Monday, June 28, 2010

A Supreme Court Action Affects the Vatican

Slightly Bad Reporting here

US Supreme Court deals pedophilia blow for Vatican
(AFP) – 1 hour ago
WASHINGTON — The US Supreme Court declined Monday to hear an appeal by the Vatican in a landmark case that opens the way for priests in the United States to stand trial for pedophilia.
Allowing a federal appeals court ruling to stand, the decision means Vatican officials including theoretically Pope Benedict XVI could face questioning under oath related to a litany of child sex abuse cases.

The Supreme Court effectively confirmed the decision of an appellate court to lift the Vatican's immunity in the case of an alleged pedophile priest in the northwestern state of Oregon.
The Oregon case, which was filed in 2002, does not directly address questions raised in a separate lawsuit in Kentucky alleging that US bishops are employees of the Holy See.
In recent months, large-scale pedophilia scandals have rocked the Roman Catholic Church in a number of countries, including Austria, Belgium, Ireland, Pope Benedict XVI's native Germany and the United States.

Senior clerics have been accused of protecting the priests involved by moving them to other parishes -- where they sometimes offended again -- instead of handing them over to civil authorities for prosecution.

The pope, who has himself faced allegations he covered up the scandal, has repeatedly said priests and religious workers guilty of child abuse should answer for their crimes in courts of law.
Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved

First off unless I missed something Priests have been on trial for some time for sexual abuse. This is nothing new.

Further I am not sure I would be using the word "confirm" here. We have these suits all over the place and by not taking a case it does not mean the Supreme Court is agreeing with the Circuit Court. They very much could be waiting to see if there is a split in the circuits and then take it up if they wished. It is of some significance no doubt but the reporting is a tad misleading here.

The Kentucky case is one to watch though.


Realist said...

Yes, very misleading reporting by AFP. I clicked on the Reuters link and learned that AFP has it all mixed up. It is about civil lawsuits, not criminal prosecutions. And I learned from one of your posts a few days ago that there might be pedophiles who have never molested children. Of course there might also be a big-foot and a Loch Ness monster, all things are possible. But AFP's use of the word pedophile is wrong and their reporting is misleading.

James H said...

YEah legal reproting is often bad. I think I hated the "confirm" language since the SUpreme COurt or appelate COurts at all levels do not take cases for various reasons