[muawiyah]

"Might" have information ~ any given lawyer on any given day might well have information about any case anywhere involving anything or nothing that might need him as a witness of some sort.

The cases here involve something he might have known about in some manner at seminary, and that "something" would necessarily involve sexual assaults on children!

Else, what is it we are discussing?

The lawyer knew instantly what the judge said ~ so,Doc, I think you are more engaged in your attack on the RCC than this case.

So, why is it you are so cold regarding the disposition of the victims.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

The lawyer knew instantly what the judge said ~ so,Doc, I think you are more engaged in your attack on the RCC than this case.

Wow. That is the broadest non sequitur I've seen on this thread yet.

So, why is it you are so cold regarding the disposition of the victims.

lol. Show me where I've exhibited a disregard for the victims of pederast priests.

Is this all you've got? Have you figured out why you're saying the judge is implying the defense attorney is a child molester?