Jerry Sandusky files appeal in child sex case conviction, seeks new trial

WILLIAMSPORT – Jerry Sandusky again is trying to get his conviction vacated and a new trial.

Sandusky, 78, who is serving a 30- to 60-year sentence, on Saturday filed a habeas corpus petition in U.S. Middle District Court alleging numerous instances of ineffective counsel.

Sandusky, whose previous appeals of his 2012 conviction on 45 child sex charges have been denied, has steadfastly maintained his innocence.

A Centre County jury found Sandusky, the longtime former Penn State assistant football coach, sexually abused 10 boys of his youth charity, the Second Mile, between 1994 and 2008.

The state Superior Court in 2019 affirmed the conviction but ordered Sandusky to be resentenced without the imposition of mandatory minimum terms. His new sentence was the same as the old.

Williamsport attorney E.J. Rymsza in the new appeal cites what he contends were mistakes made by Sandusky’s trial lawyers Joseph Amendola and Karl Rominger.

They include:

• Providing a prejudicial opening statement in which Amendola made an unfulfilled promise Sandusky would testify and effectively conceded the weight of the evidence supported his client’s guilt.
• Failing to object to the judge in his final instructions not telling the jury Sandusky had no obligation to testify and no adverse inference could be drawn from him remaining silent.
• Recommending and arranging for the national television interview with Bob Costas for which Sandusky was unprepared. The prosecution used his comments against him at trial.
• Failing to properly object and request remedial measures for the prosecutor’s closing argument in which he noted Sandusky did not testify but was willing to be interviewed by Costas.
• Failing to object to the empanelment of two jurors who when questioned showed by were predisposed to convict.
• Eliciting from a psychologist testimony he had diagnosed Sandusky with a histrionic personality disorder” that opened the door to damaging rebuttal testimony.
• Advising Sandusky not to testify after jurors were told he would. Sandusky chose not to testify out of concern if he did, the prosecution would call his adopted son Matthew as a rebuttal witness.
• Failing to file a motion to either move the trial out of Centre County or import a jury.
• Arguing outside Sandusky’s presence to withdraw as counsel and then failing to file an appeal when the request was denied.

Amendola on June 5, 2012, the morning of jury selection, advised the judge in chambers he was a filing a motion to allow Rominger and he to withdraw as counsel.

His reasons included lack of preparation, absence of experts and jury consultant, potential availability of key witnesses and staff is still copying confidential grand jury materials.

“Be that aside, I feel that we’re duty-bound ethically to tell the Court we’re not prepared to go to trial at this time,” the trial transcript states.

Rymsza claims the judge violated Sandusky’s due process rights by denying a requested continuance that resulted in the defense being ill-prepared for trial.

Failure to grant the continuance also violated Sandusky’s right to be represented by effective counsel, he claims.

The Sandusky scandal resulted in the firing of head football coach Joe Paterno and school President Graham Spanier.

Spanier was convicted of a misdemeanor charge of endangering the welfare of a child and spent two months in prison.