Send a Message
to Eyeball Kid

Comments

13

Joined

Jun 16, 2009

Eyeball Kid Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

Your statement implies that there's justification to be a sexual predator: the naiveté of the victim. Is that your intent?  (Jan 8, 2012 | post #180)

Burbank, IL

Nebraska man sues former suburban Chicago priest

That's an optimistic ending... Let's hope you're right. OTOH, maybe God has no plans for Rev. Stepek at all. Maybe God is telling Fr. Stepek, "You're on your own, kid." The good father made another mistake that I mentioned many months ago. He didn't tell the truth when asked if he hurt any other kids in his career. When you don't tell the truth and you're caught at it, your credibility turns to mud. It's been, what, five years since the crap hit the fan. Fr. Stepek hasn't regained his active status as pastor or a priest. No news releases, no new revelations have occurred. My guess is that Fr. Stepek must have done something to really piss off the archdiocese, whether it's molesting kids or being a loose cannon or, as I might paraphrase you, being too proud for his own good. Or.. any or all of the above. At the end of the day, it's a sad conclusion to a flawed career. Thanks for your reply.  (Oct 18, 2011 | post #36)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

I think that this line of humor can get obscene really fast.  (Mar 16, 2010 | post #175)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

The archdiocese apparently doesn't list parish priests on their directory. However, a 12/09 .pdf file released by St. Albert the Great parish lists Fr. Stepek as the pastor, although he isn't listed as engaging or leading in any of the parish activities. So he's still in the mix, still considered to be "on leave."  (Mar 14, 2010 | post #172)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

There were a few posters who have exclusive "insider " information, but refuse to post it, probably because they heard it in a bar after four martinis. Meanwhile, the Pope is getting flack for his gag order from when he was prefect, during Paul II's reign, the Vatican is trying to backpedal, claiming that bishops "misunderstoo d" the context of the gag order (which is a lie and a poor attempt at damage control).  (Mar 14, 2010 | post #170)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

Upyours was the poster who went on a short, sweet rant at the Cambodian website that contained an article about Fr. Stepek. Were you engaged in "Pirate Talk", I could tell you, "No, I didn't lose your eyeball. Arghh!"  (Oct 18, 2009 | post #158)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

It's a hairy issue, Joe. First of all, there's no cause for a criminal trial because there's no criminal indictment or allegation. There's room for a civil trial, but apparently that got struck down because a larger can of worms would be pried open-- remember that unauthorized disclosure of confidential information by a priest?- about the internal dynamics (dysfunction) of Church affairs. And then there's the issue of the DCFS conclusion, which to my way of thinking, makes sense because DCFS wants conclusive evidence of wrongdoing that's now virtually impossible to obtain since there are no physical signs of abuse at this time in all of the lives of the principles involved. There are no bruises, no collections of Stepek's precious bodily fluids from the alleged victims, no DNA, no eyewitnesses. Nothing. But then there's something called judgement. From the perspective of one who's been in the social services profession for close to 40 years, I can tell you this: you should NEVER, in a professional role, take a nonrelative minor ANYWHERE without additional adult eyewitnesses. NEVER. It doesn't matter how esteemed your position is. It doesn't matter how well-intentioned you are. If you do so, then you do so at your own peril. Period. The reason that I'm still at work in my profession is that I've fairly well adhered to this rule, and it isn't because I'm trying to hide something. It's because we don't have control over the thoughts, feelings, and motivations of others. If in the course of my job (and Fr. Stepek's "job" was intact when he took the first two alleged victims for a "vacation ", and associated with a third), I took adolescent or child clients to Florida for a vacation, I'd get fired immediately, if not, severely reprimanded, no matter what the circumstances. And no matter the circumstances, my motives for doing so would be held under serious scrutiny. Under normal circumstances, people in these lines of work protect themselves from the PERCEPTION of conflicts of interest by establishing and maintaining professional boundaries. (You do your best to protect yourself from being vulnerable to the whims or craziness of others.) If Fr. Stepek had paid attention to his own professional boundaries, he wouldn't be in the mess he's in right now. And I haven't even addressed the allegations themselves!! So, if anything persists throughout all of this drama, it's Fr. Stepek's lack of solid professional judgement in the early years of his professional career that got him into hot water, and for which he's now paying the price. Whether all three alleged victims were damaged by the alleged events is, again, something that only they, and Fr. Stepek, know.  (Sep 22, 2009 | post #91)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

One of the Does asked Fr. Stepek for a letter of recommendation for admission to seminary. Fr. Stepek reportedly refused on the grounds that the candidate didn't have the right temperment for the job. That was over two decades ago, and this decision is touted by Fr. Stepek as a motive for attempting to throw Fr. Stepek's career under the bus. IMO, Fr. Stepek should never have used this explanation. It sounds exceptionally cheesy, defies common sense, and to the average ear, also sounds as if Fr. Stepek is trying to dredge up any excuse he can find. A denied letter of recommendation? Come on. Twenty-some years ago? Really? An average investigator would want to examine this Doe's past to look for similarly strange patterns of vindictiveness-- that likely would supplant any efforts by this Doe to-- get training for a job, and to work for a living, because this kind of extreme pattern would leave little time and energy for doing the normal things in life to survive well. The probability of finding such a pattern of vindictiveness is very low. (It's possible for this Doe to engage in this kind of pattern and still be victimized by Fr. Stepek before or after the onset of symptoms of an emotional disturbance. But we'd be entering into the high weeds of psychopathology were we to look for corroboration on THAT terrain.) I'm not addressing culpability. I'm only addressing credibility. Fr. Stepek made at least two critical errors that weaken his credibility. And this is one of them. On the whole, it looks like he listened to very bad advice. Now, it looks as if he's out on a limb, dangling by a very thin thread. Now that he lost his legal appeal, he's at the mercy of a heartless political system that will use him as an expendable tool. He played his hand, and he's in hock.  (Jul 17, 2009 | post #50)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

IMO, it's not crap. Neither law enforcement nor the district attorney nor a grand jury has accused Fr. Stepek of a crime, so there isn't any cause for a trial. Whether Fr. Stepek did or didn't abuse the three alleged victims is barely relevant at this juncture, except that abuse, if committed, DOES have long-term consequences. The lawsuit fiascos, if I can recall correctly, picked up momentum AFTER the first disclosures, AFTER the identities of the Does were disclosed by an employee of the archdiocese. The priest who disclosed the identities of the Does showed an extraordinary lack of discipline. If personnel action were to ever occur, the archdiocese should first consider what to do about THAT clown. And it shouldn't be a few minutes in a confessional booth, followed by a brief brow-beating and a prayer. The good priest is costing the archdiocese a lot of money by that singular act.  (Jul 16, 2009 | post #48)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

Here's what a therapist would say, and it's backed up by research: It's common for child victims to retain relationships with their abusers long after abusive events take place. The inequity within relationships between authorities and underlings remains constant during and after the abuse. It's also consistent with a climate of denial, that traumatic abuse is discounted as unimportant or even completely rejected, and that maintaining the relationship demonstrates that there was no trauma, no shock to the emotional, spiritual, or physical realms, when in fact there was. Your question seems to reflect common sense, but doesn't consider that we human beings are far more complex than we'd sometimes like to think of ourselves. It seems common in this locality to call someone a low life if you don't like what they're doing. I quite frankly don't care a whit what anyone calls them. All you can do is ask questions because you don't know the truth. Only the parties involved know the truth. The long and short of it is that Fr. Stepek should be looking for another career, whether he's guilty or not. The political system doesn't care whether he's guilty or not. And no, life isn't fair.  (Jul 15, 2009 | post #46)

Burbank, IL

Nebraska man sues former suburban Chicago priest

How do you REALLY feel, Poopy Pants?  (Jul 15, 2009 | post #29)

Burbank, IL

Priest cannot sue 2 brothers who say he molested them, co...

Why wouldn't a forum such as this be moderated?  (Jul 15, 2009 | post #39)

Q & A with Eyeball Kid

Hometown:

US of A

Local Favorites:

Cubbies

When I'm Not on Topix:

dkos, Huffington Post, usenet