PROSECUTORS MOVE FOR CHANGE OF VENIRE IN JERRY SANDUSKY CASE

Prosecutors in the Jerry Sandusky trial asked that jurors be chosen from a neighboring county for the Centre County Pennsylvania trial. Sandusky the former Penn State assistant football coach is charged with 52 counts of sexual assault involving ten teenage boys over a fifteen year period. The case has drawn international attention since it involves allegations that the legendary former Penn State Coach Joe Paterno failed to take proper action upon learning of the abuse.

The attorney general alleged in the change of venire motion that the extraordinary amount of publicity and the special relationship between the people of Centre County and the university makes it necessary to use a jury from out of county. But the attorney general did not move for a change of venue.

The problem with the attorney general’s motion is that the Sixth Amendment guarantees “an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Of course a defendant can waive the right to a jury or the right to a trial in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed. This occurrs relatively frequently when the defendant feels that he/she cannot get a fair trial in the jurisdiction. Its called a change of venue motion. But the Sixth Amendmend does not guarantee the government the right to change the venue. Nor does it allow the government to waive the defendant’s right to venue and venire. There is relatively little law on the subject.And it will be interesting to see what happens. But the clear language of the Sixth Amendment seems to work against the attorney general’s motion.