That the media is somehow controlling the jury. How the media is controlling the jury is entirely unclear, however.
excellent point! It would be a fairer trial too because most of the jury has worked for or have close relatives that worked for Penn State. The judge is an old Second Mile supporter (probably a Sandusky friend as well).
Kinda reminds me of the general concept that EVERY juror must agree. Who came up with that idea? Common experience seems to indicate that in any group there is often at least one person that makes everybody else go WTF? Not, we don’t agree with your logic but your logic doesn’t even exist. I guess you could dress that up as that one person being the lone voice of reason but IME very often they are just the statistically regular dipshit.
First of all, I find it hard to believe they’ll find him Not Guilty, but it’s such a real possibility that I wouldn’t even assume a guilty verdict is in the bag.
Then there will be another trial on the same indictment. A hung jury means a mistrial – no double jeopardy attaches.
No kidding. I don’t know why the witnesses didn’t address this directly by asserting their right to financial compensation for being assraped as children.
If some local football coach hero sticks his cock into me without my consent you’re goddamned right I’m going to sue. That doesn’t make everything I say a lie. Where does that kind of twisted logic even come from? Along with saying he’s got a “personality disorder” that makes him appear exactly like a child molester except he isn’t. WTF? If the jury believes that they deserve to have sexual predators in their community “showering” with their children.
I’m stunned it has taken more than five minutes for this jury. If I was on it we’d be back five seconds later saying “He’s guilty as shit and I know we don’t get to decide sentencing but we recommend the rest of his life in jail plus five hundred years.”
Okay, I know we’ve moved past this, but I want to address the first few posts: You don’t need all 12 jurors to be a member of NAMBLA, but only one, due to the unanimity requirement and the presumption of innocence.
That said, I seriously doubt anyone like that is on the jury. And if there were, he might still just go along with everyone else as it would be hard to argue against without revealing his pedophilia. And, like people said, NAMBLA is for what they consider consensual pederasty, not one where the victim is clearly protesting.
Here’s the NYT on the abused son, Matt Sandusky:
I’m not sure why he didn’t come forward earlier, or why the prosecution didn’t pursue it. Maybe he’s their ace in the hole. The NYT seems to think there could be more criminal charges filed later after this trial is over.
Regarding the Judge’s instructions, the Times had this to say:
Which sounds like the argument I was trying to make back in the gym socks thread a few weeks ago. Different states, of course.
The news accounts I’ve seen is that he only contacted the prosecutors this week. That’s way too late for them to add to the current charges, and they would have an uphill battle trying to get his testimony in as part of their case. However, there is speculation that him coming forward is what led to the decision not to call Sandusky himself as a defence witness, as the likelihood was that he would say something that might justify calling the son as a rebuttal prosecution witness.
In the vein of the O.J. trial, if there is an acquittal, we’ll be treated to endless clips of child molesters cheering at the announcement juxtaposed with clips of the rest of us groaning in disbelief.
The prosecution has to walk a tightrope WRT additional charges. If Sandusky is convicted, additional charges will come across as a pile-on. If he’s acquitted, additional charges may look like the prosecution’s desperate to get him on something, so they’re going to keep doing it until something sticks.
I also think that the Penn State love is being way overstated here. You can’t go anywhere in Pennsylvania without finding ardent fans and supporters and alumni, and the Paterno worship (which is still overstated) doesn’t extend to Sandusky. The zeitgeist is now that Sandusky deserves to go away and that his actions are his alone.
Frankly, to the university’s credit, they seem to want to do right by Sandusky’s victims. They’ve cleaned house and are willing to do what they can to help the victims. How much of this is genuine and how much is PR remains to be seen, but there does seem to be some genuine sympathy for these boys.
If he’s convicted I suspect they won’t bother charging him again. There’s not much point and it’s hard to imagine a scenario where he’s convicted but doesn’t definitively get put away for life considering his age and the sheer number of charges against him. I don’t know if it would be difficult to go through all of this again if he’s acquitted, but I don’t think many people will by sympathetic to the victim of the “piling on.”
The interesting thing about the accusations from the son is that after Sandusky was arrested, we heard that there was a restraining order filed against him relating to one of his grandchildren. Now we know that restraining order was filed by Matt Sandusky’s ex-wife. She obviously knew he’d been abused and you have to wish he’d just come forward earlier.
Meanwhile the jurors are deliberating again and it’s reported they asked to hear testimony from McQueary and Dranov again.
I wonder if the son and close relatives not coming forward till late in the game was a strategy on their own personal part. I could see myself thinking “I hope they nail that SOB and its looking good, but just in case I’ll hold back so we can get a second shot if the jury goes crazy”.
I was thinking the same thing. Everyone was up in arms because of the Penn State connections with some (or was it all) of the jurors, the argument being, “they’ll just whitewash the whole thing to save Penn State.” But if Penn State were beloved to me, I’d want the creepy child molester strung up by his thumbs on the campus quad. How dare he sully the name of my beloved blah blah blah.
In fact, I had just about the opposite reaction that most had when I heard about the jury. I figured – stacked for the prosecution.
Indeed, jurors are reviewing testimonyfrom McQueary (the only first-hand witness to testify) and Dranov (the Dr. that McQueary spoke with after seeing Sandusky in the showers).
I don’t think this is good for the prosecution. McQueary’s and Dranov’s testimonies don’t quite line up. McQueary was very sure about exactly what he saw. Dranov, on the other hand, did not get that impression from McQueary shortly after the incident. Dranov, being a doctor, would have been legally obligated to report any suspicion of child abuse.
Going through some of reader comments at the linked article, there are apparently some Sandusky defenders…or at least people who are not entirely convinced.
As for the PSU connections on the jury, it’s hard to say which way that cuts, but I initially thought it was beneficial to the defense. Having love for PSU and JoePa could lead to a desire to clear their names in this mess, which only happens if Sandusky never did anything wrong. I don’t hold to that theory quite as strongly as I did before reading the testimony, but I still think college football fanatics can be irrational.
I don’t know about that.
The jury has to deal with every single count. They might have decided guilt on all the other ones, but they still need to deal with this one.
I know plenty of the ardent Penn State faithful, and if anything, they vilify Sandusky. He is both an evil pedophile AND the man who tainted the pristine program and toppled St. Joe through those horrible actions. The consensus I hear (here in PA) is that they want him strung up by his balls. IOW, I’d say they may hate him even more than the average man on the street does. So, I’m essentially agreeing, but pointing out that the Penn State love may actually be in play, but not in the way the defense hopes.
I’m not from the US, but wouldn’t the appropriate comparison be to retired football coaches cheering?
Well, child molesters tend to avoid the cameras for some reason . . .