Posted on 02/07/2005 1:21:00 PM PST by Former Military Chick
EAST CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Jurors weighing the fate of a Boston-area priest accused of raping a young parishioner went home Friday without a verdict after about seven hours of deliberations.
Five men and seven women began deliberations Thursday afternoon in the child sex-abuse trial of defrocked priest Paul Shanley, after the defense rested its one-witness case and lawyers delivered their closing arguments.
Shanley faces life in prison on two counts each of child rape and indecent assault and battery. A fifth count of child rape was dropped from the indictment Monday after Shanley's accuser was unable to testify about one of the alleged incidents.
The jury is set to return at 9 a.m. Monday morning, prompting observers to wonder about the effect a Super Bowl victory for the Patriots would have on the verdict.
"His memories of the rapes came back when he was told of Shanley's arrest and went to a counselor within 12-15 hours with these memories."
How could there not be reasonable doubt that these momries were wrong?
See posts 19 and 20. Dozens and dozens of boys have already won a civil suit against Shanley last year. I believe one of those victims committed suicide shortly aftewards.
Well, I'm sure if you'd been on the jury, you'd have found one of the founders of NAMBLA innocent.
You clearly haven't read the terrifying Vanity Fair magazine article or Boston Globe pieces on Shanley. He was one of the founding members of NAMBLA- gave a speech at a meeting saying that "little boys are the seducers." The Catholic Church knew he was a pedophile and kept transferring him from parish to parish.
So his accuser had a financial interest in this? Then this verdict makes even less sense.
"Well, I'm sure if you'd been on the jury, you'd have found one of the founders of NAMBLA innocent."
Wasn't it stated in an earlier post here that that information was not admitted at trial? Are you saying that if you were a juror you would ignore the rules of evidence?
Yes, there is really very little to this case. The witness had a epiphany and suddenly remembered being raped one day. Right when the stuff was hitting the fan in the media.
One wonders if this was not another case like the molestations at the day care center that turned out to be bogus.
One wonders, but I doubt we will dwell on it long.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Shanley is a founding member of North American Man Boy Love Association.
Do a google search on him. Hundreds of damning articles on this guy. Also, what's wrong with getting money from someone who ruined your life, especially a pedophile ?
I hope you'll start educating yourself by reading the Vanity Fair piece or the Boston Globe pieces on Shanley. It is believed he molested/raped hundreds of boys around the country.
The defense, BTW, used the depositions in the civil case in its three-day cross of the victim.
Shanley's founding of NAMBLA or that there were other victims were not used in the trial. But your cheerleading for the founder of NAMBLA is quite apparent.
Also, Father Shanley is the reason Cardinal Law had to resign from Boston. He knew for years that Shanley was a pedophile and kept covering it up.
Sounds like you've been following Shanley's criminal career as closely as I have.
The guy's testimony was very credible. I guess you had to be there. I cought a lot of it on Court TV. There were other victims but they chickened out on testifying. There was a ton of stuff besides the victim's testimony. There was a lot that the jury wasn't even allowed to know. The guy believes in man/boy love. I think the church had already made a settlement to some of the victims, but I may be wrong on that.
One of the reasons I followed this case is that our former bishop got shoved out because he also protected Shanley when he was with the Boston diocese--and the bishop had an amazing memory loss when he was deposed.
Thank God that the right verdict was reached. Unless Shanley sincerely repents for his crimes, this will not be the only "verdict" he'll be unhappy about.
Apparently you did not follow the trial. You need to read up on it a little before you make your assumptions.
Most of what I read about that charge seemed a bit thin, but what I found was the most interesting were papers turned over by the Diocese that indicated his thought process was along those lines.
He was extremely progressive liberal in his ideas.
My concern was the particular witness they used to base the entire case on. It seemed contrived.
Not that justice has not been done, mind you, but that they took a shortcut to get the verdict and put him away.
It is this propensity of late in our justice system regarding child molestations that bother me and it reminds me of the period of time back in the 80s when daycare centers were the big story.
It seems that justice is not as blind as it should be. This can affect the entire system and cause untold damage to innocent people who might be caught in the net of emotional justice.
So you're saying you believe he is guilty, but the evidence presented to the jury in this case was not adequate?
Yes, I think they made the right call.
It may have been better is they had allowed all the other evidence in. Those who are not as familiar with this case as some of you are, may well see it as questionable.
That was my first reaction when I learned about the witnesses sudden memory recall and the pay days that many accusers were receiving from the Church.
The Church is at fault for that. They should have been prosecuting these occurrences from the start.
It just taints everything.
How true. If I recall correctly didn't another priest go to prison and someone murdered him.
Life will be tough for this defrocked man of the cloth.
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.