I am going to try to do a post later actually defending the Archdiocese some. If you have followed my posts on this I have been critical of the Archdiocese. Yet there were some areas of that Grand Jury Report I have serious issues with.
On a related note see Suspended Philadelphia Priest Defends Himself
Let me note something as to this report I link above:
DiGregorio says he is not hiding behind that. He's done nothing wrong.
Father DiGregorio took a lie detector test, but according to the grand jury, the father's answers were "deceptive"
A review board for the archdiocese ruled in 2006 that the test was inconclusive, but reportedly said the woman's allegations were credible because she had maintained her story through the years.
The same board later reversed itself saying there was insufficient evidence against Father DiGregorio.He was allowed to continue as a priest at another South Philadelphia parish until his suspension on Wednesday. The archdiocese did not respond to Father DiGregorio's comments.
I am not sure we got down yet the different standards of proof and when they kick in. That "credible" word is there again. However "credible" is the lowest standard and is used in just phase one. I think the legal terms and SOP need to be nailed down more by the press and indeed the Church.