This is not sound advice because in many jurisdictions, this will put the mother into some legal charges she’ll also have to face. Like it or not, he is still considered a citizen. His past is time served and harassment of a registered sex offender (even if a case is pending) is illegal in MANY areas of our country.2.) Each time you see this molester, approach him and say for all to hear; ‘you are the man who molests children. I would appreciate if you would leave this Mass since one of your victims is also attending this Mass Service. Your presence victimizes the victims again by your presence and if you are sincere in your efforts for God’s forgivness- then have the pressence of mind to cause no more damage in your attempt at reconcillation.’
.
Actually, the OP cannot do this if there is a no contact order in place, as she’s previously said. A no-contact order bars BOTH parties from having contact with one another in any way, shape, or form, including via a third party.2.) Each time you see this molester, approach him and say for all to hear; ‘you are the man who molests children. I would appreciate if you would leave this Mass since one of your victims is also attending this Mass Service. Your presence victimizes the victims again by your presence and if you are sincere in your efforts for God’s forgivness- then have the pressence of mind to cause no more damage in your attempt at reconcillation.’
Very good point!!Something has crossed my mind since thinking about this situation. I think it should be addressed to the local law enforcement - is it possible that this man is attending this Mass because he knows this poor girl and her mom will be there? Is he trying to un-nerve her and her daughter in an attempt to get them to NOT TESTIFY against him? I think this should be brought to the attention of local law enforcement and let them be aware of his attendance there. Just in case.
Peace,
Gail
The RO really seems to be the most logical action in this case. It could also further the OP’s case against the perpetrator if he violates it by attending the same Mass. Yes, the priest ought to step in, but I think law enforcement would do a better job at this point, and a temporary restraining order is not a difficult thing to get.Actually, the OP cannot do this if there is a no contact order in place, as she’s previously said. A no-contact order bars BOTH parties from having contact with one another in any way, shape, or form, including via a third party.
That’s why a restraining order would be best; it would mean that the man would be arrested if he came within a certain distance of her daughter, and he would be legally obligated not to attend that Mass once he is informed that his victim is attending. And once the OP has the restraining order in hand, her priest can take action and will have firmer ground upon which to stand when asking this man to attend a different Mass.
With all respect to you and poor martha (my prayers for you and your daughter) you can’t publicly call someone a child molester simply because they have an as-yet-unproven complaint filed against them.2.) Each time you see this molester, approach him and say for all to hear; ‘you are the man who molests children. I would appreciate if you would leave this Mass since one of your victims is also attending this Mass Service. Your presence victimizes the victims again by your presence and if you are sincere in your efforts for God’s forgivness- then have the pressence of mind to cause no more damage in your attempt at reconcillation.’
With all respect to you and poor martha (my prayers for you and your daughter) you can’t publicly call someone a child molester simply because they have an as-yet-unproven complaint filed against them.
Actually, the OP cannot do this if there is a no contact order in place, as she’s previously said. A no-contact order bars BOTH parties from having contact with one another in any way, shape, or form, including via a third party.
That’s why a restraining order would be best; it would mean that the man would be arrested if he came within a certain distance of her daughter, and he would be legally obligated not to attend that Mass once he is informed that his victim is attending. And once the OP has the restraining order in hand, her priest can take action and will have firmer ground upon which to stand when asking this man to attend a different Mass.
Wow. I never cease to be surprised. It was a simple question with a very notable item.This is not sound advice because in many jurisdictions, this will put the mother into some legal charges she’ll also have to face. Like it or not, he is still considered a citizen. His past is time served and harassment of a registered sex offender (even if a case is pending) is illegal in MANY areas of our country.
I will take the OP at her word and disregard the word of the pervert; expecting the OP not to be a vindictive person trying to harm people for no reason by making a false accusation. I woul derr on the side of the victim and if proved wrong, a decent person would likely accept an apology. I will risk having to give an apology to the non-pervert if he turned out to be innocent.A member of our parish, a registered sex offender, assaulted my daughter last week.
But it’s a lot more than an apology and/or hurt feelings that may be involved - even if your comments are correct. It can be criminal in itself to make such comments about something (or someone) the subject of legal proceedings, so you could be facing reasonably serious punishment in so doing. And for what? If the person is demonstrably guilty the court will declare it soon enough for the whole world to know, and perfectly legal measures such as AVOs can be utilised in the meantime, which would be at least as effective as the talking to that you suggest.Wow. I never cease to be surprised. It was a simple question with a very notable item.
I will take the OP at her word and disregard the word of the pervert; expecting the OP not to be a vindictive person trying to harm people for no reason by making a false accusation. I woul derr on the side of the victim and if proved wrong, a decent person would likely accept an apology. I will risk having to give an apology to the non-pervert if he turned out to be innocent.
In my response I placed myslef in the pew- a place I am not expecting people to lie for no good reason- next to the man, if the OP said what i suggested, since the priest obviously won’t do anything because he is afraid of…what? She, the victim(s) should not be further put through humiliation and pain because the accused has no shame and everyone around her is afraid to act in the name of common sense. I am not afraid…or rather, some things are worth risking violating one persons sensibilities when others are obviously already violated.
I am a trusting soul and some things are worth the risk. This is one. The OP said her daughter was assaulted. I believe it; it is enough for me. I use my sound judgement to determine if someone is truthfull without the need of a lawyer. I usually have good success particularly when I have nothing to gain from believing.But it’s a lot more than an apology should you be wrong that might be required - it can be criminal in itself to make such comments on something (or someone) that is the subject of legal proceedings, so you could be facing reasonably serious punishment in so doing.
Some things are. Many are not. The ‘rule’ is maybe part of the reason abuse in the Church got to where it got.The rule about alleged criminals being ‘innocent until proven guilty’ aren’t there in the assumption that victims maliciously make false accusations. Some are, with the best intentions in the world and absolutely no blame of any kind attachable to them, either simply wrong or mistaken. Or at least lacking in sufficient evidence to fully substantiate their allegations.
In theory, yes but reality has become very different. No, I disagree that we need ‘professionals’ to guide us in such regard. Such professionals are prescribing very harmfull drugs to children and adults to calm them and reduce ADD ADDHD and XYZ. They have a vested interest in these things but trust is implictly given to them. Such professionals are doing all they can to free obviously guilty people on technicalities of law. I am not suggesting getting rid of the law or the courts, but the laws and the courts have asked us to get rid of our natural instinct and common sense so we let them take care of everything for us. No thanks.Isn’t that why courts exist in the first place - because for a myriad of reasons we CAN’T simply take people’s word (correct though it may in the end be) in such situations? And we have to allow professionals trained in sifting through such matters to reach conclusions as to guilt or lack of, in a criminal context?
Honestly, I would have beaten this guy so badly he would run if he saw me or my family.I hope I’m posting this in the correct forum, but I desparately need some direction, and if I’m wrong in my thinking, then I need to know why. A member of our parish, a registered sex offender, assaulted my daughter last week. He’s out on bond, and the trial promises to be a long, miserable, exhausting situation. My work schedule, which can’t be changed, allows me only to attend the Saturday evening mass. The offender, single and retired, goes to whichever mass (we have one on Sat, two on Sun) he chooses. I asked the priest to make it so this man wouldn’t go to the Saturday mass, allowing my daughter and me the one hour of reprieve we so desparately need each week. The priest says he doesn’t have any legal means to preven him from attending that particular mass. Why not? What about “Protecting God’s Children?” Why does the molester have more rights than my child? It’s pretty pathetic when a monster like this has more safety/freedom within the church than his innocent victim. I feel like we’ve been re-victimized. Help!