Isn’t the punishment for that becoming the new Pope?
Or maybe I’m thinking of Klingons…
I’d have to bet on the guy who still has both lungs.
Perhaps the Pope would be riding a Holy Seegway?
I’d be lying if I said I wouldn’t pay money to see that. 
Gotta relate this. Was watching The Best of The Jimmy Dean Show (yes, I know) on some secondary PBS channel and the guy who wrote and recorded Yakety Sax (“Boots” Randolph) was on and played it. It was awesome to see and hear.
For what crime?
Is that what you’re hiding behind again? Oh, right, you don’t know any difference - your institutional loyalty is absolute. Reminder, for those with a moral sense.
In a part of the country where that crime family is not as revered, is there any real doubt there would have been charges placed relating to being an accessory, harboring fugitives, obstructing justice, hell, use your imagination?
No, the crime family didn’t even demote him, just took him out of the public eye so he’d be less of an embarrassment.
Which part of the country puts people on trial who have not broken the law?
Regards,
Shodan
Not all that quick on the draw, are you? No, Law didn’t break the mandated-reporter law. But there are others, you know, I listed a few.
Of course not. If they’re successful, they become Pope. Don’t you know anything?
And if they fail, the Vatican still has a fully-equipped dungeon left over from the Inquisition. Ratzinger is still in charge of it, I understand.
Really? What does he do? Chain them to a wall, put on a postal uniform, and drink beer while he shouts random bits of trivia at them?
My point exactly. It fascinates me how eager liberals are to cast off all the protections they usually demand for criminals when the alleged criminal is someone that liberals don’t like.
Kind of what you might call a bedrock principle of criminal law is: no ex post facto criminal laws.
Do liberals do that more than people in general?
In my experience liberals aren’t for ex post facto criminal laws in any great number. I think you’re finding what you expect to find.
Here is a thread from 2002 in which SuaSponte and I discuss the lack of applicability of charges like obstruction and accessory to the Cardinal Law case, in case anyone’s interested.
TEXAS?
People from the current governor to random black persons somewhat near a murder.
And the vast number of posts on this board declaring that Bernard Law should be prosecuted under laws that didn’t exist at the time he did the acts that violated those laws?
Rolling on the floor laughing! You left out the short Italian waitress shouting insults for atmosphere.
How many is a “vast number?”
And do posts on this board comprise “liberals” in general?
And do you think ignorance might be at fault for at least some of it?
And do liberals do this more that people in general?
You’re a pustule, but I don’t judge conservatives in general by you. Most of them are misinformed decent enough people.