1:00- Sandusky case in the hands of the jury.

[Are_grits_groceries]

An OJ surprise?
Or not?

[KurtNYC]

1. They're convicting

maybe not on everything, but on significant stuff.

OJ was not a surprise -- not after the McMartin, Latasha Harlens, and Rodney King verdicts -- and not after Ito allowed the defense to ramble on for weeks.

[Rambis]

2. 1:01 guilty (nm)

[Are_grits_groceries]

5. Juries are crapshoots.

All it takes is one stubborn juror.
I hope they are convicting him, but I won't believe it until until it's done.

As far as OJ surprise, it certainly was a surprise to a lot of people. Most followed it but not the moment by moment testimony.

And McMartin was an unholy mess from the get go. When charges of child abuse are brought, I want some real effort behind them. They are devastating even if the accused is found not guilty. I am glad the Sandusky prosecutors took time to carefully put together their case.

I speak as someone who was abused. False charges and unproven charges damage everyone. Every effort should be put into preparing the charges and the case. I know you never get close to 100% certainty, but I want more than some flimsy evidence and unprepared witnesses.

[vankuria]

14. The McMartin case

if my memory serves me right was based on the account of one mother who had psychiatric issues. It started a mass hysteria and kids were interviewed by so called experts however there were issues with how they were interviewed and perhaps led to believe something happened that didn't. The mother that started the whole episode died before the case even went to trial. I think this turned out to be a land mark case on how not to prosecute a case.

[KurtNYC]

15. you are correct (though I'm not sure on your detail about the mother who started it)

The McMartin thing was 3 years of investigation and then a 3 year trial. The OJ trial was not quite as long but very long by murder trial statistics. The Sandusky trial went as it should -- a damning case sworn told by credible witnesses and a jury moved to tears.

The speed of the Sandusky trial bodes well for convictions. Plus Sandusky is guilty as hell.


McMartin investigations and trial:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial#Initial_allegations

[vankuria]

16. Thanks for the link KurtNYC

It does mention the mother who started the allegations Judy Johnson who was later hospitalized with dx of acute paranoid schizophrenia and in '86 found dead in her home of complications from chronic alcoholism. From the link it looks like the case went to trial in 1990.

[LiberalLoner]

3. I pray for justice and healing for the victims.

If justice is not done....I still pray for their healing in spite of it.

[Cali_Democrat]

4. I actually expected the OJ jury to find him not guilty

I think he killed Ron and Nicole, but the prosecution was incompetent.

In this case, Sandusky is going down.

[Are_grits_groceries]

7. Judge Ito didn't help either. nt

[vankuria]

13. In the OJ case

the prosecution was totally incompetent, with investigators lying on the stand and let's not forget that infamous glove found at the crime scene. Having no clue how something will turn out when presented to the jury, is something lawyers learn about in law 101. Sandusky is toast, with eyewitness testimony of Mike McQuearry and the emotional testimony of the victims I don't see how the jury could go any other way.

[slackmaster]

6. The acquittal of O.J. Simpson did not surprise me.

I've served on trial juries before.

I believe Sandusky will go down hard. It may take several days, but only because of the large number of counts the jury has to discuss and vote on.

For comparison, one criminal case I served on took the jury three days to deliberate. There were nine felony counts and four degree issues. We got through all of the main counts by the end of the second day. We ended up acquitting on one degree issue because of lack of evidence.

There was a "lone juror" - a rather rabid older lady who wanted to convict on that degree issue as well. Talking her into agreeing to acquit on that one issue, a relatively minor thing, took several hours.

[Woody Woodpecker]

8. I expect them to return within the end of the day

and say GUILTY to all 51 charges. The judge will have no choice but to order 25 to life consecutively for each charge.

[richmwill]

9. Normally I'd say absolutely positive of multiple "Guilty" verdicts...

However, I also thought the same about Casey Anthony when that case went to the jury.

[Whisp]

10. if it was a DU jury...

but seeing as it is a real one, I have to think it's a guilty. otherwise all of them are really DUers.

[hifiguy]

11. No. OJ had a superb defense team

and world-class experts like Henry Lee. Sandusky has McQueary's testimony and that of a parade of victims of his pedophilia and a 1.5 day defense argument ain't gonna rebut that. I hope that perverted shit spends the rest of his life in the Big House.

My bet is that the jury will be done in time to go home for the weekend.

[Spazito]

12. I think the creep is guilty of child rape/molestation...

and I sure hope the jury finds the same. I have to admit the fact that eight of the twelve jurors plus two of the four alternates have ties to Penn State causes me to be cynical as to what the verdict will be.

Being cynical, it might depend on whether the jury members, due to their loyalty to Penn State, cannot believe an 'icon' like Sandusky could possibly do what has been charged, lean toward 'not guilty' or whether they are outraged at what Sandusky has done to the reputation of Penn State due to his criminal actions.

It is my fervent hope it will the latter that will guide the jurors if they bring their loyalties to Penn State into their deliberations in any way.