Alleged Sex Abuse Victim Faces Trial For Beating Accused Priest

So this is ridiculous.

LOS ANGELES — Opening statements were scheduled to begin Wednesday in the trial of a man accused of beating an aging Jesuit priest who he says molested him and his younger brother more than 35 years ago.

William Lynch has said the priest abused him and his brother during a camping trip in Northern California's Santa Cruz Mountains. Now 44, Lynch will get his longtime wish to face the Rev. Jerold Lindner in court for the first time.

Lynch faces felony charges of assault and elder abuse after prosecutors say he beat Lindner in 2010 in front of startled witnesses at a retirement home for priests.

I understand, you want your revenge, or your closure, but you don't get it by going to a retirement home and beating an old man whose not capable of defending himself.

The Lynches, who were 7 and 4 at the time, were raped in the woods and forced to have oral sex with each other while Lindner watched, according to a civil lawsuit. Lindner has been accused of abuse by nearly a dozen people, including his own sister and nieces and nephews, but was never criminally charged because the allegations were too old.

Source

It seems however that this particular priest did some very very wrong and nasty things and probably deserves a little bit of what he got, but I just think these guys went about it the wrong wrong way.

There was a lawsuit already filed, trial dates set, and they even settled in the 90's for more than 500 thousand dollars. I suppose I'm a bit torn.

Thoughts ATS?

ETA: I"m not in any way defending the priests actions, nor am I saying he does not deserve some sort of harsh punishment, I jsut thing the series of events, as they have progressed are a bit strange, that's all.

~Tenth

Should have just shot him. I was sexually abused, and it ruins lives.

He wasn't charged, so he got street justice.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


How many more aging priests are going to slip away in the night, never to atone for their sins?

As for those still out there, still going unpunished for their sex crimes, I certainly hope that the road they follow is one to their own eternal damnation.

I guess the question is: why now? 34 years is a long time to wait, I wonder what prompted retribution/revenge after all this time...

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

I understand, you want your revenge, or your closure, but you don't get it by going to a retirement home and beating an old man whose not capable of defending himself.

35 years ago he was 9 years old. I wonder if he could've defended himself?

Pity for the guilty is treason to the innocent. --Ayn Rand

/TOA

Originally posted by LadySkadi
I guess the question is: why now? 34 years is a long time to wait, I wonder what prompted retribution/revenge after all this time...

That was my question, why seek the man out and beat him now? Seems kind of strange to me.

But I know sexual abuse and what it can do to your mind, so anything is possible.

~Tenth

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

I understand, you want your revenge, or your closure, but you don't get it by going to a retirement home and beating an old man whose not capable of defending himself.

35 years ago he was 9 years old. I wonder if he could've defended himself?

Pity for the guilty is treason to the innocent. --Ayn Rand

/TOA

I'm not disagreeing that the man needs to be punished, probably back then more so than now honestly.

I jsut have mixed emotions regarding seniors I suppose. Probably due to my religious upbringing.

Misplaced sense of respect perhaps?

~Tenth

I can certainly understand the backlash, although you simply can not have a lynch mob, regardless. I also agree with those of you that feel waiting 35 years is unusual.

reply to post by tothetenthpower

I understand, you want your revenge, or your closure, but you don't get it by going to a retirement home and beating an old man whose not capable of defending himself.

I dunno. It seems wrong, but then again it wouldn't do any good to tell the police, or tell the church. Even if they kicked him out of the retirement home, or put him in jail, what difference would it make? He is old, and going to die anyway, and whatever pain he suffered won't compare to the lifetime of pain this boy and his brother suffered.

Now, I don't typically see sex crimes the way everyone else sees them, I think we make them more dramatic than they need to be, but if this guy had all this lasting animosity, and he was able to get some closure by beating up an old man, and the old man deserved it, then I say alls well that ends well.

The priest deserved it. Every bit of it.

My guess as to why 35 years went by, and then suddenly this beating: many assume this type of pain fades over time, but the pain actually becomes worse. My guess is it got as bad for this guy as he could take, and he found where the guy lived. He probably reached a point where, realizing that evil man took everything away from him, he had absolutely nothing to lose and this was his last hope for obtaining a moment of peace. And I bet he got it.

The priest needs to face some sort of justice after all those years of getting away with his crimes due to the "technicality" of the statute of limitations.

I say put this case before a jury and let them decide if these two are guilty of any crime.

They should be able to argue that they were justified in the beating because of what he did and how he never paid for his crimes. Shame a judge will never let that happen (more than likely anyway).

If a jury of reasonable adults can't come to a unanymous decision stating that the brothers are guilty of a crime, I say let them go and consider the old priests beating as justice long denied.

reply to post by tothetenthpower



I think the pedofile priest needs to not be in existence anymore...think of all the lives he traumatized...and all the suicides he caused...and there he sits in an old age home...being taken care of. I have no mercy nor compassion for him and when he does die....his true punishment will eternally begin.

I think the man that beat him up....should get therapy and community service...with no jail time...I just hope he has a compassionate judge.

reply to post by cetaphobic


I think this is debatable.

On one hand, he is an elderly man.

On the other hand, he got away with his crimes for years, amplifying the pain and suffering of those whom he victimized.

I wouldn't say that he deserved it. Rather, it was karma catching up to him.

reply to post by The Sword


Actually, karma doesn't get you in this life for your transgressions - it gets you in the next life.

Sorry - common misconception that always troubles me.

Looks like the Jury has spoken:

Man who attacked priest in revenge is not guilty of felonies

A jury has found a San Francisco man not guilty of felony assault and felony elder abuse, despite his admission that he attacked the priest accused of molesting him nearly four decades ago.

The 10-man, two-woman panel also said Thursday that William Lynch was not guilty of misdemeanor elder abuse in the 2010 attack on Father Jerold Lindner. The 67-year-old Catholic priest has been linked to more than a dozen alleged victims — including his own nieces, nephew and sister — but never has been brought to trial because the statute of limitations in every case had run out.

The jury was split on a final charge against Lynch: misdemeanor assault. Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge David Cena declared a mistrial on that count. Dist. Atty. Jeffrey Rosen said his office would decide in the coming days whether to retry Lynch.

LA Times

Apparently, when asked if he Molested Lynch, the ex-priest took the 5th and the judge told jurors to ignore his testimony. The jury didn't take too well to the "victim" not speaking up in his own trial and decided against him.

But when Lindner returned to the stand, he refused to testify further on the grounds that he might incriminate himself. The judge then struck Lindner's testimony entirely and told the jury to ignore the priest's description of Lynch's "vicious" attack.

And that, Juror No. 12 said, was key for him in deciding the case.

"The victim in this case disappeared," said the retired accountant, who declined to give his name. "His testimony disappeared. To me, if you have no victim, do you have a crime?"

Lynch says he was surprised at the verdict and wanted to face justice for his actions. Maybe he'll do the right thing and plead out on the misdemeanor charges and at least face some punishment.

My guess would be that something changed, either the anger got too much or suddenly the guy felt empowered knowing the priest could no longer defend himself, have that power over him.

Where are the so-called pro constitutionalists crying over the priests right to innocent until proven otherwise.

So American rights are for only certain people?

Hey ..good for the priest..just hypocritical for people that are usually crying over their constitutional rights cheering on a man beating another man without proving the others guilt...which the priest has the right, under the constitution, to have his day in court.

So tell me...don't pedos also have rights under the constitution or am i missing something.

I really don't care about the situation and could care less about the pedo's life...just love to point the hypocrisy that is rampant on ATS.

What? No innocent until proven guilty? Some guy claims to have been molested when he a boy and everybody jumps to conclusions that just because the older guy is a priest, he must be guilty because some priests were accused of child molesting/pedophilia so therefore every single priest is guilty no matter what? Guilt by association?

All we have is a claim. That's it. A single claim without any kind of hard evidence to back it up.