BELLEFONTE (KDKA) – The prosecution rested its case in the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse trial Monday morning after calling one final witness.
The mother of alleged victim No. 9, who manages a bar, testified that she sent her son to the Second Mile camps.
She said Sandusky introduced himself to her and told her he was interested in taking her son to a number of events. She said she thought it was a great idea given her work schedule.
The woman also said she visited the Sandusky home twice.
Her son eventually told her he didn’t want to spend time with Sandusky, but she made him go, believing the contact would be good for him.
However, she was tearful as she thought about that decision.
One night her son called from the Sandusky home and asked her to take him home.
“My kid was waiting for me outside. He didn’t have any shoes on. It was about 11 o’clock at night. I asked him if he was okay. He said he was just sick and wanted to go home and go to bed,” she said.
“Did you ever ask him what happened at the defendant’s home?” asked the prosecutor.
“No. I just can’t imagine what happened to him,” she said.
“Do you feel responsible?” asked the prosecutor.
“Yes, I do,” she said.
Later, after the investigation made news, she testified Sandusky called her son late at night asking the boy to sign some kind of affidavit on Sandusky’s behalf.
The defense begins its case with former Penn State assistant coach Richard Anderson.
Earlier in the day, the defense made several motions before jury was seated. They argued that a number of charges were not specific enough to defend and should be either thrown out or reduced to lesser charges.
Around 2 p.m., Judge Cleland ended court for day.
He expects the defense to rest by noon on Wednesday and expects closing argument to begin Thursday morning.
He also told the jury that they will be sequestered once they start deliberations.
The defense argued that they could provide alibi evidence based on Sandusky’s schedule with the team. His time with the team is documented and if allegations of time and place were more specific, they would be able to better defend against the claims.
The defense also argued that testimony regarding alleged Victim No. 2 is a case of indecent assault at best since Mike McQueary did not see penetration.
They also said the age of Victim No. 2 was not specific other than McQueary’s estimate that he was about 10 or so.
The defense also challenged the specificity of charges regarding alleged Victim No. 6, who testified he was lifted in the shower and blacked out any memory of what happened next.
In response, the prosecution argued that they are allowed a broad latitude in pursuit of ongoing sexual assault cases like this one. They argued the evidence clearly paints a picture of serial abuse.
The prosecution also said although McQueary cannot testify to penetration, “There is ample circumstantial evidence that that’s what was going on.”
The prosecution also argued that alleged Victim No. 6’s testimony is sufficient for indecent assault charge.
One count regarding alleged Victim No. 7 will be withdrawn by the prosecution given the timeframe to which he testified about alleged sexual acts.
Judge John Cleland said he had been concerned about specifics early on, but believes the amended complaint is sufficient.
Judge Cleland said there is sufficient evidence to allow the jury to assess McQueary’s testimony and to determine what, if anything, happened to the unidentified boy in the showers of the Lasch Building.