Comments | ontd_political: Jury finds Sandusky guilty of sexual abuse

moonbladem in ontd_political

Jury finds Sandusky guilty of sexual abuse

Jun 22, 2012 20:22

BELLEFONTE, Pennsylvania - A jury in Centre County has convicted former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky of sexually abusing children over the course of several decades while a coach and coach emeritus at Penn State ( Read more... )

scumbags, child abuse / csa, scandal, justice, rape, sexual assault, evil, crime, *trigger warning: abuse, for great justice, totally awesome

Comments 137

mirhanda June 23 2012, 02:33:23 UTC

YES!

ponyboy June 23 2012, 02:35:05 UTC

good tbh

azur_blue June 23 2012, 02:35:26 UTC

Thank goodness, I hope that SOB rots. So relieved for the victims.
And his wife should be ashamed of herself

homasse June 23 2012, 02:35:54 UTC

He's in jail until the sentencing in 90 days; I hope when he is sentenced, they not only throw the book at him, but the whole collection, vol A-Z, that the book is in and the library that houses the book.

Also, here is a full list of all the charges and verdicts.

evewithanapple June 23 2012, 02:40:35 UTC

Now that I've read the list, I'm curious as to what made the jurors convict on some charges and not others. He recieved at least one conviction for all the victims, so it's not like they don't believe any of the testimony.

sarahofcroydon June 23 2012, 03:05:21 UTC

It's weird, isn't it... I was a juror once here in Australia and after the hearing the judge spent a whole day explaining to us the points of the law. It wasn't just a matter of saying guilty, for one charge we had to satisfy one of two batches of three conditions, if that makes any sense. It was ridiculously complicated... we all had to arrive at the same verdict (unanimous) but we could do it via the different pathways. I'm not sure if US law is similar, but it could be that just one person didn't believe all conditions were satisfied or something like that.

missmurchison June 23 2012, 03:35:18 UTC

Many laws are written like that, with "tests" that have to be passed before it is applicable.

It may be better in the long run that there were not convictions on all counts. It shows that the jury took the matter very seriously and didn't just come to a blanket guilty verdict out of disgust. That will help the conviction withstand appeal.

Thread 7

thevelvetsun June 23 2012, 02:37:59 UTC

The verdict is a relief. I was so scared he'd be acquitted with so many jurors having ties to Penn State. The riots last year were disgusting.