In article <6YG6e.17999$1S4.1792509@news.xtra.co.nz>, carl
<mist42nz@hotmail.com> writes
>
>"Don" <don@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:d3f1hf$qa6$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk.. 
>
>
>If he forwarded them to a new hunting ground without warning others of thei
r
>problems then he is guilty of of being an accessory to the crime.  He
>literally aided them to avoid justice and find new uninformed victims.
>Worse still he is in a position of trust to see that that exact kind of
>crime to the community isn't to happen to the parishes and children under
>his care and so an excuse of ignorance regarding the outcome is not
>acceptable.  The only possible "excuse" is one of -extreme- negligence.
>
>
I don't think he could plead extreme negligence, he is a cardinal I
assume he was considered smart enough and capable enough to do it,
therefore you have to assume he is smart enough to know that when he
reassigned priests he was putting children at risk.
The church seems to use the excuse that they have to forgive these
pedophiles and give them another chance, then another chance.. how long
can you go on ignoring the fact that these priest pedophiles are using
the church as a personal hunting ground for victims.

--
Shez                         shez@oldcity.f2s.com
Shez's Garden at http://www.oldcity.f2s.com/shez/

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]