Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Jury Deadlocks On "Father Andy;" Defense Lawyer Jumps Ship

AP/Matt Rourke
By Ralph Cipriano
for Bigtrial.net

Around 1:30 p.m. today, the jury in the Father Andrew McCormick sex abuse case sent a note to the judge saying they were hopelessly deadlocked.

Judge Gwendolyn N. Bright told the jury to give it one more try, but it was to no avail. Shortly after 4 p.m., the judge declared a mistrial and dismissed the jury after four and a half days of fruitless deliberations.

The day began with the court stenographer reading back more than an hour of testimony from the alleged victim. Meanwhile, the alleged victim sat in the second row of the courtroom, listening to his own description of the alleged attack by "Father Andy." Soon, the alleged victim and his mother were sobbing and bowing their heads, while almost using up a box of tissues.

No juror, however, was seen glancing their way. The judge followed the reading of the testimony by re-reading her instructions to the jury on how to deal with the alleged victim's testimony. If you find his testimony credible, the judge had instructed the jury, the alleged victim's testimony alone was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant.

Apparently, at least one juror didn't believe the victim. The jury told the judge they did not want to talk to the lawyers, and they left without speaking to reporters. Judge Bright asked Assistant District Attorney Kristen Kemp if the district attorney's office wanted to retry the case.

"Yes, Your Honor," Kemp said. The judge promptly scheduled a court date of April 28, to set a date for a new trial.

When he shows up in court for his new trial, however, Father Andy will need a new lawyer. Defense attorney William J. Brennan told the judge he wanted to be relieved of his duties. In effect, Brennan announced he was firing his client. At the defense table, the priest and co-counsel Richard J. Fuschino both looked startled by Brennan's announcement.

"I'm done," Brennan twice told the judge, without offering any explanation as to why.

It was a bizarre and anticlimactic finish to a hard-fought four-day trial.

Judge Bright put the official damper on the proceedings by announcing her gag order on all participants in the trial, including lawyers, witnesses and jurors, would remain in effect.

That meant that reporters couldn't talk to Father Andy to find how he felt about dodging the slammer. Reporters couldn't talk to the alleged victim and his family to find out what effect their gut-wrenching ordeal had had on them. They couldn't talk to Bill Brennan and find out why he fired his client.

A relative of the alleged victim and another supporter were overheard saying the jury was split 11-1 in favor of a conviction. But since we have a gag order up, it was impossible to verify if this was true.

"The jury is deadlocked," the note from the jury foreman read. "All conversation has ceased."

After the judge sent the jury of nine women and three men in for one last try, the jury foreman wrote another note to the judge that said, "Nothing has changed since your last charge. We are still deadlocked. Our discussions have ceased."

While the jury deliberated, the judge was asked to re-read the charges against Father Andy, while nuns visiting the courtroom held a prayer vigil.

In one sense, the jury couldn't be blamed for not being able to make up their minds after hearing four days of testimony. Both sides in the case did a great job.

The accused victim told a straight-forward story with few contradictions. He was backed up by heartbreaking testimony from his mother, father and grandfather, a retired detective who took the first victim's statement in the case.

The prosecutor gave a great closing argument.

The defense did their creative best to dredge up some reasonable doubt. While the alleged victim claimed the priest wore "blue plaid boxers" when he was allegedly attacked back in 1997, the defense produced two witnesses to say the priest wore only "tighty-whities."

The defense caught the prosecution in one flub, when the assistant district attorney claimed that Father Andy had dressed up in civvies and snuck some altar boys in to see an R-rated movie. Brennan brought a DVD of the movie to court and proved it was rated PG-13.

The defense took a gamble by putting the 57-year-old priest up on the stand; some courtroom observers thought it backfired. Father Andy looked like a not-ready-for-prime-time player. He was awkward, he stammered a lot and he turned bright red. But maybe somebody on the jury gave Father Andy credit for not hiding behind the fifth amendment.

The jury in the case had a tough job.

The alleged victim was on the witness stand for about an hour and 15 minutes. His alleged attacker was on the witness stand for 15 minutes.

With only 90 minutes of testimony to go on, the jury was asked to try and figure out what happened between the priest and the altar boy 17 years ago.

The alleged victim's story was that when he was a 10-year-old altar boy in 1997, Father Andy lured him up to his room in the rectory, shoved him down on the bed and attacked him, twice trying to jam his penis into the boy's mouth.

The alleged victim, now 26, waited 15 years before coming forward to say what happened, and to identify his attacker as Father Andy.

The alleged victim came forward after he saw the priest on TV, and after he had a dream that the priest was attacking his five-year-old nephew. At the time, the alleged victim was abusing drugs and alcohol. To what extent we don't know.

The priest said the alleged attack never happened.

There was no testimony from any corroborating witness; nor was there any testimony from any second victim of Father Andy. The priest who had served for 32 years had access to literally hundreds of altar boys, his defense lawyer calculated.

Brennan's best moment in his closing may have been when he stood beside his client and asked the jury, "If this guy's a pervert, is that something you only do once?"

At least one person on the jury must have had a reasonable doubt about that.

In a few months perhaps, we'll get a chance to do it all over again, but Billy Brennan's decided to skip that party. It's a shame he can't tell us why.

Nevertheless, Brennan left the courtroom with an enviable record in these priest abuse cases. Most of these cases end up with the padre in question being hauled off in irons after a conviction.

But twice now, Brennan had wrangled a couple of hung juries for two priests accused of sexually assaulting minors. In 2012, when a jury was convicting Msgr. William J. Lynn of one count of endangering the welfare of a child, that same jury hung 11-1 in favor of acquittal on whether Brennan's client, Father James J. Brennan [no relation], had attempted to rape a 14-year-old boy.

In that case, Father Brennan admitted he let the boy watch porno, then got into bed with him, and sometime during the night, he accidentally spooned the alleged victim. But Father Brennan is a free man.

And so is Father Andy, at least for another month, thanks to Bill Brennan and his faithful sidekick, Richard J. Fuschino.

In the wake of the hung jury, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia released a statement today saying that Father McCormick remains on administrative leave.

"He has not and may not administer the sacraments publicly or present himself as a priest in good standing," read the statement from Kenneth A. Gavin, director of communications. "The archdiocese was not involved in Father McCormick's legal defense and did not underwrite its costs."

Ralph Cipriano can be reached at ralph@bigtrial.net.

193 comments:

  1. Let us give the jury a standing ovation for their time and effort, and await the re-trial.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And some with common sense to look at ALL the evidence to make a decision.

      Delete
  2. Legal Information Needed.

    We are hearing rumors and I will stress only rumors the jury split was 11-1 in favor of conviction.

    In addition a bomb shell was dropped upon the defense and fr. mccormick that attorney Brennan will no longer defend him.

    Can the District Attorney's office offer another plea deal or does mccormick have to go by the same agreement he agreed to with the first trial ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fail, would you take a plea deal for something you hadn't done?
      McCormick didn't, and won't. Try to understand, bigot, he is innocent.

      Delete
  3. It's a whole new case, If retried, all prior bets, deals are off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you JAE for the info.

      I'm passing this link to you because I think you will think its interesting.
      http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20140308_Judge_orders_Internet_commenter_s_name_revealed.html

      Delete
    2. Excellent, JAE. Ecker is losing it. The bigot thinks people will be intimidated into acquiescing in miscarriage of justice. The bigot should take a look at the comments on the Philly.com report (the only time I would bother with that joke of an organization). Oh, yeah, people seem terrified of speaking the truth loud and clear!!
      You're so right, JAE. We're getting closer to the e-bully, and this bigot definitely shouldn't be sleeping so tight at night.

      Delete
    3. Its Mr. Bigot to you guys.

      Now that the childish name calling by JAE and anonymous has been dealt with. I will play Monday morning D.A.

      Since JAE has informed us all prior bets, deals are off and I can prove this rumor of a vote of 11-1 to convict is true I would approach McCormick's only remaining attorney and only once and I mean once offer another plea deal. No trying to talk him into taking the plea deal. A yes or No answer is all I would need. The offer also would be only available for 24hrs.

      If he refuses, in the protection of all children especially Catholic children the retrial will go on as scheduled and who knows I might even put Blessington on the re-trial.

      Delete
    4. Ecker. Keep your plea deal.
      McCormick remains innocent. You remain a bigot.

      Delete
    5. Do you know what the two most words are spoken behind prison walls ?

      I'm innocent !!!

      Delete
  4. 1. Watching from a distance, this trial reinforced to me how nearly impossible it is for someone to defend himself against charges dealing with allegations from so long ago.

    2. And for the D.A.'s Office to declare already that it will retry the case only underscores yet again how Seth Williams is nuts in his jihad against the Catholic Church.

    This case *never* would have even seen the light of day if these charges were against anyone of any other profession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Dave,

      Williams is not just 'nuts', in my opinion he's deeply embarrassed over the whole Lynn prosecution blunder and will spare no (taxpayer) expense to vindicate himself and the whole Philadelphia DA operation.

      Delete
    2. Dave,

      I and everyone else who reads any words you put to paper should use caution.

      First you attacked the jury especially the female members of the jury when you gave your opinion how this jury would not be able to make a fair decision. I think you based that thought on the female jury seeing tears of the victims mother.

      Then your comment at 8:40 stating "how nearly impossible it is for someone to defend himself against charges from so long ago." If I must remind you within our justice system murder has no SOL's. Hoping child sexual abuse will take the same road. I am only taking a guess by your statement but you must believe time heals all wounds.

      Now, how can you be so shocked the D.A.'s office already knew that they would re-try the case ? Without hearing from Mr. Seth Williams himself I would take a guess the first day the jury ended without a decision it was discussed.

      Your last sentence I will agree and disagree. There are individuals who should have seen the inside of court room for a crime like this, but to say no individuals of other professions is a complete false statement.

      Delete
  5. Hello Ralph,

    Great job (as usual).

    Just one question (for now). Let's assume for the sake of argument that Father Andy's second trial also ends up as a mistrial. What happens next?

    Can the state (at the taxpayers' expense) keep trying Father Andy (who's on his own financially) until such time as they either get their coveted guilty verdict, or force a bankrupt Father Andy to either rely on the services of a less than stellar court appointed attorney who may not be as successful as Billy Brennan, or to simply accept 'sweet deal' plea (a la Avery)?

    Any non-contingency lawyers care to comment??

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ralph,

    This is something I found stated "Bright also ordered lawyers, witnesses and the jurors not to speak to reporters or comment publicly to avoid prejudicing the retrial"
    Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140313_Jury_split_in_priest_s_trial.html#h8RJoE4HjDzxGDiy.99

    Ralph,

    At last check you are a reporter. It seems though in your last sentence you are asking the jury to BREAK THE LAW so you can get a story ?

    Its shameful you don't notify the jury if they do speak with you they can be charged with contempt.

    Real Classy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dennis, I'm glad you always give me the benefit of the doubt. I don't believe her gag order applied to the jurors, although she did speak to them privately, so I don't know what was said. In most cases, jurors are free after their duties are complete to speak to reporters if they wish.

      Delete
    2. I stand corrected. The philly.com report was accurate; the gag order does apply to the jurors. Not good for the journalism business.

      Delete
    3. Now that's real class.

      Thanks, Ralph

      Delete
    4. Dear Mr. Bigot - Read ralph's comment. "i stand corrected." at least he admits when he has made a mistake.

      Delete
    5. YOU SHOULD MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS. Unless you know the full story.

      Children should be seen and not heard.

      Ralph, I am not going to explain anything to chuckles but if you wish to fine.

      Delete
    6. Dennis, the wanna be cyber bully

      Delete
  7. Above comment is absolutely right:
    This case NEVER would have even seen the light of day if these charges were against anyone of any other profession.
    At the moment there is no pressure on the accuser. Just needs to show up, go through another box of Kleenex and hope for a nice payday. Can the priest not sue for defamation?
    Also, as a general rule it should be considered a public service to publish personal details of false accusers. That way:
    -they will think twice before fabricating filth about innocent people
    -people who may come into contact with them will be forewarned of the potential danger such liars represent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Considering the alleged victim is not suing for money, is it possible that he was molested and just wants to seek peace with his past? Everyone automatically assumes he is a liar but what if he is honestly coming to terms with being sexually abused?

      Delete
    2. Every one of us here was ten years old at one time in our lives. Can you seriously relate to the claimants charge that he said nothing to anyone in authority at the time (family, with law enforcement members!, school, church, scouts, whatever)?

      No one sane, honest and ethical will ever relate to such a story. The percentage of victims that might hide such an event is so small that it boggles the sane mind to see all these claimants crawl out of the woodwork decades later - and only against Catholic clergy. Where are all those victims created from anywhere but the Church- don't they exist? This phenomena occurs just for those reportedly victimized by Catholic priests?

      Highly unlikely and no where close to meeting the reasonable doubt mandate when such outrageous claims make it into a courtroom- even in Philly, apparently the land of errant Catholic priests if you're to believe their justice system.

      Delete
    3. How do you know he does not intend to sue for money? Wake up.
      Agree with you, though, that he would seem to be seeking peace with his past. Do you agree that to do that at the expense of an innocent man would be despicable.
      Interesting hypothesis you raise: what if he actually was sexually abused? I hadn't thought of that during this show trial, but you may be right. I wonder if it would be too painful to accuse the actual perpetrator? Let me go and do some research about where child sexual abuse occurs in this country, to see if that may give us some clues.

      Delete
    4. Considering the victim has had this conversation with me, he has zero inclination to sue. He provides enough on his own to where he does not need now money. He doesn't want, he never wanted it.
      And what if father Andy actually did do it? Everyone sidesteps this, just states he is in fact innocent and the victim is covering up to ruin the church and get money he doesn't want.

      Delete
  8. Thats why seth should step down when it starts being about him instead of the people thats when the bs starts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I just started following these last two trials of the catholic church and yes there are scum bags out there that need to be put away.But when the evidence isnt enough to convict seth then u need to let it go because ur showing prejudice against the catholic church facts are facts and u just don.t have enough to convict. So seth put ur pride on the side because ur embarassing ur self and ur office if that continues ur prejudice will be judged one day not by the court but ur maker and the catholic church like the rest of us and that seth u cant fix the outcome the way u want it

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "He has not and may not administer the sacraments publicly or present himself as a priest in good standing,"

    If this is accurate then why does he continue to wear clerical garb ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 9:07

      Simply, Feel sorry for me.

      Delete
    2. A priest is a priest forever, until one passes away or defrocked. As kemp chose to say "He chooses whenever he wishes to wear his collar "(paraphrasing) is ignorant of church teaching.

      Example, Padre Pio at one time in his life was commanded by his bishop to stop saying Mass, confession and so on publicly. He still was a priest. His faculties were returned to him (after a few years) when his examination was concluded, that his gifts were given by
      God.

      McCormick is a priest. He is being tried as a priest.

      Delete
    3. @anonymous 1:145P

      Once he is ordained, a priest is a priest forever, i.e. throughout all eternity. Furthermore, 'defrocked' (laicized) priests retain the power to celebrate the Eucharist, but they are instructed by the Church not to do so.

      FYI, Catholic Cannon Law requires that laicized priests hear the confessions of those near death if an active priest is not available. This stipulation is clearly written in the document they receive from Rome when they are laicized.

      I believe that God - in His Mercy - will place laicized priests in critical situations where the powers of their ordination will be needed (and ultimately welcomed).

      Delete
    4. I don't think your comment has put any Roman Catholic at ease.

      What you are saying and let me give you an example. If there is some type of mass causality incident in the area of Pottstown where McCormick resides and there is not enough priests to give last rites he may be called upon to do so ?

      Not will only some family members believe they were sent second best, I would consider what type of child is more vulnerable to an abusive priest for his groping and touching but a deceased child.

      If your Catholic Canon Law (remember not the law of the land) feels this is an appropriate action to take while a priest is on trial for child abuse then I am sorry to say because I respect our justice system the investigated should be considered guilty until proven innocent.

      When society and parishioners are keeping an eye out for signs of a possible pedophile priest, how do you keep an eye out for ‌necrophilic priests ?‌

      Delete
    5. Dennis - have you been drinking or smoking something illicit, or do you just delight in deliberately missing the point???

      Delete
    6. Then please spell it out for me. Enlighten all of us with your superior knowledge. I gave a scenario, prove me wrong about the interpretation I made about the comment anonymous made at a 2:26.

      I'm interested to read what you have to say.

      Delete
    7. Dennis - I see you're not of the faith or just very ignorant of it. God's law prevails all laws. If one follows His law , he will follow man's law.

      Alas, if you haven't realized in this day, the law of the land keeps getting weirder by the minute. The leaders seem to be making laws for just about anything, ontop of that, many contradict. God's law doesn't.

      Also, please post your area in which you live, since it's only fair

      Delete
    8. Having a dead victim claimant testify from the grave to prosecute an accused priest for necrophilia is akin to having victim claimants from decades ago pop up out of nowhere (with nothing) to send accused ephebophile priests to jail for life (McRae) and/or blackmail the Catholic Church.

      You finally make sense. All your claimed victims are zombies.

      Delete
    9. Dennis- your scenario is idiotic. If you need last rites, I would safely assume at your last breathes you would asking "hold on a second Father, have you ever been convicted or accused of a crime? Are you in good standing?"

      Get real Dennis. Your last cares would be how to save your soul and not if the priest is in good standing.

      Anonymous 1.45

      Delete
    10. Dennis,

      A defrocked or laicized priest is absolutely required by Cannon Law to come to the aid of another Catholic who is near death, and can hear that person's confession and administer the last rites of the Catholic Church. This could be a case where someone suffers a heart attack in a court room, is hit by a car on Roosevelt Boulevard or is shot by a mugger in the Broad Street Urinal (......er, Subway).

      If you remember from your Catechism, the last rites (now called the Anointing of the Sick) can free the departing soul from eternal damnation and - most probably - either lessen or totally eliminate any time spent in Purgatory. Eternity - is 'for keeps'.

      Thankfully, the validity of any sacrament - including the Anointing of the Sick does not depend upon the 'holiness' of the priest.

      So, were there - as an extreme example - an imminent threat to our nation's safety (say, from an anticipated nuclear attack), I would hope that the laicized priests would somehow be mobilized to help.

      Second best? Hardly!

      Delete
    11. No. I would not have to ask the priest anything. I assume by the way I am made out to be the exact time he places the sign of the cross on my forehead he will burst into flames and my head will spin 360 degrees.

      Delete
    12. This is not Dennis Ecker - it's Jack Daniels.

      Delete
  12. Most likely scenario, second trial may well end up in a mistrial unless Seth is lucky enough to find 12 willing dopes who will vote 12-0 for conviction. Mention was made about plea bargain, but keep in mind that before a judge accepts a plea bargain, he or she will grill the defendant to ensure that he or she fully understands that he or she makes the decision of their own free will plus that he or she fully accepts the responsibility for the alleged act he or she is accused of doing. No judge will accept a plea from a defendant who says he is pleading guilty to "settle" a case and is not accepting responsibility for the deeds he or she is accused of committing. After all, this is not a civil trial when settlements are made without implying guilt.

    Would it be nice if the trial was held outside Philadelphia? Yes, but you would have the same ADA and DA prosecuting the case instead of a local prosecutor taking over the case who would have a different perspective of the case than the Philly ADA. No guarantee what jury pool may consist of.

    The beliveability of the victim? People have put other people in jail with beliveable testimony that withstands cross examination. Innocent people have gone to jail for offenses they did not commit. That is why the judge told the jury that Pennsylvania law allows them to convict the accused based on false testimony profferred by the victim if the jury believes the victim over the accused. Best th ing to happen to Father Andy would be the prosecutor agrees to revoke the most serious charge of deviate sexual assault provided the priest pleas to the rest of the charges in exchange for two years of probation. With no jail time, Father Andy would then be able to build a new life without being a priest and have some dignity to do so. Were Seth WIlliams to do such a thing, his credibility would be much improved among Catholics who think he has a vendetta against the church.

    His attorney, Brennan jumping ship. Philly Inky said that Brennan recently found he knew the family of the victim and had to go along with the trial until it was concluded. For reasons known to him, he chose to jump ship. Best replacement attorney would be Bergstrom and his assistant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is unfathomable why some of the posters on this blog assume that McCormick was falsely accused -- as though they know first-hand that he did not rape this boy. The comments here are eerily similar to Dottie Sandusky's interview yesterday on the Today show where she claimed that all of Sandusky's victims were liars. Apparently, there are some zealots who will ignore all reason and logic - and the evidence- based on some misplaced, blind devotion. Like the one holdout juror who hung this jury. I understand a wife living in denial of her husband's sins. But why this support for McCormick? Why would a circus of nuns and priests hold a vigil for this clown, especially in the presence of 4-5 victims of clergy abuse who attended the trial? Did it cross their minds that maybe they should have been praying for the victims? Today, after 11 of the 12 jurors found McCormick guilty, has it crossed their minds to pray for the victims?
      But again, I wonder, why this blind support? Can't these people think for themselves? Can't they reason on their own?

      The defense in this case was essentially that McCormick couldn't have raped the accuser because no other alter boys have accused him of rape over the years. Using that same twisted logic, one could conclude that he is guilty because we know that dozens of priests molested boys. That logic is so obviously flawed, but it also ignores the facts in this case.
      FACT: The grand jury report implicated McCormick for behavior that had nothing to do with the victim in this case.
      FACT: The church suspended McCormick in connection with that conduct before the victim in this case came forward.
      FACT: McCormick flunked two lie detector tests that inquired about his molestation of boys while a priest. Those lie detector tests were administered not by the prosecution but by the church years before the victim in this case came forward. And what question did he flunk -- Have you ever touched a boy's genitals for sexual gratification while a priest? Keep in mind that it was the church itself who administered the lie detector test.

      In light of those uncontroverted facts, is it that far-fetched that he molested a boy?why have the zealots blindly assumed that he could not rape a child?

      And to those posters on here who think this is a big conspiracy by the DA against the Church and its priests, have you considered the Church's stance in this case? The Church couldn't release a statement fast enough that Mccormick is not a priest in good standing and that they played no part in defending him in this trial. The Church - his employer -has already concluded that he is not fit to be a priest based on his wrongdoings. Yet some of the posters here know better?

      And what did McCormick's lawyer do at the conclusion of the trial? He quit. Or as Ralph said in this blog, he fired his client. Draw your own conclusions - if you are capable of doing so.

      Delete
    2. James, James, James

      "Lucky enough to find 12 willing dopes who will vote 12-0 for conviction. Are you sure that is how you wish to describe 12 individuals who literally will have the life of McCormick in their hands.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 11:17

      Thank You.

      Your facts are there and there is no way anybody in their right mind can challenge them.

      Delete
    4. Bigot alert! In his angry screed Anon 11:17 talks of a "circus of nuns and priests", of "zealots" and describes the defendant as a "clown."
      He wants McCormick found guilty of something he did not do because this bigot wants the priest to be a victim of his hatred of the Church.
      Note how his only argument is based on what the Church did to the priest. And yet this same bigot will post elsewhere that the Church does nothing about the (historical) issue of child abuse. See how the Abusenik narrative is becoming full of holes?
      The Church since 2002 has been in damage limitation mode and has paid out (unwisely) millions to false accusers to avoid the cost of litigation. If there is a mindset which is more severe than zero tolerance, that is the Church's. Disgracefully, it takes only an accusation, no matter how absurd or unfounded, for a priest to be removed from ministry - by the Church (bishops). Unfortunately many innocent priests have been thrown under the bus. But the tide is turning and the false accusers and corrupt attorneys are having to scrape the bottom of the barrel for their payouts these days. At long last justice is starting, ever so gradually, to be done.

      Delete
    5. James...stop playing lawyer...prosecutor..etc...its annoying. You are definitely the type to pretend to know something. Fact is...u don't realize how much you don't know...

      Delete
    6. justone1618

      Are you trying to put lipstick on a pig again ?

      If you are speaking nationwide about what has been paid out to us false accusers the number far exceeds the millions you have stated. I looked this up about a year ago and then it was 3.2 Billion with a B, I am sure that number has increased since then.

      Source: Bishop Accountability

      Delete
  13. Shouldn't attorney have disclosed that prior to trial or a mistrial declared if he discovered during trial. Potential jurors are usually dismissed if they know any of the participants. You wonder if he may have gone soft on victim when questioning. Most likely not but does create questions which is unfortunate.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Brennan used to be a neighbor of the grandfather of the alleged victim, who is a former detective. During opening and closing statements, Brennan told the jury the family of the alleged victim are good people. But I don't know if the rest of that Inky report is true. With the gag order up, nobody can talk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ralph wrong again

      Delete
    2. Give us some info. Pops.

      Delete
  15. Wait a minute. 1) This guy regularly brought boys to his bedroom. Even disobeyed orders not to, twice. Doesn't it seem like this guy can't stop hanging with boys? 2) He takes boys to Poland and pays for their trips himself. One of the boys can't remember anything that happened in Poland other than the priest gave him beer and money for booze. He can't remember if he slept in the priest's bedroom. Another boy had to be subpoenaed to appear as a reluctant witness for the priest because his mother made him do it. 3) This guy has been suspended by the Archdiocese since before this current man made his claim. The Archdiocese is on the same side as the accuser. But no one here seems mad at the Archdiocese, just the accuser. 4) This guy failed two lie detector tests. And the people here aren't calling him the liar. Does any of this make sense? 5) This guy expected the jury to believe that he has never once in his life bought his own underwear or soda. Conclusion: One person on the jury must have believed they would go to hell if they convicted this priest. There is no other explanation for not convicting this guy. I feel sorry for the other jurors who must have been driven to distraction. No wonder his lawyer quit while he was ahead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The money that Father gave the witness in Poland was spending money provided to Father Andy for the witness.

      Delete
    2. In none of the articles I read did they say the witness testified because his mother made him do it. He testified his mother was an avid supporter of Father Andy and that the defense subpoenaed him. He has been interviewed numerous times over the years, all while providing the same information on each occasion. Too bad the alleged victim couldn't keep his story straight.

      Delete
  16. I wasn't in the courtroom like so won't try to get into the mind of the juror, if there was only one, who voted to acquit. Perhaps those who wanted to convict were all anti-catholic bigots but that too seems unfair since I have no facts to back that up. All your points regarding Fr Andy are valid and at best his behavior was reckless. Still some of us have trouble with allegations made 15 years after the incident was said to take place and that come to the accuser in a dream.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Bigot - can you provide your source of the 11-1 verdict. Interesting that only you know the tally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure if you're an internet troll or just an asshole? Hard line since everyone who doesn't agree with you is a bigot, in reference to another article that was what one source claims they over heard at a 7-11 from the victims family member.

      Delete
    2. Alleged victim you mean. Facts were lacking in this case...

      And I never mentioned anything about a conversation at a 7-11

      Delete
  18. How do you know Andy didn't do anything, Did he tell you..LOL! In confession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do you know he did do anything- were you there? Infantile logic-

      Delete
  19. Can somebody clarify where the 11-1 comment came from. Surely only the jurors would know that. Another falsehood?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably from a clerk at 7-11.....

      Delete
    2. Dennis had a dream about it just like the dream the alleged victim had about his abuse. I'd start looking at the family...

      Delete
  20. Seems the 11-1 claim is a lie. Not surprising.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everything about this media-hyped scandal is a lie, it isn't surprising that they need all the other little and big lies to cover their lying tracks.

      Be careful, when you point out the spots on the leopard is gets very angry and threatens with lawsuits insisting that it is a lion and attacking you for not agreeing with it's self-deception. We're not supposed to notice the obvious. Don't let the details of any of these trumped-up cases get in the way of the bigots and haters storytelling. It's all they've got in their twisted worlds.

      Delete
  21. Agree. I would definitely look at the family. Remember, "victims" are often trying to deal with a dark issue by projecting blame on a third party. By depositing the guilt on a third party they seek to exonerate themselves and the offender, in cases where the offender is in a close relationship with them - parent, uncle, sibling, step-father, mother's boyfriend, for instance. It is a futile unburdening process which can be very dangerous for anybody on the periphery of the "victim's" life - such as a priest.
    I use the speech marks around "victim" not out of disrespect for genuine victims of sexual abuse (the vast majority of which are abused in family homes) but because the term has been abused and rendered practically meaningless by the countless false accusations over the last decade or so, and by counterfeit organizations like SNAP and bishopaccountability, as well as corrupt justice systems in places like Philadelphia. In setting the bar so low for what it means to be proved a genuine "victim" they have done a shameful disservice to genuine victims of sexual abuse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous - Well, perhaps Father Andy's new attorney will look more closely at this possibility. Unlike Billy Brennan, he or she hopefully won't have any connections with the alleged victim's family.

      How about this kid's criminal and drug records (if any)????

      Delete
  22. It will be interesting to see when the DA allows the alleged victim to announce his civil suit against the AD

    ReplyDelete
  23. Interesting point. It seems the new strategy is for false accusers - liars - to delay making civil suits against ADs until after trials. That way they can also lie about their intention not to sue the AD (for something one of their priests did not do). Gullible jurors certainly bought that lie.

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

      Delete
  24. A big public thank you to the jurors who refused to be conned, lied to and harassed. Because of your courage, because of your intelligence (using reason not sentiment) an innocent man remains free.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I would assume McCormick is back home in Pottstown in the company of his family. I would take a guess he is not truly a free man. He will remain in his house until April 28 th so he can avoid the pointing fingers and the talking behind his back. Actions that his own innocent family members will have to endure.

    Like a abuse victim he is living in fear, fear of not knowing what will happen next. He may even have the feeling lets just get over it and do want you want to me.

    Not like a abuse victim though he has brought the actions against him on by no one else but himself.

    No tears coming out of these eyes for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. took you 24 hours to write that.

      you might be the biggest bigot and piece of shit on all these blogs (ahead of your friend jim robertson). your goal is to try to drive awareness to your ALLEGED (see i can use caps too) abuse that has never been substantiated. man is free and you should let him be. is anyone concerned if the alleged victim is hiding indoors now that everyone knows who he is. would be simple to figure it out based on what friends testified and his sexuality now. will he relapse into drugs as a result of a mistrial as he will have to relive all of this again in the near future. sure hope he is able to keep his day job with all the time he took off to be present at the courthouse every day.

      answer me one question - have you ever talked or communicated with one of these alleged victims in the last few years that have brought abuse allegations in the city of Philadelphia and surrounding areas?

      Delete
    2. This one here and his friend whom you reference, Anon @2:13, have already openly (embarrassingly) expressed their man-love for each other in other forums. It is my contention that it is their overly-expressed in the other case and still-suppressed (in this case) sexuality that drives their attacks on the Catholic Church.

      There is no rationale or logic to any of their arguments, absolute disengagement of higher cerebral activation - only unbridled and uncontrollable brainstem activity (emotion) drives both of these men.

      Matching emotional basket-cases, just in time for Easter. Woo-Hoo!

      Delete
  26. What, you call me the biggest bigot and piece of shit and I am to show you respect and answer any of your questions.

    I asked myself numerous times why people like you defend scumbags like Abusive Andy and the only logical answers come down to two. You are either a family member, or in your sick mind you get off listening to the details of the horrors of what children had to suffer.

    The only difference between you and Abusive Andy is he has been identified while you are still a scary figure behind a keyboard.

    I feel sorry for the innocent children that are within your grasp when you finally snap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. just like the coward we know you are

      Delete
    2. That's all you have ? Let me help you and the other defenders of Abusive Andy along. I have also been given the name of one who was born of parents out of wedlock, and some cases I have been even called a female dog.

      When you come up with something new let me know, until then keep patting Abusive Andy on the back telling him "Everything will be o.k."

      Delete
  27. Abusive Andy is out shopping for another defense attorney.

    Seriously how does one walk into a lawyers office and ask someone to defend him against sexual abuse charges against a 10 year old little boy with the history Abusive Andy has ?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Remember Sally Doe only remembered this encounter in a dream.....

    And it is all hearsay. All evidence was lost 17 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder if anyone is dreaming of any particular EMT character these days? Let's suppose that a claim was made that 15 years ago a child was molested by a PFD-EMT in the back of a bus during transport, could the city be sued for covering up such cases? How many of these cases are out there?

      Someone should look into this very distinct possibility/likelihood.

      Delete
  29. I think its something very important you should look into.

    But you should stop watching so much television. PFD uses the term bus ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another lousy attempt at deflection. It's only important to you if it's a Catholic priest- perhaps you just never got over that man-crush (self denial of one's own reality can lead to the persecution of the other) you've been carrying around with you all these decades.

      Only a sick, twisted and evil mind would promote and celebrate sending a man to prison based upon the dream of an obviously very troubled individual. Your hatred for Catholics is palpable, and reveals your severe personality and mental disorder.

      Looks like majority of the BT commenters have your number, and have profiled you quite accurately. Now, we know also your middle name.

      Delete
    2. Did the priest fail two lie detector tests? Did he twice refuse orders to not bring boys to his bedroom? Was he suspended by the Archdiocese prior to this claim? Did he continue chasing a boy whose mother told him to stay away? Did he give 11 year old boys in Poland beer and money for booze? Did he pay for those boys' trips to Poland? Did he invite boys to Poland before even speaking to their parents? Did he use his own mother to imply that he has never once bought underwear or soda?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 1:55

      You have just earned yourself the title as I have been told I earned, BIGOT. Although I have probably earned more titles then you have.

      I am not sure, but I would take a guess and say, I don't think your questions will be answered, and if they are they would be fitting a David Letterman top 10 skit or a fun question and answer bit on the Bill Maher show.

      However, from one bigot to a fellow bigot (I know your not) I do wish you the best of luck in receiving your answers. How they get explained away by people like JAE are
      amazing.


      Delete
    4. You labeled yourself anti-Catholic here and elsewhere (aside from the rest of us easily discerning your biases) - it is documented. Are you trying to walk it back, now?

      If a commenter contributes bigoted material, we have an obligation to note it to keep debate honest. If you don't like us noting your bigotry, stop practicing your bigotry. It's really that simple.

      Delete
  30. The Only question at hand to be adjudicated, potentially, is did McCormick illegally touch this man when he was a minor 17 years ago.

    Nothing else matters.

    And to prove that charge, hard evidence, supporting a fair and ethical case for which a jury should be able to determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, should be required since the freedom and reputation of an innocent man (until convicted) is at risk.

    Anything less than this rigorous evaluation and deliberation process is nothing more than a lynching.

    Do you support or participate in lynch mobs?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the answer to the above questions are all yes, it is highly likely that McCormick touched this man. It is clear that McCormick was obsessed with boys to the point that the Archdiocese could not control him and had to suspend him. Two more questions. Why do you think the Archdiocese suspended him? Do you think the Archdiocese is a lynch mob?

      Delete
    2. That's a big "if" there, Anon @9:00pm, and even if that "if" is a yes, it doesn't mean this man did what he was accused of doing to this plaintiff.

      I have not spoken either for, against or about the AOP actions, why do you commenters keep bringing it up? Do you know something about this suspension, as a fact, that we don't know? All Catholic dioceses are faced with a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' mentality no matter what they decide when faced with managing staff - for various reasons (most personnel actions do not involve claims of minor abuse). Are other Christian denominations or other religions faced with these dilemmas? No. Are any secular organizations faced with similar dilemmas? No. Your bias/bigotry is so ingrained in every thought and word you submit that you don't realize that it is on full display in this case (and probably all others involving Catholics), but you think no one should note it. It is duly noted by those of us not biased or bigoted, so you will need to get over it, because we will continue to point it out to you and others.

      The lynch mob in this case is those commenters here and elsewhere that have convicted this man of this crime before his trial and even after a jury's deliberation was inconclusive, and only because he is Catholic clergy.

      Stop trying to flip the script here onto the AOP or others, your attempted ruse is amateurish, at best, and manipulative and dishonest at worst. Own your hatred of Catholic priests, if you believe that you're justified, defend your position without the lies and distortions.

      Delete
    3. The Archdiocese convicted this man before his trial. Do you think the archdiocese will welcome him back with open arms if found innocent ? He is fairly a young guy compared to the other abusers, but if found innocent do you think there is a church out there waiting for him ? If you think there is you are a bigger idiot then a think you are. Like I said before I can't comment on his freedom, but I can tell you his life as a respected priest and/or citizen is gone.

      There is a positive note though for him if he does go to prison. Somebody will be buying his underwear for him.

      Delete
    4. I was trying to tie the few biased commenters together with the words you have used -"manipulative and dishonest" is dead on. I certainly could not have said that better this morning. As you say, flipping the "scripts" where the hatred is so "ingrained" in them. It is so blatantly obvious to most people. You very civilly pointed it out. Thanks, JAE.

      Delete
    5. Josie- we have the truth on our side. We need to practice patience when dealing with the evil one. He's a dirty fighter and he will attempt to drag you down into the filth with him, but we won't be fooled by his tricks nor stoop to his low level. We will win this battle with truth, forgiveness and love as our weapons.

      Delete
    6. Here we see once again Josie Bailey popping her head out of her hole to join forces with no other then JAE ? Did she get to see her shadow ?

      When she shows up to add her one cent it reminds me of the statement Chippy111 made a couple of blogs ago. "On Friday afternoons I go about my life, leaving blogging and the Dennis Eckers of the world in my rear view mirror"

      Now, I never took offense to that statement because I thought there goes an individual like Chippy111, Josie Bailey and the JAE's who have the luxury to put the subject of clergy sexual abuse behind them anytime they wish. They can place their heads in the sand until they feel its time for them to entertain themselves.

      It also shows they clearly are not firsthand witnesses or victims of clergy abuse, and for that I AM truly happy for. If they were they would know the majority of their priests victims live with what happened to them 24/7. Its not something that is turned off on Friday and resumed on Monday. Even if they do not wish to see it from a victims point of view do they think Abusive Andy is sitting home not thinking about what might happen to him every minute of the day ? How about Avery, Engelhardt , Shero and Lynn do they think on the weekends they do not care where they are when those cell doors close or in Lynn's case looking at that box around his ankle ?What about Brennan sitting somewhere thinking about his retrial. He must at least once a day think about what will happen to him.

      So Josie, the comment you made is actually more then your once a month comment so you should be good for awhile, but I am always interested to read the nonsense you post.

      Sincerely,

      The Bigot (And don't forget it)

      Delete
    7. Are the minor victims of Catholic clergy abuse any more traumatized than the minor victims of sexual abuse committed by fathers, brothers, uncles, cousins, friends, teachers, coaches, entertainers, non-Catholic clergy?

      Given the prevalence of child and minor abuse in all areas outside of the Catholic Church within the context of the 24/7 vigilance of claimed victims of priests observed here, it's a wonder anything else in the world ever got or gets done! Just imagine if every victim of crime dedicated his/her life to blogging their inability to forgive or forget (hate, bigotry, bias) and brag about their inability to live a normal, productive life - where would we and they be?

      What a waste of an existence.

      Delete
    8. Nothing inspires forgiveness quite like revenge.

      Scott Adams (1957 - )

      Delete
  31. Have you no clues in the facts about this case, and is your agenda to do nothing but try and push my buttons by calling me names or trying to make individuals believe I am gay because I have a homosexual friend ? Does Mr. Robertson scare you that much ?

    What you fail to see, this lynch mob is no other than your own Archdiocese of Philadelphia.

    Who removed Abusive Andy from ministry in March 2011 even before this victim came forward ? Not that I disagree with the actions, but your Archdiocese got the ball rolling.

    What Archdiocese has failed to ever show support literally for one of their own ? Not one statement we believe Fr. Andy to be innocent and will pray for him. Instead in a comment from the Archdiocese they made a statement EMPHASIZING he "cannot present himself as a priest in good standing." In this case the word emphasizing is a very strong word, and Abusive Andy showing up in court in priest garb is nothing more then him showing up in a Halloween costume.

    Then the Archdiocese kicked him to the curb, where then the bus ran over him, and while under the bus they began kicking him. They made a statement "The archdiocese was not involved in Father McCormick's legal defense and did not underwrite its costs." Does this seem how someone would react if they believed in him.

    Abusive Andy is in search for a new attorney. But it does not seem your church will be sending him any greenbacks. It seems he will be forced to ask family members for the funds or even ask them to mortgage their homes. He does have the option of a public defender. Something I will be forced to pay for, but there is one other option. You and your other sidekicks can open up your checkbooks. Something I doubt will ever happen.

    Once again we see you fail to answer simple questions this time by anonymous 1:55.

    But I'm going to add a little bit more for you to read in response to your comment.

    I can't tell you what the status of Abusive Andy's freedom will be months from now, but I can tell you the reputation of an innocent man is GONE FOREVER.

    ...and No I don't believe in Lynch mobs but clearly your support for the AOP shows you do.

    p.s. you can answer this or not. But are you a Philly resident or New York ?


    McCormick, ordained in 1982, was pastor of Sacred Heart parish near Bridgeport, Montgomery County, when he and 26 Roman Catholic priests were suspended in March 2011 by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia for possible inappropriate conduct with children.

    After the mistrial, the archdiocese issued a statement emphasizing that McCormick "has not exercised public ministry" and cannot present himself as a priest in good standing. McCormick now lives with his parents in Pottstown.

    The statement also said: "The archdiocese was not involved in Father McCormick's legal defense and did not underwrite its costs."

    Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140313_Jury_split_in_priest_s_trial.html#WZFGPSfarGfXOLXH.99

    ReplyDelete
  32. Hi, JAE and others,
    Ecker is clearly filth. I now never read or answer his/her posts. Would suggest others do the same. Simply ignore or boycott him/her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lets see. Have I ever in my life been accused of bringing harm to a 10 y.o. ? Am I an ex- school teacher who has been convicted of sexual abuse of a child now sitting in a prison cell ? Am I a priest who has been convicted of sexual abuse of a child also sitting in a prison cell ? Am I a admitted child abuser also sitting in a prison cell ? Am I an individual who is on a tether (‌ A rope, chain, or similar restraint for holding an animal in place, allowing a short radius in which it can move about.) awaiting the decisions of strangers regarding my freedom ? Am I a priest who is awaiting his re-trial in June for sexual abuse of a minor ? Am I a priest who thought another persons genitals was for his sick enjoyment at a YMCA ?

      I can keep going on but I won't. But all those questions I can answer no, no, no, no, no, no. Can you answer no to those questions regarding your clergy ?

      I can only assume that the definition of filth has changed since the last time I looked.

      I have said this before and I will say it again. I do not force anyone to read my comments or force anyone to leave a comment. I can only say let me introduce you to two keys on your computer. One is a up arrow, the other a down arrow. USE THEM.

      Have a nice day.

      Delete
    2. are you receiving disability payments under false pretenses? the answer to that question is yes

      Delete
    3. Let me know where I can pickup these checks. I would cash them in a heartbeat

      Delete
    4. Of course, you are right, Anon @10:57, but, it's also good to keep toned up as we work over this heavy bag full of sewage.

      Delete
  33. Meanwhile, away from the kangaroo courts, crocodile tears and scumbag false accusers, real cases of PRESENT DAY child abuse continue virtually unreported:

    "Alabama Youth Pastor Jeffrey Eddie ‘Can’t Remember’ How Many Boys He Molested"

    February 2014 arrest of Jeffrey Dale Eddie, children's minister at Highland Park Baptist Church, on two counts of child pornography, 31 counts of second-degree sodomy, and three counts of sexual abuse of a child under the age of 12.

    It's the second such case at a Colbert County church within a month. In January, Oliver Brazelle, 79, the former music director at the First United Methodist Church in Sheffield, was charged by Lauderdale County authorities with second-degree sexual abuse and one-count of second-degree sodomy.

    Read and weep, anti-Catholic bigots. Apparently these poor child victims mean nothing to you:

    http://www.timesdaily.com/news/crime/article_d9a9bfce-a60d-11e3-a8c0-0017a43b2370.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doesn't make sense. If it's unreported, how did you get a headline? If both guys are arrested, how is that worse than your church's transferring pedophiles from one parish to another? You are referencing stories that show how it's supposed to be done. The pedophiles in these other religions are being prosecuted, and they're unlikely to have a chorus of parishioners and nuns praying for them at trial. Thanks for pointing this out.

      Delete
    2. Hey Anon 12:50pm - have you seen anything about the Catholic Church cases in the NYT, LA Times, Inky, or anywhere else the Catholic Church claimed cases have been headlined? Have you seen it headlining your national or local media news or have you seen or heard their leaders, as has our pope, been ravaged for inaction? Is anybody investigating or claiming any cover-ups in these other organizations? Are they getting the same colonoscopy my church has gotten?

      Your are so full of $#it you need a permit for toxic waste hauling-

      Delete
    3. Edit to 6:31pm "...have you seen anything about the non-Catholic Church cases...".

      Delete
  34. Top of the morning to all u anti cathlic

    F--- Faces Lol!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you saying that your statement represents what good Catholics should be saying? Aren't you kind of making fun of Catholics?

      Delete
    2. It spelled CATHOLICS. I'm sorry I am the last person who should be correcting another persons spelling.

      But can you tell me if your pastor or parish priest would approve of your language ?

      Delete
  35. Funny that people reply to a troll that is the source and encouragement of 112 posts!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your math is off, many comments respond to comments other than that of the troll.

      Trolls can stink up the air in the room, sometimes you must address the odor in order to refresh the environment.

      Delete
    2. Father JAE; a message board is no place for a priest. Please administer to the practicing Catholics in your parish. If you have nothing to do, then go to a hospital and hold a hand. That is what Jesus would do.

      Delete
  36. Father JAE ? It would not surprise me. It answers my question at 1:26.

    Remember that link I sent you. Please, please step over that line I warned you about.

    Look at the positive you will get to meet my smiling face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do we all see, right before our own eyes, how the liars @ 10:29 and 10:39 fabricate their stories based on no evidence? And then, they resort to threats. This is the terrorism that Catholic priests face as a result of the false witness of fraudulent victims.

      Don't waste your lies, distortions or threats on me, liars, I don't scare so easily.

      Delete
    2. and you say your not in it for the money.....

      insult me, i will sue. object to my view on life, i will sue.

      keep up the good work, you are truly an inspiration to yourself

      Delete
    3. JAE,

      I will put this very simple an ask you if you are a priest ? Its not that I will respect you anymore then the rest of the fools here who would prefer to defend a pedophile animal.

      I would then ask the question if your answer is yes are you ashamed of who you are?

      Delete
    4. JAE wrote the following on another posting on this site from January 13. Read the last paragraph carefully. It says that he is a priest. Who knows if it is true, but read for yourself.


      JAE January 13, 2014 at 5:50 AM

      The Icky genius, who could not have been more perfect in making my point, and his Anonymous blog "attorney" - who knows about as much about law as does Icky, failed to read my 11Jan 5:50 post which sets up my 12 Jan 5:13 post.

      This takedown was so easy, it is embarrassing. I am built for bigger game than you two bunnies.

      It would be an insult to the word STUPID to use it to describe your cognitive abilities and your threats. I am not a Catholic priest that will bullied by you or your criminal cohorts.

      Delete
    5. Anon @3:57 has the same reading comprehension problems as his/her anti-Catholic bigot cohorts here, he/she makes the words (and 'evidence') say what he/she wants them to say.

      You will get neither confirmation or denial of your claims - fantasize away about who or what or where I am to your black, shriveled little hearts content. One thing we can probably be sure of; none of you dimwits were likely educated in the Catholic (parochial) school system.

      Like I said back then, I am built for bigger game-

      Delete
    6. If JAE is a priest it would explain how there is so many abusive priests. To much time on their hands.

      I would also like to add that if in deed he is a priest in my opinion he is sending his comments from a location such as Childs, Maryland where he himself may have been sent to live out his life of prayer and penance.

      The concern I would have then if he is a priest what sites does he visit after he leaves his one cent here ?

      Delete
    7. A non-denial denial. Well played, Padre!

      Delete
    8. A typical biased distortion. Well played, Bigot!

      You will never know, you can only wonder.

      Delete
    9. Do you get up so early so you can say or attend early morning Mass ?

      Delete
    10. I would just say its the same urging to read and comment on bigtrial that you have.

      Keep up the good work Ralph. Your reports will someday bring out the truth and the ecker's of the world will crawl into their holes and disappear

      Delete
    11. Anonymous - 3/18 @ 3:57 Job well done.

      I went to that posting of JAE on January 13th just in case something was lost during the cut and paste.

      JAE clearly states he is a catholic priest !!

      If he would like to deny he is a priest by his own words would make him a LIAR. If he is not a priest that would also make him a LIAR since he says he is.

      The only person who has attempted to distort who he maybe is JAE himself. I don't think anyone has to wonder now who he is.

      I would like to know what he meant about his comment "I am built for bigger game" Because JAE the only thing I see is anonymous dropped you like a wild boar and is holding you up by your ears to have his photo taken.



      Delete
    12. you may want to reread that and see what exactly JAE was typing there in reference to your actions and threats.

      Who/what JAE is should not matter. In your world of 1 the only things you believe are what you write.

      Delete
    13. NO individual including myself was or is a threat to JAE except for JAE himself.

      He is the only person who makes himself look foolish.

      Delete
    14. it is now clear that the best friend you have in life in your keyboard.....close to 12 hours now and you have not left this site.

      Delete
    15. before you call me out on my grammar and threaten to sue i meant to say -

      ...is your keyboard

      Delete
  37. If Mob Boss Joe Ligambi could beat 2 trials against him for video poker,no show job,Rico and extortion,not to mention murder what makes you think a jury who knows nothing about the law will convict this guy.The system has to change were putting pettafiles and murders back on the street. The mob boss and a holy man both got away with ruthless crimes! the system sucks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The man was not charged with murder yet get over it. These cases arent winnable because the witnesses arent believe and evidence isnt holding up. The system works when u do the foot work instead of using asshole witneses who cant sell it

      Delete
  38. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is something anonymous 12:02 you may wish to look at.

      http://www.petition2congress.com/2259/death-penalty-child-molesters/view/5

      Delete
  39. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  40. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  41. This prick dennis is one righteoua sob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So was it any particular comment that I made that makes me a prick (which I have but is not used to attack little boys as your clergy) or was it a group of comments that make me a "righteous son of a female dog ?

      I know was it that comment about the big game guy JAE ?

      Could you even be JAE who now goes by anonymous because you are to embarrassed even to use 3 initials ?

      Let me know I will sure read the dribble through the name calling of what you have to say.

      Delete
    2. Dont even know u dennis but if i did and saw u on the stteet i would spit on u. From u writing u remind me of somebody i really dont care for nothing personal

      Delete
    3. That's ashame because I'm such a fun guy to be around.

      Who is this other person who pisses you off so much ?

      Delete
    4. One would wonder how the family members of one named and clearly psychologically unbalanced and bigoted (and incredibly and astoundingly uneducated and ignorant) commenter here would be received in their respective spheres of life (neighbors, business, school, friends, etc.) were their head-of-family's hateful, highly dubious, ignorant and crude comments on this site to be revealed to their peers and colleagues?

      How would this commenters' 'church' feel about their converted members skewed ideology and contributions here?

      Could he still be as loose a cannon and hateful as he is here were he still employed and answerable to an employer or clients/customers for his comments?

      It is one thing to embarrass and dishonor yourself, and basically annihilate any hope of current or future employment for yourself since you are already on the permanent entitlement and public dole wagon-train, but, to caste your family members into the same fire is about the most selfish of all acts imaginable.

      The shame this commenter brings upon his family is unforgivable- even if they aren't smart enough or old enough to realize it.

      Shame on him for exposing his family in this way, and committing them to have to answer for his sins for the rest of their lives.

      Delete
    5. Father JAE- Would you forgive Dennis if he came to you in confession?

      Also, you mention that a commenter is "psychologically unbalanced" and "bigoted" in the same sentence. Do you think there is a connection between the two?

      Delete
    6. For Anon@9:42am, aka "Dennis Ecker's" wife: aside from your feeble and transparent attempt at determining if I am a Catholic clergyman (which remains neither confirmed or denied), I won't play the "Anonymous" comment shell-game with you. Distinguish yourself or remain background noise (at least for my intent).

      I will continue, though, much to the dismay of the anti-Catholic bigots here, to point out untruths, distortions, unsupportable extrapolations and general biases in those comments that continue to persecute the Catholic Church.

      Delete
    7. fr. JAE has no choice but to "forgive" me. Its not his option.

      But not to worry I have found my salvation elsewhere.

      Although you should be asking me the same question. If I will ever forgive them ?

      I then direct you to a comment I left on 3/16 at 8:33 and I think you will get your answer.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous @ 9:42

      I hope you are beautiful, a loving mother, a loving wife and takes no shit from anyone. That is how my wife is.

      JAE, you should be careful. I married me a Texan girl through and through with an air force background, you do not want to get on her bad side especially if you are a priest. She will pound you into sand. There is only a few things in this world that make her made. Anyone who is a threat to our daughter, abusive priests and those who defend them.

      Delete
    9. This string puts me in mind of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Is JAE writing to us from the 19th Century?

      Delete
    10. "...especially if you are a priest." Kinda-sorta wraps it all up in a nice, neat little
      bigot-package of crap now, doesn't it? 'Nuff said there.

      Keep talking, Sparky.

      How much fun would it be to get this dolt on a witness stand under questioning by an honest, capable defense attorney?

      Delete
    11. Father JAE- I merely asked if there is a connection between "psychologically unbalanced" and "bigoted." I get that you don't want to reveal your priestly (or non priestly) identity. No big deal. But why dismiss my relevant question? You paired those two words together in a sentence and I would like to know if you see it as a connected idea. If not, why would you put those two words together?

      You have said in a previous post that you "made for a bigger game." This is a good opportunity to show the people posting just what you know and think. No name calling please. Just a nice, rational answer. Thanks

      Delete
    12. Father JAE- unfortunately, you can not/will not justify your statement. Its much easier to label people "bigots," "liars," and "idiots" then to rationally explain your point of view. Be well, Padre.

      Delete
  42. Why did his lawyer fire him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It.s costung him bussiness because of the catholic church these priwst are guilty even if they arent and defending this guy will cost his firm money

      Delete
    2. Was he doing it pro bono? Shouldn't he say something about that? I think it prejudices his client the way he ditched him in the courtroom like that. Makes the client look bad.

      Delete
    3. Then he needs to get another lawyer or maybe the lawyer has other cases during which this trial was scheduled eiher way im sure somebody will take it and win or get another hung jury cause the evidence and wittness are pathetic

      Delete
  43. http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2014/03/18/the-abuse-survivor-who-reminds-me-that-we-are-suppopsed-to-be-a-light-to-the-world/

    For those with open, honest and discerning minds, the link above is to a profile of a sexual abuse victim that is leading a healthy, productive life (as opposed to the many claimants and bigots here).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What an incredibly strange and completely unrepresentative story to point us to. It's a Jewish girl abused by "an adult" in a synagogue who inexplicably converted to the Catholic Church. Absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

      Delete
  44. fr.JAE,

    Are you dumber then dumb ?

    Here is a comment the young lady or someone made," Here was a Church that acknowledged its wounds."

    How about if I start at Alaska and Hawaii and work my way east and give you all these fine examples of how your church acknowledged it wounds ?

    IDIOT.

    Go away son you bother me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like I said in my opening statement; "...for those with open, honest and discerning minds...".

      Thank you for proving my point, yet again.

      Delete
    2. anonymous,

      In the old days what you and I read that JAE presented is called propaganda.

      Delete
    3. get a job Dennis. or better yet, a dog. oh wait, your alcohol dependency would not allow it.

      Delete
    4. don't need to work and I have a dog.

      Its real funny too. Because when I watch the dog run about the house. Play around in the yard, what comes to mind is my dog has more freedom then Lynn does.

      Do they roll the window down when Lynn goes for his babysitter check ? I can picture him with his head out the window and those cheeks flapping in the wind.

      Delete
  45. I think I'm giving you to much credit in being a priest. I heard the seminary is not easy. Unless you majored in child abuse 101.

    I don't know if you took notice to the many removed from blog administrator comments. They were comments from people talking about the mob. Comments that should be on George's blogs. However, when I was reading those comments I thought to myself as a kid again I would have been safer in a shoot-out between two mob families then walk alone in a church with a priest.

    Could it be the mob still has stronger moral values then the catholic church ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not really for15 years George Borgesi a ruthless mobster banged several young black boys in the ass in prison
      So the mob not only murders you they also rape you! True story right Boy George.

      Delete
    2. U see asshole u come on here with ur borgesi shit nobody cares on this blog or the other thats why george shuts it down i think u do it purposely. Therefore they should ur ID and shut u down that way i didnt think it was possible to pass George Boy Borgesi as the most hated guy in the city but u anonymous and this other annoying idiot bigot Dennis ecker have accomplished that im sure a few people would like to bitch slap u including myself for these annoying blogs but that will be up to George or Ralph to decide though dennis on his behalf dies keep it clean. Not like myself or others

      Delete
    3. They should shut down ur ID
      I didnt think
      on his behalf does
      Corrctions made
      1up

      Delete
  46. Could it be that you and your Anon cohorts are just your typical trolls?

    Are you struggling within the dark triad?

    A resounding "yes" to both.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Most fascinating blog of 2014. So far. Let's keep this going. Let's keep putting more astounding comments here. Here's mine:

    The defense attorney did the defendant no justice here. He made no attempt to show that the defendant had any kind of life outside of being with boys. He should have shown that the defendant had adult hobbies or adult interests, if indeed he did.

    You?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If it is correct that McCormick kept himself around kids all the time, with no other interests -that is a huge flag regarding his personality/character/mental health, and, it is a good point regarding the deficit in his former defense not to provide a rebuttal (if this was, indeed, a fact introduced by the prosecutor).

      It still does not mean that he illegally touched this plaintiff, or any other minor. And, it should not be enough (it certainly isn't evidence) to send a man to prison.

      Delete
    2. I don't see anything wrong with an individual throwing themselves into their work especially if they have no other responsibilities. Their work becomes their hobby. Is it healthy ? I guess that's up to each individual.

      In McCormicks case it seems he had an overwhelming interest in children. It seems that he was only capable of identifying himself with children. He felt more comfortable around children then those of his own age. He portrayed himself to be the oldest "kid" in the group. A body of an adult but the mind of a child. The scary part about that is when he wanted he could fulfill the role of adult when needed.

      We can see in two cases were he has acted like a deviant child. He was told not to have boys in his bedroom and what does he do ? He ignores the parent (archdiocese) and does it again, a mother of a child tells him to stay away from her kid and again in a deviant action he sends the boy a card and a gift. Only two events that we are aware of how many others that should be a great concern.

      Then we are informed that his aging mother is the only person who purchases his underwear. What would have happened if his mother passed away years ago ? Would he still be wearing his tattered underwear ? Maybe there is a section in the mothers will that assigns someone to purchase his underwear ?

      One question I would like answered is did he request to supervise the altar boys or was that position assigned to him.

      Delete
  48. All that matters is did he illegally touch the plaintiff in the current case (provided it is even filed again). If he didn't, nothing else matters regarding this priests' relationships with minors since, while it may be troubling (if true), it isn't against the law (although, it is asking/begging for trouble).

    If another case proceeds, and it is proven, with evidence, that this guy did abuse this accuser when he was a kid, he should go to jail. Digging up evidence after 15 years is probably impossible since no evidence was collected from the accuser at the time of the claimed offense and apparently there was no eyewitness or any other hard evidence to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt mandate.

    It is far more worthwhile to society to draw lessons-learned from these old/cold cases and accusations, teach the kids to speak up, fight back and report all/any inappropriate contact, and make sure parents and other authorities and responsible parties, especially parents, are doing their jobs educating and protecting their kids.

    Going after present-day offenders will save lives. Spending every moment looking in the rear-view mirror is a waste of time, likely to result in revictimization (of both accuser and accused) and only satisfies the lust for revenge - and nothing more; well, except unless your sole purpose is to punish the Catholic Church since your only focus has been this church.

    By restricting the focus to one organization (that clearly had a problem in the past) you enable the present-day abusers by giving them a free ride. When the parents of one of todays victims realizes how you hijacked this scourge on all society (not just Catholic priests)solely because of your documented intolerance for Catholics, you, or your family member, may be facing off with one of those angry parents one day. Would they be justified?

    While scarce taxpayers resources are being wasted chasing ghosts from 20-50 years ago, predators are free to operate today - thanks to you. You are doing more to create victims of this horrific crime today than all guilty priests have over the past 50 years since what happened (past tense) in the church is minor compared with what happened outside of it both back then, and now - present day, today (Fact).






    ReplyDelete
  49. Little comfort to todays little victims, created with your help, that you can pull a quote off the internet to roll up into your glib response.

    And, we're supposed the care about you claimed victims from decades ago?

    Not likely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JAE-Your points are filled with clarity and depth. It is no surprise that they fall on Dennis' deaf ears. As you say, we get these quotes from him as answers to deflect the truth. It is to no avail looking back over and over (and over and over) again when remedies have been implemented within the Church. There is not a week (sometimes less) that goes by when I don't read about abuse taking place in a school, doctor's office, or other place that has nothing to do with the word Catholic.It is truly amazing that we hear it once and that's it-very little interest is generated by reports of non-church related abuse, usually from decades ago. The current stuff is not important. Somewhat troublesome..

      Delete
    2. Josie - I use "Dennis Ecker" comments to identify for other readers/commenters the extent of the irrational hatred underlying all of the bigots arguments, and, there is no way to phrase this politely, sheer ignorance of the strong anti-Catholic undercurrent that defines the persecution of Catholic clergy.

      We will never convert the "Eckers" of the world to any truths on this topic because their hatred is ingrained in their blood and breath. The majority, if not all, of these bigots, which may also include the plaintiff in the McCormick non-case, are grinding their axes against Catholic clergy for reasons that have nothing to do with the insignificant clergy minor abuse cases. There is no logic to going after the ant threatening the village while ignoring the rampaging elephant as the one that poses the greatest risk to it's inhabitants. And, this is why facts must be distorted by these bigots- they dig their own intellectual and integrity graves when they regularly lie and distort to support their positions. "Dennis Ecker" is on record as regularly lying and distorting truths to defend his ignorance and bigotry in the blogosphere, forever. His record has been established.

      The vast majority of abuse claims against Catholic clergy are politically based in leftist philosophy that rejects Catholic Church teaching on marriage, divorce (likely the bug that bit Ecker regarding his divorce from his first spouse and remarriage to a Catholic-hating 'reformist'), homosexuality, birth control, abortion, clerical celibacy, women priests and the faithful Catholic theology and philosophy that is staunchly conservative and capitalistic (per the subsidiarity principle). In summary, the majority of the attacks against the Church by the Eckers of the world are driven by politics, and not because of their (largely false) claims of abuse at the hands of Catholic priests. To put it plainly, they are lying about being abused by priests when they were minors as a way to punish the Church for it's naturally conservative and traditional doctrine. After all, how easy (and courageous) is it to proclaim your victimhood of 30-40 years ago against a priest who is dead? Come on, really? These mental midgets imagine that we're all as gullible as are they!

      But, shshhhh! We're not supposed to notice their duplicity. Under threats of violence and litigation we're supposed to permit ourselves to be shut-down and drowned out by the anti-Catholic bigots and leftist anarchists, radicals and community activists so that they can continue to push their agenda on the US.

      The recent UN report, which was supposed to evaluate the Vatican State response to the minor abuse issue, veered way off-course and did more to reveal their reasons for their railings against the Church than did Luther's 95 Theses- none of it is about clergy abuse of minors, kids. The cat is out of the bag (genie out of bottle, if you prefer) and it won't be shoved back in.

      Hang in there Josie, it's hard not to notice that some of these weasels target you, specifically. Apparently, you're making them uncomfortable in their astoundingly translucent and cold-blooded reptilian skins-

      Delete
    3. You seem to have directed your last comment to Josie about a comment I made at 08:14.

      You do know that comment was directed to YOU.

      Any idea yet on the meaning of the statement by Churchill ?

      "Only the one who is can fix stupid"

      Delete
  50. I will simply continue to use your silly, juvenile contributions, as you have been used in the past (and likely still are, without being crudely graphic), to reveal the demons that drive your and other bigots irrational and hateful attacks on Catholics.

    Practically nothing I contribute to this site is intended to benefit or debate you. And, your ego happily compels you to accommodate my goals.

    Such fools.

    ReplyDelete
  51. JAE-I am actually leaving for the Mass for Healing at the Cathedral of Sts Peter and Paul, hoping that the words of the Gospel and the homily will help to heal some of the victim/survivors that are legit and sincere, obviously in need and receptive of healing. I am ignoring some other stuff as I have no time for it. The "Catholics4change" blog which I occasionally read speaks volumes for the agenda at hand. Keeping people as victims does not work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Josie and JAE. I would suggest simply ignoring "Dennis Ecker." He/she is clearly an unhinged bigot, who is right at home on the "Catholics4change" blog you mention, Josie. Full of angry bigots and pretenders who use "Catholic" as a badge, but only fool the fools (ie each other).

      Delete
  52. JAE- You believe Dennis to have this short fuse. Then why do you walk around with a lit match ?

    Is that intelligent ?

    ReplyDelete
  53. JAE never said he was intelligent.

    Josie the people over at Catholics4Change is the only hope you have for the survival of your church.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Yep, a 2000 year old church founded by Jesus Christ (His authority) needs the loons at 4Change to stay alive.

    Just like you 'reformists' need the Westboro Baptist Church to stay alive.

    Your 'papa' is gone, who will lead your merry band of bigots, now? Out of the thousands of 'heads' of your thousands of churches, which of your 'democratically elected leaders' will step up to lead your disparate tribes?

    ReplyDelete
  55. ABC News:

    "Despite the public apology, the Archbishop continues to oppose measures that would extend the statute of limitations and allow victims more time to come forward and press charges or file civil suits in abuse cases."

    He begs for forgiveness but still wants to continue by playing by the old rule book. Can anyone make sense of that ?

    Chaput take your apology and stick it were the sun does not shine.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No civil case for you on the false allegations

      Delete
  56. Time to wipe the slate clean on this whole sordid "let's blackmail the Catholic Church" escapade: no more handouts ("settlements" to the professional victims) without hard evidence of abuse.

    The bar for determining credible claims and prosecutions against priests must be raised to the same level as for all other non-priest accused and defendants crimes, especially since the pro-vic's are insisting that SOLs be suspended through eternity. SOLs also need to be suspended similarly for the myriad of other institutions and organizations, including families, where abuse is far more prevalent. This debacle is, as currently structured, undeniably, a clear-cut case of religious persecution, and nothing less.

    Chaput is absolutely correct in finally turning the page on the bigotry being practiced against the Church. The more you give these 'victim' bloodsuckers, the more they want. That is their physiology, after all-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Religious Persecution ? If you are saying lack of RESPECT for your religion then I would agree.

      When I see catholics in the lion's cage at the zoo only because they are catholic then I might agree about your religious persecution.

      At first I had to agree with anonymous claim of you being a priest by one of your own comments. But the more I read what you write I have my doubts and if its true you must be one of the dumbest priests that came out of a seminary

      Delete
  57. If only the Catholic Church is singled out for special treatment, as it has been, as is documented, it is religious persecution, that is a fact.

    The fact that you don't get anything right about just about anything and everything, including your wild imaginings about who or what or where I am, eliminates your opinion on matters of logic from any further consideration.

    You're an ambulance driver and an ambulance chaser, you're that dog chasing your own tail - embrace your limitations, we have.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Oh well, religious persecution it is then.

    So its your job not mine to change the thinking of millions upon millions of people and growing everyday who think of your church as evil.

    My job to open the minds of some of those people to see the evil of your church was not as hard as I thought it would be.

    ...And that JAE is FACT.

    ReplyDelete
  59. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  60. SarahTX - Your words do not come across as shocking because nothing shocks me anymore. There is a little concern especially knowing what you have done in the past for a loved one.

    You mention nothing about the aid the Pope should be showing to the victims of clergy abuse or their families, and you wish the "glory" (I call respect) shall be given back to an individual simply because they wear a white collar. Priests like anyone must earn respect from others each and every day like anyone else.

    If you wish priests to be priests again that must be done with continued checks. All will not be good or you yourself should know history will only repeat itself.



    Pope's new abuse commission is another promise waiting to be broken.

    by Thomas P. Doyle | Mar. 25, 2014 Examining the Crisis
    . .
    The countless victims of clergy sex abuse have been waiting for 30 years for the Vatican to show it really understands the depth of the problem and is willing to do something real about it. Judging by the latest move, naming members of a pontifical commission, victims will have to keep on waiting. Those who have been deeply involved in this issue for the long haul had little hope the promised commission would make a difference, and we probably won't be disappointed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The "Let's sue the Catholic Church out of existence" cottage industry and associated dissidents feel very threatened by the Popes Commission- I wonder why? What will this Commission discover about the whole abuse matter that frightens them so? How do you criticize any action that only adds more transparency to the inner workings of the Church's response and management of this issue prior to it actually embarking on the action?

      How very suspect these premature (cookie-cutter) criticisms are- is there no satisfying these media and money hungry gluttons?

      Delete
  61. There is a distinct possibility that the fraudulent pro-vic forces operating against the Catholic Church are doing so on behalf of their leftist deviant pedophile lobby who are well protected under the politically-correct umbrellas that shield the LGBT-allied NAMBLA, B4UAct and other pro-pedophile activist groups.

    Some of these same crazies are pushing the pablum that SNAP and other anti-Catholic activist groups are being operated or organized by the Church; I maintain that these persecutors of the Church are operatives for the secular pedophile agenda.

    Aside from sheer bigotry, nothing else makes sense to those of us with logic.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Awesome blog. I enjoyed reading your articles. This is truly a great read for me. I have bookmarked it and I am looking forward to reading new articles. Keep up the good work. NY custody lawyer

    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.