More Child Abuse Scandals Within The Catholic Church

The Catholic Church likes to pride itself on being the protector of children, though we all know they seem more concerned with protecting child-raping priests, their image, and their all-important bank account.

But recently, the Church hired  what they dubbed a "child protection official" to monitor church groups to ensure pedophiles did not gain access to children in the church’s congregations. Notice, though, he wasn't monitoring the Church, just church groups; the Catholic Church is still protecting pedophile priests.


At any rate, that "child protection "official", Christopher Jarvis, a married father of four, has been caught uploading pictures of children being abused to a website, and of having over 4,000 pictures of child pornography on his home computers.

This is who the Church put their faith in to protect children. Just more of the same.
Jarvis has admitted to 12 counts of making, ­possessing and distributing indecent ­images  and is likely to face jail when he returns to court for sentencing next month.

Church spokesman ­David Pond said: “Mr Jarvis was suspended from his position as soon as the diocese became aware in March of the police investigation. The Bishop took that action and since then the Church has worked closely with the police.”

Nice to see a church official stand up and do what's right to these pedophiles, but, one has to wonder, would the Bishop have turned the man in, called the police, and worked with authorities, if the possessor of that child porn was a priest?

source

Rigali Retires: Protecting Child Rapists Is Hard

Cardinal Justin Rigali, the leader of the Philadelphia Roman Catholic archdiocese, which has been under fire, and under the microscope during a continuing scandal over sexual misconduct by priests--which is a polite way of calling them child rapists--has decided to retire.

Protecting and transferring pedophiles is hard work and he's done tuckered out.

See, Rigali's archdiocese, which is the sixth largest in the United States, home to some 1.5 million Catholics, has been accused of concealing the sexual abuse, molestation and rape, of children, in order to avoid a costly scandal.

The key word there is costly. Not the cost of a child's childhood, not the cost of a child's dignity, or trust or faith, but cost as in money that the church would have had to pay out.

They aren't about children, they're about money. The Pope needs more red Prada slip-ons.

Rigali, archbishop in Philadelphia since 2003, has been struggling to contain the pedophilia scandal in the aftermath of a grand jury report issued at the beginning of this year, after which three priests, a monsignor and a church teacher were indicted as a result of the report.

The grand jury report concluded: "We would have assumed, by the year 2011, after all the revelations both here and around the world, that the church would not risk its youth by leaving them in the presence of priests subject to substantial evidence of abuse. That is not the case." The grand jury found 37 such priests who have been kept in assignments that exposed them to children.


Thirty-seven abusers, molesters and rapists kept in their jobs, working with children so the Catholic Church could avoid a "costly scandal". I guess it doesn't matter to Rigali and the Catholic Church and the Pope how much this scandal has cost the children.

source

Casey Anthony: The Devil's Advocate?

Well, this is the watercooler story, eh?

Unless, it's the story of my sudden switch to speaking like a Canadian.

But I thought I'd give a little of my bits'n'pieces on Miss Anthony and the Trial Of The Month!!!!!

First off, she was found not guilty of murder, manslaughter, child abuse. She was found guilty of being an unrepentant liar. Most murderers are liars, but I digress.

I think the prosecution had trouble because they came up with too many theories about how Casey did it, if she had help, why she did it and where she did it. There were too many stories, too many ideas, too many possibilities, so how was the jury supposed to pick just one?

Reasonable doubt.

If you tell em she killed her kid because she was a party monster, and then tell me she killed her kid accidentally because Caylee drowned in a pool, and then tell me that maybe Caylee died from chloroform, well, that's too many theories.

They should have picked just one.

And for all you out there ranting and raving about the verdicts, well, you weren't in the courtroom every day, as were the jurors. You didn't sit through witness after witness after witness, and hear every single question and answer, and see every detail of every piece of evidence. The jurors dd that, and they didn't believe she killed her child, either accidentally or with pre-meditation.

That said.........

Please to explain how a mother can have a child just disappear for a month and not do a goddamned thing about it, be found not guilty of Aggravated Child Abuse? She neglected her child for over a month. She lied about the whereabouts and who had Caylee.

How is that not child abuse? What kind of mother misplaces her child, or lets her child wander off, or lets someone take her child, and then she goes out and drinks and parties and tattoos?

As I said on Facebook, like OJ, Casey Anthony will soon begin her "Search For The Real Killers Tour" but, unlike OJ who looked on the golf course, Casey Anthony will be looking at nightclubs and bars that offer 2-for-1 tequila shots.

She may not have killed her child, but she's guilty of abuse and neglect and being an unrepentant liar. And she'll live with that for the rest of her miserable life.