Jerry Sandusky prosecutor in closing arguments: 'It's not about conspiracies'

State College - Centre Daily TimesJune 21, 2012 

— The prosecution in the Jerry Sandusky case mocked the defense's "grand conspiracy theory" and said the case is proved by the testimony from eight young men, which shows Sandusky exhibited the range of grooming behavior of a "serial predatory pedophile."

"It's about those boys," said prosecutor Joseph E. McGettigan III during his closing arguments, pointing to pictures of the eight boys who are now young men who testified last week that they were abused by Sandusky.

McGettigan was calm and at times explanatory about the legal process during his closing arguments. He spoke in a soft, sometimes inaudible voice and used some notes.

But he picked up his firebrand style toward the end of his hour-long argument, walked from the jury box to stand behind Sandusky and said no one could give the young men ages 18 to 28 "pieces of their souls" back. But, he said, there's one thing they can do: "Give him the justice he really deserves, and find him guilty of everything," McGettigan said as he pointed his finger at Sandusky and looked straight on at the jury.

Four of the alleged victims — Nos. 1, 4, 6 and 9 — were in the courtroom for the prosecution's closing arguments.

McGettigan reminded the jury of what he had told them in his opening last week — that the defense would admit what it must, deny what it could, call people liars, make counter charges and allege a conspiracy.

In mocking the defense's conspiracy theory — that the young men, investigators and others involved got together to allege the abuse — McGettigan said the allegations span back and the people involved didn't know each other.

"It's not about conspiracies, it's not about time-traveling conspiracies, it's not about people seeking fame, fortune or money," McGettigan said.

"If you conclude there's a conspiracy then somebody bring the handcuffs for me," he said.

McGettigan pointed out that defense attorney Joe Amendola never asked the alleged victims on cross-examination questions specifically about the sex acts, instead questioning the witnesses about dates, places and times.

Sandusky looked on as McGettigan addressed the jury in a soft voice. Sandusky smirked once when McGettigan said Sandusky was seen twice late in the night after a janitor allegedly saw him abusing a boy in 2000.

McGettigan stood up for the state police investigators Amendola blasted in his closing arguments. And McGettigan said even that, though Mike McQueary didn't call police after the incident in 2001, "he's met the mark on everything since," saying McQueary has "stood up to the criticism" and "hasn't revised history."

McClatchy Washington Bureau is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service