Thousands beaten, raped in Irish reform schools

Southern Man said:
Your previous question was answered by me in relation to my knowledge of evidence that required judgment by a court.
Click to expand...

So if your client had pictures of him molesting children and confessed to molesting children you would defend him because the court had not yet found him guilty.
 
Southern Man said:
I'm not spinning at all; I am reading from your link and trying to educate you with respect to the policies of the Church. Your link clearly refers to confessional conversations, and the required secrecy of these conversations are well document policies of the Church.

You should also understand that this policy is and has been controversial throughout history, but it is absolutely necessary due to the nature of the sacrament.
Click to expand...

Yes, so what you're saying is that you support this paedophile's charter.

Do you feel proud?
 
WinterBorn said:
Any organization that does not immediately remove a known child molester from a position of authority over children is not worth defending.
Click to expand...

...such as the Boy Scouts. Excerpts:

Boy Scouts Forced To Reveal Scope Of Abuse
Lawsuit Over Abuse By Seattle Scoutmaster In 1980s Opens Window Into Scouting Files Dating To 1946

(AP) According to a police report, Phelps admitted to a detective that he had abused the Stewarts and two other boys. The detective wrote that he called the regional Scouting office, the Chief Seattle Council, but no one returned the call.

Despite Phelps' confession, the case was closed without charges being filed because the statute of limitations had expired, the detective wrote. Phelps has never been convicted of a crime.

But the detective included this note about Phelps: "He never once, during our conversation, stated or indicated he had lost his attraction for younger males."...

...According to the files opened by the Stewarts' lawyers, the Boy Scouts ejected a leader, on average, once every three days between 1971 and 1990. From 1991 to 2005, the total was about 2,500 adult volunteers, a rate of about 15 a month, or one every other day...

Entire article here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/24/national/main3201572.shtml
 
christiefan915 said:
...such as the Boy Scouts. Excerpts:

Boy Scouts Forced To Reveal Scope Of Abuse
Lawsuit Over Abuse By Seattle Scoutmaster In 1980s Opens Window Into Scouting Files Dating To 1946

(AP) According to a police report, Phelps admitted to a detective that he had abused the Stewarts and two other boys. The detective wrote that he called the regional Scouting office, the Chief Seattle Council, but no one returned the call.

Despite Phelps' confession, the case was closed without charges being filed because the statute of limitations had expired, the detective wrote. Phelps has never been convicted of a crime.

But the detective included this note about Phelps: "He never once, during our conversation, stated or indicated he had lost his attraction for younger males."...

...According to the files opened by the Stewarts' lawyers, the Boy Scouts ejected a leader, on average, once every three days between 1971 and 1990. From 1991 to 2005, the total was about 2,500 adult volunteers, a rate of about 15 a month, or one every other day...

Entire article here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/24/national/main3201572.shtml
Click to expand...

The confession should be enough to prevent his being allowed to be a Scoutmaster.
 
Seems we have all enjoyed the same experiences in parochial school!@$%^&*@#$ nuns and priests.
 
WinterBorn said:
So if your client had pictures of him molesting children and confessed to molesting children you would defend him because the court had not yet found him guilty.
Click to expand...
Why would then accused present evidence to convict himself? Your example is absurd- unless the accused was insane. In that case he should be defended as innocent due to his insanity.
 
Southern Man said:
Why would then accused present evidence to convict himself? Your example is absurd- unless the accused was insane. In that case he should be defended as innocent due to his insanity.
Click to expand...

The confession would be covered under lawyer client priv. and couldn't be divulged.

It is common for lawyers to know the truth of their clients innocence or guilt.
 
Lets see if we can phrase a question in just the right way so as to get an answer beyond semantics.

Imagine you are a lawyer and your client has confessed to molesting a child and shown you proof that he did so. Would you defend him?
 
WinterBorn said:
Lets see if we can phrase a question in just the right way so as to get an answer beyond semantics.

Imagine you are a lawyer and your client has confessed to molesting a child and shown you proof that he did so. Would you defend him?
Click to expand...
Again, I'm not a lawyer, and one reason for that is that my standard of ethical behavior is different than theirs.
 
charver said:
I'm glad you've got your priorities right.

Who cares about some kids getting their first taste of priest cock when there's the good name of the Church to worry about?
Click to expand...
That is a disgusting image and doesn't support your argument at all, if you ever had one.
 
Southern Man said:
That is a disgusting image and doesn't support your argument at all, if you ever had one.
Click to expand...

An image your Church thinks is so bad that it protects the very people who do it. And then you support their actions.

Even a godless wonder like me is more morality upstanding than the Holy See?

Who'd have thought it?
 
Southern Man said:
What you think and reality are two different things, as demonstrated several times now.
Click to expand...

WE have clearly demonstrated that you will dodge, dance, and play at semantics to avoid any condemnation of an organization that has repeatedly been an accessory-after-the-fact to the crimes of child molestation and child abuse and has, through inaction, enabled these crimes to continue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top