Jerry Sandusky was sentenced Tuesday to at least 30 years in prison -- effectively a life sentence -- in the child sexual abuse scandal that brought shame to Penn State and led to coach Joe Paterno's downfall.
His lawyer is planning to appeal based on "due process" or something like that. He's claiming his legal team didn't have enough time to Sandusky's defense properly.
His lawyer is planning to appeal based on "due process" or something like that. He's claiming his legal team didn't have enough time to Sandusky's defense properly.
Not surprising. When the case first went to trial, there were a lot of people saying he'd do that after it was done
Victim #1 comes forward and will be on 20/20 tonight.
Quote:
BELLEFONTE, Pa. (KABC) -- One day after Jerry Sandusky's attorneys filed an appeal in his case, the man known as Victim 1 in the sex abuse trial has come forward.
Aaron Fisher, 18, revealed his identity and spoke exclusively with ABC News. Fisher was the first victim to come forward to police about Sandusky, a former Penn State assistant football coach who was convicted earlier this year on 45 counts of child sex abuse.
In his interview, Fisher says Sandusky was sexually abusing him by the time he was 12 years old. He says Sandusky would often pull him out of school and have him over for sleepovers. Fisher also explained why he waited so long to come forward and the shocking reaction he received when he did.
"Here I am, beside my mom, crying, telling them and they don't believe me," he said in an interview with Chris Cuomo that airs on "20/20" Friday at 10 p.m. "I knew they wouldn't."
Yeah, perjury, obstruction of justice, and child endangerment are fairly significant offenses, and the public focus on the prosecution is going to be so intense that there's no way that the state offers a plea bargain on this one.
Not going to get Sandusky time, but he'll be behind bars for at least several years.
Yeah, perjury, obstruction of justice, and child endangerment are fairly significant offenses, and the public focus on the prosecution is going to be so intense that there's no way that the state offers a plea bargain on this one.
Not going to get Sandusky time, but he'll be behind bars for at least several years.
Are you sure? What if he implicates someone else involved in the cover-up?
Are you sure? What if he implicates someone else involved in the cover-up?
He can implicate all he wants, he was in a position that'd essentially make him co-ringleader with Paterno for any cover-up. At most, he might get some time knocked off if he provides evidence that a load of other people also deserve to be charged, but he's way too high up to get off just by snitching.
And yes, it's a foregone conclusion. He'll get jail time.
He can implicate all he wants, he was in a position that'd essentially make him co-ringleader with Paterno for any cover-up. At most, he might get some time knocked off if he provides evidence that a load of other people also deserve to be charged, but he's way too high up to get off just by snitching.
And yes, it's a foregone conclusion. He'll get jail time.
Paterno was the ringleader now? There were certainly multiple people who had a far, far greater impact on this situation than he did.
One interesting off-shoot of Penn State's renewed emphasis on "mandated reporter" training for cases of suspected child abuse is the logging of several additional historical cases of potential sexual abuse.
University Police Chief Tyrone Parham is cited in an independent monitor's report as saying his department has received about six new reports since November 2011, "most of which concerned historical incidents of child abuse revealed to counselors or staffers at the university's summer camps."
Parham, who could not be reached for comment this afternoon, went on to say that those incidents have been referred to authorities in the counties where the alleged abuse occurred.
RT @bylawblog: Culture is the buzzword with Penn State and George Mitchell's first report shows evidence of change: ******/fMEAc
Quote:
First, at a Faculty Senate meeting attended by Mitchell and his staff, a resolution opposing the Freeh report’s findings and recommendations was debated but ultimately defeated. Mitchell’s report talks about a small minority of dissenting voices. In this case they were heard but the faculty leadership ultimately decided not to heed them. Both discussing opposing views and committing to moving forward are positive steps.
