Father Polanski Would Go to Jail

I think there is an awful lot going on in this unique focus on the Catholic Church in matters of sexual abuse. There seem to be a lot of agendas at work. I have put up a Post on my site: http://chezodysseus.blogspot.com/2009/10/priests-and-roman-polanski-post-by.html

I think there's an awful lot more to this unique focus on the Catholic Church in the sexual abuse matter. There are a lot of agendas at work. I've put up a Post on my site: http://chezodysseus.blogspot.com/2009/10/priests-and-roman-polanski-post-by.html

i [WE] agree; that LIFE, aka LOVE (sex is not LOVE) on NEBULA-BUiLT "S.pace S.hip Earth" (of many like Here; some better, some worse) is the real "MIRACLE" or "HEAVEN"!

WE eat Bread, not Bibles/Chumash's nor Qurans or Geeta's or Kangyurs..., in order to LIVE (aka LIFE as true LOVE; not sacred sex)!

Anyone Disagree?

A disgrace to all good Catholics is what it is:

To wit:

"Profile of the abusers

Half the priests were 35 years of age or younger at the time of the first instance of alleged abuse. Fewer than 7 percent of the priests were reported to have experienced physical, sexual or emotional abuse as children. Although 19 percent of the accused priests had alcohol or substance abuse problems, only 9 percent used drugs or alcohol during the alleged instances of abuse.

Almost 70 percent of the abusive priests were ordained before 1970, after attending pre-Vatican II seminaries or seminaries that had had little time to adapt to the reforms of Vatican II.[14]

Of the priests who were accused of sexual abuse, 59% were accused of a single allegation. 41% of the priests were the subject of more than one allegation. Just under 3% of the priests were the subject of ten or more allegations. The 149 priests who had more than 10 allegations against them accounted for 2,960 of the total number of allegations.[14]

2003 Vatican Conference on Sexual Abuse
In April 2003, the Pontifical Academy for Life organized a three-day conference, entitled "Abuse of Children and Young People by Catholic Priests and Religious", where eight non-Catholic psychiatric experts were invited to speak to near all Vatican dicasteries' representatives. The panel of experts identified the following factors contributing to the sexual abuse problem: [24]

Failure by the hierarchy to grasp the seriousness of the problem.

Overemphasis on the need to avoid a scandal.

Use of unqualified treatment centers.

Misguided willingness to forgive.

Insufficient accountability. "

On 22 September, speaking in the plenary of the UN Human Rights Council, the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), representing more that 100 humanist, secular and free-thought organisations in over 40 countries, criticised the Holy See over its role in covering up the scale of child abuse by its priests and religious orders, and for failing to honour its obligations under international law. The statement was based on a longer written statement submitted to the Council in August and published by the UN on 8 September (http://www.iheu.org/un-publishes-iheu-statement-child-abuse-and-holy-see).

The IHEU statement addressed specifically the role of the Holy See - which claims responsibility for the Catholic Church worldwide - in attempting to cover up the extent of child abuse perpetrated by its priests and religious orders. In exercising their right of reply to this criticism the representative of the Holy See ignored the main criticism contained in our statement.

The reply made on behalf of the Papal Nuncio Archbishop Thomasi argued that the Catholic Church was not unique in having clergy who sexually abused children and young people, but it made no mention of the physical and mental abuse meted out for generations to children under the care of its religious orders. No doubt there are abusers in all walks of life, but our point was not the abuse itself but the cover up in which some of the highest officials of the Church were implicated.

The Holy See is a sovereign state and its senior clergy, safely ensconced in the Vatican out of reach of civil law, are answerable to no earthly power other than themselves - and to the few international treaties to which they are party. One such is the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and, as shown in the IHEU report, the Holy See is in massive breach of its obligations under that convention.

Commenting on the Holy See’s response, IHEU Main Representative in Geneva, Roy Brown, said: “By failing to address this issue while seeking to point the finger of blame elsewhere, the Holy See’ has scored a spectacular own goal. One senior UN official described their reply as ‘a disgrace’. We agree.”

You make an interesting point Fr. Reese, but don't we expect more from our religious leaders, morally speaking, than our film directors?

The more I think about it the more disingenuous Tom Reese's comments on Polanski are.

They are just as self-serving in their own way as Whoopi Goldberg's, "It's not Rape, rape."

Is that because it happened twenty, thirty or forty years ago? Or because the perp was drunk? Or it happened only once? Or because it wasn't really wasn't sexual abuse, it was a homosexual act?

Oh, that's right, it was a forty something man with a female child so she must have been tempting him. Is that it?

And where have all those excuses been heard before?

Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims' Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com

As someone who is close to a survivor of clergy abuse, I don't get this article. There are still many, many priests who haven't been publicly identified as the abusers and rapists they are. They will never be prosecuted. Where possible, their bishops will continue to sweep the past abuse under the proverbial rug. The Church has a great deal of housecleaning that remains to be done, much of which was completed ignored by the last pope and his enforcer, the current pope.

Polanski is a fugitive and should be treated as such. But, to make the claim that the Catholic Church would have handled this better and would have been held more accountable, that's a stretch to say the least. Victims' groups forced the Church to act, and even then it lawyered up and tried to fight in most if not all cases.

All progress can be attributed not to the Church in these matters, but to the average lay person or victim who got involved.

jahs4fun

The following is from Yahoo news.

"He pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of unlawful sexual intercourse; in exchange, the remaining charges were dropped, and the judge agreed to send Polanski to prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation.

But Polanski was released after 42 days and fled the country for France before sentencing after the judge reportedly told lawyers he planned to add more prison"

I don't have time to go through the entire debacle of the trial with you. There is no question regarding judicial misconduct, Polanski's reasons for entering the plea, Greimer's support, etc. The web is brimming over with reports.

That said, the numbers of pedophile priests, that is ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS, is probably in the tens of thousands. These are repeat offenders. Guilty in some cases of hundreds of rapes. Not one of them has attained the moral stature of Roman Polanski, who hardly exemplifies virtue, has never claimed to, is not a Catholic priest.

And then there is the case of Fr. Lindner, who may also have been involved in a murder, of a colleague.

Let us also remember how it came to pass that pedophile priests were arrested and charged. It began in New York City, after the death of a charismatic priest, John Cardinal O'Connor. The DA announced he wanted the records of pedophile priests being concealed ("treated," i.e., sent from parish to parish after a brief trip upsate) and the Cardinal fought him.

All along New Yorkers had been disgusted. Priests raped mentally challenged children, in public bathrooms.

Now these are Catholic children and this is a Catholic issue. Is this is what you want for Catholic children, that's something you need to take up with the government.

As for me, I have any number of Catholic friends, of the Dorothy Day type, who are sickened by Reese's column. Let me quote one of them for you: "The day that the RCC crawls out of the gutter, attains the moral stature of Roman Polanski, I will thank God, but not in any Roman church."

I don’t get this dialog. Most of the posts here are actually defending Polanski. What’s wrong with you people?

I, too, am offended and angered by the sexual abuse of children by priests and the Church’s shameful cover up. The priests are being tracked down, defrocked, exposed, prosecuted, and imprisoned. The Church is paying billions in restitution to the victims. And this will go on – and it should.

But I’m equally offended and angered by Polanski’s rape of a 13 year old girl. He, like the priests, should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. No one should escape justice just because they are old, or because it happened a long time ago, or the victim forgave them, or they happen to be an otherwise nice guy or make award-winning films.

There’s no difference between Polanski and a priest who committed the same crime.

Stop defending him.

"Father Polanski" would NOT go to jail. He'd be shipped off to another parish while the church paid off the parents to keep them quiet. That's the way its been in the past. And despite all the money the church has paid out (a pittance compared to what it has) that's the way it still is.

Latest FaBlog: The Catholic Church -- "Hey We're Not Roman Polanski, OK?"

Farnaz1Mansouri1, a few details you may have chosen to ignore or simply aren't aware of:

1) This is a criminal case, not civil. The plaintiff is the state of california and it makes no difference what the (civil) victims wishes are if the state wants to pursue it.

2) The victim is tired of this being dragged back out time and time again. Why? because Polanski robbed her of any potential closure when he fled the country to avoid punishment. This could have been over and done with in one shot the first time around 30 years ago if Polanski was man enough to face his responsibility.

3) His time in a psychiatric facility was NOT his sentence, but was included in the plea bargain filed by the prosecutor (not the judge) to potentially be used as time served towards any sentence. The judge never formally accepted it and had yet to impose a sentence.

4) A judge can use their own discretion to accept or deny any plea bargain put together by, once again, the prosecutor and the defense. If that plea bargain is rejected by the judge, the accused has every right to go through a full jury trial. Instead, that poor excuse for a man fled and held out in his French villa.

As a non-catholic non-churchgoer I can plainly say with a high degree of neutrality that just about every comment I have read is simply an attack on the catholic church and they don't address the case itself or the hypocrisy so very well illustrated by the author.

Meanwhile, in other news from the twisted Huckabeelandia that once was America:

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A tiny Louisville church's newest minister is a gifted music leader and popular among its three dozen members.

Mark Hourigan is also a sex offender. Almost a decade ago, long before he joined the flock at the City of Refuge Worship Center, he was convicted of sexually abusing an 11-year-old boy in central Kentucky.

From: http://www.answers.com/topic/roman-catholic-sex-abuse-cases?method=26&initiator=CANS

Dioceses owning up to the problem in dollars and disgrace:

Year Diocese Cost Cases Reference

1997 Dallas $31 million [83]

2003, June Louisville $25.7 million 240 [84]

2003, Sept. Boston $85 million 552 [85]

2004, July Portland $53 million 100 (over) Filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy hours before two abuse trials were set to begin

2004, Sept. Tucson $22.2 million Filed for bankruptcy, after reaching an agreement with its victims [86]

2004, Dec. Spokane $48 million (at least) Filed for bankruptcy, payment was a part (has to be approved by judge and victims) [87]

2005, Jan. Orange, California $100 million 87 [88][89][90][91][92]

2006, Oct. Davenport, Iowa 15 Filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, alleged victims were 15 students, Soens denied allegations [93][94]

2006, Dec. Los Angeles $60 million 45 45 of the over 500 pending cases [95]

2007 Los Angeles $16 million 9 ordered to pay [96]

2007, Jan. Charleston $12 million Bishop Robert J. Baker agreed to pay [97]

2007, July Los Angeles $660 million 508 (over) Archbishop Roger Cardinal Mahony and diocese apologized after settlement [98][99]

2007, Jan. Charleston $12 million [97]

2007, Feb. San Diego $198.1 million 144 Filed for Chapter 11 protection, hours before the first of 144 cases issued [100]

2008, Mar. Fairbanks 130 Filed for bankruptcy, due to monetary concerns over 130 lawsuits made by Alaska natives [101]

From: http://www.answers.com/topic/roman-catholic-sex-abuse-cases?method=26&initiator=CANS

"Progressive discovery of the problem

The issue of sexual abuse by Catholic priests rose to national attention in 1985 when Gilbert Gauthe plead guilty to 11 counts of molestation of boys. In the 1990s, the issue was again brought to the national attention when a number of books on the topic were published.[1] However, it was not until early 2002 that the Boston Globe coverage of a series of criminal prosecutions of five Roman Catholic priests thrust the issue of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests into the national limelight on an ongoing basis.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] The coverage of these cases encouraged other victims to come forward with their allegations of abuse resulting in more lawsuits and criminal cases.[10]

Ultimately, it became clear that, over several decades in the 20th century, some priests and lay members of religious orders in the Catholic Church had sexually abused minors (those under 18) on a scale such that the accusations eventually reached into the thousands. Although the majority of cases were reported to have occurred in the United States, victims have come forward in other nations such as Ireland, Canada and Australia.

A major aggravating factor was the actions of Catholic bishops in responding to allegations of clerical abuse. It was revealed that some bishops had facilitated compensation payments to alleged victims on condition that the allegations remained secret.

In addition, rather than being dismissed, the accused were often instructed to undergo psychological counseling and, on completion of counseling, reassigned to other parishes where, in some cases, they continued to abuse minors.

In response to these allegations, both ecclesiastical and civil authorities have implemented procedures to prevent sexual abuse of minors by clergy and to report and punish it if and when it occurs."

With all due respect, Father Reese, thy crock runneth over.

Imagine a Cardinal who decided not to defrock a pedophile priest who had fled the country to avoid prison. You then have the case of "Father" Nicolas Aguilar Rivera, a fugitive from US justice for molesting little boys first under the tutelage of now Cardinal Norberto Rivera Carrera in Mexico and later under the tutelage of Cardinal Mahoney in LA.

Rivera "passed the pervert" to Mahoney under the Catholic clergy code of "emotional and family problems." After his conviction in the US, Aguilar returned to Mexico where he still serves as a "Padre" in the State of Puebla.

How many pedophile priests went to jail or even were defrocked? Please tell us, Father.

Catholics apologists who deny, hide, aid, abet and otherwise try to snivel out of their responsibility over this elephant in the basilica (usually by saying, in a shrill adolescent voice, "Other people do it, too") are no more "the Brothers of Christ" than Jeffery Dahmer or John Wayne Gacy.

Two final thoughts on this:

The victim in the case, Greimer, has said she will do all in her power to help Polanski. I know of no victim of pedphile priests who has done the same.

Since 1978, Polanski's attorneys have been trying to get an investigation into the judicial misconduct of the presiding judge, Ito. That there was judicial misconduct was the conclusion of both the prosecution and the defense. Had the investigations taken place, Polanski would have returned long ago, as he repeatedly stated.

Now, hopefully, the investigation will go forward.
--------------
I am not a Catholic, confess that I do not understand Catholic ethics, justice, morality. Let me provide another example in hopes that someone will explain it to me. Mathew Schmaltz, one of Reese's co-religionists, an OnFaith panelist, penned a column asking for support in his bid to gain "compassionate parole" for one, Sharon Atkins, now deceased, who was dying of cancer. She was "repentant" and Schmaltz felt the Christian thing to do was to allow her to be with her family during this critical period.

Who was Sharon Atkins? Sharon Atkins, along with Charles Manson and others was one of the Tate Labianca murderers.

The young Polanski's young bride, Sharon Tate, 8 months pregnant (EIGHT MONTHS PREGNANT) begged Atkins, "Mercy! Mercy for my baby!" Atkins replied, "NO mercy!" She then repeatedly stabbed Tate in the belly. Atkins bragged about this event endlessly.

Now, the Catholic Schmaltz wanted compassion for the murderer, which raised questions for some bloggers. Again, I'm not a Catholic. Perhaps, someone will explain to me (and many others) what appear to be strange perspectives held by Reese and Schmaltz.

On the one hand, instead of crying out, demanding the handing over of all pedophile priests, expressing sorrow for the victims, Thomas Reese, for whom I at one point had great respect, complains that the rapists are being singled out for punishment, that there is a "double standard." On the other hand, there is Schmaltz who weeps for a hell hound. Do not get it.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2008/07/manson_murder_and_mercy.html

Rape, as I understand it, is not just a grave sin condemned by the Catholic Church. From my experience, my atheist, Protestant and Muslim friends believe it is wrong as well. I am sure they would be surprised to learn that you think its prohibition is a high standard required only of lifelong celibates.
----------------------------------
To repeat;

Roman Polanski is not a pedophile priest.

To get on with his life, he pleaded guilty to a single charge: Having sex with a minor.

He was sentenced to forty-five days in treatment, which he served.

He returned, in good faith, to Judge Ito's court, but Ito had let it be known that he planned to renege on the plea agreement.

Both the prosecutor and the defense attorney accused Judge Ito of Judicial Misconduct.

Due to this and other irregularities, when Polanski fled to France, his country, the French gave him assylum.
_______________________
He is not Fr. McGuire, MaHoney, Law, Jimenez, Lindner, etc., etc, etc., who both raped repeatedly, were concealed, and concealed other rapists.

He is known to have committed a single transgression and was then faced with judicial misconduct. Given that the Catholic clergy hold themselves up as moral exemplars (as Polanski never has), are supposed to be leaders, there current complaining about Roman Polanski (and Reese isn't alone) is risible. It is risible and not only to me. I wonder if you've read the French newspapers of the last two days....

The American Jesuits aren't looking that good. Wonder why.

Once again:

See http://www.answers.com/topic/roman-catholic-sex-abuse-cases?method=26&initiator=CANS for an update how the pedophilic priest scandal is unfolding and how the Catholic Church is finally coming to grips and paying for all this sordid activity.

Said review will hasten the needed thought process of the flaws and errors of Catholicism and Christianity in general and will eventually lead to the sorely needed corrections in all religions to include Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Paganism and Bahaism.

"Really, what have I been thinking? How could one hold Roman Catholic clergy (worldwide) to the same standards as Roman Polanski?"

Rape, as I understand it, is not just a grave sin condemned by the Catholic Church. From my experience, my atheist, Protestant and Muslim friends believe it is wrong as well. I am sure they would be surprised to learn that you think its prohibition is a high standard required only of lifelong celibates. Now, I don't know any Hollywood directors, but I suspect that if I did know one he would not claim that he believed that the proscription of rape did not apply to him or his colleagues.

Rape, if it is truly wrong, is wrong for anyone and everyone.

Really, what have I been thinking? How could one hold Roman Catholic clergy (worldwide) to the same standards as Roman Polanski?

Let alone, say, Paris Hilton? Tush.

The organization that champions victims of predatory priests will stage a demonstration in downtown Los Angeles Wednesday to announce a boycott of the work of Roman Polanski and those who support his bid to avoid extradition to the United States.
------------
This is hilarious, pathetic. Polanski is not a pedophile priest, arguably not a pedophile.

Unlike the cases of pedphile priests, there was judicial misconduct in his.

Both the prosecutor and defense attorney agree that the misconduct occurred. Polanski would have turned himself in years ago if the investigation into judicial misconduct his lawyers have requested since 1978 had occurred.

He is not a priest. He was not being hidden by the Catholic church. He did not create m multiple offenses.

He offended once. Served his sentence.

Returned in good faith to the Judge Ito's court, when Ito let it be known that he planned to overturn the plea, renege on the plea agreement Polanski had reached.

He was never convicted of rape. He was convicted of one charge: Having sex with a minor.

If the organization representing the thousands, tens of thousands, God knows how many victims of priests has nothing better to do than sieze on Polanski, victims might want to look elsewhere for help.

Poor Roman Polanski. He should have been a priest. No doubt, he would have been, had he been a serial rapist.

Reese’s analogy between his hypothetical Knights of Columbus award to a priest pedophile and Roman Polanski’s recent arrest for sexual assault on a minor many years ago escapes me.

Reese only confuses the matter and comes too close to the favorite diversionary tactic of most U.S. bishops who are always pointing out that “other professions” in the culture also commit child rape. As if that is suppose to relieve priests from the dictum of living up to a higher standard.

There is no equivalency or “moral relevancy” at all for Mr. Polanski and priest pedophiles. And to make that argument, only diminishes the pain and grief of survivors of rape and sodomy by priests. Reese should know better!

It should be evident to Fr. Reese that Mr. Polanski is a fugitive from justice for the rape of a young girl and should be brought to justice. I think it would do “the culture” some good if Polanski did some hard time for his crimes.

Hollywood's penchant for celebrating and excusing depravity is irrelevant and beside the point. Hollywood is not, and is not suppose to be, infused with gospel values.

Unfortunately, like Hollywood, the church, of which Fr. Reese is a very prominent priest, seems to be motivated by the same values: money and power.

The regret and bitterness most Catholics feel for their church these days is rooted in the monstrous betrayal by our bishops and priests of the most innocent and least among us.

"Victims group to demonstrate and boycott against Roman Polanski and supporters

Daily News Wire Services

Updated: 09/30/2009 07:04:51 AM PDT

The organization that champions victims of predatory priests will stage a demonstration in downtown Los Angeles Wednesday to announce a boycott of the work of Roman Polanski and those who support his bid to avoid extradition to the United States.

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, best known as SNAP, charged that entertainment industry figures speaking out for Polanski since his arrest in Switzerland Saturday are helping to enable the crimes of current child predators."

"SNAP said three or four victims of abuse by Catholic priests will take part in the demonstration, joined by relatives and other members of SNAP, which describes itself as a self-help organization.

The sign-carrying demonstrators, according to the statement, will:

- "blast Roman Polanski and his supporters, who apparently believe that drugging and raping a 13-year-old child is not a serious crime;

- "announce a boycott of films and television shows made by Polanski and his outspoken defenders;

- "praise the L.A. District Attorney for vigilance in the case; and

- "encourage all victims of sex abuse to come forward and report crimes, despite re-victimization by the Hollywood elite."

France as a haven
Jerold Lindner, a Jesuit priest and credibly-charged sex offender with $ millions in settlements and with 15-years at Loyola High School, Los Angeles, reportedly fled to France until a statute of limitations court ruling was decided in favor of accused sex offenders. Then Lindner returned to California.
----------------
One site contains this "report." Actually, he paid out 52,000,000 in damages. One wonders where Jesuits get this kind of money. Worse, there are suspicions that he was involved in the murder of a man whom he drove to court to testify against one of Lindner's colleagues.

Lindner is not even the tip of the iceberg. With all the trials going on across the US, I doubt we'll get to the base of the berg in the next 100 years. And then there are all the other nations in which pedophile priests dwell.

And here we have Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, crying because Roman Polanski, who pleaded to a single charge involving sex with a minor, served his sentence, was victimized by judicial misconduct, has been championed by many, including the then girl with whom he had sex.

Catholic school, anyone? Perhaps, you ought to send your children for tennis lessons, instead.

Who is Cardinal Law?
Who is Pope Benedict?
Both Knew of and protected pedofiles for decades.
Who was Father Gagan?
He was one of the founding memebers of NAMBLA and they knew.

"Is there a double standard here? You bet"

Damn straight---let's see apirtual leaders on one hand and hollywood on the other....hmmm...you equate the 2? For shame.....I would hope there would be a higher standard for priests, i mean, really....

France as a haven
Jerold Lindner, a Jesuit priest and credibly-charged sex offender with $ millions in settlements and with 15-years at Loyola High School, Los Angeles, reportedly fled to France until a statute of limitations court ruling was decided in favor of accused sex offenders. Then Lindner returned to California.

I'm trying to decide which is a more profoundly corrupt and hypocritical institution, with the least credibility as to matters of justice and morality – the American System of Justice or the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and I simply can't decide . . .

Lectures on morality from a *Jesuit* ? ? ?

Please.

ALL NATIONS HAVE BORDERS AND THEIR OWN LAWS OF THEIR GOVERMENT. WHEN YOU ARE IN THAT GIVEN NATION, YOU ARE NOT ABOVE THEIR LAW NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE, OR WHAT YOU ARE.

See http://www.answers.com/topic/roman-catholic-sex-abuse-cases?method=26&initiator=CANS for an update how the pedophilic priest scandal is unfolding and how the Catholic Church is finally coming to grips and paying for all this sordid activity.

Said review will hasten the needed thought process of the flaws and errors of Catholicism and Christianity in general and will eventually lead to the sorely needed corrections in all religions to include Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Paganism and Bahaism.

Not sure the "if it were..." reflection holds up, as where is the benefit in comparative revulsion?

I generally agree with Fr. Reese and am content to let the law resolve the Polanski issue. However, it seems to me that Fr.Reese is plain wrong on a major issue. If a priest had done what Polanski did in 1977, his superiors would never have permitted his crime to become public and thus, there would have been no penalty. I'm not convinced that the same reaction would not prevail today in the Catholic Church where the local bishop or superior thought he could get away with it.

How many priests have actually gone to prison?? The worst that happens is they are quietly reassigned to another parish or in the most extreme circumstances defrocked. Yes Polanski is a criminal. But that has nothing to do with countless cases of abuse by priests. Priests are in a position of power incomparable to Polanski's. We are taught as young children that priests are one of a few adults in whom we can confide. The Catholic Church needs to punish priests instead of covering up their crimes. Only then will I believe that priests are getting a raw deal compared to Polanski.

Very well put, Father Reese. Also, for those who think consent is an issue in this case, this child did not consent, she repeatedly asked her abuser to stop and take her home. Also, Polanski can claim he didn't know she was 13, but he knew she was underage, because he had her mother sign a consent form for the pictures he planned to take. In any event, the girl was raped, she did not consent, and she was only a child. Polanski is a criminal and should be in jail.

I must admit that I was both surprised and disappointed at Tom Reese’s column in the Washington Post. He said some of the “right” things but missed an essential point. Roman Polanski and priests who rape children are far from analogous. Roman Polanski was a Hollywood director, not a Roman Catholic priest. He didn’t hold a position of immense trust nor did he come from an “industry” that preached chastity, purity and a sky-high standard of sexual morality. But even more important, Roman did not have an archbishop or a cardinal in his corner who would lie about what he had done, intimidate his victims and then send him off where he could find yet more young people to devastate.
The movie industry never tried to present a systematized illusion that all of its directors, producers and agents...to name a few...were paragons of virtue. That’s what the official Catholic Church has done and that’s a major difference between Roman Polanski and the priests.

Umm,

You should know, she forgave him.

The California Court needs closure for the case as it is active until a ruling is made. That can't happen when the accused is in absence. Which again is stupid because he served 42 days and was released. I notice you don't acknowledge that part.

Look, here in Canada, he would have received probation, and community service.

It's not like the guy didn't have normalcy in his life before Manson came along. In other words, he ain't no serious diddler. Unlike the many, many serial offenders who have been constantly re-released here in Canada. Or, the Catholic Church shifting serial offenders from church to church, victim pool to victim pool.

So what is your problem Tom?

Why don't you reply directly, I'd sure like to hear a comeback to the smackdown I just gave you.

What do you really think of Judges who re-neg on plea agreements?

Do you a fixation with punishment?

The fact is that there are numbers of priests known to have "fled the country" to avoid being held accountable for the sexual abuse of girls and boys.

There are more who were shipped to the foreign missions, sent to Rome to study or otherwise transferred out of the country by their bishops or religious superiors because of the rape of adult women in addition to the sexual abuse of children.

The important difference that Reese does not mention is that very few sexually abusive priests of girls, boys, young women, men, vulnerable adults, and that includes sisters and nuns, have ever been tried in a criminal court and found guilty, very few.

Moreover, the sorry fact is that there are a lot more that those we know about and that's closer to or more than 10%.

Visit the web site of former Benedictine monk, Catholic priest and psychotherapist at www.richardsipe.com

Unfortunately, very few sexual predators among the Roman Catholic clergy ever find their way even into a civil courtroom because the statutes of limitation have expired.

They didn't even need a get out of jail card because they received a completely free pass as did their bishops or superiors, if they were order priests or brothers.

And why is that? Because bishops and religious chose not to report the sexual molestation and rape of minors to the police, they chose not to remove them from ministry, they chose not to reach out pastorally, to warn parishioners but instead transferred them to another parish in the diocese where their predatory and criminal behavior continuned unchecked.

Keep in mind that the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church only even BEGAN to do much of anything in regard to the sexual abuse of untold numbers of children was because of the revelations of the Boston Globe newspaper in Massachusetts.

Unfortunately, their actions in 2002 was no harbinger of Accountability & Transparency.

Far from it.

Bishops in New York, Colorado, Ohio, Maryland, Pennsylvania and others have viciously opposed any states' movement to bring the sexual abuse statutes regarding the sexual abuse of children into the 21st century and spent millions of dollars, hiring law firms, lobbyists, public relations firms, and spin doctors to do it along with instructing their state Catholic Conferences to bankroll the same kinds of actions.

Would that it were possible to get all the living pedophile priests and the enablers into a civil court.

Most of them along with their enabling bishops or superiors will never be held accountable for their crimes and mortal sins in this life.

Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims' Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com

"But why is there not similar outrage directed at the film industry for giving an award to Roman Polanski..."

Because the film industry isn't in the morality and uplift business the way the Church claims to be.

Is Tom Reese for real? If Polanski were "Father Polanski" he, like the pedophile celebrity founder of the Legionnaires of Christ, Fr. Maciel Degollado, would have kept his celebrity status and been honored at Papal ceremonies with warm embraces from the Church hierarchy. Heck, he could have even been the rector of a major Rome basilica, just like another criminal from this country! Pedophile priests have not been held accountable, for the most part, and their enablers have definitely not been held accountable.

For the rest of us: Bravo, we should have the "Polanski, the Felon" in custody soon. Maybe he can direct his last film, the story of his sordid life from his jail cell.

See http://www.answers.com/topic/roman-catholic-sex-abuse-cases?method=26&initiator=CANS for an update how the pedophilic priest scandal is unfolding and how the Catholic Church is finally coming to grips and paying for all this sordid activity. Said review will hasten the needed thought process of the flaws and errors of Catholicism and Christianity in general and will eventually lead to the sorely needed corrections in said religions. e.g. there was no physical resurrection, no changing of bread and wine into flesh and blood and no original sin.

No one is defending Polanski. The mas needs to be held accountable.

For daily vetted coverage, we recommend
www.bishop-accountability.org/abusetracker

or

www.snapnetwork.org

For the rest of us: Bravo, we should have the "Polanski, the Felon" in custody soon. Maybe he can direct his last film, the story of his sordid life from his jail cell.

See http://www.answers.com/topic/roman-catholic-sex-abuse-cases?method=26&initiator=CANS for an update how the pedophilic priest scandal is unfolding and how the Catholic Church is finally coming to grips and paying for all this sordid activity. Said review will hasten the needed thought process of the flaws and errors of Catholicism and Christianity in general.

Thomas Reese

Your not factoring the church's 2000 year history. "306 Council of Elvira" This problem has been covered up for a very long time and no Bishop or Cardinal has served a day in jail for assisting the escape/transfer of priests on to the world. Our children are still at risk because of the good church trying to save face.
Yes Hollywood is guilty but don't try to minimize the RCC "Roman Catholic Church's" guilty part and justify abuse in any church or school. Nice try

Great post, Fr. Reese. I am appalled that anyone can defend Polanski or question his arrest.

No 13 year old can consent to sex. Period.