Monday, December 30, 2013

Judge Sarmina Declares She's Fallible, Lets Lynn Out Of Jail

By Ralph Cipriano
D.A. compares Msgr. Lynn to this guy
for Bigtrial.net

After declaring "I am fallible," the Hon. M. Teresa Sarmina today announced she would reverse course, and grant bail to Msgr. William J. Lynn.

It was Judge Sarmina who denied Lynn bail twice in 2012, before and after she put him away for three to six years after a jury found the monsignor guilty of one count of endangering the welfare of a child.

A three-judge panel of Superior Court appeal judges on Dec. 26th reversed that conviction, saying the "plain language" of the state's original child endangerment statute plainly didn't apply to Lynn. It only applied to adults who had direct contact with children, such as parents, teachers and guardians, the Superior Court judges said. It did not apply to the monsignor, who never even met the alleged victim in his case. [The state's original 1972 child endangerment law was amended in 2007 to include supervisors such as Lynn.]

The Superior Court judges went one step further, labeling Sarmina's handling of the law in the Lynn case as "fundamentally flawed." So no wonder Judge Sarmina looked like she was sucking on lemons today when she read a legal soliloquy from the bench that basically amounted to: I may have screwed up the case, but I really don't think so; I'm still the trial judge and you're not; and I bet I'm going to be upheld when the state Supreme Court takes this up on appeal.

Meanwhile, not to be upstaged, a representative for District Attorney Seth Williams managed to top their previous high standard for rhetorical excess. Only a few days after filing a motion that suggested the hapless monsignor might be masterminding an international plot to flee the country and escape to the Vatican, Hugh J. Burns, Jr., chief of the D.A.'s appeals unit, topped that whopper by comparing Lynn's status as a flight risk to Ira Einhorn, AKA the Unicorn.

For those of you too young to remember, Einhorn was the notorious killer hippie who, back in 1981, fled the country on the eve of his murder trial in Philadelphia.

So the D.A. was comparing Lynn, the celibate priest and ultimate company man, to the free-loving, freewheeling hippie sociopath who clubbed his girlfriend to death and stuffed her mummified corpse into a steamer trunk he kept next to his bed for 18 months. Nice.

Today's bail hearing/comedy act was a fitting capper to the show trial that was the Lynn case.

It began shortly after 10 a.m. when Judge Sarmina pointed out that in the wake of the Superior Court opinion reversing the conviction of Lynn, the monsignor's defense lawyers tried to get the Superior Court to release Lynn directly, but were told they had to go back to Judge Sarmina's courtroom and ask for a bail hearing.

As the trial court judge, Judge Sarmina reminded everyone, she alone had the discretion to decide Lynn's fate. Ah, but "what to do with that discretion," that was her dilemma, Judge Sarmina mused from the bench.

Judge Sarmina mentioned that in the Superior Court opinion, her "application of the law" may have been brought into question.

"I may have gotten it wrong," she conceded. "I am fallible."

But then she opined that ultimately, she expected to "be upheld" when the case is taken up on appeal by the state Supreme Court.

Sure enough, D.A. Burns stood up and announced that the D.A. was going to appeal the case to the state Supreme Court.

From the bench, Judge Sarmina upbraided Lynn for not doing enough to protect victims from predator priests. She said as the archdiocese's secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004, Lynn "covered up many things."

But what to do about that unanimous three-judge opinion from the Superior Court, Judge Sarmina pondered. If the "conviction is in question, is not the punishment in question as well?"

Right on, Judge. That seemed to be what the Superior Court was saying when they reversed that conviction, and said that Lynn should be "discharged forthwith."

Lynn's lawyer, Thomas A. Bergstrom, argued that bail shouldn't be any higher than the $50,000 originally set when Lynn was on trial in Judge Sarmina's courtroom. That amount of bail would require a 10 percent cash deposit of $5,000, Bergstrom said.

Besides, Bergstrom kept saying, those Superior Court judges declared that Lynn should be "discharged forthwith."

D.A. Burns stood up and argued that the Superior Court opinion Bergstrom was putting so much stock in was "subject to review," and that the judge should deny bail to Lynn.

Bergstrom returned to the "strong language" of the Superior Court. He objected to suggestions by D.A. Burns that it could take up to 30 days to get Lynn out of jail.

When the judge agreed it might take some time to arrange Lynn's release, Bergstrom got agitated.

"Discharged forthwith," the defense lawyer repeated, reminding Judge Sarmina of the language of that Superior Court decision. "I think that's meaningful, but I'm not gonna argue about it."

Bergstrom suggested the D.A.'s appeal to the state Supreme Court wasn't going anywhere, because, he said, the Lynn case was one of a kind. Lynn was the only supervisor ever to be charged under the state's original child endangerment law. That law has since been amended to include supervisors, so why would the state Supreme Court take up a case on appeal that only effects one person, Bergstrom argued.

Upon questioning from the judge, Bergstrom conceded that he was only offering one lawyer's opinion. The judge reminded the defense lawyer that other lawyers might have different opinions.

As if on cue, D.A. Burns promptly volunteered: "I don't think you can rule out that the Supreme Court might take it."

Fifteen minutes into the hearing, Judge Sarmina announced she had made up her mind what she was going to do with her discretion as trial judge: she was going to grant bail pending an appeal to the Supreme Court. But before she would release Lynn, the judge said, she wanted the prisoner brought back to her courtroom.

"I want him in front of me when I tell him what his conditions are ... conditions pending bail," she said. She said she was still concerned about the possibility that Lynn would "flee the jurisdiction."

That prompted a discussion that shifted to the judge's chambers. When the principals came out, Bergstrom had heard enough suggestions that Lynn was about to flee the country.

"It's fantastic," Bergstrom told the judge. "There's not a chance in the world he's gonna flee the jurisdiction. There's no evidence he would flee."

"Why would he flee," Bergstrom asked. His conviction just got reversed. He's an innocent man. What's the worst thing that can happen to him? The state Supreme Court takes the case, Bergstrom said, and they reverse the reversal. So Lynn has to serve the rest of his sentence.

He just did 18 months, a clearly exasperated Bergstrom told the judge. "He can do [another] 18 months standing on his head."

When Judge Sarmina objected to Bergstrom's remarks, particularly that bit about Lynn standing on his head, the defense lawyer told the judge he was just trying to be reasonable. It's not reasonable to suggest that Lynn would flee the country, Bergstrom said. That's not based on reality, that's based on fantasy.

The judge was annoyed. "You're willing to be reasonable," she said sarcastically. "That's so kind of you."

Burns stood up and argued that sometimes, "fantasy may be reality." Then he brought up Ira Einhorn. Nobody thought he would flee either, Burns said. Like the Unicorn, Lynn might be harboring fugitive impulses.

The judge set bail at $250,000, which would require a $25,000 deposit. It was five times the original amount. She ordered Lynn to turn in his passport.

"I believe I'm gonna require electronic monitoring," she said, which means that Lynn will have to wear an ankle bracelet. The judge said she would also require Lynn to report to his parole officer in Philadelphia every week.

"I'll get the passport," Bergstrom responded. "We'll post the bail. And I'll deal with the electronic monitor."

Lynn will report to a parole officer wherever and whenever the judge says, Bergstrom said.

"We'll learn to live with it," Bergstrom told the judge about her conditions for parole.

After it was all over, Bergstrom, still recovering from open heart surgery a month ago, said his client would spend New Year's Eve in jail, and New Year's Day, but after that, he'd probably be out "within a week."

The defense lawyer repeated to reporters his prediction that the D.A's appeal to the Supreme Court wouldn't go anywhere. "It's a fool's errand," he said, "because I think they'll lose."

The question of what Lynn will do when he gets out of the slammer is still up in the air.

"He's a priest in good standing," Bergstrom told reporters.

Lynn would no doubt love to return to the position he held when he was indicted, pastor at St. Joseph's Church in Downingtown. Parishioners at St. Joe's brought their rosary beads to the courtroom when Lynn was on trial, to show their support. They also wrote letters to Judge Sarmina on Lynn's behalf, describing Lynn as a humble and caring shepherd available 24-7.

But sending Lynn back to St. Joe's might bring some heat on the archdiocese. There's a lot of baggage that goes with being perceived as the disgraced Cardinal Bevilacqua's yes man. While Bergstrom was talking to reporters today, two protesters stood out there with placards that said, "No Bail For Lynn; He Bailed On Victims," and, "Bail Out Victims; Keep Lynn In Jail."

When asked about Lynn's status, Kenneth A. Gavin, the archdiocese's director of communications, responded, "It's too early in this whole process to provide a definitive answer to that question."

It's not even known if the archdiocese will spring for Lynn's $25,000 bail.

"I don't know yet," Bergstrom said, when asked by reporters where the bail money was coming from.

"Anybody want to kick in?" Bergstrom asked.

33 comments:

  1. Finally, the real story of what happened in that courtroom today! I've been scouring the net all day. Of course, philly.com weighed in. A waste of time, and very little pertinent information, the AP article was better, the NY Times was infinitely better than the Inky...but, thank God for Ralph! The real story! (Ralph, I appreciate it that it takes time to write this blog, and the excellence of your reporting....I will not even bother to watch the evening local news tonight, because it will just be a photo op for Seth.) Thank you, Ralph! Bravo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Couldn't agree more, Archie.

      Delete

  2. Victims/Survivors – Please look at this as a positive instead of a negative. We all would have liked Lynn to remain in prison, but the judge handed down a second best punishment. A large monetary bail that is seen with serious crimes, restriction of his freedom, and he must check in weekly with his babysitter most likely for his remaining days on this earth, or until the appeal by the District Attorney is ruled on.

    Judge Sarmina handed down the temporary ruling until Lynn's appeal is overturned and he is reunited with his jailhouse friends, or until he meets the devil himself.

    We as victims/survivors are only moving forward. Little steps they maybe, but we are still moving forward.

    I would doubt very highly that anyone who holds a position as Lynn did will attempt to follow in his footsteps.

    He maybe out of the facility that held him but he is still in prison being punished for his crimes

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. same rant with no purpose. head back to the other blogs with this nonsense

      Delete
    2. Dennis, he will never get back the 18 months he lost to prison, and his reputation will be tarnished forever. And, that is why I pray for him on a daily basis. I hope that when he gets out of jail he will have a peaceful life surrounded by the love of his family and friends.

      Delete
  3. Ralph,

    Any word yet on who will put up the 25K ?

    Did not the archdiocese say previously that the defense for Lynn met its financial cap ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Best meaning of this situation by Sarmina is that she knows well she screwed up royally and she knows the DA screwed up royally so like she did. To save face and to let her recoup some dignity plus allow the DA to go to a hiding place to salve his wounds, she like the drama queen she is, created this bail situation by taking her time to mediate over the bail request before granting it at 250K with 25K cash put down, electronic monitoring and surrendering of the passport plus weekly reporting to a court probation officer and staying in Philadelphia. She justified this by saying that she does not know if the State Supreme Court will agree to take the case and issue a ruling.

    She knows the ship is sinking and she needs to buy some time for herself and Seth Williams to put on their life preservers and get on a rowboat. Se will not admit she hit the iceberg and caused the ship to sink.

    After some time passes on and the State Supreme Court declines to take the case, then all bail restrictions will be null and void and Lynn will get back his cherished passport. Everybody knows this case has the makings of a term paper destined to get an F.

    How could you put a man in jail for 18 months by insisting that the 1972 EWOC law allowed for him to be charged and arrested when the newest revision of the EWOC was made in 2007 and the man transferred from his post to another post in 2004?

    Had Sarmina granted the defense the motion to dismiss the case, we would not be where we are today.

    Perhaps it is time for Sarmina, DA Seth Williams and ADA Burns should look for their passports to flee this country before we assemble a posse to find them and put them where they belong in jail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. James- well said on every level & every issue. Ralph was the best thru this entire process, trial & appeal. He deserves an award. May Seth come tumbling down!!

      Delete
    2. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    3. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    4. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    5. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    6. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    7. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    8. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
    9. Summary Judgement needs to be executed against Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington for failure to properly execute existing law, prosecutorial malfeasance, judicial malfeasance, failure by the Sarmina Court to provide for the substance of a fair trial, improper incarceration warranting compensation by the Trial Judge Sarmina, improper prosecution warranting compensation by Williams, Burns, Blessington, recommendation to the Commonwealth Judicial review board the disbarment and loss of attorney licenses and privileges permanently by Sarmina, Williams, Burns and Blessington.

      Delete
  5. What is the status of Bernard Shero's and Charles Engelhardt's appeal? Also, what has become of "Billy Doe"? Any more arrests?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OH someone please help Shero & Father Englehardt!! Don't let them sit there. Where is D.G.?? Florida still?!

      Delete
  6. If the "conviction is in question, is not the punishment in question as well?". Perhaps the most extraordinary rhetorical question, and disingenuous attempt to put a veil of propriety on abject unprofessionalism, that you will hear in any court in the country.
    But this is Philadelphia, where in the case(s) of the AOP that court is of the kangaroo kind.
    As Alice in Wonderland's fingers continue to slip from her tenuous grip on reality, and the Mad Hatter hatches one final, defiant, harebrained plot, a man innocent of the trumped up charges of a bunch of witch-hunters is forced to endure further hardship and ignominy.
    If the "conviction is in question, is not the punishment in question as well?". Get used to that phrase. As the house of cards comes tumbling down in the AOP show trials, you're going to hear it, even if not in so many words, again and again.
    Happy new year, Msgr Lynn, Fr Engelhardt, and Mr Shero. And likewise to Fr Avery, who chose what he saw as the lesser of two evils, and to Fr MacRae, who, in another state 19 years ago, did the same.
    Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

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

      Delete
  7. justone1618 - very well stated.

    This courtroom arrogance is a feeble, face saving attempt to mask the acute embarrassment they all must feel. Thanks Ralph for your excellent commentary.

    Their 'historic' conviction has morphed into a ludicrous historic blunder - suitable for a caveat in an entry level legal textbook.

    'Ex post facto' - duhhh!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thank you Ralph! Bravo for being honest and liberal, you may be one of the few forwarding thinking reporters. Trials are complex and it takes time to ses thru the trees, im sure not everyone was on board with this opinion before. Why? Because they were getting there information from the media. Ralph, you have a tremendous responsibilty. Lets see some articles FOR THE PEOPLE sharing prosecution's shit show on some other cases... All it takes is one man, will you be that man?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well there are over one hundred plus priests with creditable abuse on Victims, so what person or persons are responsible for the enabling and cover up ? Will they ever be brought to Justice or will chaput and his lobbying firm the catholic conference of bishops and some politicians in PA continue to stall long overdue legislation that will expose who knew what and when they knew it ? Why does a religious organization who claims to be a moral compass want to keep the TRUTH hidden ?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Unravel the lies at the beginning:

    1. Any one of us can be claimed as "credible" possible perpetrators given the absence of actual parameters; IOW none of those clergy deemed as 'credible' potential perpetrators were ever convicted with any evidence, they were only likely to have been in a place where the ALLEGED abuse could have happened. Innocent until Proven guilty applies everywhere in the US, even in our Catholic Church.

    2.There is no cover up of any crime, such as 'moving potential perpetrators' since no perpetrator crimes were ever proven to have occurred. Those smeared clergy are Innocent until Proven guilty.

    3. The Philly legal-political-judicial system has been documented as being infested/infected by illegal activities for over two generations, with no change in illegal and unethical actions by the current administrations. It is time for Federal intervention, but, that is not likely due to the current USDOJs own corruptness.

    4. Lynn is guilty of nothing. The clergy he supervised that are claimed to be 'credible' perpetrators are more than likely (using laws of probability since the rule of law no longer applies in Philly or the US, for now) guilty of nothing. The only crime likely committed in this whole charade is the persecution of the Catholic Church by anti-Catholic zealots and run-of-the-mill criminals in positions of government power.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JAE : is it because the SOL prevented prosecution ? If the allegations against these clergy were deemed not creditable then why did the archdiocese of Phila post them on their web site ?

      Delete
  11. Ralph deserves an award. He was such a part of this entire outcome! Tk you Ralph!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. JAE : After 2011 Grand Jury Report on Clergy Child Sex Abuse, the following priests have been permanently removed from ministry for abuse and/or boundary violations.

    Fr Michael Chapman
    Fr Stephen Perzan
    Fr Peter Talocci
    Fr Mark Fernandez
    Fr Stephen Glatts
    Fr Robert Povish
    Fr John Reardon
    Fr Thomas Rooney
    Msgr Francis Feret
    Fr George Cadwallader
    Fr John Bowe
    Fr David Givey
    Fr Joseph Gallagher
    Fr Mark Gaspar
    Msgr Richard Powers (Were it not for the shredded memo, he would have continued on in ministry.)
    Fr Andrew McCormick

    ReplyDelete
  13. Curious, has the actual plea document for Avery ever been released? Was is a nolo plea? An actual guilty plea? An "alford" (admits the state has evidence of guilt) plea?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think the document was ever released but it was read in court by the DA in the January trial of Fr. Engelhardt and Bernard Shero. Avery with additional "alleged victims" potentially putting him in jail for the rest of his life plead guilty to a single crime against Danny Gallagher that never happened so he could get his sweetheart 2 1/2 to 5 year jail term deal and in the process implicated Lynn who was later convicted of the endangerment of a minor charge... He never implicated Fr. Engelhardt, nor Shero (and Ceisler finally dropped the "bogus conspiracy convictions at the June Sentencing hearing) since Avery certainly couldn't say he conspired with them since the assaults involving Gallagher never happened. The DA knew those assault allegations were a fraud but coercing Avery to plead out set the table for the convictons of Lynn, Engelhardt and Shero....

      Delete
  14. Go back to the Beginning- the Church was forced to implement a Zero Tolerance policy-that meant sacrificing many, many Innocents, perhaps an actual Guilty was caught up as by-catch here and there. A list of names of 'credible' accused means nothing- they were never proven guilty - with evidence, as is required in most industrialized ('first world') nations. The Church merely threw some meat to the wolves. Surely, there may have been some bad meat mixed in with the good meat -we'll never know thanks to the greed and corruption of the pursuers/persecutors.

    Imagine any one of yourselves defending against accusations, without any evidence 20-30 years from now (or even yesterday), merely based on the possibility that you inhabited similar space and time with a presumed ('marginalized') 'victim'. That is your 'credible' accusation. Don't be so sure you won't be similarly tagged, some day. I am concerned for us all- we have created a very nasty legal monster in our haste to punish the Church.

    An interesting perspective on this whole dirty affair is that the Church seems to have found a socially 'acceptable' way to purge its clerical ranks of their homosexual 'problem' (aside from the new barriers in place at the seminaries). Since 95% of the 'boundary/offense' cases involves homosexual offenders preying on male adolescents (not children), the Zero Tolerance policy does two very important things very effectively; it cleanses (rids) the Church of that problem at the same time it assuages the pitchfork crowd at their doors.

    Stop with the silly responses that claim anyone sane denies there were abuses by priests and cover-ups by their supervisors - of course there was. But, not nearly as much as the bigots, who have outsmarted themselves in the long run (greed is so short-sighted), would like the world to think.

    Wise up, dear bigots, you've been 'had'. The Church, in her infinite wisdom, has her new martyrs, and you've got.....what exactly?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Money, of course. Especially for the attorney of the "victim". Typical attorney fee is 40% before expenses (usually about another 10%) of any award. So, collectively, at $2 billion damages awarded against the church, their take is about $1 billion. Pretty good day's pay for any "Sadducee” set who, at the time of Christ, had to settle for two pieces of wood, three nails and a Savior who would not save himself.

      Delete
  15. In an organization and leadership that shares very little information with its members, I find it interesting that Archbishop Chaput permitted the release of a statement acknowledging that the archdiocese contributed to the bail money for Msgr. Lynn’s release. Why is that? I submit it is that Chaput wants to show Philadelphia Catholics that he is in charge and that he will do what he wants, when he wants to do it, regardless of the facts, circumstances, pain or risk to the victims and their families.

    Reminds this writer of the soiree held at St. Helena’s in Blue Bell in October 2011:

    During the invitation-only dinner for Archbishop Charles J. Chaput at a parish hall in Montgomery County, Chaput singled out Lynn in the crowd and noted how difficult the ordeal has been for him, according to one priest who attended and two people briefed by others at the gala.

    Much of the audience, which included hundreds of priests, then stood and applauded, said the sources, who asked not to be identified.

    Look out for a similar back-slapping, hand-shaking celebration in the near future at a parish in the archdiocese welcoming back Msgr. Lynn and congratulating him on his courage and strength. Not to worry, I can guarantee that public notice to the press and media will most assuredly be made by the public affairs office down there at the castle on 17th St. regarding such an event.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What victims? The Danny Gallagher's of the underworld of thieves, druggies and liars? The others who suddenly remembered 40 years later that they were 'harmed' in such a way as to produce a substantial monetary award for themselves?

      So what if Chaput wanted to show his support for innocents? Maybe Lynn deserved a slap on the back - for trying to protect innocent men from bogus claims- how do you claim to know anymore about any of it than anyone else watching the circus of the absurd? Neither Chaput or Lynn should have been compelled to sacrifice possible innocents in the absence of any evidence - no less in a hostile legal-judicial-political environment. I expect the Church to defend their clergy, and all others around the world against bogus claims, charges and unjust laws and actions - this has been her history, and her glory.

      No rule of law, no justice - for anyone. Get used to it, you own it.


      Delete

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.