Friday, April 6, 2012

There's No "Normal" Way For A Clergy Abuse Or Sexual Assault Victim To Act

This post by Beasley Firm attorney Max Kennerly is cross-posted on his Litigation and Trial blog.

As Ralph Cipriano reported, the defense attorney for Father Brennan spent a lot of time cross-examining the prosecution's chief witness against Father Brennan by going into the alleged victim’s reaction to the molestation, including why the alleged victim — an adolescent boy at the time — did not call out to his mother afterwards, why the alleged victim took a subsequent motorcycle ride with Father Brennan, and why the alleged victim didn’t report the assault to authorities sooner.

Father Brennan’s attorney, coincidentally named William Brennan, has an important job to do — safeguarding his client’s constitutional rights and challenging the testimony of his accuser — so I don’t fault him for going into those issues, but these types of questions raise a common problem in both criminal sexual assault prosecutions and civil sexual abuse lawsuits:  the persistence of rape myths in society and in the courts. The term “rape myths” was coined by psychologists as a means of describing false attitudes and beliefs that serve to deny allegations of sexual abuse and to thwart accountability for abusers.
Some of these rape myths are easy to spot.  For example, many people will thoughtlessly say a victim “asked for it” by wearing the wrong clothes or by drinking alcohol, or they assume that victims are lying for attention or to cover up an affair.  Myths like these are so pernicious and pervasive that the people perpetuating them don’t realize it. Thus, even people acting in good faith can end up applying rape myths to treat allegations of sexual abuse differently from other allegations of criminal conduct and to demand more proof from sexual abuse survivors (such as corroborating evidence in addition to testimony) than they do from other crime victims.
The testimony by Father Brennan’s alleged victim, and by many of the alleged clergy abuse victims, raises one of the more common rape myths: that a victim of rape, sexual assault, or molestation will resist an attacker forcefully, will cry out for help during the attack, and will immediately report the assault to others.


We saw that myth at work nearly two years ago, when the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the federal appellate court for Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware) reinstated a civil rights lawsuit brought by a sexual assault victim against a township police department.  In that case, a cashier at a convenience store was sexually assaulted and robbed at gunpoint, but when she reported the crime to the police, the detective in charge immediately assumed that she had fabricated the incident to cover up her own theft of cash from the store. The detective didn’t give the victim the same fair consideration he would have given victims of other crimes, in part because of his stereotypical views about how she “should” have acted after the assault.  Even though that same detective was also part of a task force investigating a serial rapist with a string of identical convenience store robberies and assaults, the detective never connected the two in his mind, and so eventually arrested the victim on charges of theft and making a false police report. The prosecution was only dropped after the real assailant (a serial offender) was captured and confessed to the crime.
That case demonstrates more than just problems in the police department, though, because the federal district court that first heard the case dismissed it without a jury trial, finding that the detective undoubtedly had sufficient probable cause to arrest the sexual assault victim. The Women’s Law Project (WLP), based in Pennsylvania, organized an amicus effort, representing a number of sexual assault victim advocacy groups, to urge the Third Circuit to reverse that decision, which it did.  The Third Circuit reinstated the victim’s lawsuit, finding that a jury could believe sufficient facts to show the detective did not have adequate probable cause for the arrest.
More recently, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court accepted the appeal of a case in which three male college students were convicted of sexually assaulting a female student. A jury convicted all three men of sexual assault and indecent assault, and the trial judge allowed the convictions to stand, but the Pennsylvania Superior Court — which only read the briefs and transcripts of the case and never saw any witnesses testify — overturned the convictions.  The Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that, although the victim’s testimony was internally consistent and although the jury believed her testimony enough to convict the three men, the Superior Court felt that she shouldn’t be believed because she had initially invited the men (who were friends of a friend) to hang out in her room, she had not sufficiently resisted, nor had she “instantaneously” reported the incident to the authorities (she reported the assault within an hour, but that apparently wasn’t fast enough).  Sexual assault advocates are hoping the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will reverse the Superior Court and reinstate the convictions. (The WLP has also filed an amicus brief in the case)
In the bigger picture, these cases aren’t just about if the township identified above should be sued or if those three men should be convicted.  Rather, it’s a broader issue about the roles of trial judges and juries in assessing the credibility of witnesses and the need to ensure that cases are decided by their facts and not by suppositions, prejudices, or stereotypes like rape myths. The overwhelming psychological, sociological, and criminological evidence showing that there is no “normal” way for a rape or sexual assault victim to act, and that a wide range of reactions — including freezing up during the assault and not telling anyone for months or even years — are all seen in genuine victims.
Unfortunately, Pennsylvania is unique as being the only state that does not allow prosecutors or plaintiffs in sexual abuse cases to bring in expert witnesses to talk about the fact that there is no “normal” reaction to a sexual assault and that the actions by Father Brennan’s alleged victim (such as not crying out, not reporting the assault immediately, and seeing his assailant again later in a social situation) are in fact consistent with those of a genuine victim.

25 comments:

  1. The Catholic church contributes to these rape myths, and is literally trying to teach the world that child rape should be hidden, child rapists should be protected, and that child rape victims shouldn't be believed.

    As to your specific example about the possibility that the victim "asked for it", this case shows how evil the Catholic church is.

    This same Msgr Lynn, suggested to Fr. Thomas Shea -- who previously ADMITTED sexually abusing two boys -- that perhaps he was “seduced into it” by his 10-year-old victim.

    See
    http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2006b/042806/042806a.php

    Think about a 10 year old boy. Back in those days, a 10 year old Catholic boy had no idea what sex was. Now these evil, despicable, psychological misfits are suggesting that the 10 year old boy tried to get the priest to have sex with him, and in their freak fraternity, that seems reasonable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. PatO, I understand your anger with this issue. The criminal abuse committed by clergy was abominable, and the harm to victims is unimaginable.

    But to say that the Church "is literally trying to teach the world that child rape should be hidden, child rapists should be protected, and that child rape victims shouldn't be believed" is simply untrue and unfair.

    That NCReporter article was in wake of the 2005 Philly report.
    Many people are unaware that the Archdiocese released a 70-page response to the 2005 report to chronicle what it saw as falsehoods and misleading presentations.

    I thought I would link it:

    http://themediareport.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Arch-Philly-2005-response-to-grand-jury.pdf

    -

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. The Catholic church is absolutely, positively, teaching people, by their own example (tens of thousands of times),

      - that child rape should be hidden
      - child rapists should be protected
      - child rape victims shouldn't be believed
      - child rape victims should be bullied
      - pedophile protectors should be defended using unlimited amounts of money donated by parishioners (which is tantamount to stealing, by the way)
      - child rape victims should be fought with the most expensive, vicious, dirtiest lawyers, like we saw yesterday in court

      The Catholic church lies. They rape children by the tens of thousands. They fight the victims viciously, all just like satan would do. They have a billion people like you that defend them.

      We get it - God is making it so simple that you don't need any brainpower to figure this out.

      I'm not going to read 70 pages from the Archdiocese of Philly when I know it was written or overseen by Cardinal Bevilacqua, one of the greatest pedophile protectors in history, and a liar and perjurer under oath. He promised to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God”. Then he lied. About child rape. Just like satan would do.

      Bevilacqua, 2 bishops-in-training, and at least 2 other priests shredded a document in 1994 that listed 35 known pedophile priests, of which 13 had admitted raping at least one child, and most admitted more than that. Most of the others were proven later to be child rapists, like Avery, who lied for 3 decades about it.

      Then they let those child rapists roam freely among children for 17 years. They didn't care if the priests raped more children (which they did). They just didn't want to get in trouble. They didn't want to pay for therapy for children that thought they were raped by Christ. They were gutless, satanic, cowards.

      According to the grand jury report, one of the 35, Fr Cudemo ejaculated on the face of a 10 year old girl. Two years later, at 12 years old, he got her pregnant and took her for an abortion. He raped 15 other children that they know of. He got moved and reassigned and protected and now lives somewhere on a full Catholic pension.

      This is the world's largest organized child rape crime syndicate, and God is giving us all the proof we need, and we will fight people like you who oppose Him and fight for the child rape fraternity.

      You’ve chosen your side. God isn’t stupid, and your excuses won’t work. Good luck profiting on your books. Good luck getting these lawyers and priests to buy you into heaven.

      Delete
    3. 1. "Then they let those [35 on the 1994 list] child rapists roam freely among children for 17 years."

      That would mean they let them all stay in ministry until 2011. That is completely false. Some on the list were dead or already out of ministry. As far as I can see, all of the others were later removed.

      For example, in your example of the abominable Fr. Nicholas Cudemo: The archdiocese first learned of his abuse in 1991. He was placed on administrative leave in early 1992 and was already in restricted living at the time of that 1994 memo. He was taken permanently out of ministry in 1996.

      2. "This is the world's largest organized child rape crime syndicate ..."?

      No, it isn't. I think the record shoes that for the last several years, the Church has been forcefully and honestly striving to make itself the safest environment possible for children.

      3. I do not "fight for the child rape fraternity."

      I believe the protection of children is paramount. As I say on my site: "Justice demands first and foremost that those who misuse the trust placed in them and use innocent children for their own gratification be incarcerated and severely punished."

      Delete
    4. themediareport,

      Try telling the truth. Its one of the commandments.

      1. No, this means they didn't kick them out of ministry. They don't get credit for ones who died, and I can't easily find that from the list. Please tell me which ones were dead or out of ministry in 1994. I know that at least 21 lasted the full 17 years and were still in the same archdiocese.

      Here's the more important thing - in 2011 Cardinal Rigali got up in front of the congregation and blatantly lied. He said that "there were no accused priests in ministry". Two weeks later, he got up and said, oops, I lied, there were lots of them. Now we know he and Bevilacqua were protecting known pedophile priests for 17 years.

      At that point, he had to suspend 21 of them. Some, like Cudemo, who was called "one of the sickest people I ever met" by Msgr Molloy, the famous priest who kept a copy of the list Bevilacqua tried to shred) had already retired with a full Catholic pension and a recommendation and blessing of the church, even though they knew all about him.

      From the grand jury report:

      In January 1997, Msgr Lynn presented Fr. Cudemo with a certificate declaring him “a retired priest in good standing in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia,” and
      asking that he be permitted to function as a priest in any other diocese in the country. In March 2003, Fr. Cudemo told one of his former victims that the
      certificate was allowing him to minister in Orlando, Florida, where he now lives part-time.

      2. In the past 60 years, the Catholic church has been the world's largest organized child rape crime syndicate. No one else is close. They have cut down significantly because they got caught due to investigative reporters and SNAP. However, most of the child rapists and victims are still alive, and that's what I care about.

      Of course, the record doesn't show that the Church has been making it the safest environment for children. Just this week, Kansas City decided to bring Bishop Finn to trial, despite the fact that he has paid $1 million to lawyers to get him out of it. Finn let a known pedophile priest stay in ministry for a year after he got a 4 page memo from a school principal saying Fr Ratigan was taking pictures up the skirts of 5-10 year old girls.

      3. What you say doesn't matter as much as what you do. You fight for child rapists. You don't fight for the children. You make money selling books about it. You've chosen your side.

      Delete
    5. You say, "Try telling the truth. Its one of the commandments," and then you repeatedly lie.

      Yes, lying is not nearly as abominable as molesting an innocent minor, but what you are doing is sinful and disgraceful - by falsely and maliciously accusing me of saying I "fight for child rapists," just because I disagree with you. What a mean-spirited, dishonest thing to say to someone. It is false and mean and you know it.

      You keep mentioning I sell a book. Well, yeah, but I'm just doing exactly what you tell everyone to do in those paid speeches you make.

      You wrote, "Please tell me which ones were dead or out of ministry in 1994."
      Fine.
      ... Rev. Bryski, out of ministry
      ... Rev. Cudemo, restricted faculties, living with relatives
      ... Rev. Dunne, out of ministry, laicization requested
      ... Rev. Gausch, retired
      ... Rev. Jones, out of ministry, laicization requested
      ... Rev. Leneweaver, out of ministry
      ... Rev. Murray, retired
      ... Rev. Siegle, deceased
      ... Rev. Vath, deceased
      ... Rev. Cahill, deceased
      ... Rev. Dolan, out of ministry
      ... Rev. Lanctot, restricted ministry
      ... Rev. McKenzie, deceased

      There.

      Delete
    6. Show where I "repeatedly lie", since its all in black and white.

      You do fight for convicted child rapists, like the one Neal Allen was talking about, Mcrae, who is a convicted child rapist, spending 30-60 years in prison, who admitted to having sex with 3 boys, and who had a bunch of others accusing him.

      We understand - this is how you profit.

      Of course, in the Philly case, you are always discrediting the victims, in spite of insurmountable evidence that Philly was protecting dozens of known child rapists and lying about it. Avery, one of the four defendants in this case, lied for 30 years before he finally told the truth.

      I don't know what you're talking about related to my speeches. I never say, "find a group of criminals, distort the truth, and sell a book about it to Catholics grasping for any excuse to believe that their priests haven't been hiding a larger percentage of pedophiles than any institution in the world."

      I'm not going to research all of the dead priests. I don't have to. I know Fr Cudemo was in ministry til 1997, and Msgr Lynn presented Fr. Cudemo with a certificate declaring him “a retired priest in good standing in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia,” and asking that he be permitted to function as a priest in any other diocese in the country.

      They let the known pedophile roam freely, anywhere in the country, and was practicing ministry in 2003 in Orlando. This is all in the grand jury report, page 130, just before the report about him ejaculating on the face of a 10 year old girl.

      Here's the point - they let him out freely, among children, where he could rape again, just like he had at least 16 times that they know about. He should have been in prison.

      Instead, they protected him and he is now free to rape other children and always has been. That's what the Catholic church does.

      It isn't God's church, and you're fighting for them instead of the victims, and God knows.

      Delete
    7. Father Nicholas Cudemo was first reported to the archdiocese in 1966. You're playing hard and fast with the facts DPierre

      Delete
    8. DPierre will only tell the facts that help sell his books on how unfair everyone has been to the Catholic church and their pedophile program.

      Molly, I hope you don't have first hand knowledge of Fr Cudemo, but he was truly evil, and was well protected by Cardinal Bevilacqua, Bishops Cistone, and Cullen, Lynn, Malloy, and dozens of others.



      According to the grand jury report, Cudemo:

      - ejaculated on the face of a 10 year old girl as she was nude on the ground (p 142)
      - he got a 12 year old girl pregnant and took her for an abortion (p 20)
      - he had a total of 16 victims that they know about
      - even Fr Malloy called him "one of the sickest people I ever knew (p 19)
      - as Molly said, this started with complaint letters to Cardinal Krol in 1966, but had happened for years before (p 19)
      - As more and more victims came forward, Cardinal Bevilacqua steadfastly refused to remove Fr. Cudemo as pastor of Saint Callistus parish (p 35)
      - Cudemo was related to at least 2 of the girls he molested (p 133)
      - Cudemo sometimes brought in other priests to rape his victims (p 135)
      - Cudemo sometimes stuck a Eucharist into a young girl's vagina (p 135)

      Quoted from page 143, the admissions to Msgr Lynn in 1991:

      "Father Cudemo was interviewed twice in response to his family’s allegations, on October 2 and 3, 1991. Father Cudemo gave a rambling mixture of admissions and denials – stating he “possibly” lay nude on top of an undressed girl; had been confronted by a girl about touching her and performing sexual acts on her, but didn’t remember doing those things and “I remember everything”; that he had “known lots of women and that it always takes two to do these things;” that if sexual activities did occur, they must have happened 20 years ago; that all the girls were willing, and that “nothing close to sexual happened
      with these girls.” When told his accusers were family, he immediately said their names and talked about having “incidents” with them."

      Cardinal Bevilacqua allows Cudemo to retire, as a good priest, with full reedom and retirement benefits, in 1997 (p 149)

      Quoted - "Bevilacqua bestowed on Fr. Cudemo the status of retired priest, and gave him permission to fully exercise his priestly faculties throughout the Archdiocese. On Jan. 21, 1997, Monsignor Lynn issued an open-ended certificate of “good standing” to assist Fr. Cudemo in his efforts to minister in Florida parishes as well."

      Alltold, 16 child rape victims that they know about, but Cudemo continued to work with children, courtesy of the Catholic pedophile protection program.

      Cudemo will NOT help Dave Pierre sell books.

      Delete
    9. of course they do! if not, please explain Maria Goretti. please explain why the diocese of pittsburgh is closing 3 parishes, one with an accused priest, and renaming the new parish Maria Goretti. she is the patron saint of pedophile apologists. she is the example they want us all to live by, no, i'm sorry, die by.

      Delete
  3. Dear PatO,
    Thanks very much for the NCR link. It was an incredibly insightful and powerful expose on just how personally devastating this disgusting cover-up has been for so many. I find myself drawn to read as many details of this case for a number of personal reasons. However, sometimes I find it so painful to read the posts and other articles that I selfishly think "I need a break." Sometimes the details serve as painful reminders of what I endured. But then I think of my other brothers and sisters who deal with the same every day. We need to stay UNITED. I then think of ADA Spade. What a tremendous and courageous individual.
    I also have to mention how grateful I am that you are consistent in mentioning the "Catholic church," as opposed to the "Catholic faith." It's a distinction that I believe is important to make. My faith remains unshaken. My faith in the "institution" is shattered. I am looking at this as point of real growth.
    Again, thanks for your valuable insights.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I understand the difficulty in reading it. I'm a tough guy, and I get physically sick reading about what these gangsters did to children. I take breaks, too, and on a weekly basis, sometimes I can't sleep for hours.

      However, if tens of thousands of children had to live through it, I will read about it, and will inform others.

      I've always been consistent - the Catholic church (bishops, priests, followers, buildings) doesn't practice the Christian faith.

      God is proving it to us - this isn't God's church.

      Delete
  4. Thank you PatO, for posting the NCR article... I have met Will Spade. Here is one decent human being with tons of integrity.

    The truth is being exposed in a court of law in Philadelphia. There are many to thank for getting this trial to this point.. but especially thank you to the brave victims. It takes tons of courage to sit on the witness stand and tell your horrific story of being sexually abused by a so called holy priest.

    My opinion. This brave victim is more normal and sane than the men who run the Philly Archdiocese.

    The NCR article shows the 'real life' of victims who have been sexually abused and the real lives of those who cover up the sex crimes committed against these kids.

    Judy Jones, SNAP Midwest Associate Director, USA, 636-433-2511
    snapjudy@gmail.com
    "Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How come SNAP leaders have not called the police to report suspected child molesters and once wrote a letter on behalf of a guy arrested with loads of sick child porn?

      "Facts About SNAP That Will Shock You"
      http://www.themediareport.com/2011/01/10/special-report-facts-about-snap-that-will-shock-you/

      Delete
    2. themediareport,

      Your Catholic "ha, ha, caught you once"argument is childish and won't work with God. Of course, you phrase the first line to imply (and essentially lie) that it is a regular occurence tha tSNAP doesn't report child molesters.

      In fact, you are referring to the fact that David CLohessy, a Catholic sex abuse victim himself, didn' treport his own brother fast enough, even though he had minimal proof about him being a sex abuser.

      This is completely different than your Catholic organization of pedophile protectors moving 4,392 "Jerry Sanduskys" (that they admitted in the US their own John Jay report of 2002) around intentionally, lying about it, not telling the parents in new parishes, etc.

      They've never done anything like Msgr Lynn from this case, who suggested to Fr. Thomas Shea -- who previously ADMITTED to sexually abusing two boys -- that perhaps he was “seduced into it” by his 10-year-old victim.

      Your is the work of the devil himself - it was done as a group, with complete knowledge and intent, and was followed up by lying and bullying. Satan is proud of you and them, and you will be with him forever.

      SNAP is comprised entirely of sex abuse victims that fought back. If they didn't exist, the Catholic church would still be practicing their crime spree at the same rate.

      You can lie to yourself, lie to satan's other helpers, and lie to God, but you will be held accountable. Ultimately, you're fighting the victims of child rape to help the child rapists save money.

      Get a good lawyer to spin that truth for your judgment day. Pay him with your book revenues.

      Delete
    3. Neil Allen (Harvard University) wrote:
      "you are referring to the fact that David CLohessy, a Catholic sex abuse victim himself, didn' treport his own brother fast enough, even though he had minimal proof about him being a sex abuser."

      1. Didn't report him "fast enough"?? No, he didn't report him AT ALL!

      2. "Minimal proof"? Ha! From 2002:

      "David said he had known for years about the allegations and agonized over whether to report his brother to authorities. He even contemplated distributing leaflets outside his brother's church. But in the end, he did not go to the police.
      "'It will probably be a quandary until the day I die,' said David ..."

      He had a lot more than "minimal proof" if he "knew for years" and "considered distributing leaflets."

      As much as you repeatedly LIE about me lying, you have never once cited a single falsehood from me. Meanwhile, I have busted you repeatedly for falsehood after falsehood.

      I will repeat the same thing I said to your friend PatO:

      Yes, lying is not nearly as abominable as molesting an innocent minor, but what you are doing is sinful and disgraceful - by falsely and maliciously accusing me of saying I "fight the victims of child rape," just because I disagree with you and others about how this topic is addressed. What a mean-spirited, dishonest thing to say to someone. It is false and mean and you know it.

      Delete
    4. Let's review David Clohessy:

      1) David Clohessy had allegations about his brother. That's all allegations. No proof. No confession.

      2) David was alone. Not part of a conspiracy. He never reassigned his brother to a place where he wsa with other children.

      3) David himself was one of 100,000+ Catholic priest rape victims

      4) David spent the rest of his life fighting the world's largest organized child rape empire

      Let's review the Catholic church:

      1) The Catholic church had more than allegations. Every priest that raped a child confessed it in a confessional, where the priest had the right not to forgive the sin unless the child rapist turned himself in. These weren't allegation - the was a complete confession.

      2) The Catholic church was part of a conspiracy of rampant child rape, putting known child rapists in places where they could rape more children without ever, ever warning children or parents.

      3) The Catholic church has 4,392 "Jerry Sanduskys" that they admitted in their own report, and they are hiding 3-6 times that many.

      4) The Catholic church spend their time fighting the victims of child rape.

      Dave Pierre, devout follower of the world's largest child rape empire, also spends his life fighting the victims of child rape, and profiting by it.

      You use the one, weak example of Clohessy to denigrate thousands and thousands of victims of Catholic child rape. You think God is gong to accept your excuses, because you've been taught that God is that stupid. God will be surrounded by 100,000+ children that were raped in His church, and they will determine your eternity.

      Good luck with book sales.

      Delete
  5. You're welcome.

    This is really all about letting people know the truth. God gave us the Internet for a reason, and this is it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Philadelphia Catholic priests are social, psycological, and sexual misfits. They read the grand jury report, and they read that Lynn had protected countless, disgusting child rapists, but when Lynn came back for Archbishop Chaput's dinner recently, they gave him a standing ovation.

    In other words, "we all know you did what we all would have done, and thanks for taking the rap in court, and protecting our brothers in crime".

    It was sort of like the mafia applauding the guy who gets arrested, except that this mafia has no honor, and rapes children.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I truly cannot rationalize The Media Report's relentless support of continuing to demonize the victims of the sexual abuse perpetrated by the archdiocese of philadelphia. This is a festering wound that needs to be removed for the cancerous tumor that it truly is. Let's at least recognize a couple of truths:
    1.) There are some truly good, holy, and dedicated priests who serve and do God's work, everyday, living with this ugly cloud over them every day. Their lives are hell because of the actions of so many, in "power," who kept silent.
    2.) The other evening, my sister asked my wife to ask me: "Do you know any truly good, normal, holy priests? I asked her to give me a day, but after a chuckle, told her that I remembered my beloved spiritual director, Rev. John Murray, C.M. He, in many ways, saved my life. (If anyone proves he did anything I think I'll completely loose it!) I trusted him with my darkest of secrets and he was truly Christ, incarnate, to me.
    3.) Out of the 2 promises that every diocesan priest takes, chastity and obedience, without a doubt, the more important is obedience, due to its powerful grip that it holds on those who submit. This is a sad fact, and, because of the power it holds, so many voices went and go unheard. Obedience is very powerful and protective. It holds those who want to scream out and keeps them silent, (just read PatO's powerful NCR link describing Msgr. Malloy. May he rest in peace, which I wonder if he really is, but he was one of the most autocratic, pompous individuals I've ever met.)
    4.) Obedience also keeps the money flowing and the corporation afloat. However, it's its power that will prove the institution's demise.
    5.) It was the "institution" that killed Christ. It was Christ who rose. The institutions, even the "church," (ecclesia, meaning "LITTLE" house), will also die.
    6.) We will also die and hopefully our soul's (persons) will live on, for all eternity. Will our eternity be our silence, or will we still have our voices?
    7,) Thanks for all of the great insights and a Happy and Blessed Easter, especially to those with Courageous Voices!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its simple - Dave is trying to make more money off books.

      Secondly, all of the other prominent Catholics pat him on the head when he fights the victims, because this is how they tell everyone you should fight to save the church.

      To them, "the church" is the buildings, the pedophiles, the bishops who hide the pedophiles, the other priests, and the riches. This is the part satan wants to protect.

      I don't really believe that there are any "good" priests, although not all are completely eveil. However, not one has ever stood up and said, "we're doing this all wrong, and we have to go find the victims, and I don't care if it costs money and we have to sell oversized buildings". That's What Jesus Would Say, and no priests say that. (In fairness, about a dozen have said it and were kicked out).

      What Catholics should have done, all along, is to protect the integrity of the faith. They should have been model leaders, and called for victims to come forward, and welcomed them with open arms, just like Jesus Would Do. They should have sold buildings to pay for therapy, unless they were selling all the buildings to serve a higher purpose, like feeding the 15,000 who starve to death each day.

      Instead, they make a complete mockery of Catholicism. That's God's way of proving that the Catholic interpretation of Christianity isn't God's church.

      Ultimately, they all rely on Catholic confession, a Catholic "invention", to allow themselves to get away with all sins, crimes, victimizations, bullying, et cetera. Dave and his partners in pedophile priest apology think they can go to confession, say, "I'm sorry if they were really raped by a priest", and in 10 minutes, they are clear to go to heaven.

      They don't realize that God isn't stupid.

      Delete
    2. One other interesting thing - Catholic priests take a vow of obedience to their bishop.

      Have ANY of them read the First Commandment?

      Let me summarize it for them - if God tells you not to lie, and your bishop tells you to lie, the bishop is a "false idol" and you should follow God, not the bishop.

      God didn't make this complicated.

      Delete
  8. I've been following your blog, thanks for the great updates and inside look at the trial. It looks like PA needs to change their law like MN recently did. Are there any cases pending that might help do this?

    ReplyDelete
  9. It remains a serious scientific problem that the diagnostic profiles of possible ‘victims’ are – similar to the present definitions of abuse and rape themselves – vague and elastic.

    For science, as Karl Popper insists, genuine knowledge must be ‘falsifiable’. This means that you have to have sufficient clarity and distinction about your ‘discovery’ such that it can be readily determined what phenomena do n-o-t fit your definition.

    But this has always been a difficulty with ‘science’ in matters sex-offensual. One recalls the ‘lists’ by which, for example, anybody could ‘determine’ on their own if they have been sexually abused: you might be happy or you might be sad; you might be overly averse to sexual activity or you might be overly attracted to it; you might be overly averse to the sex that abused you, or you might be over attracted to that sex (usually, the ‘you’ is female and the ‘sex’ is male).

    In another aspect, the ‘logic’ would go something like: If you are an adult (female, usually) and you find you have an inexplicable aversion to coffee then you were probably abused by your father as a child because daddies drink coffee. (See? It’s science!)

    There are all sorts of non-scientific bennies that accrue, not the least of which is that the vaguer the definition, the more ‘space’ for claiming ‘numbers’ that demonstrate or ‘prove’ your hypothesis.

    This is not to make light of genuine victimization, but I must also point out again that ‘good intentions’ do not make valid science, and if we are going to make substantial (to put it politely) changes to criminal jurispraxis and evidentiary standards, then we are going to need solidly grounded science and not merely the type of ‘science’ that – if I may point out – grounds far too many of the legislative ‘Findings’ that purport to justify the legislative changes.

    It is extremely difficult to ground legitimate criminal law and praxis in such ‘advocacy science’ and – of course – it is extremely difficult to defend clients when the ground is so mushy and swampy.

    Nor can that problem be lightly brushed aside by claiming that the (alleged) crime is so great that this is an ‘emergency’ and such concerns for logic, science, accuracy, objectivity and detachment are merely ‘obstructionist’ (Catharine MacKinnon would say ‘male’ and ‘patriarchal’) and probably also indicate one’s support for the perpetrators. The entire credibility and legitimacy of the sovereign coercive/police authority stands or falls on the fairness built into the system by which that authority is or is not deployed against any accused.

    ReplyDelete

Thoughtful commentary welcome. Trolling, harassing, and defaming not welcome. Consistent with 47 U.S.C. 230, we have the right to delete without warning any comments we believe are obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.

 

Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog Copyright © 2016 BigTrial.net

Privacy Policy: BigTrial.net does not distribute, share or sell email addresses, or any other personal information received from this website.