There was plenty of corroborating evidence in this case. It was ignored.
Why didn’t the priests/bishops/parochial school authorities go directly to the police when this accusation was made in 1981?
What corroborating evidence would that be? Not that I think the priest was not guilty but I am speaking in terms of legally admissable evidence needed to prosecute a case and secure a conviction.
They should have 100% gone to the authorities.
I’m surprised by the principle’s actions by 1981 most Parochial schools were already being run by non clergy.Our Parochial school here lost the last Nuns and Priests who taught in the early 1970’s.