Dottie Sandusky, right, wife of Jerry Sandusky, arrives at the Centre County Courthouse, Monday, Aug. 22, 2016, in Bellefonte, Pa.
Advertisement
Gillum treated Fisher, and in the book they wrote that state prosecutor Jonelle Eshbach informed them a Penn State employee – who turned out to be McQueary – would testify he had seen Sandusky abusing the boy later known as Victim 2. He said, “Our position has always been that we felt if we could get a hearing and have a total airing of the circumstances, we would get a new trial”.
Sandusky was convicted in June 2012 of sexually abusing 10 different boys between 1994 and 2008.
Shubin declined to answer when asked whether he ever tried to hide the man’s whereabouts from police and prosecutors, citing attorney-client privilege.
The man denied to police in September 2011 that any abuse occurred and gave the same statement to an investigator working for Sandusky’s lawyers.
On the first day of the hearing, when Sandusky testified, his lawyers focused on what they claimed was ineffective counsel.
The appeals hearing is Sandusky’s chance to prove his claim that McGettigan was referring to Victim 2 and so he knew that statement was false.
Tuesday’s hearing called witnesses from the prosecution of Sandusky’s case.
Sandusky was convicted of 45 of 48 counts of child sex abuse charges.
McGettigan said his opinion about the man who claims to be the person described as Victim 2 in court records is based on changes in the man’s story, that he appears too old to be the boy in the shower and that he did not provide certain details to investigators until after the man who witnessed the attack had given his own story in open court. He is serving a lengthy sentence.
Sassano said some victims of child sex abuse, including some at Sandusky’s trial, are first in denial before opening up about what happened.
That “led me to believe he was never in that particular locker room”, Sassano testified.
The man was interviewed by investigators – twice by postal inspector M.J. Corricelli in February 2012 and again by Corricelli and Office of the Attorney General investigator Anthony Sassano that March. She said no one took the bait. But Lindsay said he could not call the man known as Victim 2 to the stand.
“We all came to the same conclusion”, he said. His appellate team claims the court’s failure to respond to the suspected grand jury leak also warrants a review and possibly a new trial.
It was the prospect of such inconsistent testimony – and how it might reflect on the rest of the case – that persuaded prosecutors and defenders to leave him off their witness list, Sandusky’s appellate lawyer has said.
“I live in the real world”, McGettigan told reporters.
The hearing is expected to last through the afternoon.
Advertisement
The judge did not say when he would rule but indicated there may be additional proceedings.
