"Allegations"

[Kyyle23]

:rolly  The key word is "allegations".    It is up to law enforcement agencies to determine if these "allegations" are serious enough to issue arrest warrants.  If that were to happen the Freedom of Information Act would afford the media the right to their names.

 

The Church have taken a "guilty by association" policy where allegations are enough to remove the men from public ministry.  Only a liberal would expect something more than that.

 

Seems like a whole lot of "allegations" and "guilt by association" going on here, eh Juggs? Whats that old adage? Oh yeah, where there is smoke, there is fire.....

 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/12/priest.abuse.ap/index.html

 

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- After nearly three years of legal wrangling, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles has released information from the personnel files of 126 clergy accused of sexual abuse.

 

The confidential records show that for more than 75 years the nation's largest archdiocese shipped accused priests between therapy and new assignments, often ignoring parishioners' complaints.

 

And, in many cases, there was little mention of child molestation. Instead, euphemisms such as "boundary violations" were used to describe the conduct.

 

The documents were released late Tuesday as part of settlement talks with lawyers for more than 500 accusers in a civil lawsuit. The records, which summarize clergy personnel files, offer details in numerous cases, though much of the information has already been published in various forms.

 

One priest, who served as a teacher and administrator at numerous Southern California schools, was convicted of molesting two boys and given probation. The conviction was later expunged from his record.

 

A subsequent report was made in 1994 of "boundary violations," in which he allegedly patted the buttocks of a teenager. He entered alcohol treatment days later and was eventually placed on leave.

 

Another priest's file shows the archdiocese received repeated complaints that he engaged in "inappropriate sexual conduct with children" beginning in 1959, but that it did not appear to take significant action against him until 1994 when he was relieved of his duties, documents said.

 

The files show that in many cases the church provided years of therapy to some of the clergy. The archdiocese has posted nearly 150 pages of summaries from the clergy files on its Web site. (Archdiocese of Los Angeles)

 

Raymond P. Boucher, the plaintiffs' lead attorney, said the newly released information was a first step but that complete personnel files, including letters of transfer and other confidential documents, should be made public.

 

"The significance of these files is that they provide a little more information for the public about the church's knowledge and frankly their participation in the molestation of children, but until the files are made public, we're not going to be satisfied," he said.

 

Archdiocese and plaintiff attorneys had agreed to release the information, but lawyers for the accused clergy succeeded in blocking publication, arguing it would violate their clients' privacy rights.

 

An appellate court ordered the documents released last month.

 

David Clohessy, who heads a victims' rights group, called the information release a "shrewd public relations effort," as civil cases against the clergy inch toward trial.

 

Archdiocese attorney J. Michael Hennigan said that in the early days of the accusations, church officials did not go to civil authorities because "parents of children who had been victims did not want their children famous for this. They did not want people talking about this."

 

Hennigan said that in many cases counseling was offered to clergymen accused of abuse. Those accused were generally removed from the ministry altogether as church officials' understanding of sexual abuse increased, he said.

[southsider2k5]

Like I said before. Aiding and abeting a felony. Pull their charitable charter with the IRS. They are officially a criminal organization in my book.

[kapkomet]

But it's NOT A CRIME. COME ON! Innocent until proven guilty, or the statute of limitations runs out first, whichever is more convenient.

[Mplssoxfan]

Like I said before.  Aiding and abeting a felony.  Pull their charitable charter with the IRS.  They are officially a criminal organization in my book.

 

Can you imagine an ambitious prosecutor going after a Archdiocese armed with RICO indictments? That'd be a wild spectacle, huh?

[Rex Kickass]

The question is, if the people involved in the conspiracy are no longer running the show, can you punish the legacy organization criminally for it?

[Mercy!]

The question is, if the people involved in the conspiracy are no longer running the show, can you punish the legacy organization criminally for it?

Why not? Roger Mahony was named Archbishop of LA 20 years ago, elevated to Cardinal 14 years ago, is still “running the show” as Cardinal. As we now know was common throughout the Catholic church, he allowed pedophiles to remain in the priesthood. In one famous case, the priest admitted to Mahony that he had molested children, but he was kept in the ministry for 14 more years, while he continued his abuse.

[Soxy]

Why not?  Roger Mahony was named Archbishop of LA 20 years ago, elevated to Cardinal 14 years ago, is still “running the show” as Cardinal.  As we now know was common throughout the Catholic church, he allowed pedophiles to remain in the priesthood.  In one famous case,  the priest admitted to Mahony that he had molested children, but he was kept in the ministry for 14 more years, while he continued his abuse.

And Bernard Law has a prestigious post at the vatican. The money those people got is nothing compared to the disrespect the catholic church showed them by allowing those men to stay in the ministry.