hand in glove
By Diogenes (articles ) | Aug 01, 2005
The Toledo Blade runs a lengthy investigative article on the collusion between Church officials, police, and judges in hushing-up child abuse.
As cases of child sex abuse gained greater national attention in the 1970s and 1980s, pressure began mounting on authorities to get tougher on pedophiles. But the diocese was able to rely on a new generation of law enforcement officers to hide the acts of pedophile priests, records and interviews show.
Among those officers who worked with the church was Sergeant Connors, a one-time seminary student who spent decades moonlighting as a private investigator for the diocese.
"I can tell you that there was always somebody they could go to in the police department," the retired detective recalled. "And I can tell you that, at one time, I was that man."
For the cops, perhaps, the collusion operated no differently than the favoritism showed the mayor's erring son. They come to realize zeal for law enforcement against certain protected perps brings no career benefit. But the cops, as cops, are not concerned with the eternal destiny of the victims or the predators. Someone else is meant to be.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Progress toward our February expenses ($6,273 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: lolek -
Aug. 01, 2005 11:28 PM ET USA
If "Don't ask and don't tell" doesn't work for the military, how can it work in the clergy? Let's try Plan B! LolekII
Posted by: Sir William -
Aug. 01, 2005 10:03 AM ET USA
Having worked with the Boy Scouts, I know that the police were once reluctant to make arrests when boys were molested so that the children would not be traumatized by the trial process (cross examination on the witness stand) Only when the laws changed in favor of young victims (legal taped testimony) did the attitude change among officers. I'm still trying to figure out why molesting a child only gets a slap on the wrist, though. I think life without parole is more fitting the crime.