Pericles.. the entire police force there would be Catholic wouldn't it?

Wasn't this the town that supported Irish terrorism so happily, until 9/11 killed a few of them?

No prosecutions there I bet for years of supporting and funding the IRA.

Now you can understand how Qlders felt when the Joh trial was abandoned because.... oh dear.... the jury foreman turns out to be a National Party drone.

Who knows what the judges here were in those days?

Pericles,

I don't know about the inferences based on religion and am rather skeptical. You say they are thin grounds and morally they are (the term technicality comes to mind) but either the law has the power to prosecute or they don't. The Attorney General can't spend public money on something that Law's lawyer could get him off on those grounds. That would be a waste of time.

Oliver,

He had already been questioned by a grand jury I believe before the AG decided that there weren't any grounds to prosecute. There was nothing to protect him from. It was all over. That is the point I am making in an attempt to quash the rumour. In the process obviously I'm digging up the dirt on Law but credit given where it is due.

That's precisely the excuse the Attorney General provided himself with, mjpb.

>>either the law has the power to prosecute or they don't. The Attorney General can't spend public money on something that Law's lawyer could get him off on those grounds<<

But that isn't quite the full case, though, is it?

It was entirely within the AG's power to prosecute. He could quite easily, on the material outlined in the article, have made at least a prima facie, case that would require a jury to decide the issue.

He most certainly did not have to decide ahead of time, whether "Law's lawyer could get him off on those grounds".

He only had to decide whether there was sufficient grounds to formulate a charge; not pre-judge whether it would be shot down by the defence lawyer. He could just as easily have decided that the public interest would be best served if the accusations, and accompanying innuendo, were given a full airing during their day in court.

Given that he presented a picture of breast-beating regret in the newspaper article, I'm pretty sure he could have summoned up enough potential misdeeds that would have brought the evidence out in front of twelve "good men and true".

Whether or not they might be wall-to-wall, died-in-the-wool Micks.

But he didn't. So we'll never know, will we.

Don't forget also, that the Attorney General's is and elected position.

So he would have been risking a cushy salary, as well as an extended stay in Purgatory...

Thank you from my heart Socratease. I wish you would start a poetry type thread for OLO participants to read and share any poetry you have written [great if you could put in some humorous and hilarious ones to lighten all of our spirits]too! Love, romance, country, politics for those who enjoy the topic, climate change. Any poems I'd love to read!

Your postings I have followed since joining and I would be extremely sad not to read any more. From all of your postings you are highly intelligent, you think outside the square which I LOVE in you and people, [really do], and at the same time you are highly fair and say things how they are Socratease [factual].

Am going to keep posted for a poetry thread and I can see Foxy delighting in it and contributing beautifully.

xxx.

Dear Oliver,
OK, so I should have written “no point in responding to sweeping accusations by sweeping defence”.

As to the Boston case, you certainly know more about it than I ever did. I think you are right there with your principles if the details and explanations provided by mjpb are taken into account. Thanks for the links. Whatever happened or should have happened to Law, I do not think that being made "one of nine prelates who will have the honor of presiding over funeral Masses for Pope John Paul II” is a promotion. But I agree that if not prosecuted, and if his doing can be found as morally wrong - while his wrongdoings cannot be proved to be illegal - the Church should have stashed him away in a convent or so. However, to repeat myself, I do not know (or understand) the details.

I also think that if you want to compare cover-ups of pedophile offenses in Catholic institutions, other educational institution - religious or secular, like e.g. the German Odenwaldschule (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,686190,00.html) - offer a better yardstick than banks.

As to paying compensation, I am not a lawyer but it happens in many cases either as an out of court settlement or after being ordered by the court, apparently also where the Church was involved. For instance, the Los Angeles Archdiocese paid out USD 660 million to 508 people - i.e. on average almost USD 1.3 million per victim - in 2007.

Dear George and mpjb,

Thanks for your posts.

As best I can make out Cardinal Law did skip town in December 2002, according to the BBC, Times and Boston Globe. This action appears to be the source of the publicity: The story of a Bishop ignoring a Grand Jury subpoena, after serious allegations of a sex abuse cover-up.

However, the Bishop returned in February, 2003, when it is clear that it is hard to build a case under Massachusetts Law.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&rlz=1I7GGLL_en&q=%22grand+jury%22+archbishop+law&btnG=Search&meta=&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

The claims of a cover-up seem valid even given the AG’s response.
The media reporting was more subdued on the second matter. Critics of the Church know of the first subpoena and the Faithful of the second. Only parts of the elephant.

As previous noted Law appears to have been promoted by John Paull II, receiving a new important mission, a “palatial apartment” and a US$120,000 p.a. stipend:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-122027984.html

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-122027984.html

I see abuse of power here and further see inappropriate responses.

Herein, I quote Gibbon:

“Our serious thoughts will suggest to the apostles themselves were chosen by providence among the fisherman of Galilee, and that the lower depress the temporal condition of the first the Christians, the more reason we shall find to admire the merit and success. It is incumbent on us diligently to remember, that the kingdom of Heaven was promised to the poor in spirit and that minds afflicted by calamity and the contempt of mankind, cheerfully listen to the divine promise of future happiness; while, on the contrary, the fortunate are satisfied with the passion of this world; and the wise abuse in doubt and dispute their vain superiority of reason and knowledge” – Gibbon (1776)

Hello Pericles,
Also, there is the issue of not attending to the first subpoena. I suspect if a labourer ignored a Court order it would not have been overlooked.