Posted on 03/26/2011 12:59:03 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
At an intensely combative and vitriolic hearing Friday afternoon in a sex-abuse case that has shaken the Philadelphia Archdiocese to its core, a state court judge shocked one priest's defense attorney by disclosing that the government thinks he might be a witness as a former seminarian and could be disqualified from the case. The lawyer, who represents one of three current and former Roman Catholic priests charged with raping boys in their parish, fired back that prosecutors were being "anti-Catholic" and had uttered an "abomination."
Judge Renee Cardwell Hughes told defense attorney Richard DeSipio that she's received information that "might make you, in fact, a witness because of events that occurred while you were a seminarian."
The information "stems from the fact that you attended the seminary with a student who asserts he was abused," Hughes said, adding that DeSipio "may possess factual knowledge about abuse that occurred with that student."
She added that the substance of the claim that DiSipio witnessed something is still unclear. "I just don't know if it's true," Hughes said. "I really don't know if it's true."
Yelling and visibly upset, DeSipio demanded that the government, then and there, identify the source of the allegation. "Let them spill it out right now!" DeSipio demanded.
"How dare they send you a letter about that," DeSipio said, referring to the district attorney's office. "That's an abomination."
Prosecutors said only that part of DeSipio's seminary training overlapped with the tenure of a senior clergyman accused of endangering children by failing to protect them from priests with a known history of abuse.
Monsignor William Lynn, now pastor of St. Joseph Church in Downingtown, Pa., is reportedly the highest-ranking member of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States ever to be charged with child endangerment. Between 1984 and 1992, he served as dean of men at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Wynnewood, Pa., according to his biography on St. Joseph's website. As the secretary for clergy for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia from 1992 to 2004, Lynn acted as personnel director for priests. He is accused of ignoring reports of abuse, covering up for them and putting children in danger.
"They are anti-Catholic. I'll say it," DiSipio fumed. "[The district attorney is] attacking me as a Catholic!"
The judge rejected DiSipio's claim. "Attack you? You attacked me! You don't even know me!" Hughes said, referring to a prior argument over the necessity of a preliminary hearing, another hotly contested issue Friday afternoon.
"Mr. DeSipio, I suggest you shut up," Hughes said. "People are coming from out of the woodwork [to provide information to the commonwealth.]"
If the government can prove the allegation is credible in 30 days, DeSipio will be disqualified as the archdiocese's attorney.
"You can change lawyers now, you can change lawyers in 30," the judge warned DeSipio's client, the Rev. James Brennan. "[But] there are some conflicts that are not waivable."
DeSipio argued that the 30-day investigation was "really unfair to Father Brennan," given his mounting legal costs.
Judge Hughes was livid that DeSipio spoke up again. "If you open your mouth one more time I am going to have the sheriff take you out of here," she told DeSipio.
As DeSipio continued to argue, Hughes said she might have him "locked up and held in contempt." Instead she issued a gag order, responding to what she observed as attorneys having "gone to the airways to advocate."
"No more interviews with anyone," the judge ruled.
"Does that include the DA going on Chris Matthews' 'Hardball' and going to the New York Times," defense attorney Michael McGovern asked.
The judge responded affirmatively: "I don't want tweets. I don't want Facebook. I don't want IMs [instant messages]."
Hughes said the court will revisit the gag order on April 15, when defendants are to be arraigned. That date also marks the deadline for the DA to provide the defense with the first batch of discovery, she said.
All but one of the defense attorneys challenged the government's amendment to its case, which added a conspiracy charge that had not explicitly been requested of the grand jury.
"The issue here is that if the DA seeks to amend, it has to be subject to some sort of prima facie determination," the defense argued.
The judge found otherwise, ruling that the commonwealth established "good cause" in its pleadings and that "there is no constitutional right - federal or state - for a preliminary hearing."
It was "a technical error on the commonwealth not to charge conspiracy" originally, Hughes said. "Conspiracy is made," and the defendants will not be afforded a preliminary hearing, she ruled.
Hughes said there was abundant evidence to support the amendment.
"I'm the only person, besides the prosecutors, who has seen every stitch of evidence," she said.
Defense attorney McGovern argued that her admission was precisely the problem.
"Your Honor, this is patently unfair!" McGovern said. "You know the evidence. They know the evidence. I don't know what the evidence is! I haven't seen any!"
The attorney said proceeding to trial without a preliminary hearing was like saying, "Let's have a dart game in a dark room."
"What kind of country is this where we have this?" he shouted.
The judge yelled back, baring her teeth: "You sit down! Sit, sit, sit!"
DeSipio agreed with McGovern that their clients deserve a preliminary hearing, which could allow them to confront their accusers.
"There's no witness. I know that they [the prosecutors] don't like that he's in jail," DeSipio said. "This accuser says there was an erect penis in his buttocks."
"Was it in your buttocks, or was it in your anus," he asked rhetorically. "If that question wasn't asked [of the grand jury], and he didn't specify anus or butt cheeks, I have a right to ask that."
"What you can't do, and what I submit they're trying to do, is say just because we have a grand jury, we have good cause [to by-pass a preliminary hearing]," DeSipio said.
The judge also addressed a potential conflict of interest concerning Monsignor Lynn, who unlike the three current and former priests, faces child endangerment charges - not rape or sexual assault. Plans for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia to pay Lynn's legal costs present "a whole array of conflicts that I can't even imagine at this point in time," Hughes said.
"It's real simple," the judge said to Lynn, who was donning his clerical collar, "your master is the person that's putting bread on the table."
"It may be in your best interest to put forth a defense that attacks other people [or the church]," Hughes said.
She told Lynn he was putting himself in the position of receiving "advice from people who are being paid by people whose interests don't necessarily align with yours."
The stakes of this gamble could amount to "14 years of incarceration versus probation," she said.
Lynn, in a calm voice, declined. "Well, I trust these two men." he said, adding that the church hadn't placed any conditions on the payment of his legal costs.
Hughes was incredulous. "You are making a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision to place yourself in conflict with your attorneys?" she asked.
"I am," Lynn responded, waiving his right to any future appeal based on the argument that his attorneys had a conflict of interest.
"Then we're moving forward," the judge said.
After arraignments and release of the first batch of discovery, which will include grand jury notes and testimony, on April 15, the government will begin putting together a second batch. The government said that batch would take longer to produce, as it will include roughly 10,000 pages of documentation, much of which will need to be redacted.
Hughes said the government must give the defense a specific timeline for the production of the second batch. "There has to be some finality," she said.
In January, a grand jury returned an indictment for rape and sexual assault against one current priest, one defrocked priest and one man who taught at a Catholic school. Monsignor Lynn, the third cleric who worked for the archdiocese as secretary of clergy, is accused of giving known abusers easy access to minors.
If you are one, then
We furthermore forbid any lay person to engage in dispute, either private or public, concerning the Catholic Faith. Whosoever shall act contrary to this decree, let him be bound in the fetters of excommunication. — Pope Alexander IV (1254-1261) in “Sextus Decretalium”, Lib. V, c. ii:
Do not converse with heretics even for the sake of defending the faith, for fear lest their words instil their poison in your mind. Bl. Isaias Boner of Krakow (Polish, Augustinian priest, theologian, professor of Scripture, d. 1471)
Thus, the Church forbids the faithful to communicate with those unbelievers who have forsaken the faith by corrupting it, such as heretics, or by renouncing it, such as apostates.
“the Church forbids the faithful to communicate with those unbelievers who have forsaken the faith they once received, either by corrupting the faith, as heretics, or by entirely renouncing the faith, as apostates, because the Church pronounces sentence of excommunication on both.” St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica
Is it permitted for Christians to be present at, or to take part in, conventions, gatherings, meetings, or societies of non-Catholics which aim to associate together under a single agreement everyone who, in any way, lays claim to the name of Christian? In the negative! - (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos)
How does a Catholic sin against faith? A Catholic sins against Faith by Apostasy, heresy, indifferentism and by taking part in non-Catholic worship.” (Catechism of the Council of Trent, and the Baltimore Catechism)
“It is not permitted at all for the faithful to assist in any active manner at or to have any part in the worship of non-Catholics.” 1917 Code of Canon Law [Canon 1258]
“If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or to the meeting houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion. If any Bishops or Priest or Deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from Communion” - III Council of Constantinople.
“One must neither pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the Church, whether clergy or layman: let him be excommunicated”. (Council of Carthage)
“No one shall pray in common with heretics and schismatics” - Council of Laodicea.
Rome, Italy, Feb 19, 2010 / 02:03 pm (CNA).- The president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal Walter Kasper, announced this week that Pope Benedict XVI will visit the Evangelical Lutheran Church located in Rome on March 14 for an ecumenical celebration.
“He is a heretic who deviates from any article of faith.” The American Textbook of Popery, p 143, (quoting from the “Directory for the Inquisitors”).
“The intolerance of the Church toward error, the natural position of one who is the custodian of truth, her only reasonable attitude makes her forbid her children to read or to listen to heretical controversy, or to endeavor to discover religious truths by examining both sides of the question.” (Stapleton, Explanation of Catholic Morals, p. 35)
“..there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (Cf. Jn. 16:13) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical [Protestant] communities..
They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood...-LUMEN GENTIUM: 16.
I should have done what you are doing.
Now, I’ve arguing with the same knuckleheads for far too long.
"Mediatrix? Really? Where in scripture did God say this?"
And Metmom showed you where the RCC teaches in its catechism that Mary is to be called "Mediatrix."
You voiced skepticism at using that term and yet your catechism teaches it. What kind of cognitive dissidence is that?
Whom does the puppeteer represent?
AMEN! Great teaching.
It IS an old, worn-out canard flung about by the Roman Catholic "Church" to try to refute Sola Scriptura without really knowing what means. Do you think it means that you have to find something word-for-word in scripture? If you do, you're incorrect. Basically it means that scripture is the ultimate authority for doctrine and teaching -- because it is the inerrant, inspired word of God.
AMEN! Scripture, our only rule of faith and practice.
When Roman Catholics actually read the Bible they see the glaring contradictions between Rome's teaching and the word of God. At that point, many leave the errors of Rome in the dust and head for a Bible-believing church where they find fellowship with saints who know whom they have believed.
“You voiced skepticism at using that term and yet your catechism teaches it.”
When?
No, why? Are you wondering if you're not alone in that habit?
Why would a kind, sweet, old man post a picture of a crying baby to buccaneer81?
AMEN!
Thanks for once again providing the opportunity to post a link to a solid, bible-believing Protestant denomination which people can read for themselves...
Other than this response, please don’t divert the thread. If you have concerns, post your own thread.
Certainly it was. You have no idea what I know of Corapi. In fact, your actual statement was...
LASTCHANCE: You know nothing of Father Corapi
And that statement is not only incorrect, but mind-reading, and therefore a form of "making it personal" which is against the RF rules.
Are you sure? I don’t have a habit - however you mentioned it to others - so it must be YOUR thing. Not cool when your words come back on bite you, is it? Now run along and do your lenten thing - it looks good - so making a sacrifice to look good I’m sure can be counted towards ‘works’ .
The link said the RCC dumps pederast priests into the military, and then gave substantial evidence of that fact (which you just agreed with.)
Once in the military, with their criminal pasts unknown to military servicemen and their families, these pederast priests are free to continue whatever abuse they can manage.
The link was an astounding indictment of the Roman Catholic church. Pity that some people missed that fact. Unless sin is acknowledged, it can never be repented of.
Do you think that's true? Do you think that unless sin is acknowledged it can never be repented of?
lol. Apparently RC apologists believe there are NO Roman Catholic websites unless they post them. lol.
Deny the evidence all you want. Same old/same old.
But start protecting your children from Rome’s pederast priestcraft because they are creating the next generation of homosexuals.
Something RC apologists don’t seem too concerned about.
“so it must be YOUR thing.”
That’s a non-sequitur, and actually, you were the one to bring up people talking to themselves.
“Not cool when your words come back on bite you, is it?”
I dunno, you tell me.
“Now run along and do your lenten thing”
You should try doing something for Lent.
“it looks good”
Does it? How do you know if it looks good? How do you know what I’m doing? How do you know who I am?
“so making a sacrifice to look good I’m sure can be counted towards ‘works’ .”
That’s one pretty incoherent sentence, I’d have to admit. I have no idea what you’re talking about, not that I usually do.
lolol. Everyone's out of step but Rome.
Flawed = evidence uncomfortable to Rome.
Well, some don’t consider sin, sin - they use the word ‘mistake’. i.e., mistakes were made in covering up and priests made wrong choices.
Wonder if these evil acts against children and the covering up fits under their excommunication banner? What could be worse than that.
Irish Tenor. Rnmomof7. Presentlynoscreenname. Topcat54. Metmom. My husband.
That's six in about 10 seconds.
Now that Catholics are established by several recent polls to be at the highest percentage of the American population they have ever been in the country's history and ever increasing
Mark, easily proven errors make for lousy evidence.
Evangelical Protestants outnumber Catholics by 26.3 percent (59 million) to 24 percent (54 million) of the population, according to the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, a massive 45-question poll conducted last summer of more than 35,000 American adults... "Evangelical Christianity has become the largest religious tradition in this country, supplanting Roman Catholicism, which is slowly bleeding members, according to a survey released yesterday by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.
The U.S. is over 50% Protestant and 24% Roman Catholic. Without the huge influx of immigrants from Mexico and South/Central America, Rome's membership numbers would be falling even more precipitously.
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.