What would have happened if the LA Times and The Associated Press did not intervene in the court battle over the Los Angeles Archdiocese clergy sex abuse documents?
My guess? The worst possible outcome.
What do I mean by that? The document redactions—that would have allowed church officials guilty of covering up for clergy sex offenders to remain unpunished, unexposed and unaccountable for their crimes—would probably have sailed in under the radar. Victims (and their attorneys) who fought for years to get justice and accountability would have been given the proverbial “sand-pounding hammer” and LA criminals similar to Philadelphia’s Msgr. William Lynn would be off scot-free.
Let’s hope that more media organizations—as well as Catholic justice and advocacy groups—step up and also demand the accountability that Los Angeles’ victims have been fighting for for decades. Let’s also hope that Judge Emilie Elias rules for victims and public safety (remember, many of the names that could be redacted belong to people still in positions of power).
Still have questions? Check out this awesome LATimes graphic about the redactions and Tevrizian’s proposed ruling.
IT continues to be that the journalists and the victims are at a substantially higher moral level than the catholic church. What a shame!!
Wouldn’t it be nice if in 2013, Survivors and their friends would see the shell of the once, mighty, Holy Roman Catholic Church crumble from within. All of the members of the Hierarchy, including a past cardinal, should have their sins of coverup EXPOSED for all to see. Hopefully, Judge Elias will see that his decision could be a turning point in this on-going battle. More members of the Hierarchy, similar to Monsignor Lynn in Philly should be behind bars, enjoying the view of the world from inside a prison compound! Then, maybe others, who are tempted to commit sins of COVERUPS of molestation, rape and sodomy, will reconsider their actions, before they ultimately end up in the same place!
With the judges first name being Dickran you might have already thought his ethics were just a little bit questionable, wouldn’t you?
The complete unredacted documents need to be fully released to the public pronto. Why were they sealed in the first place? Did the LA Archdiocesean abuse survivors lawyers agree to that? If so, why? Did the $660 settlement amount, a material portion of which apparently went to these lawyers, factor in?
Can we then really expect survivors lawyers, whose duty is presumably to get more settlement funds sooner, to represent the public interest. Don’t we need more to protect defenseless children? Where we we be today if the unredacted documents had been fully released 5 years ago? How many more sexual assaults by priests on young victims could have been avoided?
For info on the need for a national investigation commission that President Obama needs to set up now to prevent situations like this in the future, please read, “Vatican: A New Child Protection Strategy Now?”, accessible at: http://wp.me/P2YEZ3-25
When I was a little Catholic boy growing up out East, I was taught that the bishop is the source of truth and justice. That is so far from today’s reality. If I want the truth of the situation, I listen to the survivors of clergy sex abuse and good journalists. If I want to see justice done, I know it can only happen in a civil court of law, not at the chancery office. So where did Judge Dickran get this idea in the first place? Maybe he should talk to Judge Judy. I’ll bet she’s on the side of children.