The death of former head football coach Joe Paterno could create a “legal problem” in the criminal cases of Jerry Sandusky, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, one of Sandusky’s attorneys said.
Karl Rominger — Sandusky’s attorney alongside Joe Amendola — said the former head football coach’s testimony to the grand jury will not be admissible in court, or allowed as evidence, because he cannot be cross-examined.
Rominger said he didn’t think Paterno’s statement included any information the commonwealth was going to use against the former assistant football coach. But, he said, if Paterno’s testimony included information that would benefit Sandusky’s case, the defense would push to allow Paterno’s testimony to be admissible.
Most likely, Paterno’s testimony did not have sufficient information to benefit the prosecution or the defense, Rominger said.
“He’s not really a major witness in the case for the government or the defense,” Rominger said. “I don’t think either side thought Paterno was a lynchpin for the case.”
Attorney Joseph Musso, of Alexandria, Va., agreed with Rominger, saying Paterno’s death will not have an effect in Sandusky’s case.
In Sandusky’s case, the evidence from the men who said Sandusky abused them is so “overwhelming” that Paterno’s testimony would not have made a difference, Musso said.
Sandusky is charged with 52 counts of child sexual abuse. Two civil lawsuits have also been filed against him.
As for the charges against former Athletic Director Curley and former Interim Vice President for Finance and Business Schultz, Caroline Roberto, Curley’s attorney, issued a statement on the effect Paterno’s death might have on the defense’s strategy.
“Since the prosecution is saddled with the burden of proving the charge of perjury against our clients, the question about what impact Mr. Paterno’s death has on case strategy should be asked of the prosecution,” Roberto said in the statement.
Rominger was unsure of the exact effect Paterno’s death would have on Sandusky’s case, but he said the cases against Curley and Schultz could be significantly affected.
“It is going to make the prosecution of Curley and Schultz almost impossible,” Rominger said.
Curley and Schultz are each charged with perjury and failure to report abuse in connection with the Sandusky case.
Rominger said the lack of Paterno’s testimony would be “fatal” to the cases, since former Penn State wide receivers coach Mike McQueary is now the star witness in the case.
McQueary testified during a grand jury investigation that he saw Sandusky raping a young boy in a shower in the Lasch Building in 2002, according to a grand jury presentment. McQueary was a graduate assistant at the time.
McQueary then informed Paterno of the incident, he said at the preliminary hearing of Curley and Schultz on Dec. 16. Paterno said he “knew inappropriate action was taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster.” The former head football coach said he relayed McQueary’s concerns to Curley and Shultz, who he said he thought would handle the situation appropriately.
“McQueary can say what he told Joe Paterno, but no one knows what Joe told Curley or Schultz, because it is not admissible,” Rominger said. “How can you prove what they knew or what they were told if the [statement of the] person who told them is not admissible?”
Musso didn’t agree with Rominger. It would not be impossible to prosecute Curley and Schultz, he said.
“I think they have other avenues to prove the same conduct,” Musso said. “It may be more difficult, but it doesn’t make it dispositive. On its own, it will not lead to an acquittal by itself.”
The Attorney General’s office was unavailable to comment as of press time Tuesday.