[af_vet_1981]

I likely know more about this situation than you do. Ravi was indeed slandered, which is heartbreaking.

Innocent until PROVEN guilty. You have proof of the allegations? If not, maybe accept that he was slandered.

This is not a court of law. He died and has already been judged by the Righteous Judge. If you are making the claims he did not commit these grave sexual sins while in the ministry, prove the slander you allege. Otherwise, concede. You might also rise to defend the Catholic clergy accused of sexual sins in the ministry to be consistent (Innocent until PROVEN guilty.•).

[alexander_busek]

This is not a court of law. [...] If you are making the claims he did not commit these grave sexual sins while in the ministry, prove the slander you allege. Otherwise, concede.

In a simple debate (let alone in a "court of law"), whoever asserts "A" is obliged to prove "A."

It is not incumbent upon the person questioning or disputing a slander to prove that it is false. Rather, it is incumbent upon the slanderer (or anyone else chiming in on that slander, as you - af_vet_1981 - have done) to provide evidence supporting the slanderous assertion.

Your pointing out that this is not a "court of law" is an evasion / distraction. Even in mere polite conversation, this axiom holds.

If, however, Theo indeed possesses "insider info" exonerating Ravi, then we other FReepers would welcome his sharing it.

Regards,