Prosecutors collected a "great deal" of "highly incriminating" evidence against Jerry Sandusky, including interviews with several other accusers, that was never introduced at his trial, according to a transcript of a closed-door June hearing released Tuesday.
Pennsylvania Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina did not elaborate on those additional potential victims during the June 26 conference but expressed concern that some information had emerged about them in news reports.
The continued leaking of secret grand jury information not only hurt Sandusky but threatened the sanctity of the state's investigation, Fina said, according to the transcript.
"I'm talking about incriminating information beyond that which was presented during the trial," Fina told Judge John M. Cleland. "There's a great deal of that in the discovery. Evidence that, for a variety of reasons, the commonwealth didn't utilize but was highly incriminating of Mr. Sandusky."
The transcript, unsealed by Cleland, is poised to become a central document in an ongoing judicial probe of leaks surrounding the Sandusky trial.
It outlines a meeting of Cleland, prosecutors, and Sandusky's defense team held just four days after a Centre County jury convicted the former Pennsylvania State University assistant football coach on 45 counts of child sex abuse.
That morning, NBC News broadcast an audio interview between prosecutors and Sandusky's eldest son, Matt, in which the man said his father repeatedly molested him in his youth.
Although Fina stopped short of accusing defense lawyers Joseph Amendola and Karl Rominger of leaking the tape, he insisted throughout the meeting that only three copies existed: one held by prosecutors, one in the custody of state police, and one given to Amendola.
Amendola denied that he had anything to do with the leak.
"The irony is, we have no reason to release that tape to the media, to have them play that tape in which apparently [Matt Sandusky] says that his father committed inappropriate acts with him," Amendola said, according to the transcript. "That's certainly not in our best interest to reveal that. It makes no sense."
Fina's cocounsel, Joseph McGettigan, responded in reference to NBC's report: "You also have no reason to comment on it, yet Mr. Rominger was making comments on the same interview that the tape was played."
Rominger shot back, implying prosecutors may have been behind another high-profile leak, a series of e-mails among several top Penn State administrators discussing how to respond to a 2001 molestation allegation against Sandusky.
Those e-mails were cited in former FBI Director Louis Freeh's scathing report last month as evidence of a conspiracy involving Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno, university president Graham B. Spanier, and others to cover up Sandusky's behavior.
The e-mails were first reported in the media and quoted at length in a June 28 CNN report that ran three weeks before the Freeh report was released.
"That's a significant concern," Fina responded, referring to the leaked e-mails. Raising another possible leaker to the list, he added: "Unfortunately, copies of those also are held by Penn State."
Cleland and the grand jury court have since barred attorneys on both sides from giving any discovery material to anyone outside their legal teams and ordered the lawyers to produce a list of any people who have received information from them to date.
Rominger has appealed that order, arguing that revealing whom he is sharing information with unfairly forces him to divulge his strategy for Sandusky's appeal. No decision has been made on that case.
Sandusky remains behind bars awaiting sentencing.