Partly Cloudy
54°
Morris, IL
Partly Cloudy|Forecast »

Sandusky attorney says more time wouldn’t have changed strategy

  Comments (...)
Text Size: AaAaAaAaAa
Jerry Sandusky is escorted to the Centre County Courthouse in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, for a hearing on Thursday, January 10, 2013. (Photo by Nabil K. Mark/Centre Daily Times/MCT)

(MCT) — BELLEFONTE, Pa. — Joe Amendola, the lawyer representing Jerry Sandusky, had a mission in the months leading up to the trial — get the prosecutors in his client’s case to turn over as much information in their case as possible in the hope of raising doubt about the victims’ accusations.

Amendola got more than 9,400 pages of documents during the discovery process — plus another 2,100 from subpoenas and 674 pages of grand jury transcripts. All told, he amassed a collection of 12,000 copies.

As it turns out, Amendola testified Thursday during a court hearing for Sandusky, many of the documents the attorney labored to get were irrelevant to the trial he tried to have delayed multiple times on the grounds he needed more time to prepare a defense.

Amendola took the stand as part of a hearing for Sandusky’s defense to try to persuade Senior Judge John Cleland to overturn the conviction and grant a new trial because the attorneys were deluged with paperwork that kept them from building their case.

Cleland did not immediately rule from the bench after the 90-minute hearing.

While answering questions from his co-counsel Norris Gelman, Amendola testified he made 50 requests in the months before the June trial. By mid-May, with trial imminent, he called off his private investigators from tracking down witnesses and evidence, Amendola said.

But when pressed by prosecutor Joseph E. McGettigan III on cross-examination if any of the discovery materials he has since read would have changed the defense strategy, Amendola said no.

Many were irrelevant, Amendola said.

McGettigan argued that the only materials that were part of the trial were about 1,000 pages of discovery materials considered mandatory, discretionary or exculpatory. The rest were materials Amendola asked for, numbering more than 8,000.

Cleland also will weigh arguments from the defense about whether the jury should not have heard testimony from Ronald Petrosky, a janitor at Penn State who in 2000 was told by a fellow janitor about Sandusky in a shower with a young boy. The defense contends that Cleland made a mistake by allowing it.

If Cleland throws out the conviction on those counts, it would not change Sandusky’s 30- to 60-year sentence, as the sentence for those counts was to run concurrent to the more serious charges. Cleland did not think that would result in a new trial.

Previous Page|1||

Comments

Total Comments
0

View/Add Comments

There have been no comments made about this story.

Reader Poll

Were you impacted by last week's flooding?

Yes, but only inconvenienced by closed streets
Yes, water got close, but everything worked out OK
Yes, I had to evacuate my home or workplace
Yes, my house sustained extensive damage
No, I managed to avoid it all