Victim in Jerry Sandusky Case Preparing to Recant Testimony

Court documents reveal that one of the individuals who had accused Jerry Sandusky, former Penn State defensive coordinator, of sexual abuse is preparing to recant their previous testimony. Known in court proceedings as R.R. or Victim 10, the individual has indicated a significant change in their stance.

Sandusky, aged 82, is set to appear in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, on September 8 for an evidentiary hearing. The hearing follows a judge’s approval for Sandusky’s request to examine evidence suggesting that Victim 10 has retracted or altered their trial testimony.

In a sworn affidavit dated June 30, 2025, Victim 10 disclosed feeling pressured into altering their account. The individual cited leading questions, investigative pressure, and psychological manipulation as factors influencing the development of their testimony.

“Misleading guidance during the process, especially from prosecutor Joe McGettigan,” was highlighted in the affidavit. McGettigan, deceased since December 2025, was the lead prosecutor in the case that significantly impacted Penn State and resulted in the dismissal of Joe Paterno, the celebrated football coach, back in 2011.

Even if Victim 10’s charges are dismissed, Sandusky’s release from prison remains unlikely. He is currently serving a sentence of 30 to 60 years for his 2012 conviction on 45 sexual abuse charges.

Sandusky’s attorneys presented a motion for trial, emphasizing Victim 10’s assertions about being misled regarding memory fragmentation and potential affirmation of unclear details. Victim 10 stated in the affidavit that they were led to believe that not testifying as expected by prosecutors could result in Sandusky escaping justice.

Within pretrial meetings, Victim 10 recounted a session lasting approximately six hours. During this time, the individual was consistently prompted to adjust their account until it conformed with the prosecution’s perceived expectations.

“My testimony might reflect a blend of memory uncertainty, professional persuasion, prosecutorial coercion, and personal vulnerability,” Victim 10 stated in the affidavit.

According to Sandusky’s legal filing, Victim 10’s estranged wife is prepared to testify that Victim 10 initially refuted claims of abuse by Sandusky.

Prosecutors from the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office dismissed the wife’s opinion as “irrelevant and inadmissible,” highlighting the substantial passage of time since the trial.

Despite receiving a $5.5 million settlement following a civil suit against Penn State, Victim 10 did not address whether they are retracting all allegations or just specific details. The disposition of the settlement money remains unclear.

Attorney Andrew Shubin, part of the legal team representing Victim 10 in the civil case, declined to comment on the ongoing matter and did not confirm continued representation.

Sandusky, who served on Paterno’s staff from 1969 to 1999, has consistently maintained innocence since the allegations arose. His nonprofit, The Second Mile, founded in 1977 and operational until 2011, was the platform through which Sandusky met numerous individuals later identified as victims.