Charges dropped against St. Louis priest accused of abuse

[Micosil]

stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/charges-dropped-against-st-louis-priest/article_e33e15e1-c73c-5518-9d96-c57860776897.html

Criminal charges against the Rev. Xiu Hui “Joseph” Jiang – a Roman Catholic priest with close ties to Archbishop Robert Carlson who has been twice accused of sexual abuse – have been dismissed.

In a statement, prosecutors within the St. Louis Circuit Attorney’s Office said they had on Tuesday dismissed the charges against Jiang, saying only that “the state is unable to proceed at this time.”

“The statute of limitations in this case does not run (out) for another 35 years. The office remains hopeful that charges will be refiled in the future,” read the statement.

Lord knows how many other false accusations exist against other pious, innocent priests. What’s frustrating is that for another 35 years, this poor man has to be on his toes in case another bogus “case” resurfaces.

The old case from almost two years ago:

stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/criminal-charges-dropped-against-st-louis-priest/article_457a2e67-b367-5432-9bf2-dd9295ed7f03.html

ST. LOUIS • The dismissal of criminal charges filed against the Rev. Xiu Hui “Joseph” Jiang stunned many people Friday, including the St. Louis priest.

“He was crying so hard because he was so happy about the charges being dropped,” said Bill Hannegan, 56, a supporter whose family has been communicating with Jiang since his arrest last year on allegations of child endangerment and witness tampering.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Lord knows how many other false accusations exist against other pious, innocent priests. What’s frustrating is that for another 35 years, this poor man has to be on his toes in case another bogus “case” resurfaces.

The old case from almost two years ago:

You don’t know that this was a false accusation, only that there is not currently enough evidence to prosecute. I think you’re being quite uncharitable to the alleged victim. There’s a good chance they did in fact suffer abuse but just can’t prove it. It isn’t exactly out of the ordinary.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Some people are obsessed with running around and finding pedophiles. It makes them look cool and brings drama and something to talk about to what I’m guessing is an otherwise routine, boring life.

In the case of our Church, they delight in it because it makes their religion/philosophy look better, which is interesting for the following reasons:

1. If their outlook were so solid, why can’t it stand on its own merits
2. The gay “'marriage” supporters tread with caution since of many of the cases are same-sex abuses, but still can’t pass up the chance to attack the Church.

 

[SuperLuigi]

You don’t know that this was a false accusation, only that there is not currently enough evidence to prosecute. I think you’re being quite uncharitable to the alleged victim. There’s a good chance they did in fact suffer abuse but just can’t prove it. It isn’t exactly out of the ordinary.

So let me get this straight: we are to assume that he is guilty without any proof? Why?

People lie or over-exaggerate abuse all the time, especially since our secular culture rewards self-pity.

I think you’re being quite uncharitable to the alleged victim.

Discuss issues, not other users.

 

[agnes_therese]

So let me get this straight: we are to assume that he is guilty without any proof? Why?

People lie or over-exaggerate abuse all the time, especially since our secular culture rewards self-pity.

Discuss issues, not other users.

Why is that worse than assuming, also without any proof, that the alleged victim is lying?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I heard about this this PM. I go to noon mass at the Cathedral where he used to be assigned. Praise God.!!

 

[SuperLuigi]

Why is that worse than assuming, also without any proof, that the alleged victim is lying?

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

[qui_est_ce]

You don’t know that this was a false accusation, only that there is not currently enough evidence to prosecute.

If I make an accusation against you, would you consider that “not enough evidence,” or would you consider it false?

I think you’re being quite uncharitable to the alleged victim. There’s a good chance they did in fact suffer abuse but just can’t prove it.

Under American law, one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

It isn’t exactly out of the ordinary.

What do you mean by this?

Having said the above, the sex abuse scandal is certainly a horrific stain in Church history. My heart and prayers go out to the abuse victims and their families.

 

[Suudy]

Was it a story here? Or somewhere I read? I’m not sure, but the story was that a priest that was from a large family refused to hold or spend time with his plethora of nephews and nieces because of the hypervigilant, exaggerated fear that someone might see a young boy or girl on his lap and jump to conclusions. Or that some innocent family picture might end up on facebook with his face and a caption about priestly abuse.

It seems, at least in the eyes of the media, that priests are guilty until proven innocent. And even the priests have become afraid.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

Innocent until proven guilty.

Is the victim then also innocent of having made a false accusation?

 

[BlueEyedLady]

So let me get this straight: we are to assume that he is guilty without any proof? Why?

People lie or over-exaggerate abuse all the time, especially since our secular culture rewards self-pity.

Discuss issues, not other users.

I definitely don’t assume that he’s guilty. But lack of sufficient evidence for court does not make the accusor a liar, which is what I was defending against.

2 different people have accused him in unrelated incidents. I would be very uncomfortable branding them as liars.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Is the victim then also innocent of having made a false accusation?

In this case, the victim was Fr. Jiang.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

In this case, the victim was Fr. Jiang.

We don’t know that. The case being dropped doesn’t mean that the victim fabricated the story.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

If I make an accusation against you, would you consider that “not enough evidence,” or would you consider it false? Under American law, one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

What do you mean by this?

I’m quite familiar with the legal standards at play here. The standard in criminal cases is quite high. I’m uncomfortable calling two different kids liars because there was not enough hats evidence to meet that standard.

I don’t feel as though there’s enough information to make a judgement here.

 

[ucfengr]

You don’t know that this was a false accusation, only that there is not currently enough evidence to prosecute. I think you’re being quite uncharitable to the alleged victim. There’s a good chance they did in fact suffer abuse but just can’t prove it. It isn’t exactly out of the ordinary.

The “alleged victim” hasn’t had his name dragged through the mud. How about some compassion for the Priest who has? Where does he go to get his reputation back?

 

[qui_est_ce]

The “alleged victim” hasn’t had his name dragged through the mud. How about some compassion for the Priest who has? Where does he go to get his reputation back?

Well said. He is a good and holy man who was an inspiration to many.

One of the first things Archbiship Carlson did when he got here was to go after a child molesting priest.

He has no tolerance for it.

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

The vast majority of cops are not crooked.
The vast majority of black people are not criminals.
The vast majority of white people are not racists.
The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists.
The vast majority of Catholic priests are not child molesters.

Stop the labeling.

 

[qui_est_ce]

The vast majority of cops are not crooked.
The vast majority of black people are not criminals.
The vast majority of white people are not racists.
The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists.
The vast majority of Catholic priests are not child molesters.

Stop the labeling.

 

[Micosil]

You don’t know that this was a false accusation, only that there is not currently enough evidence to prosecute. I think you’re being quite uncharitable to the alleged victim. There’s a good chance they did in fact suffer abuse but just can’t prove it. It isn’t exactly out of the ordinary.

Friend, the “victim” here is not the boy, but the priest who has had to have his good name cleared not once, but twice. How do you know there’s a “good chance”? Is it because the gentleman involved wears a Roman collar and has “Father” in front of his name? How many more cases he’s involved in need to be thrown out until you start thinking, hey, maybe he is innocent?

I definitely don’t assume that he’s guilty. But lack of sufficient evidence for court does not make the accusor a liar, which is what I was defending against.

2 different people have accused him in unrelated incidents. I would be very uncomfortable branding them as liars.

But it doesn’t seem to make you uncomfortable to assume that there’s a “a good chance they did in fact suffer abuse”, even when both cases he’s been involved in have been dismissed.

In this case, the victim was Fr. Jiang.

We don’t know that. The case being dropped doesn’t mean that the victim fabricated the story.

I’m quite familiar with the legal standards at play here. The standard in criminal cases is quite high. I’m uncomfortable calling two different kids liars because there was not enough hats evidence to meet that standard.

I don’t feel as though there’s enough information to make a judgement here.

Let me make one thing very clear here. That this is a false accusation against the priest does not mean that the kids are necessarily liars; perhaps they were coerced into giving false testimony, maybe they were dragged into this against their own will some reason. This thread is not about me. It is about the news item I pasted, and Fr. Jiang.

The “alleged victim” hasn’t had his name dragged through the mud. How about some compassion for the Priest who has? Where does he go to get his reputation back?

The vast majority of cops are not crooked.
The vast majority of black people are not criminals.
The vast majority of white people are not racists.
The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists.
The vast majority of Catholic priests are not child molesters.

Stop the labeling.

Well said!

 

[JimG]

False accusations and even false convictions are not only possible but have occurred, especially in cases of media hysteria and prosecutorial zeal which overlooks evidence. This is especially true in cases of alleged child abuse. For a review of some particularly horrifying examples, read “No Crueler Tyrannies,” by Dorothy Rabinowitz, which includes a case of notorious child abuse at a day care center. No clergy involved here. But day care center workers were prosecuted, convicted, and sent to jail for crimes of which they were not only innocent, but which never even happened.