The arrest of yet another Catholic Priest today in Philadelphia today highlights the importance of the law that State Representative and victim Mark Rozzi is trying to change.
Click here to read: “Pa. lawmakers push for extending statute of limitations for child sex abuse victims,” by Jan Murphy, pennlive.com, The Patriot-News, September 25, 2013
2 thoughts on “PA Lawmakers Try To Extend Statute of Limitations for Child Sex Abuse”
While signing in and deciding what to say re Rep. Ron Marsico, I came across my comment on PennLive from several months ago. Seems as appropriate and relevant as ever given Mr. Marsico’s position on SOL-Reform……
Ah, yes, where to begin. I am outraged that the Chairman of the House JUDICIARY committee would make such a blatantly false and unsubstantiated statement regarding the proposed “windows legislation.” But, let’s be honest here. Mr. Marsico, in his specious and disingenuous machinations over the past two legislative sessions, has left dignity, honor and PA’s children in his wake a long, long time ago.
Let us all never, ever forget that this elected representative is using his POSITION and POWER to prevent the children of the Commonwealth of PA from receiving the legal access, redress and protection they are entitled to under our PA and US Constitutions. And, all of this, when Rep. Marsico has children and GRANDCHILDREN of his own, it would indeed be just and fitting for one of his grandchildren to query the Chairman regarding why he is opposed to providing better protection and legal access for children and young adults who are sexually assaulted, traumatized, humiliated and degraded as a result of criminal sexual abuse here in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
I think what we need here is some good old-fashioned, constitutionally-protected, day-in and day-out, residential and neighborhood picketing to draw attention to the Chairman’s recalcitrance and indifference to our children.
Philadelphia Police Dept.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer, 9-27-2013…..
“…Bevilacqua testified before the grand jury that he considered Brennan’s problems “innocuous-sounding boundary issues….”
Was the late Cardinal’s understanding here based on his Canon Law Degree perspective or his Civil Law Degree perspective?