Click here to read: “Priests’ past conduct is an issue in sex-abuse case,” by John P. Martin, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Jan. 24, 2012
“One by one, the assistant district attorneys walked to a courtroom lectern Monday to tell, at times explicitly, different versions of what sounded like the same story: priests molesting children, and Archdiocese of Philadelphia leaders failing to act on claims or signs of abuse.” Continue reading.
Click here to read: “Lawyers say prosecuters hanging entire abuse scandal on Monsignor Lynne,” by Maryclaire Dale, Associated Press, Delco Times, Jan. 24, 2012
Excerpt: “Prosecutors say the 61-year-old Lynn kept priests in ministry and around children despite explosive allegations in secret church files.
Defense lawyers argued Tuesday that Lynn took orders from Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua and several bishops above him in the church hierarchy. They said prosecutors should have indicted the archdiocese and others if they wanted to attempt a broad conspiracy case.”
Of course he [and others] took their orders from a Cardinal in perpituity, Bevilacqua in this instance, and who are they answereable to?
Rome. A good example of this is Cardinal Law, who although forced to resign, remained in good standing with Pope John 11 as a faithful son and taken home the Holy City, eventually given a Vatican post if my memory serves me right.
Just posted this on ‘Awaiting Judges Decision” but will repost right here, right now.
0 0 Rate This
I’d like to revisit the reasons the prosecutors want Msgr Lynn’s previous behaviour admitted as evidence!
“Prosecutors want to introduce the evidence under trial rules that allow jurors to hear past evidence of a defendants bad acts IF THAT CONDUCT CAN EXPLAIN HIS MOTIVES, KNOWLEDGE, INTENT, OR A PATTERN.” ( caps are mine)
I think this is a critical issue. Any reader of the RESOURCES section at the top of this page detailing Msgr Lynn’s behaviour as noted in both the Grand Jury reports of 2005 and 2011, would have difficulty being in any doubt regarding Msgr Lynn’s knowledge, intent or pattern (of behaviour). I leave the motive issue to Msgr Lynn and God.
Another posting that I am ‘double posting’ is The End of the Mystique, which deals with the pre trial Lynn hearings in a substantive manner!
Would be interested in a response!
http://www.bobfelton.com/?p=16450
The renowned moral theologian, Bernard Haring, stated that “there is no obedience without responsibility.” Therefore, responsibility is primary in all actions. Msgr. Lynne has no understanding of what responsibility is in protecting children against sexual preditors. Or, is it that Lynne hides under the protective purple cassock of “Obedience?”
Theresa, in religious life The Vow of Obedience is the certitude of doing Gods will: {through the voice of ones superior/bishop}.
Therefore one would presume, if the “will of God” is incorrect, the responsability remains with the superior/bishop.
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=13091
See NCR (National Catholic Reporter) Today blog
“Pa. archdiocese named ‘unindicted co-conspirator’.” with link to AP article
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/morning-briefing-669
I love the judge’s comment:
” ‘Father Lynn had no control over what Father Brennan did or didn’t do,’ Bergstrom complained.
‘It doesn’t sound like anybody had any control over anybody,’ the judge said.
Notice how defense attorneys are constructing Msgr. Lynn as “Father Lynn”
Yea, they’re paid very well for that sort of thing.
Martin, we’ve been fussing with that issue, big time on ‘Awaiting Judges Decisions’….I took a bit of heat over exactly that quote! Joan
Martin, here is my response to the judge’s concern about diocesan ‘control’
“Prosecutors faulted Lynn for not investigating the living arrangements before Brennan had the chance to abuse others.
“If you saw what was in (his personnel) files, it should have raised some bells and whistles,” Cipolletti argued.
Bergstrom said the abuse charged in the case occurred later, at Brennan’s private residence, during his mid-1990s leave.
“Father Lynn had no control over what Father Brennan did or didn’t do,” Bergstrom complained.
“It doesn’t sound like anybody had any control over anybody,” the judge said.”
I read the judge as commenting on a management disaster, and supervisorial quagmire. Proper AD management would have exercised ‘control’.
This sewer of abuse and upcoming trials, can be laid squarely at the feet of a totally ‘out of control’ (in terms of proper management behaviour) AD. And so many many innocent children over so many years were greviously hurt!
When will the members of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia see the billings costs authorized by the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, His Excellency the Cardinal, for attorney fees, jury consultants, and PR firms? Their is a boatload of money changing hands on this one.
My guess is that you never will.
My husband had counseling paid for by the diocese…and it came from an account that had nothing to do with the diocese. Why do that unless you are trying to “hide” what parishioners are paying to victims?
In this case, parishioners are paying to defense TEAMS. I don’t believe they average person will ever know the real numbers on this one.
Sounds a little like Australia Joan.
I’ve just looked up Brokenrites site’s update, January 22nd. Black Collar Crime List of Names with links to history.
Sadly, I’m sure it is, L. Newington. Appaling behaviour is not regionally limited!
When nuns reported suspected abuse in the past, or even the present, they were described by Lynn’s lawyers/the Archdiocese as “rats, wimps and whiners.”