"Judge wants files on Sandusky victims' deals with lawyers"
- Thread starter Ten Thousan Marbles
- Start date
He didn't get the power to subpoena though.
Sandusky lost, however, other requests for information and for the power to subpoena people as he pursues an appeal of his 45-count conviction for child sexual abuse.
Cleland said the case did not meet the standard of exceptional circumstances that is required at this point in Sandusky's case to obtain the type of information he wants.
The judge wrote that Lindsay "appears to equate 'exceptional' with 'high profile.' However, it is not the case that must be 'exceptional.' The term exceptional in this context does not refer to the nature of the case - its notoriety, publicity or public interest."
Instead, he said, the term refers to exceptional circumstances that require the court to intervene in the interests of justice. It's not a substitute for "customary investigatory techniques," the judge wrote.
Sandusky lost, however, other requests for information and for the power to subpoena people as he pursues an appeal of his 45-count conviction for child sexual abuse.
Cleland said the case did not meet the standard of exceptional circumstances that is required at this point in Sandusky's case to obtain the type of information he wants.
The judge wrote that Lindsay "appears to equate 'exceptional' with 'high profile.' However, it is not the case that must be 'exceptional.' The term exceptional in this context does not refer to the nature of the case - its notoriety, publicity or public interest."
Instead, he said, the term refers to exceptional circumstances that require the court to intervene in the interests of justice. It's not a substitute for "customary investigatory techniques," the judge wrote.
Well, not being able to subpoena AM is a serious blow to discovering the truth with respect to the C/S/S case. At this point I'm not all that concerned with Sandusky. But again, it looks as though Cleland is under someone's control.
