Skip to comments.
Pope reported set to give Law Vatican posting
Boston Herald online ^
| Friday, April 26, 2002
| Jack Sullivan and Eric Convey
Posted on 04/26/2002 11:03:22 AM PDT by history_matters
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-76 next last
``What came out of Rome was two revelations: sexual abuse of children is a crime and it won't be tolerated,'' said Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas Reilly. ``That's not news to law enforcement. These are crimes. Where have they been?''
To: *Catholic_list; goldenstategirl; american colleen; ken5050; Slyfox; rose; ClearBlueSky...
Indexing and ping.......
To: oremus; AmericaninTokyo
ping
To: history_matters
will be reassigned by Pope John Paul II to an as-yet determined position prior to a scheduled deposition of Law in a legal suit against the archdiocese, according to church officials. So, the coverup continues.
Poor Cardinal Law flees the United States for the rest of his natural life to avoid the process servers.
I wonder if he will hang out with Marc Rich?
This is what has become of the moral majesty of the Catholic Church.
Where is Bill Clinton with the pardon pen when Teddy's good buddy needs him?
4
posted on
04/26/2002 11:09:19 AM PDT
by
07055
To: history_matters
These guys just don't get it. They simply don't know how to punish a person. The only thing they know is to reassign and relocate their problems and hope that they go away.
5
posted on
04/26/2002 11:10:48 AM PDT
by
billybudd
To: history_matters
If this is true (that Cdl Law may remove himself from the jurisdiction of Massachusetts courts), this is dangerous.
I've read that his deposition has been scheduled and postponed before.
I don't know about Massachusetts, but in some states, a person's deposition may be scheduled by a notice from a party, or by a court order, if the notice is unsuccessful.
Further, some courts have the authority to make orders to aid a party in that party's discovery (depositions, written questions, etc.).
If Cdl Law is about to leave the jurisdiction, and I was the attorney for someone suing him (or 'his' archdiocese), I would make an emergency application to the court to order Cdl Law not to leave until his deposition is taken. Part of the application would be to order him to deposit his passport into the court's custody.
To: Mike Fieschko
I agree with you, Mike. The parties need to do something to prevent him from leaving.
However, if the suit is Boston, might not the judges be bought and paid for by the Catholic Church? Or the Democratic Party (and Senator Kennedy)?
7
posted on
04/26/2002 11:13:20 AM PDT
by
07055
To: history_matters
``(The pope) genuinely likes him,'' said one church officialI guess a Friend of the Pope can get away with most anything.
8
posted on
04/26/2002 11:19:25 AM PDT
by
xm177e2
To: 07055
I can guarantee you that if charges are filed against Cardinal Law he will be extradited back to Taxachusets.
9
posted on
04/26/2002 11:20:08 AM PDT
by
kellynla
To: 07055
However, if the suit is Boston, might not the judges be bought and paid for by the Catholic Church? Or the Democratic Party (and Senator Kennedy)?
Well ... I had a professor once who asked us 'what is the term for what the grand jury hands up when it fails to indict?'
An ignoramus.
To: 07055
I have no pity for Law. I don't understand how he can stand at the front of a church and say a mass when he covered up these acts of perverts by sending them to another area to perform them to a new group of children.
I believe that the Pope did Law a favor that Law was unwilling to do for the people to whom he was required to serve.
Maybe he will have unending nightmares about those little children who were molested by the perverts he sent to them.
I doubt that we will ever know, but we can dream of this type of reward for his efforts.
11
posted on
04/26/2002 11:21:45 AM PDT
by
chiefqc
To: Mike Fieschko
Just to make it obvious: I'm the ignoramus on this question.
To: history_matters
I see -- he can't handle his current job correctly, so they're promoting him. No (St.) Peter Principle here -- this is the Dilbert Principle at work.
13
posted on
04/26/2002 11:55:48 AM PDT
by
ellery
To: 07055
This will NOT happen as reported. The CHURCH has NOT lost it'ss moral high ground, but the LIBERALS in it have almost seen to it's destruction.
This is what you get when you allow homosexuals into the priesthood and Cardinals suck up to the Kennedy's.
To: Mike Fieschko;07055
The point of the move to Rome is to get him out the position of archbishop, not to remove him from the jurisdiction. Don't be dense, if, at any time, after he leaves Boston, he is required for any legal matter, he will be in the U.S.
To: nickcarraway
The point of the move to Rome is to get him out the position of archbishop, not to remove him from the jurisdiction. Don't be dense, if, at any time, after he leaves Boston, he is required for any legal matter, he will be in the U.S. I respectfully disagree.
Remember that Church official who was captured on tape telling the bishops how to deal with sexual misconduct claims?
And remember how he said if a bishop came across really bad stuff, he could always send it to the Church agency with diplomatic immunity so that it would never be disclosed (the Apostolic See?).
That is exactly what the Pope is doing here.
They don't need to send him to Rome to remove him from his position. They can just tell him to retire---maybe they can even support a claim of a health condition which mandates retirement.
And, remember, the Church has been fighting this deposition for a long period already.
The Church needs him outside the jurisdiction of the local courts. If he makes a clean getaway, there is no way the Church flies him back to Boston for depositions. He knows too much.
16
posted on
04/26/2002 12:57:34 PM PDT
by
07055
To: 07055
Another reason the Church does not want Cardinal Law to testify:
How will it look when a Cardinal of the Catholic Church is forced to repeatedly invoke the Fifth Amendment just like a common criminal?
17
posted on
04/26/2002 1:16:11 PM PDT
by
07055
To: 07055
I respectfully disagree. That is exactly what the Pope is doing here. They don't need to send him to Rome to remove him from his position. They can just tell him to retire---maybe they can even support a claim of a health condition which mandates retirement.They don't need to send him to Rome, but if you've been following, they don't want to look like the general public can decide who shoulf be an archbishop. They're moving him to Rome to avoid making it look like public pressure forced him to resign. I guarantee he will be back for any legal matter. (Law himself propbably thought until the last minute he could remain archbishop. Maybe he still does.)
To: history_matters
So, Law is skipping out to evade a deposition. Like a common criminal. It's time for AG Reilly to invoke the RICO act, and possibly arrest the Cardinal before he goes on the lam.
19
posted on
04/26/2002 1:22:48 PM PDT
by
Palladin
To: history_matters; dighton; aculeus
`(The pope) genuinely likes him,'' said one church official. ``(Vatican officials) are still trying to find a place for him. They don't want to see him getting hammered like this.'' Unbelievable statement. Does anyone have anything for a pounding headache?
20
posted on
04/26/2002 1:23:10 PM PDT
by
Orual
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-76 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson