Should Prosecution Have Let Key Witness Testify in Msgr. Lynn Trial?

Click here to read, “Detective testifies he warned prosecutor of ‘great inconsistencies’ in story of key witness in trial of Msgr. Lynn,” by Joseph A. Slobodzian, The Philadelphia Inquirer, January 14, 2017


Instead, Walsh told a Philadelphia judge Friday, the veteran detective found himself unable to get the 23-year-old witness to explain numerous inconsistencies in his story of being molested by two priests and a parochial-school teacher in a Northeast parish in 1998 and 1999.

4 thoughts on “Should Prosecution Have Let Key Witness Testify in Msgr. Lynn Trial?

  1. I was interviewed by Joe Walsh. He was very kind and asked very good questions.He was supportive even after the 5 hour interview. I believe that the prosecutors needed to listen to him as he had vast knowledge of exactly what was going on. There seemed to be quite a few inconsistencies coming from the survivor then perhaps the victim needed time to gather himself and possibly not testify in court until he felt ready if at all. As a survivor, i remember every detail even drawing the downstairs and upstairs of the rectory where some of the abuse took place. Sometimes exact dates and time can get hazy over time however the locations and the duration of time the abuse took place by the perp is never forgotten. Don’t forget that all of us were just children.

  2. Victoria, See Ralph’s 1/16/13 Post on the cross examination of Billy. You are correct that it was from the Shero & Engelhardt trial not the Lynn case. The part I’m referencing is “McGovern seemed to cut short his questioning prematurely. Prosecutors appeared surprised and elated by how well Billy had held up on cross. And Billy’s supporters left the courtroom saying the defense hadn’t laid a glove on their boy.”

    Sorry for what you have been through. LLW

Leave a Reply