Group: alt.god · Group Profile
Author: EnkiduEnkidu Date: Aug 25, 2008 20:24
duke cox.net> wrote in
news:o9m5b49ab24090m6d5pf9gqv69ehfkaeb5@4ax.com:
>>>>Because the defendants, priest or church, most often refuse to put
>>>>the evidence before a jury.
>>>
>>> No, they didn't.
>>
>>Cite one case where the churchwon a civil case of a priest was
>>aquitted.
>
> Didn't say that.
>
>>I can cite hundreds where the church or priest was found guilty or
>>settled without a trial.
>
> Meaning a priest freely admitted his involvement even though it was 30
> years ago with a then child for the plaintiff.
Plea bargaining for a lighter sentence when faced by jury-convincing
evidence of guilt!
The church has never been accused of intentionally harming children,
merely moving problem priests around, exposing new batches of children to
molesters rather than deal with the problem. Again, rather than trust to
a jury, they weighed the evidence against them and settled for the best
deal they could get. And that best deal is billions, so you know that the
evidence was strong enough that a jury trial was far more likey to cost
them much more.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
"Come on Milhouse, there's no such thing as a soul! It's just something
they made up to scare kids, like the Boogie Man or Michael Jackson."
- - Bart Simpson
| 
