ADVERTISEMENT

Commonwealth's unopposed motion for 7 days enlargement of time

francofan

francofan

Well-Known Member
Oct 26, 2015
2,960
4,805
1
Jennifer Peterson has made an unopposed motion for an extra 7 days for the commonwealth's proposed findings and conclusions of law. The brief which was due on Aug. 11 is now due on Aug. 18.

Peterson claims to have been busy lately and has not had enough time to review and address the averments and arguments set forth in Sandusky's voluminous 257 page pleading.

I think the real reason she asked for an extension is that she doesn't have any good answers to the 31 issues identified by Sandusky's attorney's as to why the trial was unfair. It will be interesting to read her response in 10 days.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/med... MOTION FOR SEVEN DAY ENLARGEMENT OF TIME.pdf
 
  • Like
Reactions: step.eng69, indynittany and denniskembala
Every time I read the word "enlargement," I think of something entirely different than the subject of this thread.....
 
francofan said:
Jennifer Peterson has made an unopposed motion for an extra 7 days for the commonwealth's proposed findings and conclusions of law. The brief which was due on Aug. 11 is now due on Aug. 18.

Peterson claims to have been busy lately and has not had enough time to review and address the averments and arguments set forth in Sandusky's voluminous 257 page pleading.

I think the real reason she asked for an extension is that she doesn't have any good answers to the 31 issues identified by Sandusky's attorney's as to why the trial was unfair. It will be interesting to read her response in 10 days.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY COMMONWEALTHS UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR SEVEN DAY ENLARGEMENT OF TIME.pdf
Click to expand...
Enlargement........................what an unusual word usage here. Was she thinking of something else when she wrote the motion?
 
LafayetteBear said:
Every time I read the word "enlargement," I think of something entirely different than the subject of this thread.....
Click to expand...
smilingbob.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jim cummings, Mixolydian and denniskembala
Why was it unopposed? Are we setting up for a whole 'nother round of how poor Jer didn't have qualified attorneys?

This one is very simple - JS's attorney's needed to oppose the request for extension.

The reality is that JS & his attorney's know they have a losing case and capitulated here as a hedge for yet another PCRA.
 
7 days .......

All I know: we're 7 days closer to Jerry Sandusky's departure from this Earth than we were 7 days ago.
 
Nittany Ziggy said:
Does anyone know how to expedite this process?
Click to expand...

The wheels of justice spin slowly. We probably won't know whether or not the PCRA is ultimately successful or not for at least a year. Judge Foradora said he hope to make a decision whether or not to grant a new trial 60 days after the Commonwealth's response which makes it at least the end of October. Whoever loses will likely appeal. Appeals to Superior and the Pa. Supreme Court will probably take a year. I'm thinking this saga still has some legs. The fat lady may not be singing for a while.
 
coveydidnt said:
Why was it unopposed? Are we setting up for a whole 'nother round of how poor Jer didn't have qualified attorneys?

This one is very simple - JS's attorney's needed to oppose the request for extension.

The reality is that JS & his attorney's know they have a losing case and capitulated here as a hedge for yet another PCRA.
Click to expand...

I think that Lindsay and Salemme have been very effective in their PCRA filings and evidentiary hearings. I also think that Judge Foradora has been a lot more even handed in his rulings than Judge Cleland ever was.

I can assure you that Lindsay and Salemme have not made any capitulations. They are confident in their case and realize that 7 days isn't going to help Peterson to discover anything to salvage the OAG's case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: denniskembala
francofan said:
Jennifer Peterson has made an unopposed motion for an extra 7 days for the commonwealth's proposed findings and conclusions of law. The brief which was due on Aug. 11 is now due on Aug. 18.

Peterson claims to have been busy lately and has not had enough time to review and address the averments and arguments set forth in Sandusky's voluminous 257 page pleading.

I think the real reason she asked for an extension is that she doesn't have any good answers to the 31 issues identified by Sandusky's attorney's as to why the trial was unfair. It will be interesting to read her response in 10 days.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY COMMONWEALTHS UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR SEVEN DAY ENLARGEMENT OF TIME.pdf
Click to expand...

Here we go again. What a crybaby.
 
marshall23 said:
I'm 90% sure JS is a pedophile, though I doubt he is guilty of the more serious charges.
I'm 100% sure The Commonwealth justice system is corrupt and the course and outcome of this case was predetermined.
Click to expand...
I'm 100% certain of both.
 
Fayette_LION said:
Enlargement........................what an unusual word usage here. Was she thinking of something else when she wrote the motion?
Click to expand...
Ha, ha. It is a standard request, including use of the word enlargement. Enlargements of time are routinely requested and granted, especially when they are unopposed.
 
Fayette_LION said:
Enlargement........................what an unusual word usage here. Was she thinking of something else when she wrote the motion?
Click to expand...

Lawyers Say The Darndest Things**
** Disorder in the Court, ©1992 by Charles M. Sevilla, W.W. Norton & Company, New York and London

Attorney: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
Witness: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
Attorney: And Mr. Dennington was dead at the time?
Witness: If not, he was by the time I finished.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn’t it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn’t know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
 
  • Like
Reactions: artsandletters
francofan said:
The Commonwealth has requested an extra day enlargement due to Jennifer Peterson's laptop having a virus. Sounds fishy to me. They are actually asking for a 3 day extension and to submit their findings of facts on Monday August 21 as opposed to Friday August 18.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY MOTION FOR ONE DAY EXTENSION.pdf
Click to expand...

Go figure, they sure do have a lot of technology issues at the PA OAG like when they released their fairy-tale presentment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan
  • Like
Reactions: francofan
  • Like
Reactions: Bob78, 91Joe95, ChiTownLion and 3 others
pandaczar12 said:
Shouldn't this be super easy for such an open and shut case?
Click to expand...

That is the big fallacy in this case. It is not an open and closed case. If it was, why did the OAG need the false grand jury presentment, why did the OAG need the janitor victim hoax, why did the OAG need the state police to use suggestive interviewing techniques and then lie about it. Something stinks to high heaven and it will take a new trial to sort it out. The first trial was a joke and patently unfair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nits74, denniskembala and marshall23
francofan said:
The Commonwealth has requested an extra day enlargement due to Jennifer Peterson's laptop having a virus. Sounds fishy to me. They are actually asking for a 3 day extension and to submit their findings of facts on Monday August 21 as opposed to Friday August 18.

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY MOTION FOR ONE DAY EXTENSION.pdf
Click to expand...

So francofan, how did the Judge rule on this motion? Also, do you know if it (i.,e., the additional extension) was opposed? Simply filing this motion is not a granting of the adjournment requested - the Judge has to "order" it. Do you know if the Judge ever issued an "Order" granting the motion? If the motion wasn't granted, The State's response is due today.
 
PSU_l said:
So francofan, how did the Judge rule on this motion? Also, do you know if it (i.,e., the additional extension) was opposed? Simply filing this motion is not a granting of the adjournment requested - the Judge has to "order" it. Do you know if the Judge ever issued an "Order" granting the motion? If the motion wasn't granted, The State's response is due today.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that Judge Foradora has ruled on this motion. I just checked and there is nothing new on the Centre County web pages. In the motion, it said that Peterson had sent an email to Lindsay and Salemme but had not gotten a reply at the time of the filing. My guess is that Judge Foradora will grant a 1 business day extension. I will monitor the Centre County web pages. I suspect we will see Peterson's filing on the Commonwealth's proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law on the Centre County web pages on either Monday or Tuesday of next week.
 
francofan said:
I don't believe that Judge Foradora has ruled on this motion. I just checked and there is nothing new on the Centre County web pages. In the motion, it said that Peterson had sent an email to Lindsay and Salemme but had not gotten a reply at the time of the filing. My guess is that Judge Foradora will grant a 1 business day extension. I will monitor the Centre County web pages. I suspect we will see Peterson's filing on the Commonwealth's proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law on the Centre County web pages on either Monday or Tuesday of next week.
Click to expand...

Did you ever see anything on this? I believe all Court business is closed as of 4:30 pm today. This is getting a little bizarre at this point, no?
 
Is it normal for the OAG's office to use personal laptops for business?
 
francofan said:
I don't believe that Judge Foradora has ruled on this motion. I just checked and there is nothing new on the Centre County web pages. In the motion, it said that Peterson had sent an email to Lindsay and Salemme but had not gotten a reply at the time of the filing. My guess is that Judge Foradora will grant a 1 business day extension. I will monitor the Centre County web pages. I suspect we will see Peterson's filing on the Commonwealth's proposed findings of facts and conclusions of law on the Centre County web pages on either Monday or Tuesday of next week.
Click to expand...

Francofan, do you know if the State ever posted this response?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S

Are the ‘Rich Men North of Richmond’ Really Allowing Our Taxes to Pay for ‘Bags of Fudge Rounds’?

Replies
1
Views
254
Current Events Board
The Spin Meister
The Spin Meister
Ten Thousan Marbles

More to ignore, Book 122...

Replies
177
Views
3K
Current Events Board
Ten Thousan Marbles
Ten Thousan Marbles
C
  • Locked

Penn State just announced, back to full masking for all

Replies
23
Views
5K
Penn State Football
razpsu
razpsu
francofan

Renewed motion for in camera review of therapy notes

Replies
0
Views
843
Penn State Football
francofan
francofan
francofan

The Commonwealth's dubious claims in their proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law

Replies
128
Views
12K
Penn State Football
Mixolydian
Mixolydian
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back