a crime for a man to take a shower with a boy. It's not necessarily a crime for a man to wash a boy's hair or lather his back or shoulders or to engage in back rubbing."
The bottom line was Sandusky's intent, "not the child's reaction," he told the jurors, who heard eight of the 10 alleged victims testify that they were traumatized by Sandusky's alleged advances.
In other words, "you must distinguish a display of innocent affection from lust," Cleland instructed.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Documentary film takes on military sexual assault 'epidemic'
- Special ops commander relieved of duty after Osprey crash
- Rock Center: Sandusky accuser details years of abuse
- Vacation fund for bullied bus monitor tops $300,000
- Video: Watch Zimmerman re-enact the Martin shooting at the scene
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
The article only gives excerpts from the judge's instruction, but if accurate, they are in error. If Sandusky was sodomizing the young boys [McQueary testimony could support, as well as other victim testimony], that is a crime no matter how much Sandusky may argue that his "intent" in doing so was not "sexual." Statutory rape laws would apply, and the children were too young to consent to the touching. Moreover, it DOES matter what the boys' reactions were if the contact was unsolicited and unwanted because they were uncomfortable because of sexual connotations. The prosecution should have objected strenuously to the instructions if they really were as lax and misguided as the article indicates. The judge was basically asking the jury to let Sandusky off the hook.
Those particular instructions were for the charges that did not involve actual sexual contact. In those the judge said they must judge his intent. If they find him guilty of raping the other kids then it isn't difficult to judge what his intent was every time he got into the shower with one of those kids. He will be found guilty.
No matter what, he will be found guilty and rightfully live the rest of his life in unmitigated misery....which will still be luxurious compared to what he put his victims through.
Heck of a job, Penn State.
Don't most of the jurors have ties to Penn State? We'll soon see if his school is still protecting him.
You are wrong on the point about the boys' reactions, they are not relevant to a criminal case. They would be relevant in something like a civil sexual harassment case, but are not in this criminal case. What this whole thing is going to come down to is whether or not there is any evidence of actual sexual contact between Sandusky and any of these boys. Most of the testimony has been about things that would be considered inappropriate and in exhibiting judgement on Sandusky's part, the question is did the prosecution show that there was sexual contact or not. There were some accusations made by a few of the boys that would indicate that he did cross the line, the only question is whether they are believable or not, particularly in light of their financial motives to lie. I do not know what really happened and I seriously doubt that anyone other than Sandusy and the boys involved will ever know for certain. I even wonder if some of these boys know what really happened and what may have been planted in their heads by accusations from others. Memory is a very tricky thing, particularly when it comes to things that happened a long time ago at a young age in a confusing situation. Sandusky's actions were definitely out of line, the only question is did they rise to the level of being criminal. No matter what the verdict here, I doubt that anyone other than those involved could ever be certain. I think that the judge gave the correct instruction under the law and now it up to the jury to decide if Sandusky ever crossed the line. My guess is that Sandusky will be convicted based on the fact that what he did was wrong. Even if the jury is not sure on the criminality issue, I think they will convict anyway.
The reason the prosecution didn't object is because this whole setup is insanity. The fact that victims of such a horrific level crime have to come and be bullied just to receive justice already has the entire premise of this event wrong.
The way the @!$%# went down in Shiner, Texas, that was perfect. Unfortunately, the child suffered 1 abuse but she did not have to suffer repeated abuse because the father was there to protect her.
Our justice system still has a bit of a connotation of "why didn't you stand up for yourself sooner, you idiot" about when child victims of repeat sexual abuse finally come out of the closet. And I say out of the closet not bc they are gay or have something to hide but having been emotionally damaged and the humiliation that must unsurface is a process of ..... well... So the justice system sort of has its fun with these victims. As if to connote that if they didn't like the abuse, well maybe they should have spoken up sooner. Which in turn holds the connotation that it must have been consensual.
I just think that our bullying society enjoys at the expense of others the concept of the following: "that these dumb child victims never spoke up for themselves, well then they deserved it!"
I am a married woman, and when I was kidnapped from my garage while my husband was home and later sexually assaulted, my husband, who you would think would have come out to protect me but disregarded my screams as though I had seen a cockroach or something, my husband said the following words to me verbatim and I am absolutely not even exaggerating: "Why didn't you jump over the car and get the Samurai sword?"
That assault was 5 or 6 years ago but yesterday when said car was being totaled for hail damage I reminded my husband of this comment he made and I invited him, one last time, to go out and jump over that car, clearing both the hood and the trunk, and the roof. I told him to jump over it from every angle. He said nothing. Nor did he jump over the car.
My point is that sexual assault in the United States has such a negative connotation with it and in our bully-istic society people seem to insinuate, "well, why didn't you defend yourself, you idiot?"
Well, if you ever find yourself up against the same circumstances- let's say- you're a 10 year-old child who still believes in the tooth fairy and finds yourself outsmarted/outmanned/and that no one will believe you over this person who is either hands-down pious, (priests), respected (sports leaders), or has say so over the important details like how you get your food in your daily life (close family member), you may fall victim just like these kids did. Or if you ever find yourself as an adult victim- let's say that you are out-weaponed- (you are female and dod not carry a weapon), out-drugged (you do not do drugs but you're attacker is on something strong), and your are unprepared, you might fall victim just like a lot of adult victims. As if all the victim had to do was to "will" to protect themself.
To all the haters and to especially attorney Amendola, I say "go jump over a car!"
Underground sanity :Nope, you are way off base; there are 48 different charges that the jury will find him guilty; the 4 the Judge threw out were either duplicate or no evidence was given at the trial; the jury will find him very guilty, he will spend the rest of his life in a prison; Penn officials should all have been fired, they were warned over the years that this person was a pedophile, and they chose to do nothing, my brother in law is a Penn Graduate, always donated to their football fund, he now says he will never give them another dime.
JS,
There has been nothing reliable presented about these boys being in it for the money, or colluding together to bring Sandusky down. Several said they either don't have an attorney, or have never talked to the one their parent hired. Also the cops on the tape said to the young man, "what you have been telling us lines up with what others have said." They didn't implant anything. Experts have said those types of statements are routinely made when trying to make someone feel comfortable talking about extremely difficult information. Additionally, you state "Most of the testimony has been about things that would be considered inappropriate and in exhibiting judgement on Sandusky's part, the question is did the prosecution show that there was sexual contact or not. There were some accusations made by a few of the boys that would indicate that he did cross the line." I believe all but one said he forced, at the very least, oral sex. That is way more than just "a few" and way worse than simply "crossing the line." In addition, there were two corroborating witnesses to these acts, so there is just too much evidence to deny what Sandusky has done. Remember, the standard is reasonable doubt, not absolute certainty.
The victims were railroaded by sandusky..guilt as charged and quickly.
I really love when people like JS in SD spout law like they know what the hell they're talking about. Just so everyone knows, I've worked in the law for 21 years and what JS said is bs... it DOES matter .. in a criminal case...what the boys felt about what was being done to them. JS, in the future, don't state your opinions like they are facts, because they aren't.
When I read this article that was my thought too. It sounds like the Judge is trying to let Sandusky off the hook. I hope that they understand that we will not stand for this. We need to take a stand and protect our children from predators like this and not allow the law( or the money that is standing behind it ie Penn State who knowingly covered this up) to protect them.
I don't understand this. Are they saying that his rape and sexual advances towards young boys, if they were not sexually motivated, were not a crime?
A very weak defense. There was nothing of substence presented to prove the claim that this was a setup to get money. The prosecution on the other hand had a ton of independant witnesses and accusers that were able to provide vivid accounts of the abuse. This one should be a no-brainer for the jury.
that train went down the wrong track. you can't say sandusky has been railroaded, he had the opportunity to tell the court just what type of man he became over the years. you do not rely on some sort of twinkie syndrome defense(which is admission of guilt- without ever taking the stand).
does anyone remember the Bob Costas interview, when he asked Sandusky if he was attracted to young boys? His defense of his "non-answer" was that he was shocked that he was asked that question. If someone had accused you of molesting young boys, you should know that that question is coming. And if you know that question is coming, if you truly are innocent, you would vehemently deny this accusation. You wouldn't attempt to parse it out and and hedge as you hem and haw the minor nuances of that question. If you really were innocent, you would stand up and yell as loudly as possible so everyone could hear you say in no uncertain terms that you are NOT a pedophile. The fact that he paused, tells you everything you need to know.
The bottom line here is that young boys who were alledgedly victimized by Sandusky are now being accused of making this up, saying these things of poor Jerry for financial gain, plotting a huge conspiracy involving them, the police, the prosecutors, and that poor Jerry is being singled out and prejudged. Boo Hoo. The kids were victimized all over again with the legal process. Poor Jerry should have taken the stand if he's innocent. Who knows how long he's been doing this, of course he just didn't wake up one day and decide to rape little boys, we'll never know how many kids he did this to, how many didn't come forward because of shame abd what happens to them in court when they do testify.
Quoting the defense attorney here... IF he did this, and what IF he didn't. I wonder if the jury heard the defense attorneys IFs. Normally, a defense attorney would follow a statement like that with "He didn't do this."
MSM is pretty big with the defense's arguments and shallow with the prosecutions. Some of us would like to hear BOTH sides.
@cms5... I actually believe the current inmates in the prison where Sandusky is about to spend the rest of his life are the ultimate winners here. They are about to have many enjoyable days and nights at Jerry Sandusky's expense. Have at it boys!
The defense attorney is a shameless liar, and the judge's jury instructions are sickening. Plus as I read in another article, the jury has Penn Staters on it so they have a hard time finding their football gods guilty of crimes. Given the idiocracy of America, it's possible Sanpervsky will walk. Let's see if justice is meted out to the sicko, or not.
If convicted Jerry probably will not be incarcerated with other inmates. I believe there is some kind of a code of honor among prisoners and if it's discovered that you're a convicted pedophile you're a dead man walking. It's okay if you sodomize other adults while in or out of prison but messing with an under-aged kid is a big no no.
These young men did not get together and file charges they came one by one...... also 6 of the 8 victims filed a civil suit, the other two have not.
Perhaps the case against Sandusky was SO hopeless that his attorneys decided the best defense was to be SO incompetent that he could appeal on the grounds that his defense was in fact incompetent. Based on what I've read of the case they put on, they couldn't be a lot more incompetent if they were actually trying.
I'll say I haven't followed this real closely, mainly because of the media spectacle and the distortion of facts and bias, but from what I have gathered, to me, this seems like a clear case of the good ol boys club trying to cover up to save face for an institution and each other.
It appears this was an issue that was known internally and nothing was done about it except to make sure it didn't see the light of day. We it has seen the light and its clear at the very least he did things he shouldn't have. It's just a matter of how bad where these things. This is one thing our society seems to struggle with, they know its bad but instead we put other thing that we deem more important (Penn State Football) ahead of justice for these victims. This also isn't limited to sexual abuse/harassment. Other cover ups from fraud, embezzlement, pyramid schemes, ect. go on and there are many times when these are at high level and/or prestigious institutions where sullying the name is a no no so it gets buried (sometimes resolved) or just not spoken about. Take the Secret Service debacle, you think that is the first time they did something like that, no. They got arrogant, usually the downfall, and now everyone knows what was going on. The thing is we need to make sure that not only the main criminal is punished, but those who know or where involved are as well, Paterno resigned with a major black mark and died shortly after, and there are many others in the group who need to be at least fired as well. We also can't ever let the fall guy, or sacrificial sheep be the one who only goes either, needs to go all the way up the chain. We also need to personnally make sure we don't allow things like this to happen and when they do we make the right choice and do what we would want done if we were the victim.
Whatever the case here, I think he is guilty and at the very least he needs locked up for the rest of his life. If they could prove beyond a doubt he molested or raped any of these boys then a bullet to the head should be the answer, as it should for all pedophiles.
However, do to all that has gone on it really will be hard to know for sure , if ever, what actually transpired beyond that he acted inappropriately.
It is time
Ever notice how these so-called Big Men always opt for the "victim" defense when they know they can't win? Sandusky spent his life seeking the ultimate goal: win, win, win...that's all that every mattered to him. So why wouldn't he play any card he can just as he did in sports to "win"? These are those Big Men who lavish intimidation upon everyone around them, bullying throughout their lives and then they get their moment of truth and can't measure up. What a pathetic excuse of a man. What was in his mind is all that mattered. What he did with those thoughts is all that mattered. How any adult can possibly believe he is a victim only panders to that "bois will be bois" routine played out since the Second Coming of the Neanderthals realized they could "get away with it".
Right word to use railroaded..but wrong way to say it..he used his so call steam engine to ram little childrens caboose!
If found guilty, surgical castration should be the sentence along with 20 years in jail. Then, Jerry can see if he likes being someone else's "GIRLFRIEND"
Sounded to me like the judge wants to make damn sure a conviction and sentence sticks and those 3 charges would have jeopardized it. 48 or 52, either would put him away for what is left of his life, and unless he goes to Club Fed he may not even live long enough to get out on any appeals. If the 3 the judge threw out were legit, I'm sorry for those 3 victims, but it may still help them just knowing he is locked up for good.
Welcome to the club Jerry!!! Tens of thousands of juveniles have been railroaded into long adult prison terms over the last 35 years too, many on far less evidence than was presented in Jerry's case.
My guess: Guilty on all counts and 12-25 years in the joint, and if he had been tried here in Colorado, someone guilty of all of these charges would serve as much as 48 years too!!!
I hope the jury rams Sandusky worse than he did to his victims!
Why "surgical"? Why not just a piece of piano wire formed into a loop and then pulled on by someone who's pretty strong? Imagine how many youtube hits that would get!
I do know if he doesnt get thrown in jail for this he will eventually, there is surely more out their and more to come.
" Memory is a very tricky thing, particularly when it comes to things that happened a long time ago at a young age in a confusing situation. "
Umm.....I'm pretty sure you will remember something being poke up your keister. No mater how long ago it was. That was the most pathetic statement I've read trying to find execuses for this breathing bag of sh!t.
There will be no fair trial in the Keystone state, the jury is mostly Penn State loyal and I do mean loyal!!!
Sandusky was supposed to be a "trusted" mentor to young boys. The children that needed the services of the charity that Sandusky was affiliated with were especially vulnerable. Sandusky was in a key role to help these youth improve their lives. What did Sandusky do? He mercilessly sexually abused them. Now, he blames some of the victims for the horrific events that happened to them. His facial expression does not portray stress nor remorse. Put Sandusky behind bars, for life!
Well, he was tried and found guilty, some time ago, by the newsvine posters. What do you suppose the jury will say?
It's very alarming to me that the jury didnt walk out of the room and come right back in 5 mins later with GUILTY on ALL counts...and life imprisonment is wayy too good for this horse faced monster !! But being a realist it would not surprise me IF he walks...all it takes is for just one of the jurors to be paid off by Penn State...but IF he walks Im sure he will eventually get his...and Penn State still isnt going to be saved from the millions it is going to cost them in civil suits (and rightfully so) It killed me to hear their so called President dismissing the complaints against Sandusky when it was brought up to him again saying,"Ohh yeah I've heard NOISE about this before." Him and Paterno are almost as guilty as Sandusky in allowing this to happen over and over again. Paterno couldnt face himself anymore and gave up. Spanier will too IF he has any soul and as for Sandusky, like I said will get his ..and it wont be pretty either.
well he had his day in court, so now its OK to Lynch the S O B. oh I'm sorry I forgot he is a athlete and he has money, we have to really look hard at this one, he is a college coach they cant do wrong, somebody is lying better let him go , his wife for Gods sake never saw or heard a thing, that's proof positive, this is all made up, I have no idea they will probably make a statue? juries can be bought. perverts run free in America, its the new thing, all that remains is that age thing and the brother sister stuff, oh maby that person with the donkey, hell lets just make it all legal and we wont have to concern ourselves any more. its OK to be sick a sicko told me that so it must be true.
You never know what a jury is going to do in deliberations, no matter how strong the case may seem.
But, I'll be beyond shocked [and appalled ] if that jury brings in a verdict except guilty.
What a creep.
They are deliberating around 50 counts and must rule on all of them. Certainly with some of the victims there is more compelling evidence than with others. For example, in the one case there was the eyewitness accounts of the assistant coach. The charges associated with that particular victim should be a slam dunk (and should be enough to put him away for the rest of his life). Others, however, could be more problematic, having little more that the victim's word against Sandusky's word, and most juries will not convict based solely on the victim's word alone (especially if he/she stands to gain financially from their testimony as in this case).
I expect them to rule guilty on some of the counts and not guilty on others. Not because they don't think he is innocent of those particular charges, but because there really isn't enough evidence to convict. Bottom line, it could take them awhile to sort out all the different counts. I don't see any scenario, however, where they rule not guilty on all counts.
I don't see how they can find him anything other than guilty.
I think that Sandusky did the "railroading."
Lock him up with the General Population for life.
Heck of a job, Penn State.
He (Sandusky)must be a Catholic priest want to be.
Never stop - What does Penn State have to do with this? Nothing.
GUILTY
wryview, you cannot be serious when you ask me what Penn State has to do with this....seriously?
In fact, there must be a more widespread knowledge and concern about Sandusky's antics by the fact that he was never recruited to work in higher-paying and more prestigious NFL markets.
He was a "coaching hero", if you will, yet never moved "up."
Circumstantial evidence is legion.
Okay...I see both your points but lets get something straight here.
When you say "Penn State"...you mean the administration. They are the ones that fielded the cover ups.
Not the staff, not the kids. In fact....the Penn State community wants someone to hang for this possibly even more than those outside Happy Valley.
Still trying to sell that wryview?
@WRYVIEW - as always - you have to EXPAND your "VIEW" - you are so shallow that you will sink in 2 inches of water.
PENN STATE ADMINSTRATORS - [do I have to name them???? - ] and your "GREAT JO-PA-THETIC" covered up for this guy and his pedophile organization for decades!
This wasn't single-handedly hidden by Sandusky
DECADES !!!!
Wryview...are you serious?? I mean really truely serious?? Spanier said when it was brought to his attention for the second time, "Ive heard NOISE about this before." NOISE !! For Heaven's sake !! Noise ?? He was BOTHERED that he was being told about Sandusky RAPING boys IN Penn State's showers !!! He was being told about Sandusky raping boys else where (which any NORMAL person would have reported to the police and kicked the ass of their employee while they were waiting for the police) but he was being told that LITTLE boys were being sodomized IN PENN STATES SHOWERS !!! LITTLE boys for Goodness Sake !!! I have young children and it hurts me soo much to have heard what these children went through...my heart goes out to him ! How in the world can you defend these so called "people?" Monsters they are !! Paterno had some kind of soul and couldnt face himself anymore and gave up...but your Spanier almost as bad as the sicko pedophile himself !!!
Wryview and Amediamogul are both correct.
The "authorities" at Penn State, and others at fault, should be the target for wrath - NOT the entire Penn State University, the Alumni, the athletes, the students, the staff, the surrounding community, the Commonwealth (State) of Pennsylvania, etc.. It's amazing how many idiots want to punish anyone associated with one of the finest Universities in the country because of the actions of a few. MOB MENTALITY.
Here is an analogy (definition is in the dictionary) for the mob, should America be bulldozed because of the irresponsible actions of our Nation's Leaders?
Let's get this trial over with already so Sandusky can go on to his punishment phase and feel what it's like to get prison raped....
Hopefully he feels the irony every time he's raped in the shower.
Rape is never acceptable, even in prison. In his case, he would probably stay in solitary confinement, since child molesters are in constant danger in prison.
that won't happen, he'll be placed in special unit for "his own protection", and someday, he'll "slip" and hit his head or "accidently" fall down some stairs in the unit.......complain of chest pain...and suffer a bit of a delay in the guards calling for help...or a sort of rough resus. that goes badly....But getting caught in the shower by the general population inmates? Won't happy.
Who in prison would even want to rape this breathing bag of sh!t. Their third leg would shrink at the sight.
IF their is any justice in our justice system they WONT protect Sandusky once he is found guilty (if he is found guilty and Penn State hasnt paid off one of the jurors) Put him in regular population and let the inmates have their way with him... Ive heard bars of soap in pillowcases is a good way to start the evening
I wonder what kind of damaging testimony Sandusky's son would have given if the prosecution had called him to testify? Is he the son whose wife won't let Sandusky near their kids? In any event I hope this jury does right by the victims and puts Sandusky in prison where he belongs.
He had all but admitted signs of someone with a problem in denial when he spoke about helping them, teaching them, etc.
You are soooo right! As an attorney I can tell you that the decision not to expose Sandusky to rebuttal by a family member who was likely in the home at the same time these boys were staying the night and being molested, would KILL both Sandusky and Mrs. Sandusky. I am also wondering why the son was not called in the prosecutors case in chief.
Spanier and Mrs Sandusky (and I use the term "Mrs." lightly) need to be charged next. Accessories after the fact in helping conceal his horrific crimes. What pieces of crap !!! They will certainly rot in hell forever
Okay, the below, (what Sandusky's attorney says to the jury), goes against every new-hire job training session I've ever attended concerning sexual harassment. Here's what the attorney says:
"For example, he said, "It's not necessarily a crime for a man to take a shower with a boy. It's not necessarily a crime for a man to wash a boy's hair or lather his back or shoulders or to engage in back rubbing."
The bottom line was Sandusky's intent, "not the child's reaction," he told the jurors, who heard eight of the 10 alleged victims testify that they were traumatized by Sandusky's alleged advances."
Sexual harassment is not about the intention of the harasser; rather, it is about the fear, intimidation, or discomfort it places on the receiver of advances.
But none of that matters because there is too much evidence against Jerry that this is not a case of sexual harassment. This is a case of sexual abuse.
May the Lord heal.
Lawyer here. That wasn't the defense attorney. It was the Judge, giving instructions to the jury. He was explaining that, based on what the jury thinks happened according to the evidence, there may have been inappropriate or "icky" behavior, which was nevertheless not illegal.
In jury instructions, the Judge tries to help the jury understand how to connect the facts as they see them, and then apply them to the elements of the crimes. I don't think that intent is relevant in these criminal acts. Whether or not Sandusky intended to molest the children is not relevant, if he committed illegal sexual acts.
My bad. I just reread what the Judge said, and it looks like it is relevant, whether or not the actions were motivated by sexual behavior or not. I don't know the state law in Pennsylvania, but that sounds strange. Usually, these sorts of crimes are based on the acts committed, not the intent behind them.
@itshard2lookat, the statements, "For example, he said, "It's not necessarily a crime for a man to take a shower with a boy. It's not necessarily a crime for a man to wash a boy's hair or lather his back or shoulders or to engage in back rubbing." were the Judge's instructions to the jury, not closing argument by Sandusky's attorney.
I have an 11 yr old DAUGHTER, and if I found out her Gym teacher or any other adult female, coach, Principal, friend's mother, etc. was soaping up her back or naked with her in the shower, I would see RED!! And certainly push to have her prosecuted... These boys were not HIS children! And regardless, it's totally wrong. I'm certainly no prude, but DO believe a grown man, interactively, showering with boys, touching them at all, is criminal and deviant...
This judge seems to be a bit biased... Hopefully, ties to Penn State or not, the jury members ALL have children and will use their logic while deliberating..
Michele - You could "push" to have the person prosecuted, but if it isn't considered a crime, the only thing you could do would be to file a civil suit.
You may "believe" it is criminal, but that doesn't make it criminal.
I'm with Michele, the judge seems to lean to the defense. Another example of what the judge instructed:
In other words, "You must distinguish a display of innocent affection from lust," Cleland instructed.
Try this line of thinking in a sexual harrassment case and see how far you get.
But this isn't a sexual harassment case. (And those tend to be civil, not criminal, cases - where it is a preponderance of evidence, NOT evidence beyond a reasonable doubt).
The day a judgement of guilt comes down to what someone "intends" rather than what they did, the entire country is in trouble. So when the next gym teacher decides to get into the shower and wash a pre-teen or teens back...how is that different from a father who climbs into bed with his son at an inappropriate age with no intentions of sexual abuse but then sexually abuses his own kid? Is Sandusky's intention to lower the bar on the appropriateness of adult behavior in order to allow him to get off scott free?
When they read the instructions everybody says " What?" The Casey Anthony case for instance, the intructions we confusing and I think thats why they let her go. Not to mention the jury were a bunch morons and wanted to go home.
Dont ever think it is a "no brainer"for the jury...The way the past 3 or 4 "big name" trials have gone, I sit and wonder if I was reading and had same info as these jurors did that come back with "not guilty" verdicts
"a father who climbs into bed with his son at an inappropriate age with no intentions of sexual abuse but then sexually abuses his own kid?"
You lost me there. Is the father doing this in his sleep? Is intent to sexually abuse like a switch that you can just turn it off/on instantly? I think you are confused between homicide and sexual abuse. There is not such thing as not having the intent to sexually abuse but did it anyways.
Hang the SOB from the highest tree and get it over with.......
He is still charged with 48 counts - this is a classic situation where the prosecutors threw as much rice on the wall as they possibly could to see what would stick. I don't see the prosecutors being that worried about the 4 dropped charges - Sandusky is still looking at the rest of his natural life in prison. The only thing he can hope for is that he is put in protective custody - inmates hate child molesters worse than murderers. One who is doing multiple life sentences would have no problem killing Jerry Sandusky.
If I was a betting man I'd say Sandusky molested his son also...
I recently watched the Matt Lauer interview with Sandusky. Sandusky basically admitted to sexual contact. He tried to justify it by saying how many boys he helped. Instead of saying I did not have sexual contact with any of them, he said he did not help all of the boys to groom them sexually--to me it implied he was saying, "just some of them."
Everyone who covered up for him, including his wife, should also be indicted.
Enma3, it is quite possible that his wife knew nothing about this behavior, whether because she was clueless or Sandusky was very good at hiding it.
I have a HUGE hard time believing that Neal. Everyday for 45 years being with someone. He was bound to slip up or get lazy. You know she saw something, heard something or just FELT something! When you're a mother, with adopted children or your own, you have an undeniable 6th sense. You can tell when a child is hiding something, hurt, upset or even just withdrawn.
I think she's an evil witch who is covering for her morally depraved husband!
Hang them both as far as I'm concerned!
If my husband brought home young boys for the weekend in the basement...WHOA! Something is going on here and I would have found out what it was. As in ''what the hell are you doing man"? Did her friends husbands bring home young boys and sleep with them in the basement rather than with their wives? I think not. The woman is lying. She was protecting her lifestlye as a Penn State coaches wife which puts you WAY up the social ladder.
Mrs. S. chose her comfortable lifestyle over saving young boys from her pedophile husband and she knows it . She should be charged with perjury.
If I recall correctly from published testimony, he did not sleep in the basement with these boys.
Enma3...It's also possible Sandusky was hugely intimidating and bullying as this type usually is. It's their way or the highway. And some women, are born enablers of male behavior they know is wrong but never open their mouths for fear of loss of financial status or in her case, celebrity status. There are very few women in this country who don't know what their husbands are really like. It's called "marriage"? If he was into young boys, he wasn't interested in her. Which in some women's cases, they much prefer. Making that another reason to keep her mouth shut. Financial security and marriage don't always make good bed fellows.
Your comments says volumes. Hes so fugly and even uglier now.
@ Wryview..of course he didn't sleep with those little boys in the basement..he was to busy banging the hell out of them with his........lets call it....... a coaches pointer.
It could be his wife was glad he was interested sexually with anyone else but her. It is likely that the reason he did not molest some of the boys is that they were more likely to report his creepy a$$ and he only went after the ones he was sure would keep quite.
I couldt agree more...the wife, and Spanier should be charged with accersories after the fact in covering up his horrific crimes she is a disgusting piece of crap too that will rot for eternity right next to her dispicable husband
If this jury releases him there is no justice. Perhaps it is the law, but to instruct a jury that the feelings of a child who has been forced to shower with a grown man and "soaped down" and subjected to "back rubbing" naked in a shower, don't count is nuts. That this unwanted physical contact isn't seen as abuse is even more nuts. Is there anyone aside from Penn State coaches who think physical contact between naked coaches and young boys is okay?
RRuin...The male lust for power often turns good, decent men into evil cretons without morals, values or honor. In the case of pedophile, their twisted minds tell them that they "love" a young child so much, all they want is the intimacy they can only get from sex. This kind of male pedophile is used to being Number One through his bullying and intimidation. He gets a major charge from that. The more powerless his victims are the more he gets his jollies. It's power gone off the edge of decency.
"The male lust for power often turns good, decent men into evil cretons without morals, values or honor."
Huh? Don't discredit yourself or your whole statment with that one, as it applies to all gender.
RRuin spot on post sounds to me like the judge is being taken care of by Penn State...and if not then how skewered has our "justice" system become?
The judge must be a fan. HOWEVER it is not what you think it is what you do that matters in court.
Will not suprise me at all when he walks.
Coyote, unfortunately you might just be right, especially after the Casey Anthony fiasco. I don't have much confidence that the justice system works as it was intended. The system of street justice seems more effective, let him loose in a "hood" and let the gang banging thugs have at em.
You could be right, Coyote. The North American Man/Boy Love Association is sitting on pins and needles about right now...waiting with bated breath. If he walks, it could open the door for all kinds on nastiness for these guys.
Maybe either one of these: Assisted death like joeperv or maybe a vacation on a tropical island in hiding with the death a scam. Ya see, I believe in conspiracies and disdain the god like worship of drug and steroid fulled athletes and their fellow entertainers. Seriously tho, what does this whole thing say about the new Pervert State U football recruits. That does confound me, PSU will be a long time waiting for another decent football program.
HUH, rail roaded? Is that like how in prison they will be pulling a train on him?
I am so disgusted and sickened by this whole charade. I think the judge is a friend/fan of Sandusky. if this sob is set free, I hope someone shoots his coc* off and he bleeds to death. His wife, his friends at Penn State who have covered for him all these years, they all deserve time in prison for allowing this to continue. When is our justice system going to make the punishment fit the crime??
That judge is still the one that decides the punishment if he is found guilty. That is what is scarey. The judge definitely is biased. He wasn't "helping" the jury to understand he was tyring to influence them. You know almost jury tampering. Hopefully, he is a judge that is elected and the local penn State fans will see to not voting for him. YA right.
Cat, the first judge on the case gave him a ridiculously low bail...it was then discovered that she had ties to his Second Mile charity and she was forced to recuse herself. Centre County revolves around Penn State. They all know each other.
Uh, wasn't he railroading the kids? This guy is a real sleazebag and so is his wife. I know that she knew what was going on. She claims she did not hearing children crying for help from the basement? Yeah, uh huh - right. Liar. She is just as guilty. Along with Paterno. If they do convict this slime I hope he is railroaded on a daily basis in prison. And the guards dismiss his screams for help (that is if he doesn't like it.)
Exactly^^^^this is where justice will fail unfortunately. I would also to see all involved go straight to prison. these people are all the most vile loathsome foul monsters i can think of. how cold a heart must be to hear or see these things and do nothing to stop them.
The defense is right about one thing. It doesn't make sense Sandusky became a sexual predator in his fifties. But they're wrong that it means he's not a sexual predator. It only means there are many more victims out there, older victims of Sandusky who haven't come forward, He's likely been doing this for decades, but he's gotten away with it. Let's hope he doesn't get away with it this time.
But you would think that some older victims would have come forward. They have in most publicized cases. Not that the jury could take that into consideration in their deliberations.
You are right and my thoughts this whole time. So he finally got caught and that is great, but for one thing there are most likely other victims...and remember his grown adopted son? They stopped their defense after he was coming forward?
Yeah, you'd have to go back to the 60's. Maybe others did come forward. Some of them might even be dead by now. They did say a couple of months ago that there weren't just 9 or 10 victims, but 19 or 20...that they know about.
Coming forward would have a lot of negative for victims that are older. They will be spotlighted to the world, their friends, and their family. They have (conjecture) lived with their memories, possibly come to terms with them, and have moved on.
Crimes against them could not be charged against Sand--- due to statute of lim's and I believe that you would be hard pressed to convince them of the greater good (that only works in Star Trek movies)
wryview
What is your angle? Are you trying to make sure you don't get caught? and if so how you can get a hung jury?
Amendola repeated the phrases "it doesn't make sense" and "does that make sense?"
...Sounds they're using the South Park "Wooky Defense"
@American - it was the Chewbacca defense!!!
I imagine he is going to get a different kind of railroading when he gets to prison.
I seriously have to say this…… Dear Defense Lawyers for Sandusky; When Sandusky is acquitted for sexually molesting and raping young boy’s, he is going to have a “sleep over party” at his house and ALL your kids, grandkids, nephews and their friends are invited over to Sandusky’s house for the “sleep over party”. NO ADULTS ALOUD!!!!! Are you going to happily let all your family’s children attend?!?!?!? Really, can they go??!!??
Take the judge's kids and grandkids to the sleepover too.
resinable dout was not proven...... THATS GREAT He messes around with kids lives... Like i said before, I have clients that some of the little kids wanted to show me their bedroom when I was at house writing lie Insurance and I will not Let them take me any where in the house with out parents there or able to see me..... You dont take showers with little boys and say that is ok.........
Rick - the defense doesn't have to prove reasonable doubt, the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
HEY Wry VIEW - can you PLEASE "recuse" yourself YOU are incestuous about Sandusky & PENN STATE
God Forbid if there is a juror like you ! Though you may be a NAMBLA Member??
Oh poor Sandusky. When you get to the joint, remember the joint you gave young boys will be the same joint you get in prison. And it won't be one you can smoke. You might have to puff on a few of them though. What goes around, comes around........
After having spent 21 years in the New York State Correctional Facility at Attica, I can assure you that, upon Mr. Sandusky's introduction into the Pennslyvania Penal System, justice will be served!
@Dave
That's the best post I've seen on this vine!!! That just made my day
@Dave - I truly hope that it isn't too quick - this POS needs to suffer, and suffer a great deal!!!
If he is convicted, I think prison is too good for what he did to those kids. How can you put a price on what he did to them, what he took away from them, and how he has impacted their lives through his pedophilic, deviant behavior.
@Dave: i hope you're right.
Sandusky better pray he does NOT walk...he can't pull a Casey Anthony and "hide" from the world until everything blows over. Someone might very well kill the man if he is not imprisoned. That said...I will never again try to predict a jury's verdict after the Casey Anthony debacle. All I can hope for is that the Sandusky jury consider ALL testimony and audio evidence, as well as what the defense did NOT do: put Sandusky in the chair to be questioned because his adopted son would be called to provide damaging testimony. As for the statement by Amendola regarding how ridiculous it was that Sandusky "suddenly, in his 50's, decided to become a pedophile" - ludicrous statement. I don't know when Sandusky founded the 2nd Mile charity, but it became a pedophile's hunting ground with far too much temptation. Also, you don't just decide to be a pedophile...but, you DO decide if and when you act on your urges!
AGREE! Wait to see whats happens once hes fates decided. I wont be surprised if he walks, hes been walking under PENN STATES Protection POLICY.
"All these alleged charges only go back to the mid-'90s, so out of the blue, after all these years, when Mr. Sandusky is in his mid-50s, Mr. Sandusky decides to become a pedophile? Does that make sense to anybody? Does that make sense?" Amendola
-----------------------------------------------
Stupid statement. Sandusky was finally caught based on his molestations in the mid-90's and McQueary walking in on Sandusky in Feb. 2001. That's why he was charged with the crimes!! Hopefully, some victims from the 70's and 80's will still come forward.
FOLKS ! The "Casey Anthony" trial & "OJ" crap - in BOTH cases had NO DIRECT complainants, NOR a single "living" witness
They DON'T COMPARE
The concern here is the credibility of the plaintiffs: the strength of their accounts and the evidentiary reports, including the investigator reports.
However, it seems extremely difficult to 'read' the verdict after the Judge gave the clarification that [para] "actions or behaviors are not criminal" - UNLESS the jurors will connect the intent that brought the resulting claims of the plaintiffs
The jurors have to believe the plaintiffs, [as evidence] and corroborate that with the actual evidence.
If I can be entirely "objective", all I can say is that there is NO "documented" or historical evidence, i.e. a hospital report, a police report a child protective report or action against Sandusky
The report of a mother with the investigator says she confronted him - but - bottom-line - there is NO documented evidence or claim against this sleazy bastard
The jurors will HAVE TO believe the plaintiffs and supporting testimony, BUT! I'm scared that the judges instructions clearly [may be saying] if there is NO DOCUMENTED PROOF, THERE IS NO CRIME
Anyone's thoughts on this ?????
He will be up a sh...t creek with out a paddle
"The system" prejudged Jerry Sandusky and "set out to convict him" even though the case against him makes no sense, his attorney told jurors Thursday, as they continually tried to duck his expanding nose.
In other words, "You must distinguish a display of innocent affection from lust," Cleland instructed.
Ah geez, when I penetrated your anus I was thinking how affectionate I was caressing your a##hole. What a waste of skin.