Sandusky trial might be over sooner than you think

By Steve Kallas (posted by Rick Morris)

Surprisingly, the prosecution may rest as early as Friday in the state court prosecution of former Penn State assistant Jerry Sandusky.  In a morbid, horrific case, Sandusky is charged with 52 counts arising from his alleged sexual deviance with 10 little boys over 15 years.

IT’S NOT GOING WELL FOR THE DEFENDANT

An understatement, to be sure, as victim after victim has come (and will come) forward to testify in graphic detail about the things that Jerry Sandusky allegedly did to them.  It’s disgusting, to say the least, and, if convicted, they should lock the door and throw away the key on this guy.  Add the graphic testimony of former assistant Mike McQueary and it’s hard to believe that there is any defense the defendant can mount.

HERE’S WHY AN ACCUSED SHOULD NEVER SPEAK PUBLICLY

You (almost) always hear an accused say “I can’t talk about the case on instructions from my lawyer.”  While people often wonder why, here is the prime example.  Inexplicably, Sandusky’s lawyer allowed him to speak with Bob Costas on NBC last year.  Costas asked a very straightforward question, “Are you sexually attracted to young boys, underage boys?”

After a brief pause that seemed like an eternity, Sandusky gave a rambling answer and eventually got around to what should have come out of his mouth immediately: that he was not sexually attracted to underage boys.

But, unbeknownst to him (and maybe his lawyer), the damage was already done.  Reports from inside the courtroom stated that the jury was stunned by the answer (or, more likely, the lack of an immediate “no” answer).  It’s hard not to call this piling on, but the prosecutors are just making their case.

And, frankly, it’s virtually a slam dunk.

WILL THE DEFENDANT TESTIFY?

It’s not that often that a defendant in a criminal case takes the stand in his own defense (Roger Clemens being the latest example in the news).  But the lawyers for Sandusky said that he will testify.  The only remotely rational explanation for this (if there is one) is the one in a million (or ten million) chance that Sandusky could convince a juror that it was all a misunderstanding or a mistake.

It seems to be all a pipe dream.

More victims are expected to testify today with the prosecution resting as early as Friday.  Then, the defense will put on whatever case it can put on.

But it sure doesn’t look good.