Well that didn't take very long—one of the jurors from the Sandusky trial has shed some light on the deliberation process. Among other things, Joshua Harper told TODAY that he and the other jurors felt that Sandusky's lack of emotion when reacting to the verdict was "confirmation" that they had made the right decision. Now, let's put aside the likely fact that Sandusky was coached to appear like that and get in to some more of the insight offered by Harper.
He and his fellow jurors felt they did not have the evidence necessary to convict Sandusky on the charges relative to Mike McQueary's testimony because McQueary had not witnessed Sandusky actually penetrate the victim. Harper did note that he had "no doubt" that Sandusky raped him. It's kind of a credit to the jury that they were able to separate their guts from their brains on this one, though they were likely comforted by the sheer enormity of the remaining charges and sentences associated therewith.
Harper said that the jury's focus was on determining credibility, and he and his peers found decisively in favor of the victims.
"I think there were a couple that I felt [were] very credible. I mean, it's hard to judge character on the stand, because you don't know these kids, but most were very credible, I would say all," Harper told TODAY.
With high profile cases like this one, it sometimes seems impossible (and probably is impossible) for any jury to be unbiased, but as long as biases are held in check, that's really the best you can hope for. If Mr. Harper is to be believed, we may have gotten just that out of this jury.
Image via MSNBC
Juror: Sandusky's lack of emotion at verdicts was 'confirmation' [MSNBC]