Priest gay porn probe in limbo: Parents told inquiry ‘inconclusive’

  • Thread starter Thread starter pepipop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pepipop said:
belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/priest-gay-porn-probe-in-limbo-parents-told-inquiry-lsquoinconclusiversquo-as-cleric-takes-leave-16148098.html

Unfortunately, it would be difficult to prove if the offending material had been loaded onto the USB, deliberately although I would have thought a date and time of the upload would have been available, which coudl have narrowed it down.
Click to expand...
It’s safe to assume the journalists covering this story are largely ignorant of how computers work. Therefore we can assume we are simply not getting the whole story about what really happened. (But ain’t that the truth will secular news coverage of so much these days?)

The article’s statement, “16 indecent images of men were displayed during a Powerpoint presentation”, doesn’t really say much about what happened, or how. In fact, it technically doesn’t even say:
  • whether the images formed part of the PowerPoint Presentation, as though someone pranked Father by secretly replacing his pie charts with smut,
  • or if they were just thumbnails of files displayed when the folder containing the PPP was opened, as though Father, God forbid, had been saving pornographic images for himself and unwittingly saved them to the same folder as the presentation, so that they accidentally got displayed en route to finding the presentation to double-click on it.
All told, you are right, there would be all kinds of evidence left behind that would tell us how they go there in the first place.
 
Rainaldo said:
It’s safe to assume the journalists covering this story are largely ignorant of how computers work.
Click to expand...
Would it not be safer to assume that either the priest in question and/or the people who examined the computer for the Church authorities are ignorant of how computers work given that they have had access to this computer and the media has not? 🤷

Would it not also be safe to assume that you are showing an unnecessary bias against the media which has only reported on an incident it had no hand, act or part in creating? 😉

Would it also be safe to assume ‘shooting the messenger’ for bring news - as opposed to comment - is always the correct response? 😦
 
Cormacnl said:
Would it not be safer to assume that either the priest in question and/or the people who examined the computer for the Church authorities are ignorant of how computers work given that they have had access to this computer and the media has not? 🤷

Would it not also be safe to assume that you are showing an unnecessary bias against the media which has only reported on an incident it had no hand, act or part in creating? 😉

Would it also be safe to assume ‘shooting the messenger’ for bring news - as opposed to comment - is always the correct response? 😦
Click to expand...
Journalists as a whole are gaining a reputation not only for being biased but also for being ignorant. People who follow religion news as reported by the secular media are already thoroughly familiar with the trend, and people who follow science news appreciate it just as much. Given what kind of education is required to become a journalist, no one should be surprised at this.

As for your objections, I’m having trouble coming up with likely scenarios that justify them. The first one I simply cannot make sense of. Is there a misplaced “not” somewhere? As for the second, I am mystified that you would think the media is capable of accurate and knowledgeable reporting *if and only if *the journalist caused the reported events to happen. What do you really mean? The third accuses me of shooting the messenger and I have no idea what that has to do with what I said.
 
Rainaldo said:
It’s safe to assume the journalists covering this story are largely ignorant of how computers work. Therefore we can assume we are simply not getting the whole story about what really happened. (But ain’t that the truth will secular news coverage of so much these days?)

The article’s statement, “16 indecent images of men were displayed during a Powerpoint presentation”, doesn’t really say much about what happened, or how. In fact, it technically doesn’t even say:
  • whether the images formed part of the PowerPoint Presentation, as though someone pranked Father by secretly replacing his pie charts with smut,
  • or if they were just thumbnails of files displayed when the folder containing the PPP was opened, as though Father, God forbid, had been saving pornographic images for himself and unwittingly saved them to the same folder as the presentation, so that they accidentally got displayed en route to finding the presentation to double-click on it.
All told, you are right, there would be all kinds of evidence left behind that would tell us how they go there in the first place.
Click to expand...
This is the latest (anti-catholic press) article: Seemingly his laptop was stolen following the incident - hence no hard evidence. I would guess it was an inside job, someone wanting to make mischief for the priest/church who had knowledge as to where the laptop was and hence could steal it, removing all evidence. Why would the USB have been destroyed though - seems very naive and effectively removed evidence?

belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/priest-in-eye-of-gay-porn-images-storm-goes-on-leave-16148758.html

*Earlier this month, following the incident, a laptop belonging to the priest was stolen from his parish office in Pomeroy during a break-in. It’s also been claimed the flash drive in question has since been destroyed.
*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top