<p>Today:</p>
<p>[Jerry</a> Sandusky hit with additional child sex-abuse<em>charges, is taken into custody by authorities</em> - NY Daily News](<a href=“College Sports News - New York Daily News”>Jerry Sandusky hit with additional child sex-abuse charges, posts bail Thursday after night in jail)</p>
<p>Sandusky has just been arrested again on additional sex abuse charges. </p>
<p>Here is the new grand jury presentment: <a href=“http://enews.attorneygeneral.gov/uploads/Sandusky-Presentment2-12-7-2011.pdf[/url]”>http://enews.attorneygeneral.gov/uploads/Sandusky-Presentment2-12-7-2011.pdf</a></p>
<p>I didn’t even think it was possible at this point, but it’s worse than the first one.</p>
<p>“On at least one occasion, the victim testified, he screamed for help, knowing that Sanduskys wife was upstairs, but no one ever came to help him.”</p>
<p>His wife either.</p>
<p>[U.S</a>. News - Alleged victim says cries for help from Sandusky basement went unheeded](<a href=“http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/07/9279239-alleged-victim-says-cries-for-help-from-sandusky-basement-went-unheeded]U.S”>http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/07/9279239-alleged-victim-says-cries-for-help-from-sandusky-basement-went-unheeded)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Can’t display the link for some reason.</p>
<p>Glad that he’s rearrested and now is more likely to stay in jail.</p>
<p>At least he’s off the streets. But, $250,000 bail? He’ll be out in no time. I think they’re hoping he kills himself. If this goes to trial, it’ll be a nightmare for PSU.</p>
<p>That he was allowed to take these boys to PSU football games, after 1998 and 2002, is nothing short of criminal.</p>
<p>I don’t think I’ve ever said anything like this, but this guy could do everyone- and himself- a big favor if he just kills himself.</p>
<p>I agree. Spare the victims the nightmare of testifying. Spare us the media frenzy that the trial will become. Spare the innocent at PSU any further punishment.</p>
<p>I was called for grand jury duty about 10 years ago. For those that don’t know, the grand jury’s job is to indict – find that there is enough evidence to take the case to trial. We had on average 5 cases a day. Most of them were drug-related or shoplifting. After the prosecution presented its case, we all then had to have a show of hands on whether to indict or not, on each of the charges, or ‘counts’, against the defendant. </p>
<p>We were left to discuss the charges before the prosecution would come back for the results. We always immediately started voicing opinions, and would sometimes get into spirited discussions. But we had one sexual abuse case. The victim came and testified. He was a good-looking teenager, and spoke the entire time with his head down. All I could think was , why are they putting him through this? </p>
<p>When we were left for our discussion, there was absolute silence for what seemed like a long time. No one ever said a word. When the show of hands was called, we all just raised our hands for every count.</p>
<p>horrifying, really just horrifying. These poor boys. And to think at least the one victim was screaming for help from the basement, while Sandusky’s wife was upstairs. Dear God. Sandusky is 67, I can only imagine the actual number of victims. I don’t think he’ll kill himself. He seems to believe he can get away with this.</p>
<p>Amendola obviously knew about these additional charges/victims last week when he let it slip out that if there are more accusers Sandusky may just have to plead guilty.</p>
<p>Well… maybe Amendola HAS been pushing (or hoping) for him to plead guilty. That would explain a LOT.</p>
<p>I wonder about the effect of these additional accusers. If one or two of them can be completely refuted, what does that do to the case as a whole? Note that for the two new ones, the grand jury doesn’t cite any testimony corroborating their stories.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I wonder if what’s going on here is a message to Sandusky that he’d better plead guilty if he doesn’t want his wife to be prosecuted as an accomplice.</p>
<p>^yes, you’re right performersmom</p>
<p>my impression of Amendola is that he would be fine making a name for himself off of this case as horrific as it is. so maybe he wants to feed the media frenzy for his own sick gain.</p>
<p>I don’t believe what I’m reading. Come on. Get a judge with no conflict of interest, if there is one and move on with the judicial process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My experience on grand jury was that very rarely did they bring in the victim or the defendant. It’s not a trial. The prosecution does as little as possible to ensure the indictment.</p>
<p>I guess I’m just a contrarian, but what, exactly, is the purpose of increasing Sandusky’s bail? Does anybody think that these new allegations make him more of a flight risk than he was before? It may be helpful to the prosecution to make him do another perp walk in handcuffs for the media, I suppose. He presumably has enough money to pay for a bond to cover this bail.</p>
<p>Hunt, I havea feeling this time they will make him actually post bail, unlike the first time.</p>
<p>Well, what is the point of increasing it that amount? If they’re going to increase it, make it meaningful. He can easily post that.</p>
<p>The electronic monitoring piece is new.</p>
<p>I agree the bail should be an amount he can’t easily post.</p>