Joe Amendola, Jerry Sandusky's lawyer, has heard back from the judge about his request that prosecutors provide him with more specific details about the allegations against his client: Nope.
Judge John M. Cleland wrote that the request was "a futile act," because those details don't exist. Prosecutors had already argued that the precise dates of the alleged abuse are impossible to come up with, because the incidents took place so often and because the defendant allegedly had encouraged victims to forget what had happened. The ruling, which can be viewed below, does cite case precedent saying that the absence of exact dates "would violate the notions of fundamental fairness embedded in our legal process." But Cleland then cites additional precedents that he says give the prosecution "greater latitude when the alleged crimes involve sexual offenses against a young child."
Undeterred, Amendola has since let it be known that his next step will be to seek a dismissal of the charges because, well, why not?