Jesus. That guy is one shitty defense lawyer. On the other hand he may be the best comedian of our time.
All that’s missing is a reference to his autobiography: Touched: The Jerry Sandusky Story
Amendola recently said this trial was like a soap opera. When asked which one he said, “All My Children.” True story. I mean, seriously, dude.
At least he didn’t say Loving.
I mentioned the “All My Children” thing on the last page. You might think the defense lawyer wouldn’t want to remind everybody that his client is accused of fucking a bunch of children while simultaneously suggesting he doesn’t take the whole situation very seriously, but no.
“All My Children” is pretty bad. He could have also said “The Young and the Restless”, though.
They announced on the news that the defense rested.
What are the odds that the jury gets the case tomorrow, finds him guilty in less than an hour, and Sandusky is locked up tomorrow making tonight his last night of freedom?
The local news said it wasn’t expected to take more than a day.
I’m betting 30 minutes or less.
I’m wondering if the jury might take longer just to parse the counts. For example, (and I’m making up the numbers) maybe some jurors will believe victims 3, 4, and 7, but find that victim 2 really did look like he was out for a buck and find reasonable doubt on him.
There’s a lot of counts they have to parse, and just because you believe that Sandusky is a child molester, is the word of one person with respect to each time sexual activity took place, enough to convict on each and every instance? It’s not reasonable or possible that one of the victims lied about one of the sexual encounters to sweeten the payday?
Don’t get me wrong. Where there is smoke, there is fire, and Sandusky is guilty as hell, but is there beyond a reasonable doubt evidence that on June 14, 2003 at 4:35pm he took Victim 11 into the basement? Solely based on Victim 11’s testimony?
ETA: Did the boy that McQueary saw in the shower come forward and testify?
I wonder if Amendola purposefully made the public think Sandusky would testify, then the last minute motions were staged to make him look like an innocent man who desperately wanted to tell his story and was advised not to. Could be a plan to make him look innocent…with
that being said I think it is very possible Sandusky walks, IF the newspaper accounts are true-they did cast doubt on McCreary’s story, and the 2 policemen.
I just pray if he is found innocent that those boys find strength in the fact that they faced him and told their stories. It is just too hard to believe that that many boys would lie, and McCreary along with the janitors story are just too compelling.
Well, yes, hard to dispute; but that’s the prosecution’s case.
I believe that person is referred to in the court papers solely as ‘Victim 2’ and has never been identified.
As for the outcome of the case, the totality of the defense appears to have been the presentation of 26 character witnesses (including Sandusky’s wife), a semi-successful attempt to impeach McQueary’s testimony that nonetheless had the witness stating that McQueary was clearly highly upset over what he saw, and evidence that PA state police investigators imparted leading information to one or two of the accusers to get them to testify to abuse. Maybe there’s some more subtle ninja tactics not reported that might turn the case on its head, but those seem to have been the high points.
I’m no legal eagle, but with that, and given that several news reports mentioned jurors crying during testimony by some of the accusers, I’d say the chance of acquittal on all charges is…improbable.
I think that he’s toast but it will take a few days. They need to go through all of the counts one by one. I think it will be early next week.
The media sets us up for this great moment when we’re all stuck to the t.v. and waiting for the verdict to come in. We’re groaning and outraged when we hear “Not Guilty”, be it O.J., Jacko, Casey Anthony. Am I wrong about this? Because my theory is that this is how American Media works. If Sandusky gets a “Guilty” verdict, no one will groan, or even cheer for that matter, but maybe we’ll feel relieved a monster is put away, but in the process we’ll feel let down by the media because the spectacle did not get a rousing closure we tuned in for. You get where I’m going with this? If it comes to the point that we get too confident how cases we’ll go, we’ll get bored, won’t tune in and most especially, won’t watch the commercials. It’s all part of the show.
No shit. Hell, I bet Frito-Lay put Sandusky up to molesting those kids just for the air time.
No, I have no idea where you’re going with this, and to the extent I understand what you’re saying, none of it makes any sense other than “This is a very high-profile case and people will be upset if he’s acquitted.” The jury will probably begin deliberations today and I think most people expect him to be convicted.
If I understand you correctly, and I’m not sure I do, you seem to be claiming that ‘the media’, whatever that is, is attempting to give the impression that the trial is likely to return a guilty verdict when in fact a guilty verdict is unlikely. Is that it?
If so, please explain why you think a guilty verdict is unlikely. That would at least approach a response to the actual subject of this thread.
So he’ll be in jail, but his pizza is free!