Full Breakdown
Jerry Sandusky Withdraws Recantation Request in Latest Post-Conviction Hearing
9/9/2026, 3:01:22 AM
Remote Hearing and Shift to Federal Court
Former Penn State assistant coach Jerry Sand Sand appeared by video link from Laurel Highlands state prison during a Centre County hearing. On counsel’s advice, he and his lawyers withdrew the request to present a recanted testimony from accuser “R.R.” and will instead pursue a new-trial petition in federal court. Judge Maureen Skerda allowed the hearing to continue and dismissed the post-conviction relief request. Sandusky’s defense, led by Jerry Russo, noted that courts view witness recantations as “inherently unreliable,” prompting the pivot to the federal system.
Background & Context
Sandusky was convicted on 45 counts of sexual abuse on June 22, 2012, receiving a 30-to-60-year sentence. He has filed three state-court petitions for a new trial, all denied, and continues to assert his innocence. The scandal led to the firing of head coach Joe Paterno and to Penn State paying over $100 million in settlements to victims. One recanting accuser, identified in filings as Ryan Rittmeyer (Victim No. 10), previously received a $5.5 million civil settlement, with $2 million allocated to his attorneys.
Data & Statistics
Official Statements & Responses
- Jerry Sandusky told CNN, “Every one of those issues can be heard together by judges who have not already made up their minds about me.”
- The Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General called the alleged recantation “highly suspect.”
- Former prosecutor Joseph McGettigan argued the recantation was “induced” and not credible.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Verbatim Quotes
- “I'm making this decision on advice of counsel,” — Jerry Sandusky
- “I now regret my role in facilitating what I have come to view as a deeply flawed prosecution,” — Ryan Rittmeyer
What’s Next
Sandusky’s team plans to file a federal petition seeking a new trial, arguing that federal judges have not previously ruled on his case. No filing date has been disclosed. The outcome will depend on whether a federal court will entertain the claim that prior state proceedings were compromised.
