posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 02:26 AM
reply to post by FortAnthem
I understand the feeling of outrage at the prosecutor and wondering why no one else seems to be outraged. My guess as to the possible reasons why it
was a misdemeanor only is that it could have been that in the interviews with the priest he might have only been willing to admit to an offense or
two, but not the worst ones and the prosecutor realized that they could get him to plead out to some charges and at least get him in the records as a
sex offender or take it to trial and he gets a sympathetic jury who finds him not guilty, he walks away with nothing, no punishment at all and no
record on the books as an offender.
This is what happened in my case at least. I was abused very badly for years by a pastor who was incredibly well liked in the community and he
refused to admit to anything but fondling, so in order for him to not walk completely free, the states attorney's office got him to plead and he
spent a year in jail. They were afraid that taking him to trial could have backfired due to his position in the community and his popularity and they
didn't want to take any chances. At least, that is how they explained it to me.
It doesn't mean that I wasn't outraged at the leniency just that I didn't get a say in the matter of how it was to be handled.
Whether the catholic church, and the pope in particular, is a conspirator in covering it up, I don't know. I believe yes, but I don't actually