In the media whirlwind following the verdict, lawyerin' Joe Amendola said many things. Some were characteristically head-scratching, while others were relevant to the facts and preparation of the case.
In passing, he mentioned how he felt the prosecution had delayed in providing some information and that left the Sandusky team scrambling to put together a proper defense. As a result they had requested that the trial be delayed so a proper defense could be formulated. That request was obviously denied. Now comes news that he and Karl Rominger had actually moved the court to be relieved as counsel.
"We told the trial court, the Superior Court and the Supreme Court we were not prepared to proceed to trial in June due to numerous issues, and we asked to withdraw from the case for those reasons," Amendola said.
Sandusky, a former Penn State assistant football coach, was convicted Friday on dozens of child sexual abuse charges. His lawyers had said a delay was needed because a key member of the defense team had a scheduling conflict and a lengthy grand jury investigation had inundated them with documents and other materials.
Legal experts say the seven months between Sandusky's arrest and trial on such serious charges is a fast pace by Pennsylvania standards.
That sounds much more like "we need more time because we're not prepared" and less so like it has anything to do with the prosecution's conduct. Many people have speculated that this whole bumbling show has been a set-up for an ineffective assistance of counsel defense on appeal. Maybe this adds to that dubious theory, but in general, defendants always want to delay proceedings and prosecutors (and plaintiffs) always want to push for a resolution. It's more likely this was just a last ditch effort to delay the trial, the success of which, like an acquittal at trial itself, Amendola and co. knew was a long shot.
Photo via AP