tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post1161454130983497130..comments2023-10-22T09:32:13.417-04:00Comments on Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog: Prosecution Puts the Archdiocese of Philadelphia On TrialAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04116104602505815614noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-55679889057662781352012-04-20T00:00:46.352-04:002012-04-20T00:00:46.352-04:00On top of everything else, you also know the best ...On top of everything else, you also know the best therapy for those who were raped as children? I'm confused. Are you talking about children at all in any of your long drawn-out comments? Or are you conducting a class in beating around the bush?SarahTX2http://www.blogger.com/profile/13127925134697324637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-19485870569795401932012-04-19T23:01:09.779-04:002012-04-19T23:01:09.779-04:00Can't do it cause it's a religion. States...Can't do it cause it's a religion. States can chase out small cults, case in point, Texas and the polygamists. But this is a national cult. And they must obey or jeopardize their salvation. I don't think a non-Catholic can even conceive of how entrenched Catholic children are in the need for obedience. reverence and secrecy. Hence, the endless cases of children who couldn't tell anyone, least of all their parents.SarahTX2http://www.blogger.com/profile/13127925134697324637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-27987608529050422672012-04-19T22:46:53.993-04:002012-04-19T22:46:53.993-04:00Now might be a good time to re-read the Grand Jury...Now might be a good time to re-read the Grand Jury Reports. They can refresh our memory regarding rape reporting. There are never a lot of "current" rapes because victims do not report it, sir, not until they've matured enough to even be able to articulate this pornography that took place in their childhood at the hands of Catholic priests. Does the concept of "children" figure into your lengthy argument in any way?SarahTX2http://www.blogger.com/profile/13127925134697324637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-37214322378318058472012-04-19T11:15:11.742-04:002012-04-19T11:15:11.742-04:00gee, ya think? because i know that they know that...gee, ya think? because i know that they know that it's all a a lie. including the bible that they wrote, or more accurately rewrote from buddhist and zorastrian sources, to suit their criminal enterprise. the catholic church is the mafia and it always has been.<br><br>this is so much bigger than a few boys being abused. this is about prostitution and blackmail just like penn state. RICO certainly applies, and for that matter it should be used in happy valley too. it's like RICO was written for the purpose of WAITING until the right time to strike the catholic church. and i really hope now is the time. my children shouldn't have to grow up in a world with a catholic church.<br><br>it would be different if their religion was just harmless mythology meant to uplift the soul and promote justice throughout the world. but it isn't harmless, much less "true." rather their philosophy is designed to promote the powerful over the weak and to create false "sins" like homosexuality to cover for their real crimes, like rape, torture, human trafficking, contraband smuggling, and war profiteering. it's a blame-the-victim culture. men are to be forgiven but women and children are to be punished. so are any men who dare to stand up to their sadistic lavender syndicate.Roza Moyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05040582532748911343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-4698563123977058702012-04-18T14:04:15.552-04:002012-04-18T14:04:15.552-04:00Once again with the blanket assertions.Google and ...Once again with the blanket assertions.<br><br>Google and Wiki are not the statutes, which perhaps might be more of an informed source for blanket assertions or even merely accurate ones. <br><br>There is no evidence of “rampant child rape” and indeed every published Report that does not simply assert but actually displays all of its findings, numbers, sources, and methods indicates that.<br><br>And again with this gambit: if I don’t agree with some people, then I am merely “protecting” pedophile priests. This is cartoonish.<br><br>And – more vitally – if it is indeed the mindset of certain, perhaps influential, circles among ‘advocates’ that in order to ‘protect’ they can dispense with the obstructive formalities of serious and accurate thought and deliberation, then you have to wonder what goes on in those meetings and – frankly – what goes on in the minds of these people. <br><br>This is precisely the cartoon thinking that got this country into Iraq and it has also now been enshrined in the current government claim that it can invade anywhere on the planet where it deems it has a ‘responsibility to protect’ (the so-called R2P doctrine). Thoughts, even cartoonish ones, have consequences and take on a life of their own. <br><br>And recall Thomas More’s point made in Bolt’s 1966 play and film, “A Man for All Seasons”: If you flatten all the laws to get at the Devil, and then the Devil turns round on you – how will you hide, the laws being all flat? I will go further than Bolt: what happens to YOU when you engage in a flattening of the laws – do you not turn into some sort of devil yourself in the process? (That ‘YOU’ is meant in the general and the abstract; the commenter to whom I am responding is not a devil, but perhaps something far less.)<br><br>Which is a worry not assuaged by the final blanket assertion that “God is so stupid”. Which I can do no better than allow to stand as written by the commenter.Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-57075514895891731342012-04-18T13:48:02.949-04:002012-04-18T13:48:02.949-04:00Well, it’s nice to see that I’ve not been inaccura...Well, it’s nice to see that I’ve not been inaccurate in my assessments. <br><br>What we see here is precisely what I have been talking about: Thinking is ‘verbosity’; thinking is only designed to fool people; and if you don’t agree with us then you are being ‘paid’ (and – marvelously – that I am a Judas … to what, the Church? Christ?)<br> <br>I urge every reader to read the ‘hrh’ comment and reflect seriously on what’s going on in so much of all this.Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-84081832474308811882012-04-18T13:02:43.755-04:002012-04-18T13:02:43.755-04:00All your verbosity and deflection fool no one here...All your verbosity and deflection fool no one here. Whatever you're being paid, it's too much. Thirty pieces of silver, perhaps?hrhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06989434735794993426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-19747879099442400222012-04-17T22:12:27.502-04:002012-04-17T22:12:27.502-04:00‘It can easily be believed” is perhaps more accura...‘It can easily be believed” is perhaps more accurately stated in the first person-active voice; as a universal assertion it would require rather substantial demonstration which is – not surprisingly – missing.<br><br>I am not familiar with any quotation of Jesus that includes “the one, holy, and apostolic church”. And at the time He conducted His earthly ministry, why would He have used the concept of “one” in the first place?<br><br>Given the mysteries of Divine Providence in the past two millennia, I’m not sure how any of us humans can say with any assurance at all just what God would and would not permit. And if the idea is that no god that allows people to starve can be a god, then what religion on the planet and what god can stand? <br><br>Thus by the same token, if God is testing the Church, and His idea is to demonstrate that this isn’t His Church, then what church is? (Remember, the commenter has already implicated God in the starvation of 15,000 people a day, so is this really a real God we are speaking about here?) <br><br>And again, I point out that serious matters (and serious and coherent thought) are not really ‘simple’ at all. And the only way to make them simple is – like the proverbial primitive undertaker – to chop pieces off until the subject fits the box he cobbled together before he took any actual measurements. <br><br>I take the time with all of this because it becomes increasingly clear here how certain thought-processes can appear – in the webverse – to be knowledgeable merely by the insistent and repetitive use of assertions that apparently are so ‘clear’ that they need no discussion or substantiation. That’s the internet and there’s nothing for it. <br><br>But to what extent, I can’t help wondering, does this type of presentation prevail at support-group meetings ostensibly run for genuinely troubled people who are looking for consolation and constructive help in mastering their lives and their experiences? <br><br>Lastly, I note that in today’s ‘New York Times’ there is an article investigating lawyers who locate businesses that are not in compliance with Disability laws’ requirements, and then they “aggressively recruit plaintiffs from advocacy groups” – apparently with some collaboration from the groups themselves. If that scheme rings some sort of bell among readers following the instant matters here, I would encourage further thought about it.Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-38369101538233026272012-04-17T19:04:23.078-04:002012-04-17T19:04:23.078-04:00It can easily be believed that this isn't God&...It can easily be believed that this isn't God's church.<br><br>Jesus said 2000 years ago that He created "the one, holy, and apostolic church". He didn't say that after it fragmented into hundreds of types of Christian churches, the one that was financially richest would be that church.<br><br>God wouldn't let His church be the richest on earth while 15,000 people die of starvation every day. He wouldn't let His church commit organized child rape and child torture, organized lying, and organized bullying of victims, in His name, to save money.<br><br>This is a God's test, and He made it simple - this isn't God's church.neilallen76http://www.blogger.com/profile/04966954580793318142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-26473237552232600422012-04-17T18:57:53.112-04:002012-04-17T18:57:53.112-04:00You're wrong.Look at Google and wikipedia, whi...You're wrong.<br><br>Look at Google and wikipedia, which states in the first paragraph that "it allows for the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because they did not actually do it."<br><br>The Catholic church's prime crime is rampant child rape, committing at least 10,000, and by this year's vatican estimates, over 100,000 child rapes in the US alone. No one knows due to omerta, the Catholic mafia code of silence.<br><br>As far as the rest of your comment is concerned, there are two sides to this argument:<br><br>1) you protect and fight for the pedophile priests<br>2) you protect and fight for the victims<br><br>However, most remaining Catholics think they can do nothing, and God is so stupid He would be cool with that.neilallen76http://www.blogger.com/profile/04966954580793318142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-71628926238133149662012-04-17T15:49:22.357-04:002012-04-17T15:49:22.357-04:00One other point.If the Church allegedly has enough...One other point.<br><br>If the Church allegedly has enough power to direct its myrmidons to resist a RICO prosecution, then why has the Church not deployed that power to prevent this case at bar or, indeed, the whole past 10 years of allegations, lawsuits, and such trials as there have been? This seems to me, surely, to require the old Sherlock Holmes 'Dog That Didn’t Bark'. <br><br>Once again, commenters are within their rights to make any assertions they care to in the webverse. <br><br>But if by any chance I am right in my surmise about the content of thinking that goes on in so-called support groups, then I can’t at all consider the amplification of such deficient analysis as being therapeutically helpful to genuine victims in need of useful comradeship, empathy, and maturity-strengthening support. <br><br>To simply blastfax such deficient analysis all around and claim it is solid thinking and adequately reflects reality is simply setting a lot of genuinely needy people up for disappointment. <br><br>Who would actually want to do that? And why?Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-70452191655568417492012-04-17T15:34:53.840-04:002012-04-17T15:34:53.840-04:00As to why neither DA’s nor US Attorneys have broug...As to why neither DA’s nor US Attorneys have brought RICO charges … ‘cowardice’ is one possibility. Another possibility is that they know the Church isn’t liable under RICO statutes. (Yes, a victim group some months ago filed a Complaint with the International Criminal Court in the Hague; but that Complaint is going for ‘crimes against humanity’ rather than RICO, and it remains to be see what that Court is going to do or whether the Complaint will even get off the ground.) <br><br>Some folks have mentioned the Church abuse issue in the past tense (“was”) and that is one of my points: the Church problem (and to whatever extent it existed, and it did not by any known facts include many cases of ‘rape’) has been addressed with clearly increasing efficacy over the past 10 years. <br><br>That pressure had to be brought is granted (does anybody think the US government is going to be backing off torture any time soon without some sort of pressure?) and I consider it a sad reality of humans and their institutions. <br><br>But what intrigues me is that in the face of demonstrable evidence that things are now improving, the pressure-groups (if I may) are becoming increasingly agitated and angry. <br><br>Lastly, I’d like to remind non-Catholic readers that the Church has never presented herself as a direct heavenly outpost in the frontier land of this earthly creation. That is to say, the Church is not a German outpost in Occupied France; for the Church to be that, she would be staffed literally (and not metaphorically) by angels, by members of the Angelic Choirs. <br><br>Rather, God chose – in Catholic theology – to erect a Church made out of the same crooked timber of humanity that she was to minister to. <br><br>If crimes have been committed, then let the law enforcement process take the steps it deems justified (keeping in mind, as I said in other comments on this site, that some of the recent legal changes have been nothing if not regressive). <br><br>But it can’t be continually insisted that the Church is somehow to be thoroughly disbelieved because she falsely presented herself as being Divine and has proven not to be. The Burning Bush will be subjected to the flames, but it will not be consumed but rather the wood will be tempered by the flames. That’s how it’s been all along with the Church – even through the Renaissance papacy and the Borgia pope and all of that. <br><br>The US government tortures and assassinates. Do we dissolve it because of that? Do we abandon the Framing Vision because some of those sworn to preserve, protect and defend it have chosen rather to ‘walk on the Dark side’?Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-38947828125924364962012-04-17T15:28:32.335-04:002012-04-17T15:28:32.335-04:00A couple of points.The RICO statutes – if I unders...A couple of points.<br><br>The RICO statutes – if I understand them correctly – are aimed at organizations that are primarily set up to conduct organized crime; they may have a ‘front’ business (so, for example, Don Vito Corleone’s olive oil importation business was just a front for the organized crime operation). <br><br>To assert that the Church is RICO-liable, is to necessarily insist that for 2000 years (or since 1787, if you want to go back only to the Founding of the Republic) the theology, the sacraments, the ministry, the Gospel and the whole works was simply an elaborately organized ‘front’ for ‘pedophilia’ (however defined). <br><br>Now it is legitimate to make such an assertion, and some folks – including commenters on this site – have done so. Fair enough. But they need to be upfront about just what their assertions entail; they have to be upfront to themselves and then to everybody else to whom they make that assertion. <br><br>It’s not my way to get into yes/no catfights with commenters in the webverse and I won’t do it here. But I point out for educational purposes that the type of cartoon thinking that goes If You Even Ask A Question About What We Want Then You Must Be One Of ‘THEM’ … that’s the type of cartoon thought-process that helped get this Mania stampede going in the first place and keeps it going. And it’s also queasily close to the Bush-Cheney mantra: you are either with us or you are against us – and that type of thinking didn’t work out well for anybody at all. <br><br>But I will also note in that regard that it leads one to wonder: is t-h-i-s the type of thinking that is influential in victim-groups when they get together to ‘support’ each other? I have seen this type of thinking far too often in comments here and there to think it is simply a random occurrence. It’s not going to genuinely help struggling folks – therapeutic support should strengthen maturity, not intensify immaturity (whether in thought-process or emotion).Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-86601935922702770382012-04-17T14:42:21.760-04:002012-04-17T14:42:21.760-04:00Its simple. There are a billion Catholics, and th...Its simple. There are a billion Catholics, and they are driven by what their bishops say.<br><br>If a DA tried to prosecute the Catholic church under RICO, the bishops would make their sheep revolt, and would instruct the sheep to vote against that DA forever. As long as Catholics refuse to seek the truth, and continue to follow thier bishops instead of Christ, this will continue.<br><br>However, God gave us the internet and social media for a reason. Now Catholics can learn the truth from people who don't lie (as opposed to Cardinal Bevilacqua, Cardinal Rigali, etc), and as they see more truth, more Catholics can push for a RICO investigation.neilallen76http://www.blogger.com/profile/04966954580793318142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-35015305184594748842012-04-17T14:38:02.898-04:002012-04-17T14:38:02.898-04:00The real thing themediareport and Dave Pierre are ...The real thing themediareport and Dave Pierre are concerned about is, "Will this affect my book sales?", since book sales about the innocence of pedophile priests don't sell well when a group rips secret archives out of the hands of the Cahtolic church, and then finds that they were hiding and moving known child rapists, and didn't care.<br><br>Yes, this will have a negative effect on book sales for a long time, and the more evidence that comes out, the more guilty Lynn and every other Catholic co-conspirator will look in their protection of child rapists instead of children.neilallen76http://www.blogger.com/profile/04966954580793318142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-14268535542828422092012-04-17T14:34:29.019-04:002012-04-17T14:34:29.019-04:00This trial is showing that the Catholic church is ...This trial is showing that the Catholic church is the world's largest, organized, pedophile protection program.<br><br>Lynn was the mafia lieutenant, moving the child rapists to new locations. Bevilacqua wa the mafia Don, running the whole operation the was that every other Catholic organized crime family ran it in every other city.neilallen76http://www.blogger.com/profile/04966954580793318142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-31620406836561587792012-04-17T14:27:31.027-04:002012-04-17T14:27:31.027-04:00I read this sentence hours ago and it has stuck in...I read this sentence hours ago and it has stuck in my head, as one of the victims: "In 2002, the Boston pedophile priest scandal exploded, and Karpinski realized he had not been the victim of an isolated incident, but an epidemic."<br><br>That is why thousands of us never said a word before 2002. We thought there were only a few of us. We didn't realize until recently that there is an estimated hundred thousand victims. Bishop Accountability has close to 7000 priests in its database, from reports over the last 20 years, and most pedophiles have dozens of victims. <br><br>Pedophilia among Catholic priests was an epidemic. Keep telling the whole truth here, Mr. Cipriano. I am a dedicated daily reader. Wish you'd write more!Kay Ebelinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13753284586265566961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-30101077706125785662012-04-17T13:39:35.598-04:002012-04-17T13:39:35.598-04:00Cowardly DAs, more concerned with re-election than...Cowardly DAs, more concerned with re-election than justice.hrhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06989434735794993426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-90411207786080100052012-04-17T13:38:50.516-04:002012-04-17T13:38:50.516-04:00Yet another (paid?) pedo-apologist heard from.Yet another (paid?) pedo-apologist heard from.hrhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06989434735794993426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-12197736907260587502012-04-17T10:22:46.134-04:002012-04-17T10:22:46.134-04:00Interesting insight. And this is the same criticis...Interesting insight. And this is the same criticism of the RICO cases against the mob--when it was already a shadow of its former self; and prosecutions against Fumo, which was basically, look how this rich politician is so greedy that he needs to expense his tools. Yes, every day there are violent crimes committed by the powerless against the powerless. Poor people treating other poor people badly. There is a certain hopelessness to the cycle of street crime and senseless violence. City kids killing other kids because they felt disrespected. The catholic church prosecution is different. It is the story of a rich politically powerful organization that was able to play by its own rules; and cover up crimes. There is something about a historical reckoning against a previously immune institution that is compelling.<br><br>The decline in "church-related" rapes is related to the decline in the church. The stories told by the last generation of catholics could have only occurred in a world where the church totally dominated the lives of its members. It was where you sent your children to school, where they played sports, and where they socialized. The clergy were the absolute gods of these communities. They had absolute unquestionable power on certain matters. And the adults were dominated by these same petty tyrants. <br><br>If today, a priest announced that he was going to take little Johnny on a sleepover, it wouldn't happen. There are few altar boys left, as opposed to a time when a typical 6th grader at catholic school might serve 2 masses and a funeral a week; and spend hours with priests being trained as a an altar boy, singing at mass, or cleaning up the church grounds. And there are fewer priests and they are much older. But nothing has changed about the church leadership. <br><br>The church heiarchy didn't wake up some day and say, we need to take clergy abuse more seriously. It was pulled kicking and screaming to finally confront its past. The press, courts, and now prosecutors have played a role.kopridehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14033734864815154844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-14282431443090414942012-04-17T10:09:01.853-04:002012-04-17T10:09:01.853-04:00I keep hearing about RICO cases and the assertions...I keep hearing about RICO cases and the assertions that the Church clearly and surely qualifies for prosecution under that statute. <br><br>But why then hasn't there been such a prosecution? Why isn't this a RICO case?Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-54007828307628327962012-04-17T07:27:37.704-04:002012-04-17T07:27:37.704-04:00The trials that are long and drawn out where the p...The trials that are long and drawn out where the prosecution loses, are usually cases that are very circumstantial. In other words, there are few witnesses that can actually offer direct evidence of what happened. So the prosecution puts on lots of evidence of motive or state of mind; and there are lots of experts who can be cross examined about their opinion. A better analogy in this case is a mob Rico case or a political corruption case. In those cases, there is lots of testimony about how the defendant functioned within the organization and his contacts with victims or relevant witnesses. In many of those cases, the cumulative effect of the evidence is devastating. In my opinion, the Philly DAs office is putting a Rico style case against Lynne. Essentially they are portraying the AOP as an indifferent enabling organization that assisted criminals; and that Lynne was a key enabler. Since the underlying predicate acts are a failure to report criminal child abuse and even to discourage good faith reporting, this evidence is devastating to the dense. Bergstrom is the best defense lawyer in the business. If he only kept this guy on the stand for a few questions, that tells you everything you need to know. Bergstrom could get most people to confess to the kennedy assassination.kopridehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14033734864815154844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-42507686250071859912012-04-17T03:15:00.446-04:002012-04-17T03:15:00.446-04:00It seems to me that the trial is being used as a l...It seems to me that the trial is being used as a lever to break open space for some larger plan. <br><br>The Archdiocese is not a Party Defendant, the trial was framed as having to do with ‘rape’ in order to maximize a certain mindset in the public eye but then the charge was suddenly reduced in a maneuver that raises even more questions, and the primary victim presents oddly as having amassed a largely disreputable past yet as being a balanced, mature, articulate individual. <br><br>Clearly there were priests who should never have been permitted to continue in public ministry. I still can’t get my mind around the fact that the Ordinary – if he did nothing else – didn’t simply break the ‘fire triangle’ by removing the priests to forms of ministry where there would be no temptation. <br><br>But the case at bar is not ‘current’ in the sense that the charged acts are recent; rather, it has to do with ‘historical’ acts, from quite some time ago. <br><br>That leads to several observations. First, there were apparently no sufficiently grave ‘current’ acts that were available – according to whatever strategic parameters the prosecution has determined. Which is not to ignore the aforementioned significant reduction in the charge of rape in this case. <br><br>Yet – hardly unpredictably, given the various legal derangements peculiar to sex-offense cases, especially if the trial judge is properly predisposed – this trial has provided a handy vehicle for introducing assorted historical assertions by persons not Party to the case. Perhaps this was the tactical objective all along – to find some pretextual means of introducing ‘evidence’ that isn’t actually quite that. In this type of case, after all, the ‘story’ is pretty much everything. <br><br>And yet – if assorted advocacy claims are taken as accurate – there are numerous ‘rapes’ being perpetrated in the Philadelphia jurisdiction even as this trial continues along its path; and the majority of those rapes may very well be in venues other than the Church. One can only hope that the prosecutor’s office is directing sufficient resources to those current rapes.<br> <br>Why would the prosecutor’s office divert energy to a trial of ‘historical’ issues under such conditions? Perhaps the whole thing is an effort to establish a precedent for such trials of Church administrators both legally and in the public mind and Philadelphia at this point somehow provides a convenient and sufficient platform for the launch. <br><br>But if so, then wouldn’t almost all subsequent trials also be of ‘historical’ cases, since the number of ‘current’ allegations against Catholic clergy is extremely low and the number of current ‘rape’ allegations lower still? (I base this thought on the assorted Reports extant that have actually done the math as to the nature of formally recorded allegations; I do not credit mere assertions of vast numbers of current Catholic clergy rapes that seem to me to shade from un-grounded ‘opinion’ into outright rant.) <br><br>So why would the prosecutor’s office go to all this trouble if the cases are mostly ‘historical’, if all the research and formal Reports indicate a problem that was – in terms of rapes – not large to begin with and has been improving significantly for a decade, and if there are most likely substantial numbers of rapes taking place in venues other than the Church? <br><br>The Correct come-back is that ‘even if only one’ that would justify such a substantial outlay of increasingly limited state resources; and perhaps that through the alchemy of extrapolation (of dubious statistics to begin with) that there must be tens or hundreds of thousands more Catholic clergy rapes. <br><br>That’s the way advocates might see it, but it’s not the way prosecutors’ offices see these things. So what’s up there? Why has this prosecutor’s office gone to all this expense and diverted so much of its resources?Pertinaxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15407357930254142688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-24610527537795965042012-04-16T23:18:16.330-04:002012-04-16T23:18:16.330-04:00Edit 4th graph to read:"I'm thinking of i...Edit 4th graph to read:<br><br>"I'm thinking of instances where high-profile trials that were long and drawn out actually worked to the advantage of the defense."TheMediaReport.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07605908176445177281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-36287526125432014822012-04-16T22:54:48.175-04:002012-04-16T22:54:48.175-04:00I'm wondering ...Is the longer trial - with mo...I'm wondering ...<br><br>Is the longer trial - with more witnesses and accusations - actually working to the prosecution's advantage? Or could a longer trial slowly be creating doubt in the jury's mind?<br><br>I'm wondering if a better strategy for the prosecution would have been a quick two-to-three-week trial featuring their "strongest" witnesses.<br><br>I'm thinking of instances where high-profile trials that are long and drawn out actually work to the advantage of the defense.<br><br>Anybody else have any thoughts on this (without calling me nasty names)?<br><br>-TheMediaReport.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07605908176445177281noreply@blogger.com