Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron found guilty

  • Thread starter Thread starter curious_cath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

curious_cath

Guest
Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron was found guilty.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/vatican-convicts-guam-archbishop-53794395

The case raises very serious questions. We are talking about charges from the very distant past, 30-40 years ago! The accusers are former altar boys, now in their fifties and sixties.

Does this case make sense to you?

Guam, a former Spanish colony has 80% Catholic population. It is an American territory now, with a heavy presence of the military on an island of about 180 thousand inhabitants…
 
But how to look at the evidence? How reliable are the recollections after 30-40 years? How to prove/ disprove the charges? How to make conclusions of guilty or not guilty?
 
Cardinal Pell is going through this at the moment in a commital hearing in Melbourne.

From the commital hearing, if he has a case to answer, on evidence, it will go to trial
 
Roseeurekacross said:
Cardinal Pell is going through this at the moment
Click to expand...
I have read about it. Cardinal Pell’s accusers do not seem honest people to me. The case is likely to fall apart. However, the course of the Archbishop of Guam took a different turn! How can you know, as it was decided, that Apuron;s accusers were reliable?
 
We must never say that those who give witness to their abuse are not honest. We must always listen.

Those children abused were not heard, not believed, dismissed.

Have you heard of the Australian Royal Commission into Historic sex abuse?

It is for the legal process to determine the guilt or innocence of Cardinal Pell
 
Roseeurekacross said:
We must never say that those who give witness to their abuse are not honest.
Click to expand...
I only said they do not seem that to me. It is my view, not a factual statements and not judgment. I respect the victims, but I also maintain the right to ask relevant questions about their veracity,
 
How can you make that judgement. . There are 50 witnesses in a closed sitting.
The public does not know the stories as yet
 
Last edited:
Please. You have no business with other people’s opinion. I did not state it as a claim. I surely hope Cardinal Pell will be exonerated.
 
Anyone on this forum has business to ask why an opinion is formed if another offers one.

Right now you are calling out those alleged victims as liars and detractors and really accusing them of trying to nail a Cardinal.

There is no charity in that.

Some of these alleged victims were victims of Risdale et al.
 
Even our opinions ought to be based on some evidence. For example, at least one of his accusers had accused another priest, but had not brought up any abuse by then-Father Pell at that time. That is the type of info that forms an opinion.

Saying the accusers seem untrustworthy without a shred of evidence is not an opinion but an emotional reaction, and thus saying it is slanderous.
 
Over a year ago,the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith chose Cardinal Burke to be sent to investigate this complex and difficult case in Guam, given his expertise in ecclesiastic tribunals and a cannon lawyer.
He travelled with two or three other cannon lawyers and experts.
He interviewed the witnesses among other things.
So it is a case than has been taken care of by the Vatican
This at least should give you an idea that it has been closely followed .
 
Last edited:
graciew said:
This at least should give you an idea that it has been closely followed .
Click to expand...
I do not doubt that. I respect the canonical background and experience of Cardinal Leo Burke. My question is theoretical. How can you infer guilt from events that happened 30-40 years ago? While utterly honoring the rights of the victims to speak up, what other circumstance can support the claims they make? Physical evidences or witnesses are non-existent after 30-40 years had passed.
 
I have no idea,curious cath.
That is why I mentioned that those who know about ecclesiastical tribunals and such complicated and delicate matters, have been investigating…
Since real people are involved ,we can always pray and entrust all to Our Lady.
 
Last edited:
Well if the alleged victims or any who have been abused and come up against opinions like yours, I pray your heart will soften enough to demonstrate sufficient empathy to listen and to not
curious_cath said:
Cardinal Pell’s accusers do not seem honest people to me.
Click to expand...
Accuse these people of ‘ not seeming honest’.

That’s slander. Painting people with the less then honest brush to discredit them.

And it’s not a purely theoretical question.

Watch and listen to see how this is determined in a court of law.
 
Last edited:
My opinion is based on an overall reading of this article:

www.abc.net.au

Cardinal Pell's lawyers to try to prove accusations are 'recent invention'

Cardinal George Pell's lawyers will question his accusers about when they first disclosed Australia's most senior Catholic had allegedly abused them, as they try to prove the allegations are a "recent invention", a court hears.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

Let me quote:

"Ms Shann said they did not intend to ask any of the complainants about the details of their abuse by other alleged perpetrators.

Magistrate Belinda Wallington will rule on whether to permit that line of questioning on Friday.

Cardinal Pell’s legal team were on Tuesday denied access to a report regarding one of the complainants when he came before a court.

Barrister Robert Richter QC said the report was tendered to the court by the alleged victim’s lawyers in an effort to mitigate his sentence, and for him not to have mentioned any allegations against Cardinal Pell at that time “speaks volumes”.

“It is critical to the credibility of those allegations … when it was entirely in [the complainant’s] interests to make the suggestion of sexual abuse by the Cardinal that no allegation was made,” he said."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top