Pennsylvania
judge hands setback to Sandusky in bid for new trial
Send a link to a friend
[November 07, 2015]
By David DeKok
HARRISBURG, Pa. (Reuters) - A lawyer for
Jerry Sandusky, the former Penn State coach convicted of child sex
abuse, said on Friday he is considering his next step after a judge
rejected his request for an investigation that he hoped would lead to a
new trial for his client.
|
Judge John Cleland said he lacked jurisdiction over lawyer
Alexander Lindsay's petition for a probe into how the Harrisburg
Patriot-News newspaper obtained secret grand jury information in
2011 for its Pulitzer Prize-winning expose of Sandusky’s crimes.
Lindsay has argued in court papers that the grand jury leak to
Patriot-News reporter Sara Ganim, now a correspondent for CNN, was a
factor in what he said was a denial of due process to Sandusky and
potential grounds for a new trial.
Cleland instead ruled on Thursday that Lindsay needed to petition
Judge Norman Krumenauer, the current supervising judge of the
statewide grand jury that investigated Sandusky.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2015/Nov/07/images/ads/current/charrons_bch041713.png)
"We'll make a decision next week," Lindsay told Reuters on Friday.
"The judge gave us the option to pursue the information from Judge
Krumenauer."
In 2012, Sandusky was convicted of 45 of 48 child molestation
charges filed against him. The former assistant to legendary Penn
State head football coach Joe Paterno is serving a 30- to 60-year
sentence in the state's "supermax" prison in Waynesburg.
Cleland made the ruling after hearing testimony on Thursday from
Attorney General Kathleen Kane. She denied knowledge of any leaks to
the paper by Judge Barry Feudale, who was supervising judge of the
grand jury when it indicted Sandusky, or by Frank Fina, the Sandusky
prosecutor.
[to top of second column] |
![](../images/ads/current/richardson_lda_040113.png)
Kane said an Oct. 28 news release she had written had been
misinterpreted as suggesting she knew that Feudale or Fina played a
role in leaking secret information to the reporter.
Asked if the ruling was unexpected, Lindsay said: "We had no
expectations. This was a very unusual proceeding. Anything could
have happened."
He would not comment on whether he might appeal Cleland's ruling.
(Reporting by Frank McGurty; Editing by Tom Brown)
[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2015/Nov/07/images/ads/current/directory_buttons.png)
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2015/Nov/07/images/ads/current/memorial_home_sda_100115.png) |