Skip to main content
Advertising

Originally published Saturday, June 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

  • Share:
             
  • Comments (3)
  • Print

Jerry Sandusky's lawyers reveal they attempted to quit case | College football

Jerry Sandusky's lawyers said they tried to quit at the start of jury selection in his child sex-abuse trial because they weren't given enough time to prepare, raising an argument on the trial's speed that might become the basis of an appeal.

Most Popular Comments
Hide / Show comments
Enough time to prepare?? Prepare for what? That their client is a monster. The sooner... MORE
HERE'S when Sandusky's lawyers should have quit: on the first day of law school. ... MORE
What BS!!!! The constitution guarantees a defendant a speedy trial, which implies that... MORE

advertising

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

Meanwhile, one of the jurors who convicted Sandusky of 45 child sex-abuse counts Friday said he was swayed by the "very convincing" testimony of eight accusers who said the former Penn State assistant coach molested them for years.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sandusky's sentencing should be in about three months; an exact date hasn't been set.

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

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

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

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

The case is poised to move to an investigation of university officials' role in reporting the charges; two former Penn State administrators — athletic director Tim Curley and vice president Gary Schultz — face trial on charges they didn't properly report McQueary's account of the suspected abuse in 2001.

Almost immediately after the verdict, Penn State President Rodney Erickson signaled an openness to quickly settle potential civil lawsuits arising from the convictions.

News where, when and how you want it

Email Icon


Advertising