Judge John Cleland may be the perfect choice to deliver swift justice in the high profile, extremely divisive Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse case.
So says Art Stroyd, former president of the Allegheny County Bar Association and a Pittsburgh-based attorney.
He has been close friends with Judge Cleland for 40 years, since their first days clerking together in federal court.
“I have always held him up as the benchmark of what a judge is, who is not just capable from a legal standpoint and as a legal scholar but has the (right) judicial temperament,” Stroyd said.
“He doesn’t bring in any personal bias in any decision. Judge Cleland is very careful in the way he follows precedent – he’s conservative in that sense. He’s not going to create any law or new precedent if he doesn’t have to.”
Judge Cleland established himself as a capable trial judge during his career in McKean County, where he serves as the senior judge. He’s prepared to preside over emotional and sensitive testimony, Stroyd said.
Jury selection begins Tuesday at 8:30 a.m. in the Sandusky trial at the Centre County Courthouse in Bellefonte.
In 2008, Cleland heard the “Cash for Kids” trial, in which two Luzerne County judges were charged with receiving kickbacks from juvenile detention facilities in return for harsh punishments handed down to juveniles so the aforementioned centers would stay full.
Emotionally-charged testimony fueled the tense atmosphere in the courtroom, Stroyd said, but Judge Cleland set the tone that kept counsel and media under control, which could re-manifest in Courtroom 1.
“He had a firm and diplomatic way. If there were emotional points being made, he never cut anyone off,” Stroyd said.
“He was always in control. There was never a question in anyone’s mind – he never let the media, witnesses or emotional facts turn the tables and get away from decorum.
“That is the hallmark of his career as a trial judge.”
So far.
On Monday, Judge Cleland made the controversial decision to deny five of the alleged victims’ requests to conceal their identities on the witness stand and use a pseudonym.
While many questioned the judge’s order, Stroyd said there’s no way his friend would sign any order without close scrutiny of the facts and a thorough assessment of each party’s argument. Judge Cleland isn’t one to succumb to the court of public opinion.
“I’m sure it was a difficult decision for him as I’m sure it is for any judge. There are pros and cons to both sides of that argument ,” Stroyd said.
From an entry level clerk to judge of the ‘trial of the summer,’ Stroyd said there are many who have faith in Cleland, the father from Kane, Pa., who lives on the farm next door to his grandsons.
“Judge Cleland is such a good selection to handle these kind of decisions. He doesn’t bring in any type of bias or undo emotion,” Stroyd said.
“He’s able to make those kind of hard decisions. He knows that they may not be popular, but Judge Cleland has never made a decision he doesn’t believe in personally.
“He’s a good choice to handle this case.”
