The reasons why our own Kansas City Star and SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) is correct, to date, about Bishop Finn, the Catholic Church and the abuse charges against this Bishop are because, first, the Star is merely reporting things as and when they happen. It's called reporting. It's what they're supposed to do.
Should they take editorial stands on it?
Sure they should. It is, after all, adults sexually and/or physically abusing the students--children--they are supposed to be otherwise responsible for. That and they're from their own churches and schools. What other stand should any people or organization take?
As for SNAP? Same thing. They're trying to see to it that the sexual and physical abuse of students--children--isn't left unpunished so that it doesn't take place any longer.
So the Catholic Church and their attorneys have done their best to intimidate SNAP by asking the courts to take their files.
Crazy but not a huge surprise. It is, after all, the law firm's goal to win the case, whatever ugliness that might entail.
But, in spite of that, the latest news today on this scandal vindicates, I think, both SNAP and the Star. It is this:
Prosecutor wants new charge against Bishop Finn, diocese in failure to report child abuse case --Mark Morris, The Kansas City Star (link at bottom)
The new charges would not allege any new facts about conduct attributable to either Finn or the diocese. Rather, the new charges would subdivide the existing charges into two distinct periods in which Finn and the diocese allegedly should have reported Ratigan to state child abuse and neglect investigators.
The first period would cover Dec. 17, 2010, to Feb. 10, 2011, when the church learned of the photographs, Ratigan attempted suicide and he was sent for medical treatment.
The second period would begin on Feb. 11, 2011, the date Finn sent Ratigan a letter outlining restrictions on his conduct and May 18, after Murphy notified police.
Additionally--and this seems logical and like a good move to me, knowing what we do of the case and the events to date--they've added this:
"Prosecutors also have asked a judge to approve a massive request for records from the diocese’s so-called 'secret archive' detailing the diocese’s responses to child abuse allegations both before and after Finn began serving in Kansas City in May 2004."
In the first place, Finn's attorneys did this to SNAP so turnabout is fair play but far more importantly, if the Church and their offices have any such "secret archive", it should naturally come out to the light of day so the prosecutors know what they're dealing with.
The last word on this case and all others facing the Catholic Church is that this abuse--sexual, physical and any and all other--must, at long last, end after all these centuries and continents, literally, once and for all.
Hopefully that day is coming soon. Hopefully that day is nearly here.
Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/05/07/3599367/prosecutor-wants-new-charge-against.html
Posts
Anora: A Refreshingly Radical Depiction of Sex Work on Film
11 minutes ago
2 comments:
Good article, but let's clarify.
It is not the law firm's goal to win the case regardless of whatever ugliness that might entail. It is the law firm's goal to do what the client wants based on the client's goals.
The Catholic church has made a clear decision that they are going to fight the victims of their own child rape. That's a decision. That's their goal.
The Catholic church as long abandoned Christianity, and has made a decision that protecting money and protecting pedophiles is their primary goal, and the lawyers are going along with it.
The Catholic church is proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they no longer care What Jesus Would Do. They care about money, power, and protecting pedophiles.
If you think you know what Jesus would think about that, tell the Catholic church, since they are doing the opposite.
Thanks for that comment, distinction and clarification, Pat.
We're agreed on these points, for sure.
Post a Comment