UPDATE, June 26, 1:47 p.m.: Kane’s office released a statement that clarified the details of one of the two victims allegedly abused in 2009.

Kane’s office acknowledged that one of the victims to whom she referred during her press conference was actually “Victim 9,” for whom Sandusky was charged with abusing and who testified during his trial in June 2012, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

“We will confirm that of the two individuals that alleged abuse by Sandusky into the fall of 2009, one … reported abuse to [Office of the Attorney General] in 2012,” Kane’s office said, according to the paper. “The other victim was not originally (in the charges against Sandusky). We will not give any other identifying information, to protect their privacy. It is imperative, as prosecutors, that we do not re-victimize individuals.”

This comes after her office released a statement on Tuesday that defended her initial claims that both of the victims did not press charges.

“We don’t know that they exist,” former deputy attorney general Frank Fina, who prosecuted the Sandusky case, said in an interview with a CBS affiliate in regard to the alleged victims of whom Kane spoke. “And now a politician is accusing us of the most grotesque thing that you could possibly accuse somebody of.”

Multiple calls to Kane’s office for comment were not returned.

***

Attorney General Kathleen Kane revealed that two additional alleged victims of Jerry Sandusky came forward during the commonwealth’s investigation of him, saying that they were allegedly abused by him in the fall of 2009.

When Sandusky was convicted on 45 of 48 counts of child sex abuse, the victims to whom the decision related were abused before the alleged ones of whom Kane spoke. Kane said that these two additional alleged victims came to light in 2011 and did not wish to press charges against Sandusky because he was already in jail and his legal team’s appeals were failures. During Sandusky’s trial, there were reports that the prosecution had more alleged victims ready to come forward had he been found not guilty, but it’s unknown if these alleged victims are the ones Kane spoke of today. In October 2013, Penn State paid almost $60 million in settlements to 26 Sandusky victims. The news about the two new alleged victims was revealed during the question-and-answer segment of Kane’s press conference with lead investigator of the Corbett review Geoff Moulton, but was not included in the report.

One of the report’s faults with the investigation was that it should have issued a search warrant of Sandusky’s home based off the word of the first victim to come forward in 2008. Kane said that search warrant would have found corroborating evidence to make the case stronger.

“Had that happened, Sandusky would have been charged earlier, no doubt. Different prosecutors make different decisions,” Kane said. “I would have made different decisions. Logically speaking, if different tasks were taken, and Sandusky was in jail, with bail, if he was in jail, of course there wouldn’t be more victims.”

In a statement, State Rep. Scott Conklin said that “our worst fears have been confirmed” by this news, saying that Kane’s report lacks an explanation for why various delays were made in the case.

“There are holes and questions that remain unanswered,” Conklin said. “Today we took a look back to see if the legal system is working to make sure Pennsylvania children were, and still are, being protected under the fullest extent of the law.”

Kane said she wasn’t saying Corbett mishandled that, despite earlier calling some of his investigation’s missteps “inexcusable” and “unfathomable” — she said there wasn’t a sense of urgency to get Sandusky off the streets.

On the whole, the report said there was no evidence that Corbett’s investigation was influenced by electoral politics, which Kane claimed it was when she ran for Attorney General.

Penn State declined comment on the report.