It was just 24 hours after a judge said he would announce a decision on an appeal that Jerry Sandusky’s attorneys tried one more argument.
Despite the fact that Jefferson County President Judge John Foradora had shut down earlier requests for additional arguments, on Tuesday, Sandusky lawyers Al Lindsay and Andrew Salemme filed a motion to re-open the record, seeking to attach new evidence.
Sandusky, the retired Penn State defensive coordinator convicted of 45 counts of child sex abuse crimes in 2012, is seeking a new trial or dismissed charges with a Post-conviction Collateral Relief Act petition.
The new evidence in question is an email between former Penn State assistant coach Mike McQueary and prosecutor Jonelle Eschbach.
The Nov. 10, 2011 email was written the morning after Nittany Lions head coach Joe Paterno was fired. McQueary was one of the key witnesses in the case, with arguably the most memorable allegations — of Sandusky found in the showers at the Lasch football building with a young boy and of telling Paterno about it with his dad.
“I never went to coach paterno’s (sic) house with my father...It was me and only me...he was out of town the night before...never ever have I seen JS with a child at one of our practices...I have only seen him once or twice,” McQueary wrote to Eschbach. All ellipses in McQueary’s email are original and do not indicate missing text.
“I am being misrepresented in the media...as are some others...it just is not right,” he said. “Again...I am sorry for being like this...it has been a terrible week in so many ways.”
Eschbach wrote back almost 10 hours later.
“I know that a lot of this stuff is incorrect and it is hard not to respond. But you can’t,” she replied.
The email was uncovered by Ray Blehar in a blizzard of documents he has pulled over the year in the case. BigTrial.net published a story about it last week.
According to Sandusky’s attorneys, the email was never provided to the coach’s trial attorney, Joseph Amendola. Amendola’s ineffective counsel is one of Sandusky’s grounds for a new trial in the petition.
They say that Eschbach previously testified to an email exchange where McQueary said the AG’s office “twisted his words” regarding his shower observations.
“This additional information is further evidence of the prosecutions’ failure to turn over ... impeachment evidence,” Lindsay and Salemme wrote.
The state attorney general’s office had no comment on the motion.
A decision on Sandusky’s petition is expected at noon.