Attorney Joe Amendola said that he would have done some things differently while defending Jerry Sandusky, notably wishing he had prepared his client better for an interview with Bob Costas.
Attorney Joe Amendola looks back on the way he handled the Jerry Sandusky trial with a few regrets, saying there were some things he wishes he had done differently to prevent his client from receiving a life sentence for on charges of sexual abuse.
In an interview with Harrisburg CBS affiliate WHP-TV, Amendola said that he'd "have to be an idiot" not to wish he'd done things differently after seeing a client he still believes could be innocent convicted on 45 charges. He thinks that he could have prepared Sandusky better for a damning interview with Bob Costas, where the former Penn State assistant hesitated when asked to proclaim his innocence or deny an attraction to young boys:
"Obviously, Monday Morning Quarterbacking is always great... I think I would've said, Bob Costas, look. Here are the questions you're permitted to ask Jerry. And Jerry would've known the answer. Because the answer was simple: 'I'm innocent.'"
Amendola also says he felt he didn't have enough time to go through the massive amounts of information against his client in the four-and-a-half month period before the trial.
"All this information was was flooding into us, which we were trying to decipher, to come up with other ways to show that his accusers were lying, which is what Jerry was saying. And we were cut off."
He said that the fact that he was given so little time to prepare for Sandusky's trial, featuring 45 charges and a potential life in prison while former Penn State administrators Tim Curley and Gary Schultz have had over a year to prepare to defend two charges, one of which Amendola said is essentially no worse than a traffic ticket, "doesn't look right".
He also wondered whether he was the right man for the position, thinking somebody else might take over.
"The longer I stayed in, the harder it got for me to say, maybe I want to get out. I kept thinking somebody else was going to jump in. Maybe some national, high-profile attorney."
When asked whether he thought Sandusky was innocent, he wouldn't answer either way, but said that he didn't think there was enough evidence to conflict him.
I think based upon what I know, if I had been a juror, there would have been a reasonable doubt.
Sandusky, now 68, is still trying to appeal the conviction that will see him spend the rest of his life in prison.