Skip to main content

Originally Posted by interventor1212:
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Why in the world would that Church’s bishop just restrict Brazelle from choir directorship with young people after he was accused of inappropriate sexual contact in the 1970's?

1970's? Knowing of his inappropriate sexual behavior, they only restricted him??

Does anyone see anything wrong with that picture?

 

 

I suspect the reason is there was no actual victim identified, only rumor.  

It could have something to do with the confessor/penitent confidentiality that is protected by Constitutional law.

DF

That being said, it brings up an interesting point of what we call Liberty.

 

Liberty means we get to own guns, but we've seen the tragedies of Colorado and Wisconsin in the last few weeks.  Liberty means we retain confidences with lawyers, priests, accountants, and others, by law, even if those confidences have severe and horrible consequences.

 

Is the occasional massacre the price of Liberty?  Is the shielding of a pedophile the price of Liberty?

 

I'm asking.

 

DF

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

That being said, it brings up an interesting point of what we call Liberty.

 

Liberty means we get to own guns, but we've seen the tragedies of Colorado and Wisconsin in the last few weeks.  Liberty means we retain confidences with lawyers, priests, accountants, and others, by law, even if those confidences have severe and horrible consequences.

 

Is the occasional massacre the price of Liberty?  Is the shielding of a pedophile the price of Liberty?

 

I'm asking.

 

DF

________________

The only legally protected confidences are those between lawyers and priests.  Records and testimony can be subpoenaed from everyone else.

How strange this is turning out.

 

So, whaddya think?  No one is willing to go public with charges.  Oliver admitted to an "inappropriate relationship", a rather vague term, but then we were not there when he discussed it.

 

Is this a rumor gone wild?  Are people so scared of the religious community that no one will come forth?  Is Oliver, in any sense but legal, obviously guilty?  Innocent?  Are legit victims so scared of local public opinion that they would prefer to suffer in silence?

 

Kudos to Chief Ray of the SPD.  He seems to be playing this one straight by the book.  As he should.

 

DF

Originally Posted by Seven:

Another side to this is what if he is found to be innocent? What the impact of being accused of being a pedophile will be like for him, his re p u t a tion and life in general after the dust settles. There are always 2 or 3 sides to every story. 

Seems we should keep this one in mind. I am thinking this may have gone to the grand jury. If so, we can expect an indictment in the coming months. That said, who can you indict when there are no plaintiffs? No evidence at all.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×