I missed what was supposed to be day one of Father James Jordan’s preliminary hearing on possession of child porn. It looks as though I would have been nothing short of frustrated had I been there. Look at this:
I don’t quite know what to make of this. Surely police didn’t lay a charge based solely on someone turning in a memory stick filled with child porn claims this was on Jordan’s computer? I can not for the life of me believe that could happen. And, if it did happen, I have trouble believing the Crown didn’t nip it in the bud instantly.
So, what happened here? Aside the fact Justice Maissoneuve declared the charge “a nullity” what happened that this ended up in such a mess?
Does anyone have any further info? Was Father Jordan improperly charged? Did someone make a mess of the charge? Should Father Jordan never have been charged in the first place?
And, who’s responsible? Whatever the problem is/was, who -if anyone – will be held accountable?
Interesting news from the Vatican:
Vatican to issue letter on abuse guidelines Monday
11 May 2011
VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican is issuing a new document for bishops on how to deal with cases of sexual abuse of children by priests.
The Vatican says the letter due Monday from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is designed to help bishops conferences around the world prepare their own guidelines for dealing with abuse cases.
The head of the Vatican office, Cardinal William Levada, said in November the Vatican would recommend bishops establish prevention programs, better screen priests and obey civil reporting requirements.
I will wait to see what the document has to say before commenting further.
As is often the case with funerals, I saw old friends today I haven’t seen in years and had time with others whom I see all too infrequently. Strange as it sounds, a beautiful day.
Enough for now,