HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Pennsylvania judge: No ne...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 01:22 PM

Pennsylvania judge: No new trial for Jerry Sandusky

Source: CBS/AP

Pennsylvania judge: No new trial for Jerry Sandusky

CBSSports.com wire reports
Jan. 30, 2013 1:06 PM ET

HARRISBURG, Pa. -- Jerry Sandusky lost a bid for a new trial Wednesday when a judge rejected his argument that his lawyers were not given enough time to prepare for the three-week proceeding that ended with a 45-count guilty verdict.

Judge John Cleland's 27-page order said lawyers for the former Penn State assistant football coach conceded that their post-trial review turned up no material that would have changed their trial strategy.

"I do not think it can be said that either of the defendant's trial counsel failed to test the prosecution's case in a meaningful manner," Cleland wrote. "The defendant's attorneys subjected the commonwealth's witnesses to meaningful and effective cross-examination, presented evidence for the defense and presented both a comprehensive opening statement and a clearly developed closing argument."

He also rejected post-sentencing motions regarding jury instructions, hearsay testimony and other matters.

-snip-


Read more: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/21623874/pennsylvania-judge-no-new-trial-for-jerry-sandusky

1 replies, 310 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 1 replies Author Time Post
Reply Pennsylvania judge: No new trial for Jerry Sandusky (Original post)
Eugene Jan 2013 OP
MrYikes Jan 2013 #1

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 02:32 PM

1. It's good to see that politcal pressure doesn't always succeed. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread