P
pnewton
Guest
Even the victims? Even the parents? Do you think these who failed to report this abuse to the police should also serve prison time for convering up their, or their children’s abuse?
- Status
S
Seeker1961
Guest
You know exactly what I meant by that comment, but like many here you are more interested in defending the Priests and Bishops than ever even speaking about the victims. I see calls for prayer for the Priest going to prison but I don’t see any calls for prayer for the young boys who were victimized because of the actions he took. Whether it was on orders from the Bishop or not-he still transferred Priests that he KNEW were abusing children instead of contacting the authorities. I see comments about how few abusers there are in the Catholic church as compared to the rest of society. WHO CARES??? If there is even ONE Priest abusing ONE child and ONE Bishop transferring him quietly rather than turning him over to the police it is ONE TOO MANY.
Good grief, have we completely lost our sense of right and wrong in our zeal to protect the image of the Church???
Christ banished the moneychangers from His temple-what do you think He would want us to do to these people who abused children or allowed abusers to continue their heinous acts??
T
trapper1
Guest
I think I was the one that posted “comments about how few abusers there are in the Catholic Church as compared to the rest of the society.” I was merely attempting to put the global issue in perspective. I was not attempting to downplay anything. I agree with everything you wrote above.
Any bishop that transferred an accused priest instead of turning him over to authorities, if not criminally liable, should be shipped off to a poor mission in Africa where he can learn/re-learn what it means to imitate Christ. This men are successors to the apostles…they need to be held to a very high standard indeed.
P
pnewton
Guest
Yes, I knew what you meant. I wish to point out that what you are wanting is not equitable punishment of the clergy, but greater punishment of the clergy. You expect a greater punishment to descend on the third hand report of a church leader than descends on the first hand report to the parent. In this case, the punishment even exceeds that of the actual offender. I have a diffult time seeing this as justice, but then I never did like when punishment was disproportional based on race, color or creed.
.
That is because that is not what this thread is about. This occurs many other places here and throughout the Church.
No, nor have I lost perspective due to the emotional content of the subject.
He pretty much said what he thought about the first group. As to the second, he warned all of us about trying to usurp his judgement seat.
Z
zab
Guest
Did you know:
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
For the most part, whether it’s the Catholic Church or an educational institution where a sexual predator worked, they followed the protocol of the day as advised by doctors, lawers and law enforcement.
Today, we’re prosecuting the leaders of those organizations with today’s standards, in that all criminal acts against minors must be reported to the police.
It’s the right thing to do, but it wasn’t the way it was handled in the past, based on the experts in the field of law enforcement and psychology.
The Penn State scandal is an example. The leaders are punished for following the advice of lawyers and law enforcement officials at the time, and now good names are ruined as a result of enforcing today’s standards on them.
People mentioned the parents, yes, why didn’t the parents go to law enforcement when their child was sexually molested by a priest or teacher ? Where is their accountability?
The reason they’re not mentioned is because they don’t have deep pockets of money to be made by trial lawyers chomping at the bit.
No child should ever be abused, but the fact that today a child won’t have to live a life in the school yard with the negative stigma that past ages had to endure, is a reason why we can prosecute abusers.
Jim
Today, we’re prosecuting the leaders of those organizations with today’s standards, in that all criminal acts against minors must be reported to the police.
It’s the right thing to do, but it wasn’t the way it was handled in the past, based on the experts in the field of law enforcement and psychology.
The Penn State scandal is an example. The leaders are punished for following the advice of lawyers and law enforcement officials at the time, and now good names are ruined as a result of enforcing today’s standards on them.
People mentioned the parents, yes, why didn’t the parents go to law enforcement when their child was sexually molested by a priest or teacher ? Where is their accountability?
The reason they’re not mentioned is because they don’t have deep pockets of money to be made by trial lawyers chomping at the bit.
No child should ever be abused, but the fact that today a child won’t have to live a life in the school yard with the negative stigma that past ages had to endure, is a reason why we can prosecute abusers.
Jim
S
Seeker1961
Guest
Please tell me you don’t want to see the parents of an abused child led off in handcuffs.
How many times did we read stories of victims who feared telling their parents what “Father” or “Coach” or “Teacher” was doing because the parents liked or respected that person so much? These children were also told by their abusers that nobody would ever believe them because who would believe them over an authority figure like a Priest or Coach?
It also concerns me that the impression is that the only reason these cases are being brought to light is because of the “deep pockets of money” available. No amount of money will ever heal these children, or erase what happened to them. However, it will serve as a reminder to anyone that such behavior will cost you and your organization. We use money, because for most people that is what is going to hurt them the most.
Z
zab
Guest
Please tell me you don’t want to see the parents of an abused child led off in handcuffs.
Yeah, I think that is what he wants to see
C
clem456
Guest
P
pnewton
Guest
Am I the only one that sees the potential for a double standard here? Priests are not the only people required to have moral courage, nor are they the primary caretakers of children. Do parents not have the responsibility to all children, not just their own?
I am very understanding with the moral difficulty facing parents. On the other hand, I am not the one clamoring for blood of those that made some of the same choices some parents do. Again, I fall back to the truism, by whatever measure you judge, by that you will also be judged.
Z
zab
Guest
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Seeker
Fact is, the reason why most of these cases weren’t prosecuted, was because the parents, refused to expose their child to the public, knowing the torment they’d possibly receive from their peers. As a result, the civil authorities wouldn’t bother because they knew they couldn’t get a conviction. As time and time again this was the case, the civil authorities did nothing and the perverts management merely took them out of service until they were given a clean slate by psychiatrists.
The problem I’m having with the Monsignor now being led off in hand cuffs, is that he is being judge by today’s protocol, for what happened under a different protocol, and he is the fall guy for his Bishop, who had to approve the reassignments of offending priests.
Just as in the Archdioceses of Boston, the documents show that the psychiatrists for offending priest gave approval for reassignment after than had been treated.
Heck the attorney for the victims in the Archdioceses of Boston, was the same authority who settled some of the same cases 20 years before, with the agreement that all sides would remain silent. He then accused the Church for being silent on the cases of abuse.
Why wasn’t the attorney not sued for helping to protect sex abusers through his silence?
The thing is, today cases of sex abuse where there are no deep pockets, are merely handed over to the civil authorities to handle. If there are deep pockets, then there is also a law suit. Lawyers don’t work for free.
I remember back in the late 60’s, a girl in my parish was working at a convenient store part time. A man entered the store just before closing and dragged her out into the woods, tied her to a tree and raped her multiple times. When the cops arrested the guy, they didn’t want to prosecute unless the girl testified. There was a tug of war between the girls parents and the DA, but eventually she testified, and of course it made it out into the public. She was so traumatized by the rape, but added to that was the public stigma. She suffered from a nervous breakdown. The parents eventually sent or off to a private school where her rape was not known, so she could finish her high-school education.
Today there are rape shield laws which protect the identity of the victim, but even when the identity gets out, the victim doesn’t suffer as they did in the days when society was more uptight about sex in general, never mind rape.
Jim
No I don’t, but they’re as culpable as the authorities who we now see being led off in handcuffs.
Fact is, the reason why most of these cases weren’t prosecuted, was because the parents, refused to expose their child to the public, knowing the torment they’d possibly receive from their peers. As a result, the civil authorities wouldn’t bother because they knew they couldn’t get a conviction. As time and time again this was the case, the civil authorities did nothing and the perverts management merely took them out of service until they were given a clean slate by psychiatrists.
The problem I’m having with the Monsignor now being led off in hand cuffs, is that he is being judge by today’s protocol, for what happened under a different protocol, and he is the fall guy for his Bishop, who had to approve the reassignments of offending priests.
Just as in the Archdioceses of Boston, the documents show that the psychiatrists for offending priest gave approval for reassignment after than had been treated.
Yeah, we hear about this too, where the victim kept the information from everyone for a long time. However, we also have the cases where the victims and their parents went to the pastor and Bishop, to report the case, but when asked if they wanted the case brought into court, they refused.
Yup, some were told this, others didn’t buy it and told their parents/civil authorities and Bishop about it, only to have nothing happen. The perverts presented this to the victims, to show that no one would believe them.
In many of the cases this is the case.
Heck the attorney for the victims in the Archdioceses of Boston, was the same authority who settled some of the same cases 20 years before, with the agreement that all sides would remain silent. He then accused the Church for being silent on the cases of abuse.
Why wasn’t the attorney not sued for helping to protect sex abusers through his silence?
The thing is, today cases of sex abuse where there are no deep pockets, are merely handed over to the civil authorities to handle. If there are deep pockets, then there is also a law suit. Lawyers don’t work for free.
That’s right and it’s a good thing that in today’s world, rape victims don’t suffer from being stigmatized as victims in the past did.
I remember back in the late 60’s, a girl in my parish was working at a convenient store part time. A man entered the store just before closing and dragged her out into the woods, tied her to a tree and raped her multiple times. When the cops arrested the guy, they didn’t want to prosecute unless the girl testified. There was a tug of war between the girls parents and the DA, but eventually she testified, and of course it made it out into the public. She was so traumatized by the rape, but added to that was the public stigma. She suffered from a nervous breakdown. The parents eventually sent or off to a private school where her rape was not known, so she could finish her high-school education.
Today there are rape shield laws which protect the identity of the victim, but even when the identity gets out, the victim doesn’t suffer as they did in the days when society was more uptight about sex in general, never mind rape.
Jim
Z
zab
Guest
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
clem
When they refused, there was nothing the DA could do to get a conviction.
In fact, there were recent cases of sex abuse of children thrown out of court, because they testified in private without facing the accused, as guaranteed in the bill of rights.
The accused has a right to face the accuser in a court of law. If the accuser refuses to face the accused, the DA’s will refused to prosecute the case.
Joe Paterno didn’t see the abuse, he was told about it, from a witness who has changed his story since.
It’s nice of us to say, oh he should’ve called the cops, but that’s in today’s mindset, not when the cases in question were taking place.
Keep in mind, the majority of the sex abuse cases were not cases of pedophilia, but young gay priest having sex with young teen boys.
Jim
People were prosecuted if the victim agreed to prosecute and take the witness stand.
When they refused, there was nothing the DA could do to get a conviction.
In fact, there were recent cases of sex abuse of children thrown out of court, because they testified in private without facing the accused, as guaranteed in the bill of rights.
The accused has a right to face the accuser in a court of law. If the accuser refuses to face the accused, the DA’s will refused to prosecute the case.
He reported it to his superiors, who were suppose to handle it from there.
Joe Paterno didn’t see the abuse, he was told about it, from a witness who has changed his story since.
It’s nice of us to say, oh he should’ve called the cops, but that’s in today’s mindset, not when the cases in question were taking place.
A lot has changed in 15 years when it comes to reporting and prosecuting these cases. We still don’t have all the facts on what the administration at Penn State actually did or didn’t do. When the story first broke, it was reported that the case was reported to the then DA, who did nothing. Is he being prosecuted today?
It’s not that they tolerated sexual abuse of minors, but rather, they followed the protocol as advised by civil authorities, lawyers and psychiatrists.
Again, under the law, if the accuser refuses to take the stand in a court of law against the accused, the case won’t be prosecuted. Parents who refused to put their kids through the mill of the justice system, had to settle for whatever happened to the pervert. In the case of Catholic priests, the Bishops generally followed the advise of the doctors and lawyers and sent the priest for treatment, and only reassigned them after they were given a clean slate by the doctors. It stunk buy again, we have the hindsight of 20-30 years and also we now know that pedophiles can never be trusted around children.
Keep in mind, the majority of the sex abuse cases were not cases of pedophilia, but young gay priest having sex with young teen boys.
Jim
S
St_Donatus
Guest
Z
zab
Guest
C
clem456
Guest
- Status