Bishop Finn, diocese indicted

  • Thread starter Thread starter HoraceX
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Look at last link and go to particular state -
Or you could ask your local police department…

In Missouri, clergy under law are required to report it.
 
estesbob said:
The Church is not above the law, but neither is it below the law. . I would be interested to see how many times charges have been filed against any other employer because of allegedly pornographic images on one of their employees computers.
Click to expand...
The Church is an indepedent state. She can take care of her own problems without the world’s intervention. This is happening because our leaders failed to do so. The Church is what uphold moral unlike the world. But because our leaders have failed to uphold the morals tought by them, now we are in a mess and governments have acquired the right to interfere on the Church affairs. This is not meant to be. The Church have prisons and judges to judge their own. This is a precedent change within the Church to turn their own to authority outside the Church.
 
Hopey said:
Look at last link and go to particular state -
Or you could ask your local police department…

In Missouri, clergy under law are required to report it.
Click to expand...
Actually they are not. Thank you very much for finding this, btw. (page 31 of the document) It seems my suspicion may be confirmed. The only one’s required to report child pornography is photo and print processors. This make sense as this would lead to the victim directly.
A commercial film and photographic print processor has knowledge of or observes any film, photograph,
Click to expand...
• videotape, negative, slide, or computer-generated image or picture depicting a child engaged in an act of sexual conduct.
 
Let us put a new spin on this. If a father has a son, or a man has a brother, and he finds out that this man is sexually attracted to children, what does he do? If he suspects that he has been sexually active with children, then of course reporting the family member is the difficult job that must be done, the right thing to do. However, if if is just attraction, as evidenced by a pornography collection, what would you do? I would get professional help, spiritual guidance and most importantly I would take the away opportunity to act on that attraction.
 
“Ministers including clergypersons, priests, rabbis, Christian Science practitioners, or other persons serving in a • similar capacity for any religious organization”

They do have the responsibility to report. He has entered “not guilty”.

His plea may be based on what he saw/knew, etc did not SEEM to indicate anything, but what troubles me it that he didn’t look far enough when he saw smoke. Do dioceses need IT specialists to help them when looking into computer and files?

As far as your new twist, if you know someone is has child pornography, you need to report it. It can be done anonymously in the Child Exploitation line/site and will go to correct authorities. You can help the person on the side.
 
pnewton said:
Let us put a new spin on this. If a father has a son, or a man has a brother, and he finds out that this man is sexually attracted to children, what does he do? If he suspects that he has been sexually active with children, then of course reporting the family member is the difficult job that must be done, the right thing to do. However, if if is just attraction, as evidenced by a pornography collection, what would you do? I would get professional help, spiritual guidance and most importantly I would take the away opportunity to act on that attraction.
Click to expand...
I think you’re on to something…

If I understand the law, it’s that its not illegal - in and of itself - to be a pedophile. It’s socially unacceptable, and certainly mentally damaging, but it isn’t illegal. The point of when pedophilia becoming illegal is when the one sexually attracted either possesses, distributes, or comes into contact with child pornography. Of course, sexual acts is also illegal. But being a pedophile by itself, without acting on those desires, is not illegal by law.

Now, the question is: did the pictures that Bishop Finn was shown constituted as child pornography?

If it’s possible, can anyone make a good, simple timeline on the events leading up to today? I think it’ll be easier to see how the events unfolded.
 
Had the Bishop reported the photo to the police especially based on what he knew from the principle of the school, and the police taken a report, then they would decide IF they needed to proceed further. It would not have come as a surprise at all to them. If the police dropped the ball, then the Bishop had full authority to restrict this priest based on what he had (which I think is what he did - but sometimes internal laws are stricter than civil).
 
Hopey said:
“Ministers including clergypersons, priests, rabbis, Christian Science practitioners, or other persons serving in a • similar capacity for any religious organization”

They do have the responsibility to report.
Click to expand...
Report what? I notice that this verb is presented so often without the required object. What is to be reported is suspected child abuse, *not *possession of child pornography, according to the law, (unless you are a film processor.) If you find child pornography on your son’s computer, do you report him? I bet most parents would say they would not, but would rather deal with the disordered desires.
 
Based on what the Bishop knew, the ONE picture at that time + disturbing behavior with children, THAT IS WHAT HE REPORTS! You can what you suspect and I think you are misreading that, those who have a duty to report are clergy too not just those in charge of printing/photography, etc.

You can make a report based on most anything, especially concerns. They will decide if it warrants looking into.

Again, had the Bishop done that, the other may have been discovered at that time.

As for your own child, if they are an adult, it could warrant turning them in.
 
Hopey said:
You can make a report based on most anything, especially concerns. They will decide if it warrants looking into.
Click to expand...
I know one** can** report anything. The question is why he is being criminally liable for not doing something that he must do.

Wouldn’t this be an odd twist if we find out that the bishop’s action actually prevents a pedophile in the making is separated from the opportunity before he acts?
 
I guess that is what the judge will decide or a jury.

It doesn’t seem he did all he could regarding this matter.

If they are to report what he knew, he will know for sure now.

On the whole, you think when you report something to the diocese that it will be handled correctly and they will look into it. It is clear, that wasn’t done well (re the many page letter from the principle).
 
BTW, it seems he wasn’t prevent (the priest) from acting on his perverted desires.

He took pictures of the child for lustful purposes. The damage has been done to what extent, the trial against the priest will tell.

IOW, he is already a pedophile in the strictest sense of the definition (in US pedophilia is the abuse of prepubescent children - and taking pictures (which is all we know now) is abuse).
 
Actually, what has been found and what he is charged with (priest), is more than one child now:

"The Reverend Shawn Ratigan, 45, was charged with 13 counts in all, including 11 counts of producing or attempting to produce child pornography and two counts of possessing it.

According to the federal indictment, Ratigan took or attempted to take sexually explicit photos of at least five young girls beginning in 2005, shortly after he was ordained, through the spring of 2011, before he was arrested.

The victims ranged in age from two to 12 years old.

The indictment alleges that some of the photographs, including those involving the 2-year-old child, were taken inside the choir loft of the church in Easton, Missouri where he worked."
 
Let us pray for all involved. :gopray2::sad_yes:That’s the best thing that we can do in this situation.

Threads like these concern me because they can sometimes result in gossiping and judging people. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t talk about it, but that we need to be careful when we do. I just want people to be cautious and prudent.
 
ExLibris said:
The specter of the Protestant Inquisition should not be forgotten.
Click to expand...
Well, it’s a specter indeed, since there never was any such thing. This was in some ways unfortunate, because civil governments (who handled persecution in Protestant countries, with Geneva coming the closest to the Inquisitional model) were typically harsher in their persecutions than the Inquisition, being concerned with social order and not with the conversion of the heretic :D.

Please let’s stop using “Inquisition” to mean “religious persecution in general.” It’s an abuse of language and history.

Edwin
 
CMatt25 said:
I’m not surprised it would be big news when an Apostolic successor in Christ’s one true Church is indicted.
Click to expand...
No surprrise since this is something that no one would ever expected. The CC has been the one to uphold the Truth and Morals, today she is on trial by the world for the same things she condemns.

Again, I say until our Leaders come into full repentance for having offended God in such a perverse way and change their ways, we can expect heavier chastisement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top