Monday, December 28, 2015

Grandstanding D.A. Vows To Keep Monsignor Lynn In Jail

By Ralph Cipriano
The D.A.'s credo: Never let the facts get in the way of a good story
for BigTrial.net

He may have won a new trial but he's not getting out of jail anytime soon.

That's the political reality facing Msgr. William J. Lynn. Last week, a panel of three state Superior Court judges overturned Lynn's 2012 conviction for endangering the welfare of a child, and ordered a new trial.

But at least for the next month, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia's former secretary for clergy will continue to work as the prison librarian at SCI-Waymart for 19 cents an hour while lawyers back in Philadelphia continue the battle over his case.

Standing in the way of Lynn's release is Philadelphia District Attorney R. Seth Williams, and Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina. At a press conference today, the D.A.  announced he was appealing the decision by the panel of judges to the entire state Superior Court. Williams requested an "en banc" re-argument of the case before all nine judges on the appeals court, rather than just a three-judge panel. If he gets turned down, the district attorney promised, he'll appeal to the state Supreme Court, where the D.A. has a winning track record.

The Superior Court previously reversed Lynn's conviction in 2013 and ordered that he be "discharged forthwith." Lynn got out of jail, but Judge Sarmina placed him under house arrest. The D.A. appealed. The state Supreme Court then reversed the reversal and, at the D.A.'s request, Judge Sarmina promptly sent Lynn back to jail.

At his press conference today, D.A. Williams engaged in some of his usual grandstanding. He managed to screw up the facts of the case and use his own daughters as political props, so he could do more grandstanding. In Philadelphia, this lame act is what passes for the city's top prosecutor.

"One in four women and one in six men are sexually abused before the age of eighteen," Williams began his press conference. "And 90 percent of those who are sexually assaulted know their attacker."

Going by the D.A.'s math, if there are approximately 100,000 or so male victims of sex abuse wandering the streets of our city, couldn't the D.A. have found somebody who had actually been sexually assaulted by a priest rather than a fraud like Billy Doe?

"The victim in this case knew his attacker and Msgr. William Lynn covered up Father [Edward V.] Avery's record," Williams continued. "My office is committed to ensuring the safety of all the citizens of Philadelphia and today, specifically the victim of Msgr. William Lynn. Simply put, we will continue to use all of my office's resources to ensure that the Defendant Lynn remains in state custody as ordered by Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina."

The panel of state Superior Court panel of judges overturned Lynn's conviction because they found that Judge Sarmina had abused her discretion by allowing into evidence 21 supplemental cases of sex abuse dating back to 1948, three years before the 64-year-old Lynn was born.

But Williams argued that Judge Sarmina  had "properly admitted into evidence 'other bad acts' . . . to show a pattern and practice of concealment and protection of child sexual-predator priests" by Lynn. 

"The same evidence also established the defendant's expert knowledge of the characteristics of pedophiles," Williams argued. The evidence introduced by the prosecution at trial "showed the Philadelphia jury and the world that the defendant's handling of Father [Edward V.] Avery was completely typical of his handling of other similar predator priests," the district attorney said, sounding drunk on his own press clippings. "The defendant knew just how dangerous such priests were."

"I have three daughters . . . "
"We knew Msgr. Lynn's behavior," Williams said. "We knew how he handled those cases." Lynn, the D.A. said, was "more worried about the treasury of the church, and again forgetting that his treasury is people. And so to protect the bank account [he] didn't even  call the police; didn't even call the parents."

I don't go to a lot of press conferences held by D.A. Williams. [He no longer invites me]. But for the third time at one of those press conferences about the Lynn case, I've heard Williams use his own daughters to make a political point with reporters, by saying how upset he would be if his daughters were molested or raped.

Gee, thanks Dad.

"I have three daughters," Williams said today. "If a priest sexually assaulted my daughter I would at the very least [expect] my church to call me."

"They didn't do that," Williams said. "What did they do? They sent Father Avery to St. Jerome's. Didn't tell the priest there, didn't tell the nun that the guy they put in charge of the CYO is a pedophile. So we had to show all these other acts . .  to show Msgr. Lynn knew how dangerous it was to put a pedophile into a school with children. so we had to show all those bad acts."

The district attorney described Lynn as somebody who "shuffled pedophile priests from one parish to another unsuspecting parish."

Where to begin. A pedophile is someone sexually attracted to children, generally age 11 or younger. Lynn knew about a prior victim of Avery's who testified at the monsignor's criminal trial in 2012. The  victim, a 49-year-old doctor, testified that when he was 15 years old he was fondled by Avery. When he was 19, the victim testified, he consented to accompany Avery on a ski trip where he was molested.

A pedophile doesn't target 15 year-olds and 19 year-olds. And, for anybody who cares about the facts of the case, Avery never ran the CYO.

"It's all wrong," Thomas A. Bergstrom, Lynn's defense lawyer, said about the D.A.'s oratory. "The premise to the whole thing is his assertion that Avery is a pedophile, which he wasn't." Bergstrom also objected to Williams saying that Lynn "transferred pedophile priests, which he didn't."

"Lynn didn't have the power to transfer and assign priests," Bergstrom said. This was the evidence presented at trial. The only official in the archdiocese who had that kind of power was Lynn's boss, the late Cardinal Anthony J. Bevilacqua.

"So they just lie about things and everything flows from that," Bergstrom complained about the D.A. "He [Williams] has done that all along. He's beating a drum but unfortunately the facts don't support him. But his constituency doesn't care about that."

Avery didn't run the CYO at St. Jerome's, Bergstrom said What he did do occasionally, at the request of the church pastor, was to hear confessions from children in a group setting at the church, with parents and priests nearby. Avery also was an occasional disc jockey at St. Jerome's, for weddings, adult dances and one high school dance.

At his press conference, D.A. Williams conceded that Lynn might be tried again.

"There could be a new trial," Williams said. "And if so, we're fully committed to empaneling a jury and going to trial again."

Meanwhile, while the appeals continue, "We will fight to keep Msgr. Lynn in state custody where he belongs," Williams said. The D.A. said he wanted to ensure that Lynn stays in jail so "that he doesn't have an opportunity to be reassigning priests in the future."

It's really hard to believe that the archdiocese would ever be dumb enough to put Msgr. Lynn back in his old job as secretary for the clergy, a position he held from 1992 to 2004. Can't imagine the lawyers and the insurance company would sign off on that one.

But the D.A. was on a roll. As far as Seth Williams is concerned, the appeals in the Lynn case can go on forever. As long as he gets to hold more press conferences and make more speeches.

Bergstrom is right. The facts don't matter at all to our crusading D.A.

"The guy they put in charge of the CYO is a pedophile . . . "
I've had my own experience. I wrote a story three years ago about 20 factual errors that I found in the D.A.'s 2011 grand jury report on the church.

The mistakes were brazen rewrites of grand jury testimony to fit the D.A.'s own story line.

A 14-year-old boy got in bed with a priest. Both males had their boxer shorts on. But 11 times in the grand jury report, the D.A. wrote that the priest, Father James J. Brennan, anally raped 14-year-old Mark Bukowski. Even though Bukowski testified at the grand jury, and at trial, that it never happened. The proof was at trial, when Father Brennan was only charged with attempted rape, for what his lawyer described as a "savage spooning."

Billy Doe's mother testified to the grand jury that her son underwent a drastic personality change in high school. But that didn't fit the D.A.'s story line. So the D.A. simply rewrote the mother's testimony to say that her son's drastic personality change happened in grade school, when little Billy supposedly was raped by Father Avery, as well as another priest, and a school teacher.

After I found the factual errors, I wrote up a list of questions and sent it over to the D.A.'s office. His response: stonewalling. For three years, he's refused to answer those questions and more.

That same grand jury report, complete with all 20 factual errors, remains online today at the D.A.'s website with all of its original lies intact.

This D.A. doesn't give a damn about facts. Not when he can invent his own facts. And have the rest of the media pass it along as gospel.

48 comments:

  1. With Seth Williams announcement today that he will continue to fight to see William Lynn the convicted priest remain in prison until his debt to society is repaid by serving out his time in prison for the crime he committed, one must question if Thomas Bergstrom the lawyer for William Lynn is giving his aging and feeble client proper representation. If it was not for the advice and appeals filed by Mr. Bergstrom his client at this time may have been able to spend Christmas with his family.Instead upon his conviction Lynn was sent to prison, released only to be placed under house arrest that did not count for anytime served towards his sentencing and thrown back in jail.To make matters worse or to rub salt into the wound while awaiting for a state prison cell to open Lynn could call home he was chosen to be a prisoner to meet with the Pope only to be shipped out to his new address prior to the Pope's arrival who many believe was orchestrated by his own Archdiocese.

    It only seems now this would be the proper time Mr.Bergstrom put aside any possible agenda he may have and inform his client to "man up" and except the punishment for his crimes and serve out possibly only a few more months of that 3-6 year sentence so this time next year he will be able to celebrate Christmas with his family and welcome in the 2017 New Year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. probably close to one of the most idiodic takes one could have on this story. and thats saying alot based on what has been posted previously.

      Delete
  2. What DA Seth Williams is trying to do is like charging a rapist with 21 unsolved rapes committed by others. That shows his unfitness to serve as DA with harboring such prejudice. Unlike other DAs, he has chosen to make up the facts without any corroborating evidence to back them up. BergStrom is playing his cards right to draw in Williams to the climatic fight in front of the judges who will be left totally speechless at the stupidity shown by our DA who proffers evidence that cannot be corroborated by the facts. If stupid wants to make a fool out of himself, then that will be his problem as the judges will be wondering why Bergsstrom is not our DA.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Seth Williams" "I will pound the law until I get Msgr. Lynn reconvicted!"
    Interlocutor: "But the law doesn't support your case."
    Seth Williams; "Then, I will pound the facts until I get Msgr. Lynn reconvicted!"
    Interlocutor: "But the facts do not support your case."
    Seth Williams: "Then, I will pound the table, throw a temper tantrum and chew the corner of my desk until I get my way! I want to be the Mayor of Philadelphia! I want to be the Mayor of Philadelphia! IWANTTOBETHEMAYOROFPHIDELPHIA!!!!!”

    ReplyDelete
  4. Should all clergy abusers be forgotten
    and never see the light of day.
    Should all clergy abusers be forgotten
    and enjoy their jail time stay.

    Victims from the past my dear,
    And victims from today,
    Will raise a glass to the great DA for
    extending their jail time stay.

    As we pray for all the survivors we will.
    As the Archdiocese payyys the bill.
    Let us forget those clergy abusers friends
    AS WE ALWAYS WILL.

    LOCK Them UP and Throw Away the key.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Definition of doggerel : loosely styled and irregular in measure especially for burlesque or comic effect; also : marked by triviality or inferiority.

      I would hope that the readers of this forum see nothing trivial or comic about this case.

      There is too much at stake here when it comes to a matter of justice to treat it with such disdain.

      Delete
    2. O.K great for you, you learned a new word. But this is nothing but comical and the only thing we have not heard in Lynn's defense is THE DEVIL MADE HIM DO IT or in Lynn's case not do it.

      However, do not give up hope. If there is a judge out there who can give a kid probation for killing 4 people I am sure there is a judge who will go along with the "devil made me do it defense"

      Delete
  5. HEY HEY HEY ! Move over Msgr. Lynn you maybe in prison long enough to be joined with FAT ALBERT. HEY HEY HEY !

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's kind of funny to call it grandstanding when a man is taking on the Catholic Church and stopping its predators from getting at Catholic children. I suppose you'd say the Bill Cosby D.A. is grandstanding also.

    Lynn made a list of 35 predator priests, submitted it, and then did nothing and asked no further about it. He was weak and cowardly. He should have resigned his position if he didn't have the gumption to actually do his job. Or if he believed that his job was actually to compile filthy information that he knew no one would do anything about, well, that's taking part in a huge cover-up. No, that's being a central part of a huge cover-up. He's in jail because he was a weak, spineless man who viewed children as more like commodities than actual human beings.

    I don't think there will be a new trial. Either the full Superior Court will reconsider its 3-judge decision or the state Supreme Court will nix it altogether. I think I read that the one judge out of three who opposed the reversal is moving up to the Supreme Court. I really think the full Superior Court has to reconsider whether they want to get reversed again by the Supreme Court.

    All of this because there is one man standing, Seth Williams, who values the dignity and innocence of children, including his own, and will not give up this fight. We definitely need a Spotlight sequel focused on the heroes and villains in Philadelphia. Children are not commodities. And, for God's sake, a 12 year old is a child, so please stop with the Bill Donohue trope that anyone over 11 is not a child.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First, if there was widespread knowledge that most of the children in Catholic schools were abused by priests, nuns and teachers, then what would parents do? Ignore this and leave the children in school? Probably not as they as a group would be withdrawing children and filing charges to the police. That would be devastating to the Archdiocese as they would lose their schools plus run the risk of losing parishioners .

      Problem was Archdiocese did not handle abuse allegations correctly as it was accorded policing powers by government likewise was done to public schools, colleges then. Discipline powers were given to schools colleges and corporations by goverment. Strikers branded as malcontents with companies hiring Pinkerton to squelch dissent. This is no longer thee case as a wiser citizenry has seized the power to expose abuse and corruption. Child abuse allegations levied in public schools against teachers who had romantic relationship with students but principals not jailed like Lynn was by DA's. People are not afraid to speak out unlike past decades.

      DA Sera Williams is a very desperate and insecure man in seeking to keep Lynn in jail for decades if can get his wishes. He conjures up the fact he is protecting children while ignoring the fact that the Archdiocese has protected children better than decades ago by having employees and volunteers screened according to law. In Seths small mind, children are in danger as long as Lynn is set free and he spreads this irrational fear among the public which is smart enough to dismiss his irrational fears.

      If we compare Seth Williams with Ed Rendell, both were DAs, but Rendell is the more rational and logical one who won votes and supporters for Mayor, Governor and works for a powerhouse law firm. Seth only supporters are in the black community and I don't see any reason why a powerhouse law firm would want to have him. If I want someone to be DA, I would want him or her to apply the law in a rational, logical way instead of making up evidence to convict like Seth has done. After all, we have kids in law school looking up to lawyers in public office. They cannot screw up with who is looking up to them.

      Eventually the case will end when Lynn is finally released. He will be forgotten and will future DA'S do what She EWING IAMS did or follow what Edward Rendell did?

      Delete
    2. Correction last sentence do what Seth williams did or follow what Edward Rendell did.

      Delete
    3. I just want to make a general statement here that I believe that, even in this modern world, proofreading remains very important for those who want their words to be heard and considered.

      Delete
    4. James when did you become a racist ? I'll get back to that though. Your first paragraph describes what Lynn has done wrong along with the rest of the church. Parents never had the chance to make an informed decision if they wanted their children to be around suspected abusers. It was forced down their throats as we have seen with Avery, Fr. Paul at Our Lady of Calvary and most recently the removal of Fr. Harris from ministry once again keeping St. Bridget parishioners in the dark. If you don't think the actions of the church have not been devastating to the church you are right. They don't care. But ask that question to the majority of parishioners they would disagree with you. The empty pew space, along with the closing of schools and churches, the sale of real estate and increases in tuition is only small proof of the devastation. How this archdiocese has not made it into bankruptcy court is a miracle in itself. Something I cannot take away from CEO Chaput.

      Now for my opening comment calling you a racist. Please inform us how you were able to make this a black and white issue with your comment "Seth's only supporters are in the black community" I am white and live in a upper middle class neighborhood and I am one of his biggest fans and so are my neighbors who are also white and black. I thought your words not to be well thought out.

      Delete
    5. White DA would be lit up for doing what Seth did in the Lynn trial. Inky leaves Seth Williams alone to avoid blowback from black community. No accident two women judges assigned to host Lynn and Englehardt Shero trials as their motherly instincts would kick in when denying defense motions to dismiss. Male judges would have killed both trials by granting defense motions. Zero evidence to convict due to unreliable testimony from Billy Doe. They Had nobody left to convict other than the above referenced and McCormick and Brennan. McCormick survived both trials and Seth declined to retry him. Brennan up for trial next month. You do the work, you get the conviction, not depend on willing judges to help you out like Seth did. No one including blacks own the word racism as you do the work to reap what you seek.

      Delete
    6. I am sure you are only surmising when you make the comments you do. Without proof that could backup your racist thinking I would not be shocked more white people re-elected Williams then black citizens of this city.

      Delete
  7. Changing facts to be presented to a grand jury seems to be commonplace, prosecutors are not the seekers of the truth they are held out to be, they want to win a conviction at all costs, distorting the facts if necessary.
    Why are we so eager to believe in a priests guilt or a police officer or a politician, but not the guilt of a prosecutor. Why has it been forced on the public that the justice department is truthful, the media forces us to believe that the justice department tells the truth and they are infallible.
    Being convicted of someone else's crimes is not justice, it only gives those that are angry at the situation some satisfaction. I wonder how many would find it acceptable if it happened to them, think about it, someone in your profession commits a crime, it get publicity but you go to jail for being in the same line of work. Since all politicians, cops, priests are guilty, right. Is that what kind of justice we want? If the answer is yes, hopefully it will happen to you or your family.
    If the DA's office is relying on playing off others peoples crimes to gain a conviction its a sad day indeed. Again the media has to get it right, stop using incrimination words when referring to defendants, especially the feds favorite "scheme" every one is guilty of a scheme according the them,everyone plots and plans, its all a scheme. Except the prosecutors plot and plan and use inaccurate info to convict , aided by the darling media to deliver a jury with a preformed opinion.
    Calling prosecutors and district attorney and judges out for their misdeeds is the first order of business.
    My suggestion is to use the media the way the prosecution does prior to a trial, let it play out in the media rather than the court room , where there is no justice. Maybe this way the judge and jury will get some accurate facts.
    America is getting it wrong, and many were willing to stand behind the judicial system, well no longer and the civil unrest we see on the streets is the being of the change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lynn wasn't convicted for someone else's crime. He was convicted for being a central part of the cover-up of other people's crimes against children. He made a list of 35 predator priests, submitted it, noticed that nothing was being done about them, and did no follow up. With institutional abuse such as this, the cover up is worse than the crime.

      Delete
    2. When you say "media has to get it right" does that statement include blogs ? I know of one that has been one sided and the writer of the blog has admitted to being bias, clearly appearing as if the writer and/or sponsor to the blog is in the back pocket of a particular institution.

      Delete
    3. Are you serious? I give this blog alot of credit for sharing facts and details never printed in the Inquirer's biased and slanted coverage from O'Reilly, Slobodzian, and now Roebuck.
      What about "Judge" Sarmina's delay in presenting her filings to Superior Court?
      Or how about how she coddled prosecution witnesses at the trial while frequently combatting defense counsel?
      Ralph also shared that Msgr Lynn while supposed to be "relesaed forthwith" was not able to perform his nieces wedding. No one including Bill Cosby had to go through such draconian "house" arrest. Please show one other case where someone had to go through such a process.
      And Ralph provided excellent coverage of "DA" Williams' press conference where again he played loose with his "facts" Avery in charge of St Jeromes CYO - not true
      How is a Grand Jury report with factual errors still allowed to be posted?
      And why didnt the Inquirer ever report that Gallagher dropped his suit against Fr Engelhardt right before he was going to be forced to testify and be cross examined on the stand?
      So if you ever want to talk about bias and slanted coverage - start there
      This blog and Ralph deserve alot of credit for being the only site to get all of the details and for their sharing all of the information. Thank you.

      Delete
    4. Being in possession of grand jury testimony were prosecutors invented facts, made false accusations, used extortion tactics and generally invented scenarios of crimes that were never committed give one a very different slant on what is printed in the media. Being a victim of overzealous prosecutors and the media that runs with incorrect facts condemning a defendant,has forever changed how I feel about the judicial system and the media.
      I had always believed in my country and the judicial system, but no longer, prosecutors want to win at all costs.

      Delete
    5. To SarahTXZ

      Cover up is a very interesting thought, maybe we can then accuses the media of covering up the FBI agent that was caught lying at the Traffic Court trial, he lied to a grand jury to get indictments and again at trial, in fact all but one of the defense attorneys referenced his behavior in their closing statements in front of a room full of reporters but NOT ONE WORD was printed not that say or any day following.
      IS that you idea of justice ?
      One attorney mentioned to me that the media would never write that an FBI lied.
      I suggest he goes to jail for lying for the prosecution and the prosecutors also go to jail for spending millions on a useless federal trial that could have been handled by the judicial review board.

      Maybe in an alternate universe prosecutors would get in trouble for their actions. You cant have it both ways.
      I don't agree with the Archdioceses history of covering up of heinous crimes committed by the clergy, no one would deny the facts, its turned millions from the church who will never return. It broke the stranglehold the church had over all us, never will be feel the same way about any authority figure. What I do object to are facts being distorted by the prosecution. It happens, believe it.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous 10:58, are you saying that you are in possession of grand jury testimony that was not introduced at trial? If so, who gave it to you? Sounds as if there should be another investigation.





      Delete
    7. Is this Mariana Sorensen? If it is, maybe you can explain all those errors in the 2011 grand jury report.

      Delete
    8. That song is getting so old. It's as old as the corrupt judges, corrupt juries, lying defendants. Your attempt at creating reasonable doubt with your readers has failed. I know if I had or even the belief you have with the grand jury report I would be shouting it from the rooftops every day and not only when it is time to post a new blog. I would have taken the opportunity when the leader of the catholic church was in town to look at these so-called errors to appeal to the mayor regarding possible wrongdoings of the District Attorney's office. Did you even attempt to go down that avenue ? Have you brought these errors to the Bar Association ? How come we have not seen one interview from an attorney from the law firm that sponsors you ? If it was me it would be a crusade. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE RALPH CIPRIANO ?

      Delete
    9. Mr. Cipriano I would like to know if you are protected by the Pennsylvania Shield Law afforded to actual reporters/journalists ?

      Is it true you have been accused of harassment and intimidation when involving the case involving Billy Doe by publishing the victims real name, e-mail address and photographs ?

      Is it also true you have been accused of attempting to taint the jury pool in the case of Billy Doe ?

      All information I have obtained through public records.

      Delete
    10. COMPLETE WORDING

      "Mr. Cipriano in order to harass and intimidate plaintiff and his family, and potentially poison the jury pool in Philadelphia the court should note that the web stories written by Ralph Cipriano have prompted archdiocese zealots and apologists to intimidate and badger plaintiff by publishing among other things, his real identity, his e-mail address and even photographs of his current place of residence."

      Delete
    11. Was this in a response to discovery in the case?

      Delete
    12. Ralph -- I have nothing to explain to you. Except that I can't even begin to quantify your "errors." Especially counting, as you do, every repetition of a single purported mistake. Your original article claiming 20 errors in the grand jury report is completely bogus. So every time you've quoted or referenced your own dishonest work would constitute another error (lie??). Given how often you like to do that, I would estimate that your untruths are approaching triple digits. I'm not going to go through all your misrepresentations of the facts, but given that you count the use of the words rape and sodomy with respect to Fr. Brennan's crimes as 11 discreet errors (because, according to you, it is impossible to commit a rape if the victim is wearing underwear), I suggest that you consult your blog's sponsor on the law. Last time I researched the topic, there was no ruling by Pennsylvania courts, but several other states and federal courts that have considered the question have held that rape and sodomy can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt even when the victim is wearing underwear or other clothing. The necessary “penetration no matter how slight” can be accomplished through or around the clothing. See, for example, Davis v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 643 S.E. 2d 322 (Va. 2006)(penetration found through “regular issue . . .polyester pants . . .and undergarments as well), citing United States v. Norman, 139 F.3d1099, 1103 (10th Cir. 1997)(“Unquestionably, some penetration could occur through pliable clothing. . . . Existence of such material does not ... protect defendants from prosecution under the statute [object sexual penetration of a child].”); Nguyen v. Cate, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33561, 33 (U.S. District Ct. N. Cal. 2012) (Where the victim described contact “in the middle …[of her] butt,” ”“the jury could find sufficient evidence of sodomy even if they believed that the contact occurred outside Sandy’s clothing.”); People v. Ribera, 34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 538 (Ct. of App. Of Cal., 5th App. Dis. 2005)(evidence was sufficient to prove sodomy where victim testified that defendant “poked” his penis into her behind, even though victim was wearing underwear). See also, Chrobak v. State of Arkansas, 58 S.W. 3d 387 (evidence was sufficient to prove rape where defendant penetrated by moving the victim’s underwear and pajamas to the side); Cummings v. Burge, 581 F. Supp. 2d 436 (W.D.N.Y. 2008)(rape accomplished by pushing underwear aside).

      Now, I have a question for you. Who gave you copies of grand jury testimony that was not ever made part of the public record?

      Delete
    13. I thought we were prosecuting Fr.Brennan with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I didn't know you can take a law from another state and apply it to a person whose crime was committed in the Commonwealth of Pa.To me that seems a bit unfair. You tell the defendant wait just a moment there is no law covering your case but soon I'll find one in another state to charge you with. I'm simple minded Mariana show me where I'm missing your point

      Delete
    14. It seems to me Mr Cipriano has alot of explaining to do.

      It is one thing to claim of errors in the grand jury report it is another to prove those errors or say you are doing something about it.

      Looking back on it now if there is all of these "errors" you speak of, why would the archdiocese settle with Billy Doe ?

      Delete
    15. What is bothersome regarding the case against Brennan is his own attorney's description of the actions of his client towards Mark as a "savage spooning". What is that ? How did his attorney define the meaning ?

      Delete
  8. Ralph jumps on the Bill Donahue, Dave Pierre bandwagon when he has nothing to fill his blog. They all have many things in common and the most outstanding is they all wish to be judge and jury. The other is all three have no clue to what a abuse victim at the hand of a clergy member goes through and sadly for being so-called highly educated individuals they do not want to learn.

    This blog would be better served by postings of family recipes for sauces, lasagna, manicotti and pasta or what is the best wine to drink.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It is very clear. Any person who has knowledge of a priest (or a teacher or a coach or any other adult) sexually abusing children (or physically abusing them) is bound by morality – and, it turns out, by civil law – to report that person to the authorities. There is no moral argument for protecting the bishop, and only a selfish one for protecting one’s own job. Lynn should have resigned but probably had his eye on a pointed hat for his head.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The voices of a lynch mob . . .

    ReplyDelete
  11. Seth Was At Ron Galati"s Block Party 3 Years Ago Just Saying...

    ReplyDelete
  12. I tried not to comment but sometimes it is hard not to express something that has bother me over the past several weeks and has not been mentioned. Seth Williams and his staff including Mr. Blessington who criticized so many on the stand during Monsignor Lynn trial. Just a few weeks ago Seth Williams did exactly what he charged Monsignor Lynn in doing and put him in jail. He claimed Monsignor Lynn moved Priests around to different Parishes and here is Seth moving his three buddies including Mr. Blessington to three other departments. He didn't fire them and let them go just moved them to another department to get them out of his way so he doesn't need to be responsible for anything that is going to happen. Hard to believe that if you are in the Political World it seems you can get away with it. Our Justice system has no more Justice anymore. Something needs to be done soon.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Great point, Seth is in charge of men that make decisions on woman lives. Men that view porn as a right of all men, those prosecutors see nothing wrong with it.
    Nothing happens to prosecutors, ever, they never get in trouble for their deeds.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Can anyone confirm the scheduled January 4th retrial of Father Brennan will once again be postponed while a plea deal is worked out and the sides are only going to meet to schedule a new trial date if needed ?

    ReplyDelete
  15. It's definitely not going to happen in January. Word is that the DA does not want to retry the case. Have not heard about a plea bargain; will check.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For the DA, smart move would be probation to kill the trial and no jail term. Even smarter would be giving Lynn credit for time served under restrictive house arrest as time served in prison which would ĺet him be released from prison to serve probation. Doing both in dead of January is best. Only an idiot would take a chance with State Superiot court.

      Delete
  16. IDIOT - One who does not proofread or use modern technology we call spellcheck before hitting the publish button. Superiot Court really James ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DA Sera Williams was kind of funny too. 2 out of 4 letters wrong in a name that was the focus of his comment.

      Delete
    2. I use tablet and you have to hit the keyboard right, sorry about that.

      Delete
  17. Ralph - looks like you struck a real nerve with regard to Sorensen - the walking, talking personification of sour grapes. I wonder how she likes working with SNAP with the likes of Dorris, etc. What a comedown from her previous lofty perch.

    ReplyDelete
  18. WOW. I come here to check out the latest rants of Ralph and see that he is getting beat up pretty good.

    Then I see a post from a Mariana who Ralph and one other reader believe to be Mariana Sorensen one of the greatest,kindest woman God placed on this earth.A woman who I define as a hero.

    If this Mariana turns out not to be Miss Sorenson then this Mariana should be honored to be mistaken for her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dennis, you are the hero. I am awed by how you remain not only civil, but kind and open-hearted, in the midst of all the mean-spirited and ignorant comments about abuse survivors on this blog. Obviously, I can't do it. Hope you and your family are doing well.

      Delete
  19. Mr. Cipriano is it true as a employee for the Beasley firm you were also retained by another law firm ON BEHALF OF BILLY DOE the very same Billy Doe you claim to be a LIAR to provide summary accounts of the trials of defendants LYNN, ENGELHARDT and SHERO ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What have you been smoking - some of Billy's magic mushrooms?

      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.