Media MonsterNCAA FootballSports & Politics

Pulitzer-Winning Sandusky Reporter Admits To Helping “Victim 6″ In Investigation

Ever since that grand jury report came out — that cringe- and anger-inducing grand jury report — the prevailing thought on former Penn State assistant coach and alleged child rapist Jerry Sandusky was that he was guilty. It’s understandable: the nature of the alleged crimes was so shocking, the sheer number of accusers so staggering, that the gut reaction from any sane person following the case was that Sandusky was not only guilty, but that he should suffer for what he (allegedly) did.

Unfortunately, that completely understandable human reaction gave Sandusky’s defense team a play on the final day they presented their case to a jury in Bellefonte, PA, where Sandusky is currently on trial for 51 criminal counts of sexual abuse related to 10 boys over a 15-year span.

Sara Ganim, the Pulitzer-Prize-winning reporter for the Harrisburg Patriot-News, who was the first to report a grand jury was investigating Sandusky, admitted today to giving a member of one alleged victim’s family contact information for an investigator to help them make their case. In doing this, though, Ganim opened the door for Sandusky’s lawyers to attack. Why? His defense has come out as saying he has not been put through a fair legal process, and institutions like media organizations have always assumed his guilt while ignoring potential evidence of his innocence.

This trial brings on such a high level of emotional attachment that it is nearly impossible not to let some subconscious opinion influence the way you think about Sandusky’s innocence or guilt. Take Ganim: the work the 25-year old reporter has done is extraordinary. But no one has been closer to this story and more in the know than Ganim. No one else has had to endure reporting on the excruciatingly gut-wrenching details as much as she has. You may think it’s inappropriate for Ganim to interject herself into the story, but ask yourself this: had you been in the same position, would you have been inclined to help one of the families affected by Jerry Sandusky?

As inevitable as it is to be affected by the details of the case, though, it results in a major issue for the trial. The bedrock of our country’s legal system is due process, and the idea of being innocent until proven guilty. If Sandusky’s lawyers can convince the judge Sandusky took the stand and was already guilty in the eyes of the jurors, it will be provide the defense with considerable leverage.

It’s far from just Ganim: many media items have only sped along the overwhelming presumption of Sandusky’s guilt. There was Bob Costas’ interview on NBC. The haunting accounts in the testimonies of victims that have taken the stand during the trial. And just about every radio host, blogger, or media member with an opinion (including us) has painted a picture of a guilty Sandusky to some degree.

It comes down to emotions. The people who will control Jerry Sandusky’s fate feel them, too. This story, and trial, are too hardwired with raw passion and opinions not to raise questions of objectivity. You can’t just turn your human-ness on and of like a faucet, and as hard as anyone either covering this case or deciding it might try to look at it with a purely objective eye, that human-ness may very well affect a jury’s ability to determine Jerry Sandusky’s guilt or innocence.

[Via MSNBC]

Follow Evan Sporer