Jerry Sandusky cried "conspiracy" Tuesday as a judge sentenced him to 30 to 60 years in prison, a veritable life sentence, for sexually abusing 10 boys over the last two decades.
In a rambling statement, the revered coach-turned-reviled-convict blamed an overly dramatic accuser for sparking a media storm that led to his demise.
His attorney, Joseph Amendola, said they might have been able to produce evidence of the supposed conspiracy if only the judge, John M. Cleland, had given them more than seven months to prepare for trial.
The lack of preparation time will be a key component of Mr. Sandusky's appeal, but will it matter?
Case law in Pennsylvania varies on the discretion judges have in granting or denying continuances, the legal mechanism for delaying a trial.
In a decision last week, the state Superior Court ruled a judge should have granted a delay in a Blair County murder case because the defendant's newly hired attorney only had two weeks to prepare.
In a 2003 decision, the Superior Court found that a Luzerne County judge erred in allowing a trial to start without the defendant, absent because of a death in his family.
Mr. Sandusky's attorneys reiterated after his sentencing Tuesday that they would appeal his conviction and sentence. Under state law, Mr. Sandusky's attorneys must prove Judge Cleland abused his discretion by putting efficiency and scheduling above Mr. Sandusky's right to due process.
Even if Mr. Amendola and his co-counsel, Karl Rominger, had a year or more to prepare their defense, could they have overcome the overwhelming evidence of eight victims and other witnesses who said Mr. Sandusky routinely violated the youths he was entrusted to mentor?
Mr. Amendola first broached the conspiracy theory after Mr. Sandusky's canceled preliminary hearing last December, alleging some accusers may have colluded to frame the ex-coach in hopes for a monetary settlement from his charity, the Second Mile, and Penn State.
"I can think of $9 million right off the top of my head from the Second Mile, in terms of their assets, and I can think of countless millions when I think of Penn State and the deep pockets," Mr. Amendola said, adding that he wanted to review accusers' telephone records, email and other material. "What greater motivation could there be than money?"
But Mr. Sandusky's attorneys never introduced that material at trial and only touched on his theory.
They called a neighbor of the first accuser to go to the authorities, Victim 1, who told jurors of a 2008 conversation in which the boy purportedly boasted, "When this is over, I'll have a nice new Jeep." The neighbor, Josh James Fravel Sr., said the boy's mother told him around the same time that she wanted to buy a big house in the country, where her dogs "can roam free," once the Sandusky matter was settled.
Victim 1's mother denied Mr. Fravel's assertions. She acknowledged hiring an attorney after the allegations became public because she wanted to "keep the press away from my family." Mr. Fravel, she said, had given reporters her new address and attempted to blackmail her to keep the information private.
Judge Cleland, before sentencing Mr. Sandusky, dismissed the notion of a grand plot to convict the ex-coach - a harbinger of things to come in his court.
Contact the writer: msisak@citizensvoice.com, @cvmikesisak on Twitter