CNN and Reader Agree: Steubenville Ra...
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#351 Mar 22, 2013
Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:
<quoted text>Nobody without a criminal record and no domestic history should have to surrender their firearms no matter how sort the period may be.
Once the temporary orders were in place, she couldn't wait to claim one of the handguns. That was fine by me, but there was no need for the hassle in the first place.
Exactly.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#352 Mar 22, 2013
Seriouslady wrote:
<quoted text>
You're making way too much sense for this conversation, keefer.
An appeals document is nothing but a filing wherein a plaintiff/defendant makes any claim they want to to warrent an appeal or vacate a conviction. It's not evidence. Not evidence.
As for moving money, it can be done without much effort and be untracable.
Of course that link was to the opinion of the court, not the argument of any party. But sure, it means nothing. That's why you don't need attorneys. You know it all.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#353 Mar 22, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
A) Church pays family $45,000 to deter filing of lawsuit alleging sexual abuse of their son. Family understands terms of agreement to include perp priest never wearing vestments again.
B) Family learns months later that perp is about to wear vestments again.
C) Family threatens to expose perp priest publicly, and does.
D) Church retaliates for family's refusal to remain silent.
E) Church threatens family, makes false allegations.
F) Family files lawsuit alleging sexual abuse.
Let me ask you this:
When someone offers a cop or a building inspector or a politician money, services, or goods in exchange for influence or favors, do they say "Here Fred. Take this "bribe". I am hereby "bribing" you with this new car. In exchange for this new car, I expect you to "hush up" about my prostitution business in the back room"?
Do you expect that they would then memorialize their agreement in front of a notary at the bank and record it down at the courthouse?
woof
Exactly one of my points. You have the burden of providing the proof that this all happened. This happened concurrently with allegations of fraud. You sort it out. An appeals document isn't proof of the "payment."

How many times do I have to explain that
1) "Hush money" is hard to prove
2) You have to have a documented history, which wasn't provided here
3) Regardless of my opinion of these "rogue priests" as you label them, Che certainly seemed to confuse the civil lawsuit settlements with "hush money." The two are not the same.

I take it you don't like Kibbles and Bits with Bacon? Only other thing I have to offer is indoor cat food, designed for cats who whorf up hairballs a lot.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#354 Mar 22, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Monies paid out due to lawsuit settlements, another matter entirely!
Sweet Jesus, what do you think we have been talking about?

The Dioceses: We acknowledge that Father X raped your son. Here is $43,000. You never speak a word about this and we will move Father X to another parish (wink, wink) where he can't rape any more children, ok?

Parents: Ok, Bishop Pilla. We trust you.

If that's not "hush money," what is?
Duke for Mayor

United States

#355 Mar 22, 2013
"Kodger was 14 in 1981 when he spent a day doing yard work and swimming at the home of the Rev. F. James Mulica, pastor of the Chapel of the Divine Word in Kirtland. Mulica sexually assaulted the teen, who escaped in the priest's Volkswagen Beetle.

Pilla met with the Kodgers, and later agreed to pay them $45,000 and to keep Mulica away from children.

Pilla kept only half of the bargain, however. Within four years, the diocese reassigned Mulica to St. Jude Church in Elyria, and to Holy Redeemer Church in Cleveland - both of which had schools.

Mulica left the priesthood in 1991 and lives in California, where he sells insurance and founded the Chapel of Light, an interactive Internet ministry.

Nearly 20 years passed before the Kodger case re-emerged. In 2002, at the height of the diocese's sex-abuse scandal, church officials challenged the family's version of events that had appeared in stories in The Plain Dealer.

In diocesan statements released to the media, church officials acknowledged that Mulica was twice transferred to parishes with schools, but said the moves were made with the Kodgers' approval.

The Kodgers sued the diocese in 2003, accusing church officials of making false and defamatory statements.

During six hours of sworn videotaped testimony last July, Pilla denied he approved the release of the statements placing responsibility for Mulica's transfers on the Kodgers. The bishop also denied ever seeing the documents before Crosby produced them at the deposition.

Pilla is not a defendant in the lawsuit, although he would have been required to testify if the case had gone to trial, Crosby said."

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2006...

woof

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#357 Mar 22, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's get this straight. You acknowledge that the diocese paid the Kodger family in excess of $40000 to settle the abuse claim involving their son. Yet you dispute that it was designed to keep them from talking about the abuse because the Bishop was accused in a financial misconduct scheme. That discredits not the diocese but the family of the abused child. Got it.
It discredits no one because you don't have it straight.

You still haven't proven that the diocese paid "hush money."

And no, I would not discredit any of the victims of the abuse scandals. If you've read around here for any length of time, I've KNOWN a few personally. It goes to YOUR insistence that there is proof of "hush money" in this specific case. There really is none that I've ever found, and "hush money" is very, very hard to prove in these cases. The Catholic Church isn't so stupid as to do something like that in a blatant manner.

The case in Toledo has no concurrent charges of fraud going on. Yet, there were allegations in certain quarters that families were paid "hush money." The diocese records were provided access to by the investigators. They found nothing concrete in those records to definitively state there were "hush money" payments although a few families claimed such. Suggest you read David Yonke's accounts of what happened up there, you may understand how it worked.

And also realize these statements are in no way a personal indictment against the Catholic Church. There were "rogue priests" no doubt. However, as you moved up in the heirarchy, little first-hand knowledge existed and when an allegation was brought to the diocese, it too had to investigate through its own bureaucracy. Hence, one of the reasons there is such a call for reform to its structure down from the Vatican. Kinda like the US federal government in is slow-moving bureaucracy in some regards.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#358 Mar 22, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Depends whether I'm working simultaneously.
woof
If you are, you are defrauding your clients and a possible breach of contract and/or misconduct by officer of the court. You did take an oath, did you not?
Let's take take this admission to the Attorney's Grievance Board.
Easy. Make the complaint. They'll supeona your IP address and do their own investigation by interviewing past and present clients, auditing your accounting and probably reviewing your topix postings.
My work here is done for tonight.:-) Like I said, I've worked with lots of attorneys.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#359 Mar 22, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly one of my points. You have the burden of providing the proof that this all happened. This happened concurrently with allegations of fraud. You sort it out. An appeals document isn't proof of the "payment."
How many times do I have to explain that
1) "Hush money" is hard to prove
2) You have to have a documented history, which wasn't provided here
3) Regardless of my opinion of these "rogue priests" as you label them, Che certainly seemed to confuse the civil lawsuit settlements with "hush money." The two are not the same.
I take it you don't like Kibbles and Bits with Bacon? Only other thing I have to offer is indoor cat food, designed for cats who whorf up hairballs a lot.
Explain the difference between "hush money" and "civil lawsuit settlements."

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#360 Mar 22, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Sweet Jesus, what do you think we have been talking about?
The Dioceses: We acknowledge that Father X raped your son. Here is $43,000. You never speak a word about this and we will move Father X to another parish (wink, wink) where he can't rape any more children, ok?
Parents: Ok, Bishop Pilla. We trust you.
If that's not "hush money," what is?
Sweet Jesus? You have to PROVE it. If there is NO evidence other than one's word against another's, it's useless. You keep moving the target and re-defining it. The appeals document is NOT proof of "hush money."

Civil lawsuits WERE filed and heard, and settlements were awarded to the victims.

Good gawd child, hush money (private agreement) is NOT a lawsuit settlement!
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#361 Mar 22, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
"Kodger was 14 in 1981 when he spent a day doing yard work and swimming at the home of the Rev. F. James Mulica, pastor of the Chapel of the Divine Word in Kirtland. Mulica sexually assaulted the teen, who escaped in the priest's Volkswagen Beetle.
Pilla met with the Kodgers, and later agreed to pay them $45,000 and to keep Mulica away from children.
Pilla kept only half of the bargain, however. Within four years, the diocese reassigned Mulica to St. Jude Church in Elyria, and to Holy Redeemer Church in Cleveland - both of which had schools.
Mulica left the priesthood in 1991 and lives in California, where he sells insurance and founded the Chapel of Light, an interactive Internet ministry.
Nearly 20 years passed before the Kodger case re-emerged. In 2002, at the height of the diocese's sex-abuse scandal, church officials challenged the family's version of events that had appeared in stories in The Plain Dealer.
In diocesan statements released to the media, church officials acknowledged that Mulica was twice transferred to parishes with schools, but said the moves were made with the Kodgers' approval.
The Kodgers sued the diocese in 2003, accusing church officials of making false and defamatory statements.
During six hours of sworn videotaped testimony last July, Pilla denied he approved the release of the statements placing responsibility for Mulica's transfers on the Kodgers. The bishop also denied ever seeing the documents before Crosby produced them at the deposition.
Pilla is not a defendant in the lawsuit, although he would have been required to testify if the case had gone to trial, Crosby said."
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2006...
woof
Nuh uh. Until you post a link to the video deposition so that everyone can watch it for themselves with Pope Francis in their home while watching its not true.
Duke for Mayor

United States

#362 Mar 22, 2013
Seriouslady wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are, you are defrauding your clients and a possible breach of contract and/or misconduct by officer of the court. You did take an oath, did you not?
Let's take take this admission to the Attorney's Grievance Board.
Easy. Make the complaint. They'll supeona your IP address and do their own investigation by interviewing past and present clients, auditing your accounting and probably reviewing your topix postings.
My work here is done for tonight.:-) Like I said, I've worked with lots of attorneys.
That would require an actual client filing a complaint alleging that I surf Topix while working and that I am inaccurately accounting for my time when billing. And on top of that, it would require proof beyond the mere admission that my hourly rate when I am on Topix depends upon whether I am simultaneously working or not.

Have at it sunshine. You're not thinking at top speed, are you?

You'd have a better chance going after Bob for his racist commentary.

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#363 Mar 22, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Sweet Jesus? You have to PROVE it. If there is NO evidence other than one's word against another's, it's useless. You keep moving the target and re-defining it. The appeals document is NOT proof of "hush money."
Civil lawsuits WERE filed and heard, and settlements were awarded to the victims.
Good gawd child, hush money (private agreement) is NOT a lawsuit settlement!
You are even more ignorant than I had imagined. I'm sorry.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#364 Mar 22, 2013
Seriouslady wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are, you are defrauding your clients and a possible breach of contract and/or misconduct by officer of the court. You did take an oath, did you not?
Let's take take this admission to the Attorney's Grievance Board.
Easy. Make the complaint. They'll supeona your IP address and do their own investigation by interviewing past and present clients, auditing your accounting and probably reviewing your topix postings.
My work here is done for tonight.:-) Like I said, I've worked with lots of attorneys.
Those attorneys saw you coming a mile away.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#365 Mar 22, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain the difference between "hush money" and "civil lawsuit settlements."
Child, you've just proven your willful ignorance.

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#366 Mar 22, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
That would require an actual client filing a complaint alleging that I surf Topix while working and that I am inaccurately accounting for my time when billing. And on top of that, it would require proof beyond the mere admission that my hourly rate when I am on Topix depends upon whether I am simultaneously working or not.
Have at it sunshine. You're not thinking at top speed, are you?
You'd have a better chance going after Bob for his racist commentary.
woof
Or you and Che for your religious bigotry...
Duke for Mayor

United States

#367 Mar 22, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Good gawd child, hush money (private agreement) is NOT a lawsuit settlement!
That's the point. Now listen closely.

The $45,000 paid to the Kodgers in the early 1980's was a private agreement. No lawsuit was filed. Hushhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Their first suit was filed 20 years later when the Church falsely alleged that they consented to the perp priest being placed into parishes with schools in Cleveland four years after they were paid the 45 G's.

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#368 Mar 22, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Child, you've just proven your willful ignorance.
I will accept that answer as your admission that you cannot explain the difference.
Duke for Mayor

United States

#369 Mar 22, 2013
Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:
<quoted text>Or you and Che for your religious bigotry...
I know, I know Paco...this is a touchy subject for you. But its better to face your demons than to run.

woof

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#370 Mar 22, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, I know Paco...this is a touchy subject for you. But its better to face your demons than to run.
woof
What would your clientele think of your bilious hatred of Catholicism?

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#371 Mar 22, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
I will accept that answer as your admission that you cannot explain the difference.
As I accept your answer as definite proof that you are willfully ignorant and can't accept defeat.

Nighty night, I think it's past your curfew.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
August 21 - When it All Hits the Fan 9 min 404 not found 3
Dems in disarray- Well, yeah! 10 min Mojo Risen 1,249
breaking: antifa members protesting soros deman... 1 hr Mud, James Mud 2
News Fair tragedy: Victim enlisted in Marines 1 hr Stevie Wonder 41
News 2 Columbus council members endorse Nan Whaley f... 8 hr Duke for Mayor 1
Party In Crisis–Anti Trump Approach/Identity Po... 12 hr Duke for Mayor 6
Democratic voter base declines 12 hr Duke for Mayor 2
Why Ask about Obama? America has Only One Presi... 16 hr ImPeach 156

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages