Clerical thief receives stiffer sentence than clerical molester

There is a pre-trial for Father Jean-Claude Lefebvre at 3:20 pm this afternoon (29 May 2012) at the Sudbury courthouse.  This is NOT open to the public.  In a day or two we should be able to find out when the next court date is.

Please, as always, keep the complainants in your prayers, and pray that justice will be done, and it be done sooner than later.

*****

There were two sentences handed down yesterday, one for an Ontario priest convicted of sex abuse, and the other for a New Brunswick priest convicted for fraud related to taking funds from several parishes.  It is particularly disturbing to note that, while both sentences were light, the latter received a stiffer sentence than the former.

(1) Father James Boudreau

Father Boudreau was sentenced to 15 months jail-time on one conviction, and six months for the other.  The sentences are to run concurrently, meaning in truth that  Father Boudreau is sentenced to 15 months in jail.

And Boudreau’s lawyer thinks this is “on the harsh side”?  Does he have the slightest clue of the damage done to those victims?

28 May 2012: Former priest sentenced in historic sexual assaults

28 May 2012: Ex-Guelph priest sent to jail over sex assaults

The Crown, I gather,  was happy with with the sentence. He viewed the judge’s decision as “well reasoned” and “appropriate.”

As for the judge, well, he was caught up with the fact that Father Boudreau was well liked and respected and has, in his eyes, led an admirable life since he abused those boys.  True, Justice Hearn did, on the one hand, note that Boudreau abused a position of trust, and in all these years failed to disclose the abuse of those boys to authorities. But, on the other hand,  Hearn said this as a “difficult” sentencing,” the crimes were “isolated”  and a “gross” error in judgment,  and “sex abuse of children is to be treated seriously.”

Then he turned around and handed down a 15 month prison sentence!  The pros prevailed. The fact that Father Boudreau was well liked and respected and has, in the eyes of the judge, led an admirable life since he abused those boys, prevailed

I fail to comprehend how 15 months in jail for the sex abuse of two boys by a priest shows the victims, their families, Father Boudrau or any of us, us that the “sex abuse of children is to be treated seriously.”

I also fail to understand how Justice Hearn can say with such certainty that Boudreau does not “in any way” represent a danger to the community.  No one thought that Boudreau represented a danger to the community when he was molesting those boys, did they? Boudreau deceived the masses for years.  He unfortunately enjoyed a respect which he did not deserve.  He fooled people.  He was a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  Why should such despicable and manipulative behaviour by a con man be viewed by anyone, let alone a judge, as a pro?

Yes, I know –  the sentence is harsh when it’s seen relative to, say,  the piddly two-year sentence Father Hod Marshall received for molesting 17 children abusing 17 children.  That’s precisely the problem with these ‘Tut. Tut, Bad boy’ sentences. One “Tut. Tut. Bady boy” becomes relative to the other.

How are we to believe that the judiciary treats the sex abuse of children “seriously” when all these molesters ever get is a ‘Tut tut,  Bad boy!’

(2) Father Yvon Doiron

Father Doiron was sentenced to 18 months in jail for stealing $116,000 from four parishes.

28 May 2012: Priest gets 18 months for fraud on his parishes

28 May 2012: “18 months in prison for the former pastor Doiron” (google translate of French)

I am happy that Father Doiron will be behind bars for 18 months .   He deserves it.  I would have been happy with a stiffer sentence there too, but at least he has been identified as the criminal that he is and will spend some time behind bars.

But how can it possibly be that in this great country a priest who steals $116,000 from his parishioners and is going to pay it all back received a stiffer sentence than a priest who destroyed the lives of two young boys and can never ever undo the damage done?

It makes no sense, aside the fact that actions speak louder than words.  If , as they invariably tell us, judges truly believe that the sex abuse of a child is a serious and horrific crime then they should started imposing sentences which reflect the severity of the crime, should they not?

*****

The last few days were committed to family time, getting the yard squared away and a few flowers and tomatoes planted, and taking care of other business on the home front which needed tending to.

With the exception of one veritable down-pour we’ve had absolutely beautiful weather over the past few days.  I truly had to drop everything and get the yard in order.  It’s done.  It feels good to have it done:)

Enough for now,

Sylvia