Wednesday, April 3, 2013

The Day 56 Bags of Heroin Disappeared

By Ralph Cipriano

At 8:11 p.m. on June 9, 2010, the district attorney's star witness in the case against the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, a man subsequently identified in a 2011 grand jury report as "Billy Doe," was walking on the 200 block of Allegheny Avenue when he caught the eye of Police Officer Cesar Torres.

At the time, Torres was on patrol in a marked police car, the officer subsequently testified.

Assistant District Attorney Katie Brown asked the officer what caught his eye about Billy Doe:

Q. What was the defendant wearing when you saw him?

A. I believe he had [on] sweatpants with a hoodie that had a jacket over it ...

Q. Did something draw your attention to the defendant that brings you here today?

A. Yes, ma'am. I was traveling eastbound and I observed a large bulge coming out of the right side of the defendant's waist area.

Q. What happened after that?

A. At that time, myself and the defendant made eye contact and he looked very surprised ... um, just like, you know a look of shock. His eyes opened wide.

That large bulge turned out to be 56 bags of heroin. This is the story of how a smart criminal lawyer made that heroin disappear.

First, a little background courtesy of formerly secret records from District Attorney Seth Williams's "historic" prosecution of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia:

On June 9, 2010, the night Billy Doe got nailed with 56 bags of heroin, he was already an important witness in the ongoing sex abuse investigation of the archdiocese.

Five months earlier, Billy Doe had been sprung out of Graterford Prison by Detective Andrew Snyder, and driven to the district attorney's office to be interviewed by Snyder and Assistant District Attorney Mariana Sorensen from the Special Investigations Unit. 

Billy Doe, who was in jail on a parole violation at Graterford -- the largest maximum security prison in Pennsylvania -- subsequently enrolled in a drug rehab known as Gaurdenzia House.

On May 3, 2010, according to police records, Detective Snyder drove to Gaurdenzia House to check up on Billy Doe. The detective wrote in his notes:

I stopped by Gaurdenzia House to have [Billy] sign the release papers and was informed that [Billy] absconded. I talked to Jack Kelly, director of Gaurdenzia. Kelly stated that there were rumors of [Billy] using drugs. Kelly had no evidence of [Billy] using drugs but he did cancel [Billy]'s appointments for the day and they were going to search his room. [Billy] came down for lunch and left through the out-patient entrance. I talked to [Billy's] parents. [Billy] did call them and told them that Kelly accused him of using drugs and that his probation officer, Ryan Smith, was on his way to Gaurdenzia to lock [Billy] up and take him back to prison.

But Billy Doe was on the lam. On June 2, 2010, Detective Snyder got a phone call from the escapee:

[Billy] told me he that he left Gaurdenzia because of his problems with the director, Mr. Kelly. [Billy] stated that he first was staying with a friend and then lived with a girl and her children in Glenside, PA. [Billy] did admit to using heroin for about a week after he first left Gaurdenzia but he assured me that he has been sober for the last couple of weeks. [Billy] is back home with his parents.

... [Billy] asked me if I could help get him into a rehab. I asked about Miramount and [Billy] replied that "they" are mad at him for leaving Guardenzia and then using. I told [Billy] to get me a list of some of the places that he would like to stay at and I would make some phone calls on his behalf.

Despite Billy Doe's assurances to Detective Snyder, his new attempt to stay sober would last exactly one week.

On June 9, 2010, Billy Doe was arrested by Officer Torres and and charged with possession with intent to distribute 56 bags of heroin.

On Jan. 7, 2011, there was a hearing in the case of the Commonwealth V. Billy Doe. In Courtroom 604 of the Criminal Justice Center, the Hon. Judge Adam Beloff was listening to a motion to suppress evidence.

"My grounds for the motion to suppress are based on Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution as well as the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution,"said Brian Edward McLaughlin, the attorney for Billy Doe. "My client was stopped by police, who did not have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to make the stop. Additionally, after the stop, items were recovered and they were seized in violation."

That's when Assistant District Attorney Katie Brown put Officer Torres on the stand. The officer testified that he saw Billy Doe walking with a large bulge around his waist. After the officer made eye contact with the suspect, Torres testified, Billy Doe started moving down Allegheny Avenue at a "faster walking pace."

Q. And what did you do?

A. I went around with my patrol vehicle and pulled up next to him and asked where he was going. He stated he was going home, so I stopped him for investigation of the bulge coming out of the right side of his pants and asked him if he had a weapon, and he stated no. I conducted my frisk, and during the frisk, in the lower left-hand pocket, I asked the defendant what were those and he stated four bundles of heroin which he purchased on Mutter [Street].

Q. Did you recover anything as a result of your conversation with the defendant?

A. Just four bundles of heroin ...

A. And back to the bulge. When you saw the defendant, how far were you from him?

A. At first, I would say 30 to 40 feet ...

Q. Can you describe the size and shape of the bulge?

A. It was sticking out ... I thought it was a firearm ...

Q. Where were the bundles of heroin recovered from?

A. They were recovered from the shorts inside the pants. He was, you know, wearing shorts and then pants over the shorts ...

At this point, Judge Beloff interrupted the proceedings.

The Court; Hold on. They were recovered from inside the shorts, in the pants?

The witness: Yes, Your Honor. He was wearing shorts, basketball shorts, and then pants over the basketball shorts. He had pockets inside of the basketball shorts with pants over it.

On cross-examination, Attorney McLaughlin questioned Officer Torres about the particulars of the stop.

Q. You're driving down Allegheny Avenue in a marked police unit?

A. Yes.

Q. It's daylight out?

A. It's sunlight. It's 8 o'clock in the afternoon, it's dusk.

Q. You see my client walking down the street, right?

A. Yes.

Q. All he's doing is walking, right?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Your driving towards my client or away from him?

A. Towards ...

Q. While driving towards him, you're claiming you make eye contact with my client?

A. Eye contact, yes. I observed him and I was checking him out and as I observed him, he we made eye contact?

Q. This is from a distance of 50 feet?

A. Forty feet. I would say 40 feet.

Attorney McLaughlin brought up Officer Torres's testimony at a preliminary hearing on Aug. 6th, 2010. McLaughlin handed the officer a transcript from that hearing.

Q. All right. Directing your attention to page 7 of the testimony. You were asked a question on direct about how far away you were from him just as an estimate and your answer was 50 feet?

A. Yes, sir ...

Q. Now, regarding the eye contact you mentioned, where you said he had a surprised look, does the [transcript] mention that eye contact?

A. No, sir ...

Q. All right. So at that point, that's when you see the bulge on this person's waist band?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You don't know what the bulge is?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. At that point in time, you make a decision to go to my client and basically tell him to stop?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. When you go up to him, you stop him and he's not allowed to go?

A. At that time, no.

Q. Ok. Nothing was ever recovered from the waist band?

A. It wasn't a firearm, just a water bottle.

The Court: A water bottle? Like a plastic water bottle?

The witness: Like a plastic water bottle ...

Q. So the bottle is what you thought was potentially a gun?

A. Yes ...

Q. You patted him down first or ask him questions?

A. Asked him questions first.

Q. Then you pat him down. What did you ask him, first? What are you doing?

A. What are you doing, identification, do you have weapons on you?

Q. What was the response to that?

A. Nothing.

Q. And at that point in time, did you conduct a pat down?

A. Yes, sir

Q. And during that pat down, you said you felt an object.

A. A couple. Some small items on the left side.

Q. It's your testimony today when you ask those questions, you knew what the items were?

A. At that time, at that point, when I felt those small items, I knew that they were some type of narcotics. I did not know that they were heroin or cocaine. I knew it was narcotics ...

Q. Did you have any information he was wearing a gun at that time?

A. No sir ...

Q. Never recovered a firearm?

A. No.

In arguments before the judge, McLaughlin said the police stop "wasn't based on some type of anonymous call for a robbery in progress."

"We didn't hear anything about a lot of gun arrests in that particular location," McLaughlin said. Instead, the officer claimed he made eye contact and spotted a bulge before he "stopped my client and he wasn't free to go," McLaughlin said.

"I submit to Your Honor that's not enough to allow a stop."

And when the officer conducted a pat down of the bulge in the waist, McLaughlin told the judge, all he found was a water bottle. Then he discovered the lumps in Billy Doe's shorts. When the officer asked Billy Doe what was in his shorts, he told him about the heroin. That's when the officer goes in and recovers the drugs. That's why the drugs and the statement given by Billy Doe should be suppressed as evidence, McLaughlin argued.

Assistant District Attorney Brown countered that "there was a reasonable suspicion" to stop and search the suspect "because of the bulge." When the officer approached the defendant, "based on experience .. he immediately knew that there were some kind of narcotics in the pocket."

"I would submit that he did have probable cause," the assistant district attorney said. "I'm not saying that statement -- the statements were made without the Miranda warning. I'm not going to argue that. I would just say based on Officer Torres's experience, based on his interaction with the defendant, it was sufficient enough for him to have probable cause to make the arrest."

The judge was ready to make his ruling.

It was the court's findings that the officer observed the defendant walking down Allegheny Avenue. He observed a large bulge at the defendant's waist and indicated he made eye contact with the defendant. The officer stopped the defendant, asked where he was going, and then conducted a pat down for weapons and narcotics. A water bottle was recovered. The officer then discovered several small objects hidden in the defendant's shorts. When he asked the defendant what they were, the defendant stated it was four bundles of heroin.

"The court finds that the officer did not have reasonable suspicion or probable cause at the time to stop the defendant," the judge said. The officer did not have probable cause to conduct "a further pat down beyond the area where the alleged water bottle was found. Therefore, the motion to suppress is granted."

During the trial of Father Charles Engelhardt and Bernard Shero, Billy Doe disagreed with the charge he was originally arrested on, possession with intent to distribute. Billy Doe told the jury he intended to use those 56 bags of heroin himself.

Alan J. Tauber, one of the defense lawyers for Msgr. William J. Lynn, has had considerable experience representing defendants at the Criminal Justice Center, also known as the CJC. He says the judge made the right call.

"It's just another day at the CJC," Tauber said. "The police had no lawful justification to stop Billy Doe. He wasn't observed behaving in any criminal behavior, or even suspicious behavior at the time they stopped him and frisked him."

"That doesn't mean the police shouldn't get a merit badge for good instincts," Tauber said. "On the positive side they kept Billy Doe from injecting himself with 56 bags of heroin."

The Commonwealth did not appeal the case.

During the hearing on the suppressed evidence, Judge Beloff made no public mention of having conferred with Billy Doe when the judge was a civil lawyer about whether Billy Doe could sue the archdiocese in the civil courts for damages. Billy Doe has told authorities Beloff was one of the lawyers he conferred with before filing a civil suit against the archdiocese.

The judge committed suicide on Dec. 1, 2012.

The heroin bust wasn't Billy Doe's last arrest.

On Nov. 10, 2011, ten months after the hearing to suppress the 56 bags of heroin, Billy Doe was arrested again in Philadelphia, this time for possession of a controlled substance. It's still an open case that's been continued nine times in the past 16 months.


  1. The judge committed suicide on Dec. 1, 2012. That helped Billy Doe file the law suit against the archdiocese and dropped the charges him for carrying 56 bags of heroin. Were are the FEDS?

    1. Probably reading the Inquirer, and taking a nap. Or talking to Craig McCoy about their favorite whipping boy, Vince Fumo.

    2. By the way, where the hell is that lazy useless Inquirer on this story? Probably giving Mayor Nutter another well-deserved pat on the back for his brilliant AVI initiative that will force thousands of residents to sell their homes that they can no longer afford.

      This town needs a real newspaper, not the pathetic lapdog on life support known as the Inquirer.

    3. Ralph - thanks again for your dogged reporting - it's sincerely appreciated by those of us who thirst for justice.

    4. Hey thanks Joe. I'm glad somebody actually read that story.

  2. Skipped out on rehab (demons in his head I am sure) and then is caught with 56 bags of heroin. No reasonable suspicion, no just cause, no conviction. Leave it to the imagination of BD to say that he was going to keep all 56 bags for himself. The pride of his family.....oh wait that would be his brother who is a lawyer. Starting to wonder if he exist, where has he been hiding? All we do know is that he has a client for life in Billy Doe.

  3. In case anyone wants to ask if this has anything to do with this case, it has everything to do with this case.

    The NATION of Australia is going after the catholic church.

    Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard called the inquiry into sexual abuse a "moral moment" for the country and warned of "very uncomfortable truths."

    Link listed below:

    We can only help our government follows the actions of Australia and makes the catholic church be held liable for EVERY abusive action from any clergy member or employee of the catholic church.

    Philadelphia Law Enforcement you should be proud for setting an example of how this country
    should end this horror against children.

    1. Hey Denny; what's that got to do with this story?

    2. Brother ? Do I know you ?

    3. You're an idiot. Two innocent men lost their freedom and you praise Seth and his staff. Do you even read Ralph's articles?

      Hmm, beloff the attorney is now the judge for your precious billy doe and the case is thrown out. What do you call that? Justice. Billy should be serving time for having that amount of heroin on him.

    4. dennis, how about if this lowlife had sold one of those bags of heroin to your son or daughter and they overdosed, I think you would have a different perspective on Billy Doe. He gets these passes because of his connections to the to DA thru his family, for the prosecutor to say he's not getting "preferential treatment in exchange for his false testimony is a joke.

    5. I never answer anything Dennis Ecker writes, because he performs a disservice to this blog by posting obsessively with irrelevant, repetitious comments. His tedious comment above is typical. SaraSNAP has already tried to pull this one and has been called out. So as not to indulge him and sidetrack the matters of interest at hand I will make 2 points:

      - "The NATION of Australia is going after the catholic church" is a preposterous comment. The Commission, for what it's worth, will investigate a range of Australian institutions. If it was really concerned with addressing the epidemic of child sexual abuse - happening today - it would include the one area where it is most rife, Aboriginal communities.

      - DE's post, like so much of what he litters this blog with, is irrelevant to the case under scrutiny. Given the overwhelming evidence of wrongful conviction, I am not surprised that he seeks to obfuscate and divert attention from the truth.

      While healthy debate is constructive and at times illuminating, what DE posts does not fall into that category. He long ago overstepped the mark.

      I suggest he has overstayed his welcome.

    6. Well, Justone, now that you responded about Australia, you are making it part of the topic because your misrepresentations have to be corrected.

      The nation of Australia is going after the Catholic Church. Even the Catholic Bishops in Australia acknowledge that. The Australians called for the investigation because of a law that said that no one could sue the Catholic Church because it is not a legal entity. The populace wants that law changed. The populace also became very alarmed about the number of suicides of children abused by priests and demanded some recourse for these children.

      Everyone should view the Prime Minister's announcement of the Royal Commission which, for what it's worth, is a national investigation coordinating evidence and reports from all states and will be hearing testimony from a minimum of 5000 damaged children:

    7. Ah, the anti-Catholic bigot saraSNAP stirs.
      Already dealt with this nonsense above and in a previous post, so won't dignify it with further, unnecessary comment.
      Thanks for the continued great reporting, Ralph. And, people, please remember to spread news of this blog and its content far and wide. It is having results, believe me.

  4. YOU FUNNY. You can keep saying innocent until your blue in the face.

    1. What an erudite reply.

      Dennis: Intellectual Giant.

  5. Judge who personally new Billy helped him with lawsuit against the catholic church, threw out his arrest then commits suicide, DA covers up polygraph results and makes deal with priest that is a lie, Billy brother who sworn statement discredits Billy's story, magically gets a job and and is in Chicago while he brother is testifying in one of the biggest cases in the country. Still no word from the jury on this last trial on what they were thinking or what were the 3 question asked that the judge kept quiet. Any other case would have had a federal investigation by now. The Philly school system has had 10 times as many sex assault allegation then the catholic church yet nobody their is ever prosecuted. This is plain catholic bigotry and Philly corruption at work.

    1. Perfectly summarized, Anonymous (Apr 4, @9:29AM).
      Anti-Catholic bigotry and Philly corruption. Bringing shame and disgrace to Philadelphia.

  6. Dennis, Have you noticed there is no action on this site, this thread unless you or SarahTx. and 2 others post and then like a nest of hornets they swarm out to fight you.
    If you say nothing they go away because they are otherwise preaching to the choir.
    This is an also ran in the history of Corporate Catholic sex abuse.
    Suppose every thing said about Billy Doe by the opposition here is true. Billy scammed everyone including the jury.
    And the Philly D.A.s expected their case to implode but it didn't. The verdict was in favor of Billy.
    Isn't it more likely that this whole show is a set up. A conspiracy of dunces to defend the corporate Church just like the Beasley Firm and Ralph are doing here?
    I know many victims with drug and alcohol problems. Billy's whole m.o. is typical of an abuse victim.
    Either way, pro or against Billy, this trial has been put on a pedestal as big as the Statue of Liberty's.
    It's been placed to be "seen".
    And the few people who "care about justice" and "truth" here, never identify themselves.
    There's too much " of a strangeness" on both sides to be "normal".
    It just too "easily" became a "cause celebre" just when the corporate Church needed one.
    Maybe if we walk away, the light will be turned off on this show.
    In other words if there is no conflict displayed here there will be no drama; there fore no interest; therefore no audience.

    1. Hello there Jim. I have learned many are family members of Engelhardt. That is why it spreads like wild fire

      Like I said, This case is over. You and I can celebrate without losing one minute of sleep. A jury has found them guilty, and unless facts come about they are innocent they will go to prison

      We must remember some maybe family members so we should feel sorry for them also.They too became victims

      And it maybe the time to shut that light out. Let them prey upon each other.

      Hope your doing great.

    2. It's all about you Jim. And Dennis and Sarah. You're right about that.

    3. Yup, I agree, Jim. Time to stop squabbling with anguished family members. Now that I've corrected the misrepresentation of Australia above, I too can leave the family members alone now which I should have thought about already. Thanks for gracious guidance here.

  7. Justone1618 and Anonymous, This case is over.

    For not caring what I write you sure do comment about them.

    I have a question ? What goes good with sentencing day ? Red or white wine, or a shot and a beer.

    Justice has been done.

    1. How do you know its over? The judge has the authority to overturn the verdict and order a new trial given the craziness of the verdict in light of the testimony in court. You know, the place you never attended during the trial nor will be on the 18th. See you in Palmyra for coffee.

    2. Dennis - this case will not be over until:

      a) the appropriate authority investigates the Philly DA office for their (shall we be charitable) 'incomplete' investigation that led to the indictments and arrests of 4 people. Had the DA properly investigated Billy's statements in the context of the testimonies provided almost a year after the arrests, I really doubt that the Grand Jury would have chosen to indict, and -

      b) assuming the judge passes sentence on the 18th - the Engelhardt / Shero appeal is heard, a new trial is ordered and the defendants are acquitted.

      The stigma of a sexual abuse allegation is indelible. Even when ultimately acquitted, Engelhardt and Shero's careers will have already been effectively terminated. There will be no way to restore to these good men what they have lost in terms of time, treasure, reputation or self worth.

      It’s all gone for them, as it likely will be for the other innocent individuals who will also be subsequently unjustly accused in today’s environment.

      With child sexual abuse allegations, I fear that it will be a long time indeed before the scales of justice are restored to their touted position of initial equilibrium.

      No, Dennis - an injustice has been done, a catastrophic one!

    3. Enjoy the suffering of others Dennis. Encourage others to hate like you hate.

  8. A agree with Dennis. What does this all have to do with the trial?

    BTW does Catholic League fund BigTrial?

    1. Asked and answered Douchie.

      Dennis, J. Robertson and Snappy Sarah: three blind trolls; three Catholic haters.

      Three dopes who can't read, but can only spout the same lines every time: We're victims, we're special, everybody needs to hear about how special we are.

      Pay attention to us, listen to what we have to say. Learn to hate like we hate. That's what we're all about, hate.

    2. BTW can you read?

    3. To the dopey ANON...Catholic League does not fund ANYONE...the blog "Bigtrial" is supported by the Beasley Law Firm (written in rather large letters at the top). This has been explained over and over. Your comment is ignorant and tiresome and a waste of space. BTW, do you have ADD? seems that way.

    4. Anon, Catholics,like you, are worth hating. Well worth hating.

      Remember Hitler was a Catholic and you fulfill his "tradition".

      Anon where are you posting in your spare time? NAMBLA sites?

  9. Hi, my name is Dennis Peckerhead. I don't have to read the stories; I already know what I think.

    Every victim is as pure as the driven snow, every Catholic priest is a molester.

    It's all black and white to me. And that's why it's over. It was over the first moment Billy Doe stood up and said I am a victim. He was 100 percent right, and cloaked in truth. It's really so simple when you think the way I think.

  10. It is over. The pedophiles have been convicted. Justice HAS been served. All of the whining and moaning and crazy conspiracy theories in the world (or at least in Philadelphia) aren't going to change the facts. Msr. Lynn, Fr. Avery, Engelhardt, Shero... GUILTY!

  11. As the sentencing date approaches, any ideas as to people we might write to (media/legal) to make our feelings felt about this injustice?

  12. I wonder if Anonymous 4:21 ever let the thought enter his mind that Engelhardt and Shero are not AS PURE AS DRIVEN SNOW ?

    Now, Now, what is also the reason for name calling ? YOU FUNNY !!

    In two short weeks from today and by this time we will all know how much time Engelhardt and Shero will have to spend inside Hotel Graterford.

    1. You could never shut the light out. This is your only interaction with society. Weak and naive describe you. You were weak as a young male in judge and it had continued for over 30 years. Your basis for participating is to say I am the same as billy.

      See nothing else out of you trying to protect the abuse of young children except your continued rants on how you were abused once. all on this site and nowhere else. false accusation could it be?

    2. This dank hole of speculation and false hope is "light" to you?

      It's not anyone but the police; the adults who should be held responsible for children, to protect your children from abuse not the people who were raped, you baboon.

      Here's a big secret, the fact that victims are willing to talk to chumps like you, who discredit us, is miracle enough for any believer.

    3. Jim, I would be interested in knowing if Dennis were raped? Is that what he claims? I have never read that.. I believe he claims that he was abused once-never heard rape. By the way, he wants to know all the time about everyone one else so why shouldn't this question be asked.

      Shouldn't your parents or family have been responsible for your protection?

    4. Sure, if they had known what was happening but they didn't. They sent me to school and assumed I was safe. I assumed I was safe. I wasn't safe.I found out how unsafe I was after the abuse happened.
      When I say "rape" I'm not using the legally defined term. I'm speaking of the emotional; psychological and spiritual rape of a child.

      If you'd been through it, (and I hope you haven't) you'd know what I mean.
      If you think being forced to preform orally on an adult male isn't the equivalent of "rape". I don't know what is.
      "I would be interested in knowing if Dennis were raped?" says volumes.
      Would you Josie?
      Would you be "interested in knowing"?

    5. Seems to me that you have to use correct terminology. You can't make up your own definition of rape, saying "emotional, psychological and spiritual".

      Why would my question speak volumes? Dennis says all kinds of things and I frankly don't believe him at this point for various reasons, not the least of which is that he embellishes, seems to be delusional. No, I am not a psychologist but it is not hard to figure him out. Dennis said he was "abused" once-never used the word rape-recently he had a sentence about all being raped. I don't buy everyone being raped. And Jim, don't go on a rant about how "unbelievable" it is to ask. Dennis and you are very assuming about others, have your opinions-- much like Sarah Clueless Texas. You and she are really quite removed from Philadelphia. I, like many others here, am very familiar with the local cases we discuss. Sarah, I think said she had a cousin somewhere? who alleges abuse and that is her interest in all this. Most people think she is a member of SNAP which you despise. I don't care who she is because she doesn't seem to follow too well-seems kind of thick headed eg. keeps bringing up Mr. Shero's note to his parents before he took 2 pills. No one paid any attention to that (except I think a juror asked to see it) as it did not prove guilt or innocence. So, don't go on with your drama with me.

      PS. Did you say that you were 16 when you were raped and told no one. I just don't understand that although I am sorry for you if it happened. I know that there are those who don't believe you either, even if you did get a payoff in California.

  13. To Jim, Sarah and Anonymous 4:44-You guys are right. I also feel that we should give the families of Engelhardt and/or Shero and Mr. Cipriano the time to prepare themselves for the events that may occur on April 18th.

    So at this time I will be ending my comments until that day.

    My goal is to show the families I do have a heart and understand their feelings. I wish them well and will pray for them at this time in their lives.

    Dennis Ecker

    1. What a gift to the rest of us! Blessed silence.

      While you're praying ask for wisdom. So you don't go through the rest of your life being a moron.

  14. Thank you. It's about time!................ RALPH. Do you know anything about this Judge from any of her other cases? What are the lightest possible sentences?

  15. Ralph,

    Correct me if I am wrong. When the facts of Geloff and Billy were being brought up by defense attorneys during the trial when Billy was being cross examined, the prosecutor objected and the defense was told they were not allowed to question Billy as to his history with the judge. Seemed like the grounds were the facts that this guy committed suicide.

    Do you remember why that line of questioning was objected to and why they were unable to continue with this specific cross? I remember hearing some of the other attorneys in the audience per say, saying that the judge's ruling on the objection was wrong and the questions were relevent and should have been allowed.

  16. I don't get the point of this post, as Dennis et al I think have commented above. . .

    A LOT of the pedophile priest survivors are screwed up people with unusual appetites for self-destructive substances. After interviewing survivors of these crimes at City of Angels Blog since 2007, I can easily see Billy Doe planning to use that amount of heroin himself.

    The fact that Billy Doe had a drug problem and tended to use in large quantities only serves to prove that he really was a badly damaged person. So. . . ?

    kay e

    1. Goodness, it must be SaraSNAP's sister. Possibly the most naive post thus far. You're only slightly less skilled than our resident SNAPite at hiding your real agenda.
      Bye bye.

    2. I'm amused by Kay's(aka our friend Dennis) let's hope your son or daughter doesn't meet this fine fellow, Billy Doe when he's out there selling his next 56 bags of heroin in the badlands of Philadelphia. Perhaps the lure of those drugs will be too powerful for your children and children like them to resist, same as it was for this loser when he got to high school where the peer pressure pulled him into the drug culture. Most people use drugs because they like to use drugs and they will steal from anyone in their path and lie and cheat anyway possible to get that next high. That's the individual that you attempt to defend.

    3. Ever hear Jesus' words: "Judge not lest ye be judged"?
      If my child were offered heroin; she'd turn it down.
      Why? Because she's not interested and because thankfully she wasn't raped by a priest.
      So let's hope your son or daughter isn't raped by a priest either.
      And remember a jury just found Billy Doe "guilty" of having been raped by priests.

  17. The message that needs to go out loud and clear at the retrial (with thanks to Ryan MacDonald on TMR):-

  18. Wow you guys are clueless, not worth replying to. Ralph, what have you begotten?

    1. Welcome Kay/Dennis to the conversation. What do u find everyone is clueless about?

    2. Kay, nice to hear from you. This trial has taken a few unpopular twists for some of my readers. However, when we set up the previous blog -- -- we put our mission statement out there for all to see:

      "We pledge to be an independent voice. That means we will chase this story where ever it goes, and not follow any predetermined plot line. And because we are intimately aware of the Constitutional rights and protections afforded to all, including the accused, we are not going to censor our accounts."

      I believe we've lived up to that.

    3. My guess, Kay, is that the people who read Ralph's blog are much less "clueless" than the people who rely on the Inquirer or the AP for their news.

      Ralph has been tirelessly covering the trials and the back-story. There are many of us who follow his reporting. We, who follow his blog, are actually more knowledgable, and less clueless, than others following the case from much less worthy media sources. Some of us have real life experiences and have done our "homework" and research, as well.

      Ralph rocks, and we love him! That's some of what he has "begotten", to use your term, which I thought was kind of cute, but not totally sincere.

      Rock on, Ralph, you Maverick, You! You are loved by your readers, and very much appreciated.

  19. I just researched a bit about Judge Beloff. Apparently he was very compassionate toward addicts. Also, he had just recently separated from his wife before his suicide. His widow, Christine Hope is now running for Judge. Sounds like she must be really recovering well from his unexpected death.

    It just gets weirder and weirder!

    1. Hello Archie,

      While compassion toward junkies is - at face value - Christian and commendable, I wonder just how much compassion this now deceased judge extended to the silent victims the addicts robbed or hooked on drugs to distribute - - just to continue their filthy, expensive and insatiable habit.

      It's called 'dope' for a good reason, and we need much stiffer penalties for those who distribute.

    2. Oh, Joe, I agree with you! This case still continues to fascinate. Joe, I really appreciate all your comments and annecdotes. You, and of course, Ralph, are what make this forum addictive, and required reading!

  20. Yes, all this discourse is getting passionate. False charges, false imprisonment, false convictions do not protect children at all. What protects children is screening of all persons applying or volunteering to help children (criminal background checks), employer training program to advise proper and improper way to interact with children, zero opportunities for teachers/volunteers to get too close to children through personal interaction outside the classroom - no basketball or baseball game tickets without a chaperone present. Parents must take an genuine interest in children's education and social interactions. Long term, it will be a daily slog against the forces of evil and temptation. NO easy answer. Trust but verify (Reagan's way of dealing with the Soviet Union and it worked well for us).

    Yes it will be horrible on sentencing day. But then the appellate phase will kick in and pens will be scratching appeals. Lest hope a good appellate judge will see through the bs and give new trials to those falsely accused and allow them to be held outside Philadelphia under a new local DA, not Philly DA.

    1. Well put, I pray for all children to be kept safe and a good appellate judge

  21. Where's that silence you promised us?

    1. HEY, my little female dog has spoken. But without this information he wants everyone to believe he has about me. When I met with the oblates, what I talked about with the oblates, and who I am. Who is the FAKE ? who is the FRAUD ?

      You sit at your keyboard under a false name and mouth off about something you know nothing about. You should be smacked in the nose with a rolled up newspaper and told to sit in the corner. Then you complain because you feelings are hurt because I called you a name. Read back on this blog alone all the name calling you have been doing. The difference between those who you call names and yourself is we heard it all before from people like you, and we have learned to brush it off, and we don't go running home to mommy and say "he called me a name".

      This is a big boy and big girl subject and if you would like to learn about it, sit down, keep your eyes and ears open and your mouth shut.

      In closing you still are my little female dog who must be kept on a tight rope because you think you can play with the big boys, but you have proven to me and those who read this blog you are filled with nothing but hot air.

      p.s. stop being so paranoid. Kay and myself are not the same person as you would like to believe

  22. Isn't it amazing how the cowards who are scared to say who they really are have the balls to call other people "psycho-bitch" and "fraud".
    Dennis is attacked as a CHILD, a child, and you whores say the shit you do, to and about him.
    HAVE YOU NO SHAME???????
    If I ever had any sympathy for your side. It's long gone because you are cowardly, cheap shot taking, child rapists, lovers.
    This is the reaction YOU create in people. You are pathetic!

    1. Thanks, Jim, for doing your best to cool down this situation.

      Guys, I haven't been paying attention to the comments lately, but I think we are out of line here with all the name calling and nasty stuff.

      So you're all warned that I'm going to start zapping comments again. No personal attacks, please.

    2. Now it's "my job' to help you Ralph, calm down a "situation" you created?
      First, I wouldn't let people publish here unless they identified themselves.
      Second, you started this fire Ralph.
      Third, I support you Ralph. if you believe these men were railroaded great. Do what ever you can for them.
      But when real victims put our lives on the line here show some fucking respect.

  23. You guys really need to take a step back.

    Jim, I've been reporting what I've been reporting. It's all out there for everybody to see. If I've gone over the line, anybody here can call me on it.

    I don't recall making any incendiary comments. You guys are all pretty good at that.

    Dennis, you feel threatened because somebody might whack a comment of yours? That's threatening?

    You guys need some perspective. And Dennis, you're acting like a kid, so I'm forced to behave like a parent.

  24. Mommy Dearest, don't dress up your manipulation and your hostility towards victims as non incendiary.
    You came out full tilt boogie against the guilty
    Fine your every right; but name one other of the un named posters here that are supported by a legal firm. Absolutely none.
    God knows victims aren't.
    (Hell we were handed SNAP by our own lawyers who in fact were connected through Jeff Anderson,someone who I have real questions about,to a lengthy "history" in connection to the Church.)
    There are no more investigative reporters. none. but up pops you dressed as one.
    This isn't even a newspaper it's a legal firm's blog.
    To pretend that this is in anyway "normal" is incendiary in my opinion.

  25. Hmm, I don't recall being cast as hostile toward victims during the first trial. People were applauding me for what I wrote when it fit into their particular world view.

    This blog is doing the work that newspapers used to do.

    I've been doing investigative work since the early 80s. Please don't lecture me about journalism. I taught it at Temple.

  26. It appears that Dennis does not work at anything except to comment here morning, noon, night, and after midnight. He just may be on disability.If that is the case, we are paying for him to have the time to annoy us. Geez...

  27. Nah that Judge was the appeals Judge at CJC that heard appeals from traffic court among other things until they moved him to hear cases in his new room . the powers to be seem to thing he had something to do with the investigation into traffic court.

  28. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.


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.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.