Mahony sued under racketeering laws - 4 men say L.A. cardinal conspired to protect their molesters

San Francisco Chronicle | April 30, 2002 | Elizabeth Fernandez, Harriet Chiang, Chronicle Staff Writers

[Bonaparte]

I absolutely agree with you. This should have been SOP, if not for moral reasons then at least for their own legal protection. This is what happens when arrogance trumps decency and common sense. It's a powerful lesson for us all.

[JoshGray]

It's about time. I hope the plaintiffs refuse to settle and I hope we hear about a LOT more of these cases.

If only it were the law-enforcement types going after them, too.

[Bonaparte]

There is no doubt that the church is going to endure much withering commentary from the bench, peppered liberally with phrases like, "knew or should have known," "reasonable care," and "a prudent individual," but there is one more aspect to all this that I neglected to bring up -- and that is the means by which the parents and victims were dissuaded from making criminal complaint. If these involved even a hint of fear-mongering or intimidation, then there are some clerics who will soon be sharing a cell with the Dapper Don.

[Saundra Duffy]

Hi, pal. Thanks for showing up on this thread. Love to your family and that little darling FReeper. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

If only it were the law-enforcement types going after them, too.

No kidding. I don't understand why it isn't a crime that these cardinals refused to protect children. "Suffer the little children."

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

We have actually been raising hell about this issue. You can go back twenty, thirty years in the conservative Catholic press where anyone can find the concerns raised by decent, moral, law-abiding, conservative Catholics. What is going on is a situation where the homosexual mafia have infiltrated and squatted as freeloaders on church property. All of the major conservative Catholic publications (Crisis, First Things, The New Oxford Review and The Wanderer) have voiced alerts and complaints about these issues for some time. I first discussed the matter of "the gay problem" with a ranking Catholic official in 1983. Had proper attention been focused on this then, some of these cases never would have happened.

[SierraWasp]

I can't take credit for that idea alone. Why do you think Carry_Okie calls 'em "RICOnuts?" In fact he thinks we should be using CEQA, NEPA, ESA and all that other LOONEY LAW to whup on 'em with!!!

I agree heartily!!! I like hoisting pricks on their own petards, YES I DO!!!

[Proud2BAmerican]

i"m not sure who you're insulting more by comparing Mahony and Law: Mahony or Law? I guess it's sort of like "I'm worried Hirohito is another Hitler"

[Grampa Dave]

I know that a lot of loyal and great Catholic Lay people have been trying to get the Church to recognize the problem of predator Homosexuals for about two decades. Up to now, your efforts have been ignored.

Hopefully, now the bishops, cardinals will now listen to you as the Good Pope has spoken, in my view, very cleary on this problem.

We, also, know that it is not just a problem with Catholic Churches, the non Christian/homosexual predators have invaded most of the major churches and are doing the same thing and pushing their agendas. The coverage by the mediots is not there. They decided to go after the Catholics this past year. I think and pray that it will backfire on them big time.

As I have posted in Free Republic and told others in California, this problem is a problem that must be addressed and handled by the good and faithful Catholics. We non Catholic Christians must step back and support you in your task of rooting out the evil that has squatted as you noted in your churches. We must pray for your success, and then we have the same chore in front of us in our churches.

Good luck and God bless you in your massive task that you must attend to, to save your church!

[JoshGray]

Someone on another thread asked yesterday why the law wasn't after Law.

I checked around the newspaper sites and as near as I can figure, in MA, anyway, the clergy isn't required to report child-abuse -- I'm not sure about California, but I'm betting it's the same thing, having to do with the sanctity of the confessional and all that. (I believe the mandatory report law is changing to remove that exemption in MA.)

The other problem would be that the victims aren't reporting it to the DAs in time.

Things are changing in that victims ARE reporting it these days (noone really thinks this is a recent problem, do they?); there's not as much stigma about homosexuality and speaking against the church as their used to be. But it's still not within the statute of limitations.

Other victims, of course, have taken the money and ran -- reporting it to the Church instead of the law, then accepting whatever promises and pay-outs that are offered in exchange for their silence.