Posted on 04/20/2006 12:21:15 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
Cardinal Roger M. Mahony acknowledged to Los Angeles Catholics in his 2004 "Report to the People of God" that he left five priests in ministry despite complaints that they had molested children.
But a Times analysis of church records released since then shows that he left 11 other priests in ministry for periods up to 13 years after parishioners raised concerns about inappropriate behavior with children.
Seven of these 11 cases were not detailed in the People of God report. The other four were mentioned incompletely; the report said they were removed when complaints were lodged but did not disclose that the Los Angeles Archdiocese had received earlier reports of misconduct.
The Times analyzed edited summaries of personnel records written and posted on a public website by the archdiocese in October. The summaries were first given to counsel for more than 500 plaintiffs suing the church over alleged sexual abuse by priests. The archdiocese and the plaintiffs are engaged in court-ordered mediation.
--
Mahony has fought to keep from releasing full personnel files either to prosecutors or plaintiffs' lawyers in the civil cases. On Monday, however, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a California appellate court ruling requiring him to hand over to prosecutors the files of two priests who are under criminal investigation.
Legal experts have said the high court's refusal to hear Mahony's appeal increases the likelihood that the Los Angeles church may soon have to hand over many more confidential documents in the civil cases.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
That spin is now utterly dead.
incredible.
if you read the entire article, Mahoney's Zero Tolerance Policy was "from then on".....and didnt include past activities....
That is crazy.
Is there any doubt that Mahoney is a poofter?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the LA Times apparently quite willing to shield him all along -- has something changed? Maybe it was just one reporter, but I'm sure I recall threads here about that when the Boston Globe (which supported Law in all his more crack-brained liberal notions) sprung on him with the scandal (that their reporters had known about for years) and wouldn't let go. I also seem to recall a start-up paper, "The NEW LA Times" or some such, that tried to blow the whistle on Mahony.
¿Fart Protector?
Alright Catholics, time to stand up and be heard. It's mostly YOUR children that are being abused.
I agree 100%.
I have no idea why the LAT flipped on him.
He may refuse to go.
I wonder what the domestic legal ramifications of that may be.
And if he doesn't I may pull a Sicilian Vespers on him.
Mahoney makes me projectile vomit. The man has no shame, no conscience & no morals.
Although I think these corrupt priests should be defrocked and imprisoned, its funny that there is a double standard here with regards to the state/church.
With the same type of case in a public school or social service organization, most have statute of limitations of less than 1 yr and limit the awards from states/cities/public schools to under 250K.
How often is that reported by those who only do this because they care about the "children"?
It would be nice if the goose and gander had the same standard and those "well meaning" lawyers had the same interest in the crimes being done in the public schools.
Do you suppose Mahoney recruited these guys for their special qualities? I would not put that past some of our more leftish bishops.
Didn't some absolutely obscene number of molesting priests come from the LA seminary ? So obviously for some time the place was practically a sodomite bath house with crosses ?
Or do you think Benedict will be just as afraid to discipline evil bishops as were his predecessors?
I wonder what the domestic legal ramifications of that may be.
I hate to say this, but I doubt much will happen. My guess is the Vatican will look the other way in the name of collegiality.
My guess is that he will not discipline a particular bishop for doing what every bishop in the world was doing.
The attitude of the Church (the Vatican included) up until the 90s was that these men were sinners and their sin could be overcome through prayer and a new assignment.
The Catholic Church (including the Vatican) was more concerned about the welfare of the offending priests than their victims. Even as late as 2002, even Cardinal Ratzinger said that the media was "sensationalizing" what were isolated incidents.
I am listening to the local news as I write this, and a Dallas teacher has been suspended after two complaints of sexual activity between himself and two students were reported to the Dallas police. The local press doesn't seem to be quite as concerned about the mounting numbers of sexual predators in area schools as they are about six priests in Fort Worth (three of whom are dead) who abused minors in the 60s and 70s.
He will submit it, and he will go when it is accepted.
It can't be any fun being a bishop in the Church today, especially when those in the larger dioceses spend most of their time in court.
I was idly wondering when he came out with his idiotic immigration speech whether he knew something was coming out and he was moving to solidify his base, so to speak.
(The speech, of course, in which he said he'd ordered his priests to continue helping illegals had nothing to do with helping illegals or anyone else. He knew the law didn't apply to Good Samaritan type help. And if you're genuinely interested in helping people duck the law -- any law -- the last thing you do is shout, "Hey, look over here! We'll break that stinkin' law!" If, on the other hand, you want to draw lots of attention to yourself upholding some crack-brained liberal position, currying favor with your natural allies, well . . . .)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.