Prosecution In Sandusky Case Say Key Testimony Is Incorrect

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

New developments in the ongoing child sex abuse case against former Penn State Assistant Football Coach Jerry Sandusky.

The prosecution is now saying that key testimony that an alleged assault was committed by Sandusky on Penn State`s campus in 2002 is incorrect.

Prosecutors say they`ve learned that alleged assault happened the year before.

Filing a motion in Centre County Court, prosecutors say the alleged assault by Sandusky of a boy reportedly witnessed by then-graduate student Mike McQueary happened in February 2001, not March 2002.

McGueary had told a grand jury he walked into a locker room shower at Penn State facility in March 2002 and saw Sandusky with a boy.

Attorney Peter Paul Olszewski has a long history in law, serving as a prosecutor, defense attorney and judge in Luzerne County.

He says this development could affect how believable McQueary`s testimony will now be seen.

“A witness`s credibility is something that has to be ruled on by the jury,” said Olszewski. “It`s going to be the weight that his testimony has.  His testimony is going to be admissible. The question is how much does it convince the jurors?”

A day after McQueary allegedly saw the assault in March 2002, he reportedly told then head football coach Joe Paterno.

Paterno reportedly told his superiors, athletic director Tim Curley and finance director, Gary Schultz.

The grand jury has charged Curley and Schultz with perjury and failing to report Sandusky to authorities.

Olszewski says the change in date of the alleged assault could affect the statute of limitations on the charges Schultz and Curley face.

“If it does has an effect on the statute of limitations, it`s on the failure to report charge,” said Olszewski. “It should have little to no bearing on the more important charge, the felony charge of perjury.”

Olszewski says it will be interesting to learn how prosecutors found the new date of February 2001.

“What evidence did they uncover, what new witnesses did they talk to?” said Olszewski. “And the other thing is, what`s Mr. McQueary`s reaction going to be?”