The charge relates to an accuser identified by prosecutors as Victim 7.
During testimony, the man said the offense happened in 1995 or 1996, but the unlawful contact with a minor statute didn’t apply until 1997, prosecutors told the judge overseeing the case. Three charges related to the man are still in effect, including attempted indecent assault.
Prosecutors also said they planned to call one more witness Monday before resting their case. The defense would then begin presenting its own witnesses although it remains unclear if Sandusky himself would testify.
Sandusky now is charged with 51 counts accusing him of sexually abusing 10 boys over a 15-year span. He denies any wrongdoing.
Prosecutors presented 20 witnesses in the first four days of testimony last week, including eight boys who said Sandusky abused them.
The gripping, sometimes graphic testimony included details about gifts and trips to Penn State games that prosecutors sought to tie to escalating physical contact that started out as harmless affection and morphed into forced sex acts.
Defense attorneys have already gotten approval to argue that letters and other acts of alleged grooming by Sandusky are evidence of a personality disorder.
Jurors have already heard Sandusky deny the abuse allegations, in the form of an audio recording of a stilted television interview Sandusky conducted shortly after his November arrest.
The defense has sought to show how the stories of accusers have changed over time, that they were prodded and coached by investigators and prosecutors, that some are motivated to lie by the hopes of a civil lawsuit jackpot, and to paint Sandusky’s interactions with children as misunderstood and part of a lifelong effort to help, not victimize, them.
In a recent court filing, Sandusky’s lawyers have asked the judge to allow them to put before jurors the out-of-court statements made by former Penn State president Graham Spanier and Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, two university administrators who are fighting criminal charges they lied to the Sandusky grand jury and did not properly report suspected child abuse. If permitted, that could help Sandusky undercut the credibility of a witness who says he saw Sandusky sexually abusing a yet-unidentified boy in a team shower more than a decade ago. The judge has not ruled on the request.
During cross-examination, Amendola pressed the accusers for dates and locations, details of their involvement with the kids’ charity Sandusky founded, arrests or drug problems, contacts they had with Sandusky in the years since the alleged abuse ended and the terms of representation deals with civil lawyers. At least six said they told incorrect or incomplete stories in early contacts with police, and three testified that some of the details only came back to them in recent years.
During jury selection Sandusky’s lawyers asked potential jurors about ties to a list of people who might be witnesses, including members of coach Joe Paterno’s family and Dottie Sandusky. It is unclear, however, which of them will take the stand.