# Cardinal Mahoney: God Grant Me The Grace To Forgive My Accusers **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 27, 2013, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521 "2013-02-27T15:13:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/241 "2013-03-01T20:47:24Z")
**Bricker** : can I expect a response to my recent posts or are you just going to ignore them and instead go after low hanging fruit of “debating” the “rule of law”? ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/242 "2013-03-01T21:09:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > His betrayal of that duty is sickening. It’s sinful, mortally sinful, and given the lack of repentance he’s expressed so far, I believe he will burn in Hell for it. Guess he’ll have to find a priest willing to absolve him. I think he may have a name or two in mind. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/243 "2013-03-01T21:18:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And he was under an even stronger obligation – well, what should have been stronger – as a priest, as a bishop, to protect children, even at the cost of his Church’s dollars and reputation. His betrayal of that duty is sickening. It’s sinful, mortally sinful, and given the lack of repentance he’s expressed so far, I believe he will burn in Hell for it. [John 20:23 :](http://www.usccb.org/bible/john/20/) "Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” Jesus to the disciples, after resurrection. So **Bricker** , do you honestly think Mahony hasn’t found a priest anywhere in the church willing to grant him absolution, or are you simply a heretic? ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/244 "2013-03-01T21:33:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But how do you balance this attitude against the idea that before we punish a criminal, we should have written the law that defines his crime? > > I feel that no matter how heinous the crimes, it’s worse for us as a society to accept that we can allow us to do this “Let’s find a way to snag him.” > > “The way” to snag him needs to be a law that was written before the conduct took place, and one that clearly and unambiguously lays out the prohibited conduct. The show is over. Done. Finished. I did not see any requests for curtain call nor a re-iteration of the same old shit. Thanks for coming by, we all get the point. There is not a legal basis for charging the pedophile enabling old fucker with a crime. Thanks. Point taken. Move along. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/245 "2013-03-01T21:37:49Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > There is not a legal basis for charging the pedophile enabling old fucker with a crime. Not for the reasons that **Bricker** made up out of whole cloth, but rather because of the statute of limitations and a lack of mandatory reporting laws when the crimes were committed. The sum total of **Bricker’s** contribution to this thread is semantic, legalistic nitpicking about the use of the word “criminal”, misinformation on the requirements of “specific intent”, a lot of dodging issues, and the old standby “I stand for the rule of law!” martyrdom. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/246 "2013-03-01T22:12:12Z")
Seriously. I mean, “how does he possibly remember to breathe? I’m picturing he has a little alarm to remind himself.” ETA: Oh, I’m sorry, was that to harsh a critique? Well, maybe you can pray for me, **Bricker**. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/247 "2013-03-01T22:18:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Nor do I say he can have only one intent. > > What I can say is that there’s no evidence – certainly no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt – to support his having that second intent. > > Now, a jury could certainly infer that second, criminal intent from the evidence – no doubt of that. Well, SURE they could. Look, there is no way of really _proving_ anyone’s intent, until such a day when we can take a scan of someone’s brain and find his motivations encoded in his neural pathways. And while in some instances, the defendant may have spilled his guts about his motivations to someone, that’s a pretty hit-and-miss business. This is why our legal system uses the defendant’s knowledge and actions as a stand-in for intent, as you fully well know. If you know that doing X will cause Y, and you do X, then one can infer that you meant to cause Y. For instance, if I point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, excavating a hole through their guts, no amount of evidence that my motivation was to conduct a statistical test of how often, when a gun was aimed at someone and the trigger pulled, the gun would misfire, could or should be expected to exonerate me. > [@](#): > > But they’d be doing so for precisely the reasons I decry above: he’s a bad, bad man and we want to get him on something. No, because **he committed a series of heinous acts** , resulting in child molesters getting away with their crimes and going on to victimize more children - and he couldn’t help but know that that would be the effect of his actions. And damned straight, he should pay a serious penalty for those actions. It doesn’t matter if he somehow meant well. If room in the law can be found for it to match up with common sense and bring a great evildoer to justice, then it damned well should. > [@](#): > > That’s the kind of thinking that I despised when I was a defense lawyer. It’s one thing to have your guy get tagged for the bad stuff he did. But occasionally I’d run into prosecutors who were perfectly comfortable in saying, at least to themselves, “I know this guy isn’t technically guilty, but I can convict him anyway, _and he deserves it because of the other bad shit he’s done that I can’t convict him on._” In your bullshit argument about _intent_, the idea is to convict someone **for the things he’s done** , by drawing the obvious conclusions about his brain cell activity from his actions. Your argument is the sort of thing that disgusts me when defense lawyers do it: that somehow the right state of mind will free someone from the consequences of having knowingly committed a vile and harmful act. > [@](#): > > **tagos** ’ post about the SNAP organization shows that sort of thinking too. ‘Let’s be creative – let’s find some way to snag that sonovabitch!’ I know everyone’s cheering for that kind of approach now, because it lets us punish a guy who needs punishing. > > But can’t you see what a wrong and dangerous idea that is? No, I can’t. It’s saying, “let’s see if there’s a statute on the books that **does** match up with his horrendous acts.” Why should the **Bricker** -approved statutes be the only ones a defendant can be charged with? I know we say we’re a government of laws, not men, but in reality, there’s always been a lot of discretion in how the law is applied. In the end, some sense of justice, some sense of proportion, of judgment, has to be the true test. Guy did very bad things that ruined many people’s lives, throw the book at him. If you have to dig through the book a bit deeper than usual, do it. Don’t go throwing the book at someone who committed inconsequential offenses, even if the laws are there that allow you to threaten them with decades in prison. Until the laws are perfect, and all acts of knowingly inflicting serious harm always get major prison time, nobody can be threatened with decades in jail for trivialities, what other standard can one use? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/248 "2013-03-01T22:26:34Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The fact that more posters can’t recognize this is Reason #1429 why no one should be bragging out how bright we are here. Oh, he’ll say something vaguely nice about a Democrat and people will fall all over themselves to say how they don’t always agree with him but he’s super terrific anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/249 "2013-03-01T23:04:05Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Not for the reasons that **Bricker** made up out of whole cloth, but rather because of the statute of limitations and a lack of mandatory reporting laws when the crimes were committed. The sum total of **Bricker’s** contribution to this thread is semantic, legalistic nitpicking about the use of the word “criminal”, misinformation on the requirements of “specific intent”, a lot of dodging issues, and the old standby “I stand for the rule of law!” martyrdom. Fortunately for our species, the conscience that exists for many of us between our ears has no Statute of Limitations. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/250 "2013-03-01T23:40:21Z")
You misspelled “vacuum.” ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/251 "2013-03-01T23:47:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So – thanks for being honest. > > But how do you balance this attitude against the idea that before we punish a criminal, we should have written the law that defines his crime? > > I feel that no matter how heinous the crimes, it’s worse for us as a society to accept that we can allow us to do this “Let’s find a way to snag him.” > > “The way” to snag him needs to be a law that was written before the conduct took place, and one that clearly and unambiguously lays out the prohibited conduct. > > If we can’t do that, we shouldn’t charge him. And I would say the same thing about Saul Alinksy or Eugene V. Debs or Fred Phelps. This is not a defense that arises because he’s a Catholic prelate. it’s a defense that arises because I think the rule of law is more important than punishing the conduct of anyone. If the rule of the law can’t protect the innocents, then it’s hardly a noble cause to want to uphold it; particularly to the conduct and actions of Mahony which enabled pedophiles. I’m not convinced present laws won’t eventually come through although the statute of limitations is certainly getting in the way of many child abuse cases. I’ve read enough to know Mahony’s actions led to many more victims that could have easily been avoided had he turned in the known pedophiles early, and if he wasn’t so concerned about protecting his own precious church against litigation and probably worrying about his own sorry ass being demoted. Law is often a gray area; it’s not like mathematics where we have known absolutes to work with, and everybody will have the same answer that gets it correct. Even the Supreme Court sways one way or the other with it sometimes depending on how many conservatives, moderates or liberals are making the decision at a particular time. Unlike you, I don’t think Mahony is going to burn in hell for this, which is why I feel like he needs to be dealt with in this lifetime. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/252 "2013-03-02T00:13:29Z")
> [@Robb](#): > > Wow, you’re really good at these games. > > It is trivially easy for reasonable people to look at Mahoney’s actions and words and decide that his intent was to conceal the crimes of rapist-priests and help them evade arrest as the mechanism to protect the church. We can base denunciations of this prince of the church based on his actions to hide rapist-priests and his inactions in preventing further rapes. If you can see it, it is not a good game. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/253 "2013-03-02T00:34:49Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Can you show me on this doll where Jesus loved you? Its about in the middle of the chest, a little to the left. ---
**Author:** ![Robb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Robb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robb)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/254 "2013-03-02T01:58:24Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > If you can see it, it is not a good game. Ok, I stand corrected. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/255 "2013-03-02T02:25:55Z")
Um, kinda wondering if this guy could be brought in front of congress and put to the question. Specifically , what would the people want to know. Seems like the legal system working in concert with local politicians, dont seem to have the motivation. At the moment, he seems to be that guy that we always refer to when we state that our system is set up to let a hundred nefarious types go free, so that one innocent is not convicted. Declan ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/256 "2013-03-02T13:53:32Z")
> [@razncain](#): > > If the rule of the law can’t protect the innocents, then it’s hardly a noble cause to want to uphold it; particularly to the conduct and actions of Mahony which enabled pedophiles. No. That’s good reason to change the law, as California did when confronted with the Sherrice Iverson case. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/257 "2013-03-02T14:01:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. That’s good reason to change the law, as California did when confronted with the Sherrice Iverson case. I would be interested to hear your thoughts regarding **Hamlet’s** posts regarding intent. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/258 "2013-03-02T18:54:58Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > I would be interested to hear your thoughts regarding **Hamlet’s** posts regarding intent. I disagree with Hamlet. And I think Hamlet himself knows that even if he got a jury to convict Mahoney, it would not be because the jury cared about the nuance of intent, but because they wanted to punish him and this was a way to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/259 "2013-03-02T18:56:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I disagree with Hamlet. And I think Hamlet himself knows that even if he got a jury to convict Mahoney, it would not be because the jury cared about the nuance of intent, but because they wanted to punish him and this was a way to do it. That said… There would be a sufficient factual record upon which to rest a jury verdict of guilty. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521/260 "2013-03-02T19:14:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That said… There would be a sufficient factual record upon which to rest a jury verdict of guilty. There is no evidentiary record at all yet. He is entitled to a presumption of innocence. Is there probable cause to prepare an indictment? Yes. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cardinal-mahoney-god-grant-me-the-grace-to-forgive-my-accusers/651521.md?page=14)