Butler, Butler County, Pa- On Tuesday a PA Superior Court Panel made a ruling on appeals made by Jerry Sandusky, who’s seeking a new trial and sentencing.
The panel ruled that Sandusky would not receive a new trial, but that he would receive a resentencing.
Wednesday morning Sundusky’s lawyer Al Lindsay spoke to the media on the ruling.
Lindsay says that he and his client (Sandusky) are still considering what their strategy will be moving forward. He says they were looking for a resentencing, but one that was predicated on a new trial.
Per the court’s ruling, no new evidence and testimony will be given before the resentencing.
“I don’t think we’re necessarily suprised, the courts appear to be into trying to preserve this conviction which we think is fatally flawed,” said Lindsay.
Seven years after Sandusky received 30-to-60 years of jailtime for 45 criminal counts related to child molestation, both he and his lawyer are still fighting for a new trial.
“Our position is that Jerry is absolutley innocent of these charges,” Lindsay said.
But after Tuesday’s court ruling that struck down every argument made for a new trial, Lindsay says they will appeal this decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
WTAJ spoke with legal analyst, Attorney Tony DeBoef, who says this appeal may not work.
“The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania doesn’t have to take cases. It’s not unusual for them to only here seven or eight cases a year… so it’s a very select number of cases that they take. And they always take something that’s first impression, so something that’s brand new and never come up before. I don’t think this is something brand new… so I’d be very suprised if the Court takes it.”
The court panel ordered that Sandusky be resentenced due to an improper application of mandatory minimums… something that DeBoef says has happened for many different cases in PA and has nothing to do with any established facts of the case.
DeBoef added that the resentencing could backfire and result in a worse sentence for Sandusky.
“There is an aggravated range for sentencing… if a judge decides to find it. I think a judge could find that there are some aggravated circumstances here and Sandusky could end up with more than 30 years.”