Posted on 03/26/2011 12:59:03 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
At an intensely combative and vitriolic hearing Friday afternoon in a sex-abuse case that has shaken the Philadelphia Archdiocese to its core, a state court judge shocked one priest's defense attorney by disclosing that the government thinks he might be a witness as a former seminarian and could be disqualified from the case. The lawyer, who represents one of three current and former Roman Catholic priests charged with raping boys in their parish, fired back that prosecutors were being "anti-Catholic" and had uttered an "abomination."
Judge Renee Cardwell Hughes told defense attorney Richard DeSipio that she's received information that "might make you, in fact, a witness because of events that occurred while you were a seminarian."
The information "stems from the fact that you attended the seminary with a student who asserts he was abused," Hughes said, adding that DeSipio "may possess factual knowledge about abuse that occurred with that student."
She added that the substance of the claim that DiSipio witnessed something is still unclear. "I just don't know if it's true," Hughes said. "I really don't know if it's true."
Yelling and visibly upset, DeSipio demanded that the government, then and there, identify the source of the allegation. "Let them spill it out right now!" DeSipio demanded.
"How dare they send you a letter about that," DeSipio said, referring to the district attorney's office. "That's an abomination."
Prosecutors said only that part of DeSipio's seminary training overlapped with the tenure of a senior clergyman accused of endangering children by failing to protect them from priests with a known history of abuse.
Monsignor William Lynn, now pastor of St. Joseph Church in Downingtown, Pa., is reportedly the highest-ranking member of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States ever to be charged with child endangerment. Between 1984 and 1992, he served as dean of men at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Wynnewood, Pa., according to his biography on St. Joseph's website. As the secretary for clergy for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia from 1992 to 2004, Lynn acted as personnel director for priests. He is accused of ignoring reports of abuse, covering up for them and putting children in danger.
"They are anti-Catholic. I'll say it," DiSipio fumed. "[The district attorney is] attacking me as a Catholic!"
The judge rejected DiSipio's claim. "Attack you? You attacked me! You don't even know me!" Hughes said, referring to a prior argument over the necessity of a preliminary hearing, another hotly contested issue Friday afternoon.
"Mr. DeSipio, I suggest you shut up," Hughes said. "People are coming from out of the woodwork [to provide information to the commonwealth.]"
If the government can prove the allegation is credible in 30 days, DeSipio will be disqualified as the archdiocese's attorney.
"You can change lawyers now, you can change lawyers in 30," the judge warned DeSipio's client, the Rev. James Brennan. "[But] there are some conflicts that are not waivable."
DeSipio argued that the 30-day investigation was "really unfair to Father Brennan," given his mounting legal costs.
Judge Hughes was livid that DeSipio spoke up again. "If you open your mouth one more time I am going to have the sheriff take you out of here," she told DeSipio.
As DeSipio continued to argue, Hughes said she might have him "locked up and held in contempt." Instead she issued a gag order, responding to what she observed as attorneys having "gone to the airways to advocate."
"No more interviews with anyone," the judge ruled.
"Does that include the DA going on Chris Matthews' 'Hardball' and going to the New York Times," defense attorney Michael McGovern asked.
The judge responded affirmatively: "I don't want tweets. I don't want Facebook. I don't want IMs [instant messages]."
Hughes said the court will revisit the gag order on April 15, when defendants are to be arraigned. That date also marks the deadline for the DA to provide the defense with the first batch of discovery, she said.
All but one of the defense attorneys challenged the government's amendment to its case, which added a conspiracy charge that had not explicitly been requested of the grand jury.
"The issue here is that if the DA seeks to amend, it has to be subject to some sort of prima facie determination," the defense argued.
The judge found otherwise, ruling that the commonwealth established "good cause" in its pleadings and that "there is no constitutional right - federal or state - for a preliminary hearing."
It was "a technical error on the commonwealth not to charge conspiracy" originally, Hughes said. "Conspiracy is made," and the defendants will not be afforded a preliminary hearing, she ruled.
Hughes said there was abundant evidence to support the amendment.
"I'm the only person, besides the prosecutors, who has seen every stitch of evidence," she said.
Defense attorney McGovern argued that her admission was precisely the problem.
"Your Honor, this is patently unfair!" McGovern said. "You know the evidence. They know the evidence. I don't know what the evidence is! I haven't seen any!"
The attorney said proceeding to trial without a preliminary hearing was like saying, "Let's have a dart game in a dark room."
"What kind of country is this where we have this?" he shouted.
The judge yelled back, baring her teeth: "You sit down! Sit, sit, sit!"
DeSipio agreed with McGovern that their clients deserve a preliminary hearing, which could allow them to confront their accusers.
"There's no witness. I know that they [the prosecutors] don't like that he's in jail," DeSipio said. "This accuser says there was an erect penis in his buttocks."
"Was it in your buttocks, or was it in your anus," he asked rhetorically. "If that question wasn't asked [of the grand jury], and he didn't specify anus or butt cheeks, I have a right to ask that."
"What you can't do, and what I submit they're trying to do, is say just because we have a grand jury, we have good cause [to by-pass a preliminary hearing]," DeSipio said.
The judge also addressed a potential conflict of interest concerning Monsignor Lynn, who unlike the three current and former priests, faces child endangerment charges - not rape or sexual assault. Plans for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia to pay Lynn's legal costs present "a whole array of conflicts that I can't even imagine at this point in time," Hughes said.
"It's real simple," the judge said to Lynn, who was donning his clerical collar, "your master is the person that's putting bread on the table."
"It may be in your best interest to put forth a defense that attacks other people [or the church]," Hughes said.
She told Lynn he was putting himself in the position of receiving "advice from people who are being paid by people whose interests don't necessarily align with yours."
The stakes of this gamble could amount to "14 years of incarceration versus probation," she said.
Lynn, in a calm voice, declined. "Well, I trust these two men." he said, adding that the church hadn't placed any conditions on the payment of his legal costs.
Hughes was incredulous. "You are making a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision to place yourself in conflict with your attorneys?" she asked.
"I am," Lynn responded, waiving his right to any future appeal based on the argument that his attorneys had a conflict of interest.
"Then we're moving forward," the judge said.
After arraignments and release of the first batch of discovery, which will include grand jury notes and testimony, on April 15, the government will begin putting together a second batch. The government said that batch would take longer to produce, as it will include roughly 10,000 pages of documentation, much of which will need to be redacted.
Hughes said the government must give the defense a specific timeline for the production of the second batch. "There has to be some finality," she said.
In January, a grand jury returned an indictment for rape and sexual assault against one current priest, one defrocked priest and one man who taught at a Catholic school. Monsignor Lynn, the third cleric who worked for the archdiocese as secretary of clergy, is accused of giving known abusers easy access to minors.
This thread began with a news article. Did you read it?
Thank you, says the red faced poster!
The problem with non-denominational churches is that there's nothing to stop the congregation from deciding to become Mormon or Unitarian, etc.
There is something to be said for a diagonal form of church structuring, like the Presbyterians -- organized by a representative group of congregants. This actually strengthens the Christian imperative rather than dilutes it as so many non-denominational churches tend to do."
Pax/Peace!
Cronos
Yes, we need to point out to the Christian Protestants here how your group, the OPC:
Why don't you tell pnsm, Dr. Scarpetta etc. that your group, the OPC hates them and considers them as non-OPC members to be damned to heck as heretics? |
It's been shown again and again that your group is demonstrably non-Christian in statements by your members and your doctrines of beliefs
the Hinduism link to the OPC/PCA where your groups says The Father predestinated the plan and the Son and Spirit agreed to the plan .
Polytheism OPC/PCA style.
God the Father is "conferencing" with the Son and the Spirit
Here is proof that your group is finally shedding off it's pretence to be Triniatrian Christian.
Because I don't post inflated or false figures like your posts.
kindly explain why 75%+ of the OPC voted for Obama? -- you haven't given any statistics or reasoning beyond pure blather. You've given hearsay at best, obfuscations otherwise
the same way you don't hear too much whining about the smaller version of the OPC - the WBC. At 20,000 members, your cult with it's conspiracy of silence keeps it's hateful practises secret, but now all Christians know how anti-Christian your cult is
preaching hatred against Pentecostals | from the OPC doctrinal websiteIt will be noted that the Confession sharply contradicts the view popularized today by the neo-Pentecostal movement. In essence this view would have us believe that we can have the same charismatic gifts that we read about in the age of the Apostles - such as prophecy, speaking in tongues, and healing - today. |
preaching hatred against Lutherans | Dr. Eckleburg disses the LCMS:"The liberal church teaching of free will has infected the Lutherans, too, in contradiction to what Martin Luther taught from Scripture" |
preaching hatred against Pentecostals and Methodists: | From the opc doctrinal website:. Are Arminian (Methodists, Pentecostals, Baptist etc) preachers heretics? yes"we see the inherent Satanism of Free-Will Arminianism" (accusing Methodists, Pentecostals, etc. who disagree with Calvin of preaching a gospel of Satan |
preaching hatred against Methodists | "John Wesley preached Universal Infant Damnation for unbaptized infants -- which is unsurprising, because Wesley preached the Gospel of Satan" |
preaching hatred against Pentecostals and Catholics together as targets of the OPC/PCA message of hate | Gamecock posted this"This goes to what the Reformers taught; that is the "enthusiasts" or what we call today |
preaching hatred against Judaism | Acording to the OPC OrthoPresbyterianC: "Christians should not celebrate the Seder or other Jewish festivals. " |
preaching hatred and evil against Christians martyred by Moslems in the Middle East | This man followed the wrong teachings of Rome and we know what happens to such people. Heaven is for the elect. |
preaching hatred against the Eastern Orthodox | Insinuating that the E. Orthodox are not helping others in Japan |
preaching hatred against Adventists | The Adventists are a cult that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons |
revealing their true beliefs that Christianity means only Calvinism and only their particular brand of Calvinism |
|
Probably not, just stopped by to sling some mud.
Look at that....
post things like post things like "we see the inherent Satanism of Free-Will Arminianism" (accusing Methodists, Pentecostals, etc. who disagree with Calvin of preaching a gospel of Satan
- Belot, an Anabaptist was arrested for passing out tracts in Geneva and also accusing Calvin of excessive use of wine. With his books and tracts burned, he was banished from the city and told not to return on pain of hanging (J.L. Adams, The Radical Reformation, pp. 597-598).
- Jacques Gruent was racked and then executed for calling Calvin a hypocrite
- A man who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled.
- Calvin's Letter to the Marquis Paet, chamberlain to the King of Navarre, 1561. "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels [Anabaptists and others], who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."
Have you ever worked or work for the NYTimes?
Neither I nor WPa do and see the bias on that paper by its columnists...
Interesting -- and the same thing is happening to the OPC/PCA.
>This is what an ex-Ruling Elder of the OPC says about your group: :
And the PCA has already started down this path -- next is the OPC. No wonder, these groups are founded by man and not God.
no worried — mistakes happen. Yours are definitely not intentional.
Yet, very few posters bothered to get on these -- one notable exception among anti-Catholic postes I will point out is RnMomof7, though I dispute quite strongly with her, she has been discussing on ecumenical threads, raising her in my esteem. The others decline to be involved in a non-antagonistic forum.
kindly explain why 75%+ of the OPC voted for Obama?
Would you please cite to a source for this assertion? It is quite surprising to me, if true, in that the local OPC church is quite conservative.
There is nothing in this list that teaches hate. The assertion of a position which excludes the validity or truth of a contradictory position is not ‘teaching hate.’
Assertion that one postulate is true, and its opposite is false, is the very foundation of logic.
It is not hate to espouse a position which excludes another. Hate is a feeling of enmity directed at another.
You mean that the OrthodoPresbyterian C (OPC) saying that Pentecostalism is a damnable heresy is not hate?
How can the OPC say "John Wesley preached Universal Infant Damnation for unbaptized infants -- which is unsurprising, because Wesley preached the Gospel of Satan" and that NOT be considered hate?
You mean ordering OPC members to not celebrate with Jews is not hate?
you mean that saying The Adventists are a cult that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons is not hate?
What about this statement by the OPC on Bhatti, the Christian martyr killed by Moslems in Pakistan: This man followed the wrong teachings of Rome and we know what happens to such people. Heaven is for the elect.?
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.