Friday, March 6, 2015

Father Andy's Lawyer Puts District Attorney On Trial

By Ralph Cipriano

Father Andy's defense lawyer put the district attorney on trial today, arguing that in order to put a Catholic priest in jail, the D.A. had decided that the ends justified the means.

Trevan Borum, Father Andy's lawyer, ripped the D.A.'s office for not doing their homework. Instead of old-fashioned detective work, Borum said, the D.A. relied on a blatant appeal to emotion.

"Do not decide this case based on sympathy," Borum told the jury. He asked the jury to recall how many times he had objected to questions from the prosecutor "designed to evoke an emotional response" from a witness.

Borum asked the jury to recall how many times they had to leave the courtroom because a witness started sobbing after being asked an "improper question" by the prosecutor.

The capper came when Assistant District Attorney Kristen Kemp did her closing and seemed to be going out of her way to prove Borum's point. Only a guilty verdict, she told the jury of ten women and two men, would take away the alleged victim's pain. Only a guilty verdict, she said, would assuage the guilt of the victim's mother and father, who wouldn't let the victim quit being an altar boy because they didn't know what Father Andy had done. And what about the alleged victim's cousin, Kemp asked. How do you think she feels? When the cousin was 11 years old, Kemp said, the altar boy told her about the abuse. Eighteen years later, Kemp said, the cousin still feels guilty about not telling anybody.

Holy guilt trip! In the front row of the jury some women looked stricken; one juror dabbed her eyes. Meanwhile, Juror No. 2 was watching the victim, his head bowed, sitting next to his sobbing mother.

Borum began his closing argument by posing a question to the jury: "How do you defend a case like this?"

It's a defense lawyer's nightmare. Start with a accusation about an act of perversion behind closed doors that dates back 18 years. At the time of the alleged crime, the alleged victim was a 10-year-old altar boy. And the defendant was a Roman Catholic priest.

Father Andy, Borum said, has been a priest for more than 30 years. He's been in contact with "hundreds, if not thousands of altar boys." But only one altar boy has accused him of sex abuse.

The district attorney, Borum said, took the witnesses in this case at their word. "Instead of vetting anybody, they decide to run with it," Borum said, because, "We're gonna convict a priest."

"It doesn't matter how we do it," Borum said. "The ends justify the means."

To prove his point, Borum asked the jury to recall the testimony of a couple of prosecution witnesses: Adam Visconto, a former altar boy, and his mother, Kathleen.

Kathleen Visconto had testified that back when her son was an altar boy, he came running in to see her "as pale as a ghost," Borum recounted.

Here's the story the Viscontos told: at a funeral Mass, Father Andy tried to talk Adam Visconto and another altar boy, Steve Dozier, into meeting him in the church basement at St. John Cantius in Bridesburg.

Instead of obeying the priest, Borum said, Kathleen Visconto told the two altar boys to "run home, close the door and turn out the lights."

The D.A. knew about Steve Dozier two years ago, Borum said. Yet, they never went to interview him to see if Adam Visconto's story checked out. Thank God we did, Borum said.

Steve Dozier, now a Pennsylvania state trooper, testified to the jury that he didn't recall any such panicked flight from Father Andy.

Why didn't the district attorney go see Trooper Dozier, Borum asked. He wasn't hard to find.

"I'll tell you why, the ends justify the means," Borum said.

Borum told the jury he had problems with the alleged victim's story, which he said sounded like a "slow-motion technicolor movie."

The Commonwealth ran with that movie, Borum said. But it doesn't square with how a child remembers things, Borum argued.

The alleged victim, Borum reminded the jury, told a story about how he ate two cream-filled vanilla cookies and drank a Dr. Pepper before he went upstairs in the rectory to see Father Andy's living quarters.

Then, according to the alleged victim, Father Andy attacked without warning. When the priest closed the door after fumbling with the lock, the alleged victim testified, he fondled the altar boy and tried to jam his penis past the boy's clenched teeth.

Fourteen years went by before the victim came forward to accuse the priest.

Do any of you remember what you ate 14 years ago, Borum asked the jury. "I can't remember what I had yesterday."

The alleged victim's mother, father and grandfather believe his story, Borum said. That's as it should be. But Borum didn't think that that jurors should believe the alleged victim.

Because he wasn't telling the truth, the defense lawyer said. Why would the victim lie, he asked.

"Does he want attention?" Borum asked. "I don't know."

Does he have a grudge against the church? "I don't know," Borum said.

Borum brought up the alleged victim's testimony from the first trial. He claimed that after Father Andy allegedly abused him in 1997, he never again served as an altar boy with the priest.

But Borum's investigator found a 2000 yearbook from the parish school. And the yearbook showed the alleged victim in a group photo of altar boys posing with Father Andy three years after the alleged attack.

"He misled you," Borum told the jury.

Borum went through the rest of the details from the alleged attack: the 10-year-old altar boy "zoning in" on the priest's cassock, specifically the 32 buttons that the priest supposedly unbuttoned one by one. And how during the attack all the altar boy could do was count those buttons.

It's just not how a kid remembers things, Borum argued to the jury. To prove his point, Borum recalled the scariest moment from his own childhood.

He was at a beach and got caught in a riptide. A lifeguard saved him, Borum said.

"I don't remember what I ate when I got in the water," Borum told the jury. He doesn't remember what color bathing suit he was wearing. The only thing Borum remembers was the water, and that he was scared out of his mind.

"Memory doesn't work like a movie camera," the defense lawyer said.

Borum reminded the jury that the alleged victim told his grandfather that the priest took off his boxer shorts. But when he told his story to a detective, Borum said, the alleged victim claimed that the priest took off all his clothes except for his boxer shorts.

"The story changed every time he told it," Borum argued. So don't believe it.

Borum questioned the testimony from the mother of the alleged victim, about how her son had supposedly attempted to hang himself in a closet every week. Borum reminded the jury that when he asked the alleged victim about it, he claimed he tried to hang himself several times a week.

But the alleged victim was never taken to a doctor or a hospital, Borum said.

About the alleged hanging, "There's no evidence of that," Borum said.

"He tried to mislead you," Borum said. "I don't know why but he did."

Why is the family telling these stories, Borum asked. Because they believe the victim. And they'd do anything to convict Father Andy. And if it was my kid, Borum said, "I'd do the same thing."

"It doesn't make it right," the defense lawyer said.

Borum talked about the opening statement by Assistant District Attorney Kemp.

"She constructed a house of cards," he said. "You poke it and breathe on it, and it falls apart."

He showed the jury some photos a character witness for Father Andy had brought to court. She was a former member of the Children of Mary. The pictures were of the priest posing with his arm around the witness's sister at her First Holy Communion. And Father Andy posing with altar boys and girls from the Children of Mary that he took to an amusement park.

"This is Father McCormick," Borum told the jury. Father Andy built a good reputation as a priest for more than 30 years, Borum said. "And it can be taken from you in an instant."

He asked the jury to find the priest not guilty.

When it was Assistant District Attorney Kemp's turn to speak, she compared Borum's argument to a snow globe. The defense lawyer, she said, was trying to stir up all kinds of snowflakes so that the real picture would be obscured.

He's trying to deceive you, she said about Borum. He wants to stir up so much stuff that "you don't remember" the pain of the alleged victim.

Kemp took Borum to task for accusing her of baiting witnesses to cry with "improper questions" designed to evoke emotion.

Remember the question she posed to the alleged victim, she asked the jury. The question that prompted the alleged victim to start crying?

It was right at the beginning of his testimony, Kemp reminded the jurors.

She was showing the alleged victims photos from inside the rectory. Then she asked, "Can you describe the kitchen?"

That's when the alleged victim started crying and the judge had to ask the jury to clear the room.

Just the sight of that kitchen, she told the jury, "broke him in a manner of seconds."

She was back to the snow globe. Borum, she said, was trying to "shake it up" so much that "you won't pay attention," to what happened to the alleged victim. You won't "see what happened" to him.

If you're paying attention to the snow job from the defense lawyer, Kemp told the jury, you won't remember why Father Andy targeted a 10-year-old altar boy.

"Because he wouldn't tell," she said. Because he was gay.

The prosecutor ripped Borum for criticizing the alleged victim because he remembered too many details from the attack.

Why does the alleged victim remember all those precise details, Kemp asked the jury. Because for him, the movie's still playing.

"He replayed it over and over again in his mind," she said. "This is normal, how some people react to trauma."

Father Andy, she said, used to have a "big body" when he was 30 pounds heavier.

What was the victim staring at during the attack, she reminded the jury. "That belly covered by those buttons."

Instead of getting caught up in a snow job, she said, just remember the testimony of the alleged victim.

"Did that feel real to you," she asked. That's because "What he described to you was real."

Did it feel real to you when his mother was telling you her story, she asked. His father?

Their stories felt real because "they lost him," she said of their son.

After the attack, the alleged victim would no longer hug his father. His mother found a hangman's noose in her son's closet.

Kemp attacked Borum for trying to cast doubt on the alleged victim's suicide attempts, because he didn't end up in the hospital or dead.

Just because he wasn't successful, she said, "That doesn't count for something?"

She talked about how the alleged victim "blamed himself for years" after the attack because he was gay.

"He picked the perfect victim," she said about Father Andy.

She talked about the guilt the alleged victim's parents felt because their son wanted to quit being an altar boy, and he wanted to leave the church.

"His parents forced him to stay," she told the jury. She asked the jurors to consider how the parents felt after they found out what Father Andy had done to their son.

She asked jurors to consider how the alleged victim felt when Father Andy told him homosexuality was a sin, and that masturbation was a sin. As if it was the altar boy's fault for what happened behind closed doors with Father Andy.

The question you should be asking yourselves, she told jurors, is when the alleged victim testified, did it feel real to you? And if it felt real to you beyond a reasonable doubt you should vote to convict Father Andy.

She brought up more details from the attack.

"That belly pushing him down on the bed," she said. Remember how the alleged victim turned to drugs and alcohol and trying to hurt himself. Remember how right in front of you, when he was talking about the attack, how, "He just shut down. He just went back to being that 10-year-old kid. Pulling out his hair. Hiding in his bedroom."

At this point, Kemp walked over to the witness stand and sat in it.

"He couldn't even talk," she said of the alleged victim. "He couldn't look at him," she said, pointing toward Father Andy at the defense table.

Think about his father's testimony, she said; think about his mother's testimony.

"You saw it from the witness stand and I ask you, did it feel real?"

In the second row of the courtroom, the alleged victim's mother dabbed her eyes with a tissue.

It was D.A. Kemp's turn to talk about an incident from her past.

She was being trained by a senior prosecutor, she told the jury. The prosecutor told a group of young assistant district attorneys to remember their first sexual experience because in 30 minutes, they were going to have to stand up in front of the entire group and tell that story.

She was overcome with panic, she said. She wasn't going to do it. And then, a half hour later, the senior prosecutor told them she wasn't going to make them do it. She just wanted them to get a feel for what a sex abuse victim goes through.

The alleged victim in this case, she said, has had to tell you about "the most vile experience of his life." He's not alone, she said of the alleged victim. "His family is in this with him."

Why would he put himself through this, she asked, why would he put his family through this "if it didn't happen?"

He didn't file a civil lawsuit against the church, Kemp said. He's not after money. "He wants nothing from this man."

Why's he dong this? He told you why.

"He doesn't want this to happen again," she said. "He's done being silent. He wants nothing from this process except a chance for justice."

She went through the first three charges against the priest: involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, corruption of a minor. She talked about "what feels real to you" again as one juror wiped her eyes.

"Tell [the alleged victim] the pain is over," she implored the jury. Tell his parents, "They don't have to feel guilty any more." Tell his cousin "she did the best she could do at 11."

"Find him guilty."

After a break, the judge took an hour to charge the jury, going through each of five charges against the priest. Then she gave the case to the jury to begin deliberations.

Within moments the jurors were back with their first question. They wanted to see a defense exhibit, a black cassock with 33 buttons on it.


  1. "[Prosecutor Kemp] talked about 'what feels real to you' again as one juror wiped her eyes."

    Game over. This is a jury that's riding on emotion, not any facts.
    McCormick is toast, it seems.

    "Good" (not great) closing argument by Borum, it seems.
    Borum's refutation of the accuser's alibi was *huge* and should raise serious reasonable doubt in the jury, but, again, it seems this case is all about emotional strings.

    Not looking good for McCormick.
    I hope I'm wrong.

    Great reporting, Ralph.

    1. It is winning and losing, the truth is put aside as winnibg is preferable for losing. That is ADA Kemp's mentality which is to show the boys what a mean bitch she is and let the boys sweat in -the office. And an innocent man will die in prison to make her happy.

      Why couldn't this be settled administratively vice being put on trial

    2. This can not be "settled administratively" because sexually abusing young children is a crime, not an administrative matter! Settling things "administratively" (i.e. quietly paying off victims and moving the "man of God" to a new church where he was free to sexually abuse even more innocent children) is what got this religious organization into the spot it is now in. A more apt question would be why didn't the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church" care enough about the most innocent of their flock to keep them safe from these predators?

    3. Where in the hell did you get the idea that this priest was a predator? Having served for 14 years in the same parish, multiple people testifying to his good character, NO ONE else making accusations even in spite of Seth's public plea that they do so, and you still call him a predator? Take the blinders off and acknowledge that not everyone who is accused of abuse is actually guilty of it. Don't let your anger get in the way of reason.

    4. "Settled administratively" Oh the Catholic Church would love that. Why don't we let the victim his family and his friends serve up some justice ? How about we do what the Bible says and take the lives of these priestly animals ?

      In Genesis 9:6, God told Noah that the penalty for intentional murder should be death: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.”

      I cannot think of a better example of murder then what these priests have done to God's children. They have killed the minds, hearts, and souls.

      But we are or at least pretend to be a civil society and that would be considered barbaric and it would make us no better then the animals we call priests.

    5. Settling administratively is expelling him from the priesthood for using pooor judgment in allowing boys to visit his room. That is why he is on trial. This became a he said he did event. I hope bthe bjury will apply an open mind as there are glaring inconsistencies in the trial.

  2. A masterful closing argument on the part of the defense. The prosecution had nothing but emotion on her side. Having followed this trial, imho, I think this priest is innocent. I hope the jury will not be taken in by the dramatic performance of the accuser and his family.

  3. I think I read for the first time a defense attorney help convict his own client. Could a closing argument be any weaker to keep someone out of prison ?

    We will soon know.

  4. I sincerely hope that someone on the jury has the common sense to realize that it's not necessary to remove all 33 buttons to divest oneself of a cassock. For the sake of argument, if Father Andy were trying to molest this kid in the heat of passion, why in the bloody blue blazes would he take the time to unbutton all 33 buttons instead of just unbuttoning the top and just stepping out??

  5. Heres a thought from someone who has been following the case.......every detail was put out there 4 times in 4 different stories EXCEPT one key point....yes aside from the boxers on or off which the victim stated on the stand that his grandfather the SEX CRIMES DETECTIVE paraphrased for him. This about this..... While Fr McCormick had the "victim" pinned down, he put his penis in his mouth only up to the teeth because he clenched his mouth down right??? What was NEVER said was how did he get the penis past the lips??? GO AHEAD clench your lips shut....Your going to tell me Fr McCormick while in the heat of "raping a young boy" whom he had pinned down used only ONE hand to move the boxers down, force his penis to the kids mouth and with the other hand pried open and held open his lips then move his penis inside this kids lips???? Go ahead and try it kids!!! Its relatively impossible!!!! This whole case is a shame and YES the kid went to see a that was either for the lyIng strategy OR the financial backing because at that time the Archdioces was paying out victims. Mind you he said he was at the peak of his 3 months of sober when this txt was written.

    The victim has been shut out, depressed, different, unaffectionate right? SOBER right?? After some research you can find pictures of him out drinking acting like a goof and crazy having fun if you look in the right place. I wont say its the myspace page of the first person he told because they will be deleted. BUT there were 63 pictures saved. God Bless Fr. McCormick and I pray that this jury is sensible and not the circus jury that Kemp wanted. I wish I had the honor to serve the Lord as a soldier in Fr McCormick's army!

  6. Kemp is smoking hemp. The DA did not do their job at proper investigation of this case. The so called victim was coached by the grandfather who is a SVU detective. A good DA would do their job and actually interview all witnesses not just a few from the victims side. Oh was it mentioned that the victims uncle was gay? Maybe he was the one who molested the victim and not the priest seems to me they are looking for a pay out!

  7. These Catholic apologists claim to be interested in the truth... why, then, didn't this "man of God" take the witness stand and explain why he thinks it's alright to take little boys into his room and bed at night? A practice that he continued even after his supervisors warned him to stop, a practice that led him to be suspended by those same supervisors. Why didn't he take the witness stand and explain to the jury why he thinks it's alright to take young boys on vacation to Europe and ply them with alcohol? Are these behaviors standard operating procedure for "men of God?" Sleeping with little boys, giving them alcohol... none of these facts will be enough to make Catholic apologists say this man should NOT be posing as a "man of God." In fact they will welcome his return to the priesthood with open arms and allow him to be around more young boys. A "man of God" who has so little faith in his God and the truth that he dare not stand up and shout his innocence... lest the jury finds out about his "priestly" behavior. Yes, by all means may God bless this man who beds young boys, and plies them with alcohol while on "vacation."

    1. You repeat the same rot over and over again without any acknowledgement of the facts or truth. Last year he did take the stand but because he is a simple man who has no guile he was unprepared for the prosecutor. Perhaps his attorney advised him not to take the stand and he is following his advice. On more than one ocassion this priest has proclaimed his innocence. It didn't do him any good last year by taking the stand so why should he do it again? Nowhere does it ever say that he slept in the same bed with a kid. The one witness who was his roommate in Poland said the worse thing he did was snore. There is simply no evidence here at all. You, sir or madam, have a very twisted mind which is evident by your repeated screeds against priests and the Catholic Church.

  8. Because his uncle is gay, he is the one who may have molested the alleged victim? Have I read that correctly? It seems that someone needs a lesson on Homosexuality vs. Pedophilia.

    1. That's why they are called "Catholic apologists!" In their efforts to spin the "man of God's" behavior as normal (spending the night with young boys, taking them to Europe and giving them alcohol, etc., etc.,etc...) they must come up with ever more ludicrous excuses. Funny, I have never heard even one "Catholic apologist" say "...guilty or not, this behavior is NOT the way "men of God" are supposed to behave with children..." (even though his own supervisors suspended him for this behavior). Instead, everyone else is the "villain" (the victim, the victim's uncle, the DA, the public at large...) and the "man of God" who spends the night with little boys and gives the alcohol is the "saint." I wonder if they will be lined up with their young children outside of this "man of God's" room eager to hand over their child to him for the night? I wonder how many will hand over their young children to him for an alcohol filled "fun" vacation in Europe? Any volunteers willing to place their little boy in the care of this monster... er, "man of God?"

  9. Why hasn't the fact that Kemp kept asking jurors to recall "how they felt" been addressed? The plaintiff is not only a model but he is also a self proclaimed make up artist to the stars who works for a successful cosmetic firm in New York. Now maybe I am wrong but to me a model is trained in how to control their facial expressions and emotions! What is the purpose of a model? It is to get consumers (or anyone for that matter) to feel a certain way when they look at a picture! Whether it be a sales ad or a public service announcement, when u look at a model posing in a picture it evokes some sort of emotion. Wouldn't you also think similar thoughts about a make up artist? They should know how to manipulate the face to convey emotion... It seems to me the plaintiff in this case could have made the jurors "feel" anyway he wanted them to feel based on his facial expressions and emotions, which are both things that his self chosen careers depend on. Let's hope that the jurors can see this and they remember the facts, not how they felt!

    Also, doesn't anyone else find it odd that over the last 2 years and through 2 trials not one other alter boy has come forward. What makes the plaintiff in this case so special that he was this priests only target? If my memory serves me correctly I believe I have heard and ready that Fr. McCormick has been a roman catholic priest for 30 years, how many alter boys do you think Fr. encountered over 30 years? Sex offenders do not just flip a switch on and off, sex offenders are sick demented people who repeatedly commit crimes such as sexual assault and/or rape.

    Here's hoping for not guilty!

  10. Wow. Talking about grasping at straws. The above post about the alleged victim being a model and make up artist was a big rambling mess.

    1. Well, one thing that this kid and his family excel at is crying on command for effect, and at the drop of a hat no less. What a waste of good Kleenex. I sincerely hope that the jurors can see through this charade.

      Is there a method acting class currently running in Philadelphia?

  11. Well, here's some food for thought (if anyone's hungry).

    Most of us who have grand children - especially grandsons - look to see in them the positive traits of strength and virility needed to successfully raise a family in today's world. In a very real way, the traits they exhibit reflect both on their lineage and the values instilled in them during their formative years.

    Now, this kid's grandpop at face value seems to be a real 'man's man'. He was in the Air Force and then the police where he 'specialized' in sex crimes. However, somewhere along the line he must have been extremely embarrassed to learn that his grandson didn't have a firm handshake (shall we say).

    Perhaps all the nooses hanging around the house, the hair pulling and the torrents of tears were nothing more than symptoms of the inner conflict the accuser felt as he was coming to the realization to the realization that he could be gay.

    Is it possible that the outrage and testimony which Pop expressed at the trial was directed at Father Andy who may have tried to help the kid deal with this state, but failed?

    For all we know, the accuser may have a grudge against Father Andy because of advice that he was given in the Confessional relative to this clearly disordered state.

  12. Anonymous at 11:44 a.m., I think you make some excellent points. You may wish to take a look at the following article by a local psychiatrist.

    I am sure that what this man reports will be considered controversial among the anti-catholic crowd.

  13. Did sarah Tx2 go anonymous or on vacation hmm?

    1. Why do you ask? Are you having trouble incorporating her into your "villains list" if she goes on vacation? Or, are you saying that in the "vast scheme" against your religious organization she has some nefarious intent to post multiple comments under different guises? Which conspiracy theory will it be today in defense of pedophile Catholic priests and their enablers within the hierarchy of the "church?"

    2. Not on vacation. Just didn't think it was necessary to post the obvious, that it's looking bad for McCormick. Defense counsel's complaints about witnesses sobbing and his comparison to being caught in a riptide seemed really weak to me. Being caught in a riptide is very scary. But by comparison, a child stuck in a bedroom with a big overweight priest intent on having sex with him has to be ten times as scary. I don't think defense counsel should have invited that comparison. He also should have stayed away from annoyance at sobbing witnesses. Any person would sob about this happening to their child or to themselves as a child. Even a cousin would sob when looking back and wondering what she could have done when she was 11 years old.

      McCormick couldn't stop bringing boys to his room. His life seemed to revolve around interacting with boys, taking them to Poland, movies, outings, leaving weird statues inside their front door, inviting them to basements, ignoring parents' objections, etc.

      No wonder the previous defense counsel gave up, saying "I'm done," "I'm done."

    3. Good grief, Sarah.

      You need serious help.
      You are completely unhinged.

      Please do yourself - and everyone - a favor.
      Get professional help.

  14. Now we have a gay uncle and a disappointed grandfather thrown into the mix, not the priest that's on trial. Interesting.

  15. What disturbs me as an American about those who made their minds up concerning the guilt of this priest even before testimony was heard, is the fact that they dispensed of a foundational premise of American jurisprudence: every man is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Absent this principle, mob rule and tyranny come into play. There is not one shred of evidence that this priest committed any crime. Quite to the contrary: there have been multiple people who have testified to his good character.

    The Philadelphia judicial system is so corrupt that I won't be surprised if this priest is found guilty....not because he did anything....but because he simply is a priest. And if that is true, then God help those who knowingly played any role in punishing an innocent man for such a henious crime.

    1. Typical... No concern whatsoever for the innocent children sexually abused... No concern for the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church" who systemically hid the fact that some of their "men of God" were assaulting children, and even provided new opportunities for these abusers to commit even more abuse by moving them around from location to location... But a sudden, overwhelming concern that "American Jurisprudence" is being shaken to it's foundation... because a "man of God" who spends the nights with little boys and takes little boys to Europe and plies them with alcohol has to face his accuser in open court. Perhaps we should disband the entire legal system and let you decide which pedophile Catholic priests are guilty or innocent. I am quite sure these "men of God" are all innocent to you. You should be more concerned about what your God will do to his followers who allowed these terrible things to go on for decades, and to the "apologists," like yourself, who refuse to clean up your own house (the Catholic "Church"), while wailing and moaning about injustice. That there were multiple people who have testified as to his good character doesn't mean he is innocent. There were also multiple people who testified as to his bad character. Now it is in the hands of a jury of his peers, just as that American system of jurisprudence you so callously denigrate intended. Too bad you aren't so compelled to speak out and change the system that allowed it's "men of God" to repeatedly destroy the souls of innocent children. If found not guilty, perhaps you wouldn't mind letting this "man of God" spend a few nights in Europe alone with your child or grandchild. Perhaps provide some alcohol to the child...

  16. Your thoughts that McCormick will be found guilty because he is a priest goes both ways. How many people like you are out there who believe he should be found innocent because he is a priest. I believe in innocent until proven guilty but I also believe in never judge a book by its cover.

    1. Well said. Now the decision is in the hands of a jury of his peers. Whatever their verdict, the system worked as it is designed to work. Much better than the "system" used by the hierarchy of the Catholic "Church" that hid the crimes of pedophile priests and even enabled these crimes by moving the predators from location to location so they could abuse more innocent children.


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.