Former Vatican ambassador hospitalised ahead of child abuse trial

  • Thread starter Thread starter weller2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

weller2

Guest
A former archbishop and papal ambassador to the Dominican Republic fell ill and was taken to hospital ahead of the opening of his trial on Saturday for alleged child sex offences, a Vatican official said.

Jozef Wesolowski, a former archbishop and “apostolic nuncio”, or Vatican ambassador, in Santo Domingo, is accused of paying boys to perform sexual acts, of downloading and buying paedophile material, and offending Christian morality.

Under arrest in the tiny Vatican state since last September, Wesolowski complained of feeling ill on Friday and was sent to an Italian intensive care unit, the court heard. Officials did not give any further information about his condition.

The trial, seen as an important test of Pope Francis’s drive to clean up the Roman Catholic Church, opened regardless, with the court reading out a list of five charges against the 66-year-old Polish national.

The hearing was then postponed until a future date.

Wesolowski is the first high-ranking Catholic official to stand trial in the Vatican on such sex charges and the case is being closely watched by victims of priestly abuse, who have accused the Vatican of repeatedly hushing up previous scandals.

In an effort to make the clergy accountable for their actions around the world, Pope Francis has re-written Church rules, opening the way for Saturday’s trial.

…]

He faces up to eight years in jail if found guilty of abusing a minor and two years for possession of child pornography. These sentences could be lengthened if the small Vatican court decides there are extenuating circumstances.

in.reuters.com/article/2015/07/11/vatican-abuse-trial-idINKCN0PL05120150711
 
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty , but if/when guilty …
To me it really doesn’t matter how the person looks like or who (s)he is ,
child abusers are really sick in the mind , and need to be punched for their crime http://50.22.108.14/images/icons/icon4.gifhttp://50.22.108.14/images/icons/icon4.gif
Do we, then, punish everyone who is sick, in the mind or otherwise?

Doesn’t “sick” absolve or mitigate, at least to some extent, the culpability of those who come down with the sickness?

I am confused.

Either the person is culpably guilty because “responsible” or not fully so because “sick.”

:confused:
 
Do we, then, punish everyone who is sick, in the mind or otherwise?

Doesn’t “sick” absolve or mitigate, at least to some extent, the culpability of those who come down with the sickness?

I am confused.

Either the person is culpably guilty because “responsible” or not fully so because “sick.”

:confused:
I think you’re focussing solely on the retributive aspects of punishment while ignoring its other justifications, such as deterrence and incapacitation, culpability notwithstanding.
 
Do we, then, punish everyone who is sick, in the mind or otherwise?
Of course not 🙂

My thoughts are on such sickies:
When caught , they simply try to minimize the situation ,
saying they are the victim , and that is so sick , so …
Such guys do know it is wrong , but still they continue with their “game” :banghead:
Why :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top