Central Pa. school district files motion to quash Sandusky subpoena

By Jon Campisi | May 1, 2012

A school district in central Pennsylvania attended by one of accused child molester Jerry Sandusky’s alleged victim’s is objecting to a subpoena drafted by the former Penn State University assistant football coach’s defense attorney.

David I. Lindsay, counsel for the Keystone Central School District in Lock Haven, Pa., filed a motion with the Centre County Court of Common Pleas April 30 seeking to quash a subpoena served upon Kelly Hastings, the superintendent of the school district attended by a young man identified only as Victim Number 1.

Sandusky’s defense team seeks certain educational records and other documentation related to the young man, who is one of Sandusky’s 10 alleged victims.

Sandusky, the former defensive coordinator for the Penn State Nittany Lions, stands accused of multiple counts of child sex abuse dating back to the 1990s.

The 68-year-old is currently on home confinement awaiting trial in June.

In his motion, Lindsay argues that some of the information sought by Sandusky’s defense attorney, Joseph Amendola, constitutes confidential and/or privileged information, such as communications between guidance counselor and student, and communications between a student and a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist.

Lindsay also wrote that disclosure of educational records held by public schools, such as the Keystone Central School District, is governed by federal law, which precludes the disclosure of educational records, other than directory information, without written consent from the student’s parents or the student, if he or she is over 18 years of age.

“Here, because the Defendant has failed to articulate a foundation as to the reasonableness, materiality and justiciability of his subpoena, it is not lawfully issued and therefore any corresponding request for educational records should be denied and/or quashed,” the motion states.

A copy of the criminal complaint against Sandusky was attached to the motion as an exhibit. It outlines the charges against Sandusky as they relate to Victim Number 1, who has not been publicly identified because the alleged crimes against him occurred when he was a minor.

Sandusky is charged with involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault and unlawful contact with a minor in relation to the alleged sex abuse involving Victim Number 1.

Prosecutors last week also stated in court filings that they objected to the subpoena, as well as three others issued by Amendola, on the grounds that they revealed identifying information of the victims, which has been barred by the judge overseeing the case.

The jurist, Common Pleas Court Judge John M. Cleland, has already instituted a gag order in the case that prevents those involved with the proceedings from commenting beyond what is in the public record.

Sandusky’s arrest this past November following a grand jury presentment shocked the Penn State community, which reveres collegiate football.

The school’s longtime coach, Joe Paterno, was fired after the scandal broke; he passed away shortly thereafter.

The scandal also led to the firing of the university’s president, and included criminal charges against two higher-ups with the university, both accused of reporting-related charges stemming from their purported knowledge of the alleged sex abuse supposedly perpetuated by Sandusky.

Sandusky has maintained his innocence, publicly commenting to news media that the charges are bogus.

His trial is expected to get underway with jury selection on June 5.

Want to get notified whenever we write about Penn State University ?

Sign-up Next time we write about Penn State University, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Penn State University

More News

The Record Network