The reason for it is that a judge will specifically articulate if sentences for multiple offenses are to be served consecutively or concurrently. If, during appeals, some of the charges are overturned, but others stick the remaining sentence will be adjusted accordingly. For example if somebody is found guilty on 10 counts, and sentenced to five years for each, it will be in reality a five year sentence if the judge directs that time be served concurrently. If on the other hand, they are ordered consecutively, it will be a 50 year sentence...but if the defendant successfully appeals two of them, it will become in reality, a 40 year sentence.
Forgot about concurrent sentencing....yep because I guess that’s just easier to figure anyway...
In my view, the sentences ought to be served consecutively.
Also, as pleased as I am with this sentence, I do wonder why Sandusky got 30-60 while this guy got 200.