‘Dynamite charge’ for jurors in clergy sex-abuse case
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
Monsignor William Lynn arrives at the Criminal Justice Center in Philadelphia for a question by the jury on Wednesday, June 20, 2012. Monsignor Lynn is accused of allegedly covering up abuse by Catholic priests and Rev Brennan is accused of allegedly trying to rape a minor. ( Alejandro Alvarez/Philadelphia Daily News)
Lawyers call a judge’s speech to a deadlocked jury a “dynamite charge,” the workingman’s nickname for a bid to blast through an impasse.
On Wednesday, the 12th day of jury deliberations in the 13th week of the child-endangerment and sex-abuse trial of two Archdiocese of Philadelphia priests, the dynamite sticks came out. It just wasn’t clear who might get hurt.
Common Pleas Court Judge M. Teresa Sarmina’s directive could dislodge a verdict in the landmark trial of a Catholic Church supervisor. Or it could implode a case a decade in the making.
“If I was the one of the prosecutors, I would be worried right now,” said defense lawyer Will Spade, a former Philadelphia assistant district attorney who worked on the first investigation into alleged clergy sex abuse by area priests.
The jury of seven men and five women said it had reached a consensus on only one of the five counts against Msgr. William J. Lynn and the Rev. James J. Brennan. It did not identify which charge or defendant.
After being granted Thursday off so a juror could attend to a family matter, the panel is scheduled to regroup Friday morning. Already, its deliberations have outlasted any high-profile case in Common Pleas Court in decades. Each day increases the odds of an outcome that satisfies no one.
Advocates for clergy sex-abuse victims were seizing on the positive – that at least some jurors saw sufficient evidence to convict Lynn and Brennan – but also steeling themselves for the worst.
“Frankly, a hung jury on the majority of the charges is far better than a jury that acquits. If there have to be two trials, that’s fine,” said Marci Hamilton, a victims’ advocate and lawyer who has frequented the trial and who represents accusers suing the archdiocese. “Looking at it from the side of survivors, an acquittal would be devastating.”
Brennan, 48, is accused of child endangerment and attempting to rape a 14-year-old boy in 1996. The rape allegation is a routine sex-crime charge, the type that jurors hear and decide each week in courtrooms from Philadelphia to, say, Bellefonte.
Under state law, such cases can rise and fall solely on the believability of alleged victims. In this trial, Brennan’s accuser spent nearly two days on the witness stand, insisting that the priest had tried to sexually assault him in 1996 and facing a withering cross-examination from a defense lawyer who called him a liar. [More]
SOURCE
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
-
May 17, 2013 5:37
Predator priests paid to pray for unsuspecting families
-
May 16, 2013 1:56
Cleanup of Bridgeport, Conn., diocese begins in earnest
-
May 16, 2013 1:38
Archbishop Presses Cuomo Over Abortion
-
May 16, 2013 1:26
Deal reached in Catholic lawsuit
-
May 16, 2013 1:13
N.Y. matriarch moves closer to sainthood
-
May 16, 2013 1:07
Alvare talk on women, religious freedom, draws hundreds to seminary
-
May 15, 2013 2:31
US bishops announce 2nd Fortnight for Freedom
-
May 15, 2013 2:15
Black clergy call for abortion investigations, chastise NAACP, CBC for ignoring life issue
16 Comments
There you go setting the clergy up over the victims when you don’t even know the whole story.
And again, I want justice for all, not just the victims. If someone has been falsely accused, it is a gross miscarriage of justice. How can you know, Tony, that they are guilty before a jury rules? Does God give you this foreknowledge?
I know of some poor priests who have been put out to pasture on Administrative leave who are claim they are not guilty, and I believe them. I see how they suffer and in the cause of justice. Is it the best possible answer, obviously not, but it is a step in the right direction, i hope and think.
I don’t know, Tony. The incredible shame these falsely-accused priests must feel might be almost too much to bear.
But, then again, since I am sensitive to the plight of the marginalized — and since these falsely-accused priests have been marginalized big-time — I wouldn’t necessarily expect a less-sensitive-to-the-marginalized person to understand.
“Me thinks thou does’t protest too much.” Does one actually think that ANYBODY would go through all of this turmoil and humiliation if he were “falsely” accusing? Those who brought this guy to trial ought to be commended for their courage. I applaud them for their selflessness is going through all this trauma to get Lynn and people like him out of the church and force the pope to finally do something about this clerical sexual abuse problem.
So, Recovering, what you are asserting is that, in every case without exception, no accuser has ever lied. Honestly, wake up and quit being so vindictive toward the Church. You will not have any peace in your soul until you forgive those who have hurt you.
Grant oh Holy Mother true justice for the victims.
Yes, Tony. And since the clergy are on trial, they are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Thus, justice actually may be that they are acquitted. You have already judged and condemned these men, even before a jury has ruled about their guilt or innocence. That should raise a red flag for you.
And what shall we say of the victims.?
Tony — if they truly are victims. I’m not sure of the details here, but the fact is, these clergy men right now are presumed innocent. How can you be against justice when that justice is applied to Catholic clergy? How you actually can think you are Catholic is ridiculous. You are just one illustration of the fact that education means nothing; your eyes, Tony, are closed tightly. “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”
multiple accusers and a history of cover-up didn’t raise a flag for you… or Leadership that cared more for the image than the children!!
Pat — I didn’t say that I am defending any wrong-doing. What I did say (notice my first post on this thread at 6:59 this morning) is that I hope justice prevails. Justice swings both ways: justice for any genuine victims, and justice for anyone falsely accused. It is you, Pat, with a double standard: you don’t seem to particularly care about justice for the accused, you just want all of the hierarchy to be mowed down, regardles of their culpability. Why don’t you get back in therapy with a therapist who knows the value of forgiveness? You still have some issues to work through.
Right on Pat!!! Our children ARE and OUGHT to be protected always and at all costs.
Not at the cost of false accusations. The goal needs to be justice for all, not just justice for the victims. The falsely accused need to have a right to defend and exonerate themselves.
Dear Blessed Mother, please pray that justice be done.