Amendola also defended his decision to present evidence from a psychological review of Sandusky at trial that opened the door to a more critical report from prosecutors. He explained he felt he had to do something to give jurors an explanation for Jerry Sandusky's admittedly unusual behavior and affinity for kids.
Amendola, responding to earlier critical testimony from his co-counsel on the case, Karl Rominger, minimized Rominger's involvement in the case, asserting the now-disbarred Carlisle attorney primarily assisted him with hearings, but had little to do with development of the case.
Under cross-examination from Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Peterson, Amendola said he devoted his time almost exclusively to Sandusky's case from the time charges were filed in November Cleland did not rule on any of the issues aired out Friday.
Instead, the hearing is scheduled to reconvene later this month with additional testimony from witnesses including several of the prosecutors and investigators who worked on the case. Issues taken up at that time could include more on Victim 2, the use of repressed memory therapy with several of the Sandusky victims, and whether prosecutors improperly leaked facts about the investigation to try to find more victims.
Note to readers: if you purchase something through one of our affiliate links we may earn a commission. All rights reserved About Us. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Advance Local.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site. Ad Choices. Report a digital subscription issue If you are being blocked from reading Subscriber Exclusive content, first confirm you are logged in using the account with which you subscribed. Don't settle for anything less than responsible journalism.
Subscribe today. By Charles Thompson cthompson pennlive. A contract with a network could give him time to teach on the side. Maybe even have time to write a book. Amendola has done it before and wants to do it again. Amendola says he had a book idea long before Sandusky walked into his office.
There is at least one funny Sandusky story he would tell. A gig as a legal contributor is a lot slower pace than what Amendola is used to. It also, typically, pays a lot less. What Baez did — in addition to writing a book — was expand his practice from Orlando to essentially the whole country. The result is that Baez is able to cherry-pick cases, taking those he is passionate about.
Baez, of course, won his trial. He also had cameras in the courtroom, and so every minute of it was televised. William Costopolous did the same thing in the s after he successfully freed Pennsylvania high school principal Jay C. Smith from death row. Smith was convicted in Dauphin County court of killing Susan Reinert and her children. The case grabbed national headlines, became a best-selling novel by Joseph Wambaugh and was turned into a movie. But Costopolous stayed put.
He reinvested his good will into his Harrisburg-area practice and expanded to take some out-of-state cases. Since then, Costopolous has taken a number of memorable cases and even made his way into the Sandusky case. Not even O. The Penn State case touched many more social issues and nerves and institutions, and will go down as unprecedented in terms of profile.
And for that reason, Attorney Amendola will go down in history There is really no doubt Amendola has ability as a lawyer. Amendola admitted to the jury that the evidence was overwhelming.
And eight men, plus two eye-witnesses, took the stand and bluntly called his client a child molester. Still, after his closing argument, some courtroom observers were questioning whether Sandusky might walk away a free man. He put Sandusky on television, subjected him to a New York Times interview, and let him take to a podium outside the courthouse.
When Jerry was making those comments, what was going through your mind? Well, you have to understand—there was a tidal wave of presumption of guilt from day one. The national reporters were saying this was a done deal, Jerry Sandusky is guilty as hell. I had to do something drastic.
I had to do something that was so completely off the wall to try and turn this thing around. I guess all right. But you must have been nervous. Of course. And then the next day, on The Today Show , I realized I really had to take the offensive with Ann Curry, who later in another interview called me incompetent. It was incredible. The media has also attacked you regarding your ex-wife, specifically the story that you got her pregnant when she was 17, when she was your client, and then married her.
Ironically, that garnered me a lot of sympathy, because people thought it was way over the line. My personal life is my personal life.
What they were inferring was outrageous. If you want to go out there and look like idiots, then so be it. Jerry certainly was hearing all of this criticism. Why do you think he stuck with you? And by the way, regarding that interview and the other things that I had done initially, I got calls from a number of top trial attorneys who said what I was doing was brilliant.
So after all of this criticism, you held a party. And all the national media were trying to get an interview with me. So I was tired at that point. My phone was burning up. Dallas football game tonight at my home.
I invited all the national networks. It was a discussion and to watch the game. So it was always misnomered as a party. It was really a media effort on my part to get my side out again. I was promoting our defense. What was your reaction when one of those reporters got a DUI?
I felt awful for him. I even reached out to him. To rep him?
0コメント