BELLEFONTE, CENTRE COUNTY, Pa. -- Jerry Sandusky returned to court Friday morning to continue his request to overturn his conviction related to the sexual abuse of young boys.
Sandusky's attorney argued there were numerous errors made during his 2012 trial that warrant another look.
The judge who presided over the hearing said he has to determine if each of the claims raised in the petition has any weight, and if the case would have had a different outcome were it not for those issues.
The judge also advised that the proceedings shouldn't be considered an appeal, rather that it's a post conviction relief petition.
Sandusky arrived at the Centre County Courthouse with hopes of having yet another day in court to prove his innocence.
Sandusky's attorney Al Lindsay said "we've got a lot of building blocks, a lot of pieces to the puzzle that we hope to put together to show that Mr. Sandusky by no means got a fair trial."
Lindsay questioned his first witness, Sandusky's former defense attorney Joseph Amendola, questioning how he handled the original case.
"We tried to withdraw from the case as counsel, saying we don't want to go through with the case when we know we haven't had time to properly prepare. So, what they're saying is what we said up front, it's just that people don't remember that," Amendola said.
Lindsay spent much of the morning taking issue with Amendola's role in arranging the infamous Bob Costas interview in which the former Penn State assistant football coach paused and repeated a question about being attracted to young boys.
"Jerry and I had talked about the opportunity to tell people 'I'm innocent, I'm not guilty, I intend to prove my innocence.' So, it wasn't as if I got involved in this case the week before and just threw him on the phone and said talk to Bob Costas," Amendola said.
Other witnesses called included a licensed psychologist and two Pennsylvania State Police troopers to address why some of Sandusky's accusers may have changed their stories from past statements given to testimony made in court.
"What we're trying to establish is that many of these witnesses were subject to what we call repressed memory therapy. Whatever they want to call it or not. What repressed memory therapy is where people say 'I don't remember something,' Lindsay said.
"Then they undergo therapy and then they remember things that they said they may have. I agree with Mr. Gilliam that's it's a very debunked practice," Lindsay said
Sandusky will return to court on May 11, 2017, with more witnesses to help is case. If at that time they wrap up testimony, the judge expects to make a decision within six months after that, or meet again on May 26th.