Shocking halt to trial

[Caesar]

lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2006/09/23/1883758-sun.html

CHATHAM – The stunned silence in the packed courtroom filled with abused women was broken by shockwaves of anger and disbelief.

Rev. Charles Sylvestre, 84, the disgraced Roman Catholic priest who pleaded guilty six weeks ago to 47 counts of indecent assault, listened to a judge order him to undergo a psychiatric assessment that will determine if his case will go further.

“Do you understand?” Ontario Court Justice Bruce Thomas asked.

“I do,” Sylvestre said feebly.

Groans, giggles and tears echoed through the courtroom after a surprising last-minute development threatened to stop the case in its tracks.

I wouldnt put it past Bishop Fabbro to cause this delay in some way

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2006/09/23/1883758-sun.html

I wouldnt put it past Bishop Fabbro to cause this delay in some way

I thought that it is a rule of the forum to use the actual article’s title rather than making up your own.

Not to mention that your title is totally misleading. The judge in the case, which is the government, has delayed the trial for legal and reasonable reasons.

The Bishop did nothing in this and, in my opinion, this is an unwarranted attack on him. Even if the diocese has paid for the lawyer as the lawyer works for the defendant in a criminal case and does as the defendant wishes.

Of course it is the defendants lawyers job to get him off, what else does one expect.

Also if there is some psychological issue then that needs to be addressed. If there is mental illness involved then he may not be legally guilty of any crime and that would be Justice.

 

[Caesar]

I thought that it is a rule of the forum to use the actual article’s title rather than making up your own.

Of course it is the defendants lawyers job to get him off, what else does one expect.

Also if there is some psychological issue then that needs to be addressed. If there is mental illness involved then he may not be legally guilty of any crime and that would be Justice.

He raped at least 40 young girls multiple times over his tenure at a parish in Chatam before the Diocese moved him to another parish so he could do it again. He was arrested after a cable guy found child pornagraphy on his computer. The Diocese has not been co-operative with the investigations and right after he pleaded guilty and this story was taken on by the media, Bishop Fabbro found it wise to take a long vacation.

 

[Caesar]

The Bishop did nothing in this and, in my opinion, this is an unwarranted attack on him. Even if the diocese has paid for the lawyer as the lawyer works for the defendant in a criminal case and does as the defendant wishes.

My uneasiness over Bishop Fabbro comes from various teachers and priests that I have talked to about him. Not very many of the priests here like him and one of my teachers (an faithful, orthodox Catholic) said that if the government knew half the story Bishop Fabbro would be charged with obstruction of justice.

 

[CatholicCid]

If a person is mentally uncapable to help with their own defene, then he cannot be fairly tried.

Two victims suggested the church somehow orchestrated Sylvestre’s sudden mental defects.

So, even though worse criminals are allowed this defense, it is a conspiracy if a Priest uses it?

Wait till the Psych report comes back.

 

[estesbob]

lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2006/09/23/1883758-sun.html

I wouldnt put it past Bishop Fabbro to cause this delay in some way

There is not a word in the article you posted indicating that the Church had anyhting whatsoever to do with the delay. A Priest accused of rape is not above the law NOR is he below the law. if the law says one must be mentally competent to stand trial then that applies to EVERYONE who is tried-even those who you personally despise and even if they are catholic Clergy

 

[estesbob]

He raped at least 40 young girls multiple times over his tenure at a parish in Chatam before the Diocese moved him to another parish so he could do it again. He was arrested after a cable guy found child pornagraphy on his computer. The Diocese has not been co-operative with the investigations and right after he pleaded guilty and this story was taken on by the media, Bishop Fabbro found it wise to take a long vacation.

It has been proven he raped 40 girls or has it been alleged he raped 40 girls? are not even Catholic Priests given the presumption of innonence?

 

[Caesar]

It has been proven he raped 40 girls or has it been alleged he raped 40 girls? are not even Catholic Priests given the presumption of innonence?

He plead guilty to all the charges brought against him.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

He plead guilty to all the charges brought against him.

Until he sentence is pronounced I do not think we can assume guilt.

Many people have pleaded guilty and/or confessed only to have it shown later that they were not guilty of the crime.

Also, if he suffers from some mental illness then his pleading might not be acceptable as he will not be mentally competent to enter such a plea.

 

[Caesar]

Until he sentence is pronounced I do not think we can assume guilt.

Many people have pleaded guilty and/or confessed only to have it shown later that they were not guilty of the crime.

Also, if he suffers from some mental illness then his pleading might not be acceptable as he will not be mentally competent to enter such a plea.

When 40+ victims come forward along with witnesses including former collegues, the Diocese admitts to moving him to differant parishes to avoid reprecussions, and child pornography is found on his computer, I think we can safely assume that this priest is not lying in his confession of guilt.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . the Diocese admitts to moving him to differant parishes to avoid reprecussions, . . .

The moving around is not his fault. Someone else should be up there in the dock as his accomplice.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

When 40+ victims come forward along with witnesses including former collegues, the Diocese admitts to moving him to differant parishes to avoid reprecussions, and child pornography is found on his computer, I think we can safely assume that this priest is not lying in his confession of guilt.

But we can not safely assume that he is mentally competent.

 

[estesbob]

When 40+ victims come forward along with witnesses including former collegues, the Diocese admitts to moving him to differant parishes to avoid reprecussions, and child pornography is found on his computer, I think we can safely assume that this priest is not lying in his confession of guilt.

So the anwer to my question is NO.

 

[Damascus]

He plead guilty to all the charges brought against him.

If he pleaded guilty to all the charges brought against him —

The act of pleading guilty speaks for itself, there is no logical reason for someone to do this for any other reason than the obvious and simple fact that he is guilty.

Conspiracy theories as to why he would plead this way if innocent are unfounded.

Why? He is not a martyr fighting a battle of defending the faith and found guilty of proclaiming faith here.

He is on trial for rape. He is not representing the Church in rape.

His being a Priest does not prevent him from grave sin.

The Pope in all his honor and glory is not immune to sin ( this pains me to say that since I am a Papist)

But he has no reason to plead guilty unless he is.

He is not lacking of legal help or assistance in this matter BTW.

If he were innocent even on ONE count, the legal team could run with it-

But he is not pleading innocent on any account.

Why does this shock anyone?

That a Priest could be a sinner?

Yes , Judas shocked many to this day too.

Yet we still have the Church in spite of the horrible sinners in it.

Wake up. Sin is in mankind. No One is immune to it.

If you are offended by this type of sin and defend it blindly —

You are only reflecting your own accounting of sin with hope it be met with mercy –

This is a grave sin that is taxing the Church in many ways, yet inevitable.

And a sign that we are not as worthy as we think we are just because we have the Mother Church as our guide.

We must obey. The Church is not in error.

 

[Damascus]

The moving around is not his fault. Someone else should be up there in the dock as his accomplice.

You are right. The “moving around is not his fault”

The RAPE is his admitted fault. The ones that aided him in his sin sinned with him as if they were there with him in the act.

 

[pnewton]

I miss the connection of the Church or why you would think the bishop is involved in a trial. Can you point that our to me?

Whatever the motivation, if the man is found guilty I hope he never sees light of day again, priest or not.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

If he pleaded guilty to all the charges brought against him —

The act of pleading guilty speaks for itself, there is no logical reason for someone to do this for any other reason than the obvious and simple fact that he is guilty.

Conspiracy theories as to why he would plead this way if innocent are unfounded.

These are not “conspiracy theories” as they are rooted in fact which has been proven with the release of many men from prision who have confessed to crimes only to have it shown that such a confession was false.

There are many reasons why a person might plead to be guilty when not guilty. One of them is that they thing they will be convicted and they can get a lesser sentence if they plead guilty.

Having said that, it is not what is at issue here. What is at issue here is if the defendant is mentally competent to stand trial and to plead to such a thing. If he is not mentally competent then the plead means nothing and he is unable to be tired.

Also at issue here is the smear on the Church and the bishop for the defendants lawyer doing what he should for his client by claiming that they (the Church and the bishop) are somehow interfereing with the trial.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I tried to write this earlier.

Guilt can not always be determined because of a confession. Recent case in USA proves that. Confessions from someone that is very elderly or very young could be from suggestions placed in their minds by well meaning people. A psych evaluation is a good thing so that there will be no doubt as to the validity of the confession or accusations.

In the 1970’s & 1980’s there were many cased of repressed memories in children of abuse. In the 1990’s many of these cases were proven to be false and convictions were over turned. Most of these were not done maliciously. But, there were some that were motivated by money. A conviction of someone for this type of crime against children should be beyond reproach so it can not be overturned.

Those involved should be grateful that the judge in this case is trying to be extra careful. If the person that abused me as a child was still alive and on trial I would expect no less.

Also, punishing those that were responsible for the abuse is what should be most desired.

IMHO in many of the suits brought forward, those responsible were not punished. Those people affiliated with the Church (parishes) have been the ones punished and lost years of hard work and tithes that did not belong to the (wrong doers) priests/bishops.To those seeking money to make things better, I can assure them that no amount of money will make things better. They need to forgive as they are able and go forward. Make the Church a safer place for this and all the next generations.

God bless them all. I know what they are going through. May they have peace in their hearts and blessings in their lives.

 

[Damascus]

QUOTE=ByzCath;1518450]These are not “conspiracy theories” as they are rooted in fact which has been proven with the release of many men from prision who have confessed to crimes only to have it shown that such a confession was false.

That is what we call perjury, and I highly doubt he was beaten to get a confession here.

There are many reasons why a person might plead to be guilty when not guilty. One of them is that they thing they will be convicted and they can get a lesser sentence if they plead guilty.

Pergury again.

Having said that, it is not what is at issue here. What is at issue here is if the defendant is mentally competent to stand trial and to plead to such a thing. If he is not mentally competent then the plead means nothing and he is unable to be tired.

This does not mean he is innocent - just a mental defective.

Also at issue here is the smear on the Church and the bishop for the defendants lawyer doing what he should for his client by claiming that they (the Church and the bishop) are somehow interfereing with the trial.

Yes, it is something that is a issue to look into.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

reply on CA forum

That is what we call perjury, and I highly doubt he was beaten to get a confession here.

Actually perjury is when a person lies while under oath. When one gives a confession they are seldom under oath.

Same goes with a plea bargain.

But it seems that now you agree that it does/can happen.

This does not mean he is innocent - just a mental defective.

And according to the legal system mental defect can be a mitigating circumstance.

Not to mention that someone who is not mentally competent to help in their own defense will not go to trial until such a time as they are mentally competent.