No secrecy for the original crimes.
Such a hard distinction to understand.
What doees that double-speak even mean?
Read Crimen Sollicitationis. It's all there. And it's a document that convicts Rome of its ugly, criminal, decades-long cover-up.
It instructs bishops on how to deal with allegations of child abuse against priests and has been seen by few outsiders. Critics say the document has been used to evade prosecution for sex crimes. Crimen Sollicitationis was written in 1962 in Latin and given to Catholic bishops worldwide who are ordered to keep it locked away in the church safe. It instructs them how to deal with priests who solicit sex from the confessional. It also deals with "any obscene external act ... with youths of either sex." It imposes an oath of secrecy on the child victim, the priest dealing with the allegation and any witnesses. Breaking that oath means excommunication from the Catholic Church..."Crimen Sollicitationis was enforced for 20 years by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before he became the Pope.
It is a hard distinction to make. After all anyone under investigation should be assumed to be guilty and not protected by due process. Oh you mean only priests in Canon law proceedings are guilty.
I wonder if that person is familiar with how professional boards conduct investigations against their members apart from and in conjunction with either civil or criminal investigations? Probably not.