Amendola Calls for More Specific Bill of Particulars, May Request Case to be Dropped
Joe Amendola, Sandusky’s main legal counsel, requested more specific information on each of the ten alleged victims and their offenses. The current Bill of Particulars includes vague dates for when the alleged crimes occurred — many spanning over a several year period — and does not include information regarding the identity of two of the victims, who have yet to be identified.
Amendola argued to Judge John Cleland that the Commonwealth should “try harder” to give more specific information. He cited that many of the alleged offenses occurred around specific Penn State football games, and that it wouldn’t be too difficult to identify specific games that the alleged victims attended. “When you were younger, you remember specific events, like a football game, a baseball game, or educational events,” Amendola said. He went on, “What if you were arrested today for molesting a boy between the years of 2000-2005 [or other large time spans, as noted in the Bill of Particulars]. How do you defend that?”
The Commonwealth, led by attorney Joe McGettigan, said that the alleged victims were too young at the time to recall specific games or events. The prosecution said that the Bill of Particulars they provided is as specific as they can make it with the information that they have.
Judge Cleland will rule on the case shortly, but Amendola noted, “Fundamentally, it’s unfair to Sandusky’s due process [to not provide a more specific Bill of Particulars].”
Amendola said in a press conference after the trial, “Unless the Commonwealth can give us more information, we’re going to ask the judge to drop the case.”
Jerry Sandusky was not present at today’s hearing, and there were no witnesses called. Jury selection for the trial is set for May 14.