posted without comment:
“Jerry Sandusky’s lead defense attorney told reporters Friday that “he would probably die of a heart attack” if his client is acquitted on all 48 counts of sex abuse of young boys.”
The jury has a verdict on all 48 counts…waiting…
Guilty on 45 of 48. I wonder which 3 didn’t make the cut…would have to be the ones regarding either McQueary or the janitor, right?
Ah, guilty of 45 out of 48. I guess there is zero chance, after all.
Guilty on 45 of 48 counts.
I was prepared to perhaps give him some benefit of the doubt since a lot of the charges were more he said, he said and these boys had integrity issues given their problems, but the kicker was his son Matt saying he was molested too.
I would never have guessed that it would have happened so quickly.
And there we have it. Looks fair to me! When’s the sentencing?
Here’s a breakdown on the verdict, count-by-count. The “not guiltys” are:
Count 7: Involuntary deviate sexual intercourse [Victim 2]
Verdict: Not guilty.
Count 24: Indecent assault [Victim 5]
Verdict: Not guilty.
Count 28: Indecent assault [Victim 6]
Verdict: Not guilty.
In about 3 months, according to the AP.
Finally!
One of those high profile scandalous trials that doesn’t end with most people wanting puke and/or burn down town hall.
When’s the next one? 2025?
Sandusky is apparently going to appeal. Hopefully, he’ll have a better lawyer for this one.
Wonder if he can make a case for incompetent representation.
Aren’t appeals pretty much expected in a case like this? I doubt he’ll get one, or that the verdict will be reversed.
He’ll have plenty of free time to make his case… in prison.
I was thinking the same thing, but what did his lawyer do at trial that was ineffective? All of his dumbassery was in statements to the media, and the real kicker was the speech he gave last night basically throwing away any argument he might have for an appeal (the judge was fair, the trial was fair, the jurors were fair). Nobody can argue that his stupid statement to the press AFTER the verdict improperly influenced the verdict.
Is it me or does Sandusky come across as very childlike and disconnected from reality. Regardless of what he says his demeanor pings my creepy meter. It’s like a combination of high functioning autism and low IQ.
I feel the same way. His media interviews were the height of stupidity.
Just because you lose doesn’t mean your lawyer was incompetant. The actual legal threshold for incompetency is pretty high. Your lawyer has to be literally sleeeping during the trial, failing to file documents, and so on. Merely making inflamatory statements to the media isn’t incompentence.
could a case be made that he did not mount a proper defense and he himself was already ‘set to lose’? his comment before the verdict to the affect of "I’ll be suprised if hes not convicted’ sure sounds like a sabotaged defense.