They’d still have to schedule a separate hearing for sentencing, wouldn’t they?
And that’s why I think the Histrionic thing was brought up. I think that most of whatt he defense did was in trying to find some basis uponwhihc to argue for a lighter sentence.
Yes but he’d probably go directly to jail to await sentencing.
Sandusky was a great defensive coordinator. Imagine the diagrams he presented to his defense attorneys! Another reason why I think he’ll be found Not Guilty.
I read a news report saying:
He should have said, “The defense is fucked.”
If you can’t add anything to this thread except non-sequiturs, you should probably take your comedy routine to another thread.
I read in the news that three counts have been dropped (victim 2). I’m thinking he’s not going to be convicted on all the remaining counts, either. I think it’s possible some doubt may have been created wrt the conflicting testimonies and lying cop(s). I’m not sure this will affect all the counts, though, unless there’s a heck of a domino effect. I wonder if some of this stuff and his joke of a defense lawyer might get it declared a mistrial or something. IANAL, so I’m pretty ignorant of how that works. All it takes is one unconvinced juror, right? Or is that my TV-based assumption?
Any guilty verdict on a given count must be unanimous.
The three new dropped counts were for technical reasons. In one case two of the counts were really about the same act so they dropped one of them. In the others, what was alleged to have happened technically didn’t meet the exact criteria for the crime.
They may deadlock on a few of the counts but I can’t see how they don’t find him guilty on some of them.
That’s what I’m thinking, as well ; but some of the other stuff is making me scratch my head, that may just be due to media babble.
Hold the phone…does that mean the boy wasn’t being anally raped in the shower, contrary to what McQueary said he witnessed??? If that’s the case, then I could see a potential for problems, since all the other victims came forward after that initial incident was publicized. Granted, I haven’t followed this story closely enough to make any informed judgment, but that’s basically the same reason why the infamous McMartin trial ended in acquittal/mistrial.
No, the McQueary thing was related to victim 2. The dropped charges had to do with victim 4. (Prosecutors couldn’t find either of them.) One charge was dropped because of duplication and the others were because witness testimony didn’t support them. As I understand it the witness didn’t say specifically that he saw sex, so there wasn’t enough evidence to sustain the charge.
Okay, gotcha.
He doesn’t have to be found guilty of very many charges to be put away for the rest of his life. I had an acquaintance of about 30 years of age who was convicted of a handful of charges related to seducing and raping a one young boy and he was given over 125 years in prison (he had to serve all the time for the various charges consecutively). Obviously the penalty from state to state can be different, but Sandusky is an old man. Even one or two convictions will probably mean he’ll never step outside prison again.
If you turn on any TV right about now I expect you’ll hear that one of Sandusky’s adopted sons now says he was molested. I think there were rumors before the trial about a family member who might’ve been abused, although I think that was someone different. So maybe there will be more charges in the unlikely event of an acquittal.
Highly doubt he’s acquitted, but if he is, expect the State of Texas to go after him for the abuse that took place in San Antonio at Penn State’s appearance at the Alamo Bowl.
I agree with this. It’s one of the conundrums of child abuse that the same types of kids who are most likely to actually be abused are also the same types of kids who are likely to make up stories of abuse. If you deal with an enormous number of troubled kids it’s likely you’ll encounter a few of the latter.
So I think Sandusky is guilty, but that doesn’t mean that every accuser is saying the truth.
Oops, my bad.
I don’t have a link, but did anyone see the judges instructions? They were very defense friendly. For example, he stressed that bathing, rubbing soap on bodies, etc. was NOT illegal and that the jury was not to convict on that. I’m wondering if with that kind of instruction there won’t be one juror to hang the whole thing…
Or even in the likely event of a conviction.
I also find it a bit insulting to the victims that the defense would somehow insinuate that they hired attorneys in order to file a civil suit against Sandusky. Sure I guess that normally financial gain could be a reason to lie about someone, but I know that at 18 or even 28 I wouldn’t have lied about being anal raped by an old dude to get a couple hundred grand. And I personally think that the victims have every right to seek financial compensation for the trauma he put them through.