NEWS-5740 Friday, August 12, 2016 The Wall Street Journal ...

NEWS-5740 Friday, August 12, 2016
The Wall Street Journal. Online Edition. Friday, August 12, 2016. -=-
The New York Times. Online Edition. Friday, August 12, 2016. -=- )))
00574001
Former Penn State Coach Jerry Sandusky Seeks a New Trial
Lawyer argues that missteps in the child sex abuse trial led to the coach's
conviction
By Kris Maher
The Wall Street Journal. Online Edition. Friday, August 12, 2016. -=- Aug. 11, 2016 1:50 p.m. ET 5 COMMENTS Four years after he was convicted of child sex abuse, former Penn State
assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is arguing that serious missteps by
prosecutors and defense lawyers are grounds for a new trial. Mr. Sandusky's current lawyer, Alexander Lindsay, has laid out a broad
argument for overturning the June 2012 conviction in court filings. He
compared the case, which shook the college-sports world, to a "modern day
Salem Witch Trial." A host of factors including a media frenzy that prejudged Mr. Sandusky
before the trial began "resulted in transforming an innocent man into one
of the country's most infamous 'child predators,'" Mr. Lindsay wrote. Judge John Cleland, who presided over the trial, has agreed to hear
testimony on several of Mr. Lindsay's claims, including that a prosecutor
lied at trial about not knowing the identity of an alleged victim and that
defense lawyers also knew the name but failed to call him to testify to
rebut abuse allegations. Mr. Lindsay also claims that prosecutors tainted
the grand jury process by illegally leaking information. The judge has scheduled three days of hearings, beginning Friday in Centre
County Court in Bellefonte, Pa. Wes Oliver, a law professor at Duquesne University, said that while courts
rarely grant new trials, the "substantial claims" by Mr. Sandusky's lawyer
put his chances "within the realm of possibility." Mr. Lindsay also claims that the eight young men who testified against Mr.
Sandusky made allegations of sexual abuse only after being pressured by
investigators or coached by therapists and attorneys, who later negotiated
settlements for the men with Pennsylvania State University. [pic] ENLARGE Jerry Sandusky being carried by Penn State players after the team defeated
Texas A&M in the Alamo Bowl, in San Antonio, Texas, in 1999. Photo: Eric
Gay/Associated Press Under Pennsylvania law, courts can grant a new trial for "ineffectiveness
of counsel" if a person who has been convicted can demonstrate a reasonable
likelihood that their lawyer's incompetence led to the verdict. Mr. Lindsay
argues that Mr. Sandusky's former lawyer, Joe Amendola, doomed the defense
with a series of blunders. Among them, according to Mr. Lindsay, was Mr. Amendola's telling the jury
in his opening statement that the evidence against his client was
"overwhelming"; allowing Mr. Sandusky to be interviewed by Bob Costas on
NBC with little or no preparation; and not calling Mr. Sandusky to testify
after promising jury members they would hear from him. During the trial, prosecutors played the Costas interview, in which Mr.
Sandusky hesitated before saying he wasn't sexually attracted to boys, and
they noted Mr. Sandusky didn't testify at his own trial. Mr. Amendola didn't respond to a request for comment. He has said he didn't
have enough time to prepare adequately for trial. Jeffrey Johnson, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney
General, which prosecuted the case under a prior administration, said the
office stands by the trial's outcome. "We feel strongly that Mr. Sandusky's
claims are without merit," he said. Mr. Sandusky was convicted on 45 of 48 counts related to child sex abuse in
June 2012. He is serving a 30-to-60-year sentence at a prison in western
Pennsylvania. In 2014, the state Supreme Court declined to review a far
more limited appeal by another attorney for Mr. Sandusky, who is 72. His claim of innocence continues to stir anger among victim advocates. "Every time this story is in the news and the facts of the case are
questioned, it's harmful to these young men who were incredibly brave and
came forward," said Jennifer Storm, Pennsylvania's official victim
advocate. One of Mr. Lindsay's arguments centers on the handling of an unidentified
alleged victim that an assistant football coach said he saw being abused in
a Penn State shower by Mr. Sandusky in 2001. Mr. Lindsay argues that the identity of the person referred to as Victim #2
at trial was known to both prosecutors and defense lawyers, and that Mr.
Amendola made a serious error by not calling the young man to testify to
refute the assistant coach, a key prosecution witness. He also argues that Mr. Amendola should have called for a mistrial when
prosecutor Joe McGettigan said during his closing argument that the
identity of the young man wasn't known. Mr. Amendola's former co-counsel Karl Rominger said in an affidavit that he
believes Mr. McGettigan lied about not knowing the alleged victim's
identity. "Everyone knew the identity of the second victim," Mr. Rominger
wrote. Mr. McGettigan said in an interview that he still isn't certain about the
identity of Victim #2. "The statement I made in closing was accurate then
and is accurate now," he said. He added, "I have no doubt about Jerry Sandusky's guilt and that he was the
most prolific pedophile that I've encountered." It isn't clear whether the judge will hear testimony on an allegation that
the attorney general's office leaked grand jury material in early 2011 to
locate additional victims. Mr. Lindsay has argued that the grand jury was then investigating abuse
allegations by a single young man and that prosecutors considered the case
weak. The leak resulted in a newspaper article and led investigators to
more accusers, while creating a "lynch mob" mentality in Centre County,
where Penn State is located, Mr. Lindsay alleged in a filing. Write to Kris Maher at kris.maher@wsj.com Copyright 2016. Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. #
00574002
Trump Defends Tying ISIS to Obama
Republican presidential candidate stands by remarks calling Obama the
'founder' of ISIS and Democratic rival Hillary Clinton the 'co-founder'
By Michelle Hackman
The Wall Street Journal. Online Edition. Friday, August 12, 2016. -=- Aug. 11, 2016 10:11 p.m. ET 4 COMMENTS Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump defended his remarks calling
President Barack Obama the "founder" of ISIS and Democratic rival Hillary
Clinton the "co-founder." Mr. Trump first made the charge at a rally Wednesday in Florida, claiming
the terror group, also known as Islamic State, or ISIL, "honors" Mr. Obama.
In fact, the Obama administration has launched numerous attacks on ISIS in
Iraq and Syria, harming the group. Radio host Hugh Hewitt asked Thursday if he meant to say that Mr. Obama
indirectly created ISIS by creating a power vacuum in Iraq when he pulled
most troops from the country. "No," Mr. Trump replied. "I meant he's the
founder of ISIS. He was the most valuable player." When Mr. Hewitt said Democrats would seize on the "founder" comment to
attack Mr. Trump's foreign policy views, Mr. Trump repeated that he hadn't
erred. "Everyone's liking it," he said. In a statement, Clinton adviser Jake Sullivan said: "This is a false claim
from a presidential candidate with an aversion to the truth and an
unprecedented lack of knowledge." A White House spokesman declined to comment. Asked in a CNBC interview how he plans to close the gap in recent polling
that shows him falling behind in critical swing states, Mr. Trump said he
didn't plan to change his campaigning style. "Just keep doing the same thing I'm doing right now," he said about his
efforts to win the race. "And at the end it's either going to work, or I'm
going you know, I'm going to have a very, very nice long vacation." Copyright 2016. Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. #
00574003
Germany Outlines New Security Measures After Recent Attacks
Quicker deportations and enhanced surveillance among ideas proposed by
interior minister
By Andrea Thomas
The Wall Street Journal. Online Edition. Friday, August 12, 2016. -=- Updated Aug. 11, 2016 11:13 a.m. ET 28 COMMENTS BERLIN-The German government on Thursday set out a raft of proposals to
tighten domestic security after Islamist attacks by refugees rocked the
country earlier this summer. The proposed measures range from expedited procedures to deport convicted
foreigners, rejected asylum applicants and those believed to pose a risk to
public security to increased personnel and equipment upgrades for police
and security agencies. German Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière, who outlined the measures,
said showing support for terrorism should be banned and dual-passport
citizens who joined terror groups abroad should be stripped of their German
citizenship. "I take note of many citizens' concerns that the high number of refugees
might pose additional risk to Germany's security," said Mr. de Maizière.
"We can't deny that we have indications there are terrorists among
refugees." Other proposals included stepped-up efforts to detect Islamist radicals
among asylum applicants and more video surveillance in public spaces-still
a rare sight in privacy-obsessed Germany. "Many people... are worried about more attacks," said Mr. de Maizière at a
news conference. "Nobody can guarantee absolute security, but we have to do
all we can." Recent opinion polls show that fears of attacks are rocketing across a
country that, until this summer, had been spared a major Islamist atrocity.
Yet not all of the proposals are expected to become policy immediately.
Some, such as video surveillance, are largely in the remit of the country's
regional governments. Others would have to be negotiated between the
government's coalition partners and then pass parliament before they become
law. Furthermore, proposals such as surveillance and the stripping of
citizenship would face steep co