HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Judge refuses to toss cha...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 03:50 PM

Judge refuses to toss charges against Sandusky

Source: USA Today

BELLEFONTE, Pa. (AP) A judge has refused to throw out child sex abuse charges against former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky.

Judge John Cleland rejected an argument by Sandusky's lawyer that the statute of limitations may have run out for eight of the 10 alleged victims.

Cleland also rejected defense motions that some of the charges against Sandusky were not specific enough and that evidence was lacking in others. But the judge said Thursday that Sandusky can make those arguments again before a June trial.

Sandusky is charged with more than 50 criminal counts that allege sexual abuse of 10 boys over 15 years. He has denied the accusations.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-12/sandusky-charges/54217406/1?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=206567

7 replies, 1786 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 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply Judge refuses to toss charges against Sandusky (Original post)
MindMover Apr 2012 OP
Ecumenist Apr 2012 #1
nolabear Apr 2012 #2
gratuitous Apr 2012 #3
Posteritatis Apr 2012 #4
Boabab Apr 2012 #5
Ruby the Liberal Apr 2012 #7
Ruby the Liberal Apr 2012 #6

Response to MindMover (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 03:53 PM

1. Good. He is LONG overdue for prosecution for his crmies against children, creep. This doesn't

surprise me at all. Frankly, I would have been surprised if the charges were tossed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MindMover (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 04:20 PM

2. Well ya THINK?

I don't believe there should be a statute of limitations for child sexual abuse. Anything else he wants to try and disprove is up to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolabear (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 04:25 PM

3. Whether there should or shouldn't be is a matter for the legislature

Courts have to go to trial with the laws they have, not the ones they wish they had.

Due process is so messy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MindMover (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 04:41 PM

4. Good. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MindMover (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 09:28 PM

5. Why isn't he behind bars already?

Here's hoping he hasn't had any access to children since the indictment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to MindMover (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 09:31 PM

6. THAT doesn't bode well, IMO.

They want charges dismissed, so they come in with statute of limitations reasons? Sounds like me at the crap table hoping for a 7 from a new shooter.

Glad the judge saw through this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread