Vatican Offers 3 Reasons Why Pope Not Liable For Abuse

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Vatican Offers 3 Reasons Why Pope Not Liable For Abuse



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/30/vatican-launches-legal-de_n_519113.html

VATICAN CITY — Dragged deeper than ever into the clerical sex abuse scandal, the Vatican is launching a legal defense that the church hopes will shield the pope from a lawsuit in Kentucky seeking to have him deposed.

Court documents obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press show that Vatican lawyers plan to argue that the pope has immunity as head of state, that American bishops who oversaw abusive priests weren't employees of the Vatican, and that a 1962 document is not the "smoking gun" that provides proof of a cover-up.

The Holy See is trying to fend off the first U.S. case to reach the stage of determining whether victims actually have a claim against the Vatican itself for negligence for allegedly failing to alert police or the public about Roman Catholic priests who molested children.

The case was filed in 2004 in Kentucky by three men who claim they were abused by priests and claim negligence by the Vatican. Their attorney, William McMurry, is seeking class-action status for the case, saying there are thousands of victims across the country.

"This case is the only case that has been ever been filed against the Vatican which has as its sole objective to hold the Vatican accountable for all the priest sex abuse ever committed in this country," he said in a phone interview. "There is no other defendant. There's no bishop, no priest."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/30/vatican-launches-legal-de_n_519113.html

[SpiralHawk]

1. Ahhh, the unHoly Trinity

of weak-kneed, lame-butt, weasel-squeasel Pissant Pedophile Protectorate excuses.

Herr Ratzinger and his Vatican cronies are sooo Republicon.

They just don't do responsibility, or integrity, or honor.

[NNN0LHI]

2. How did that "immunity as head of state" thingy work out for Saddam?

[spanone]

3. they never learn. once you get defensive, it's all over.

[4lbs]

4. Well... the parishoners can hold the Pope liable by withholding donations to the RCC and instead

give the money directly to homeless shelters and soup kitchens, bypassing the Church altogether.

Maybe he'll take notice if donations drop 50%.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

11. From the insert in my church's bulletin this week:

"We are at $98,000. We Need: $32,000."

It's the high-pressure "Annual Diocesan Appeal."

So here I am, at a time when money is tight and I seemingly owe everyone, "I'll write them a check so the Vatican attorneys can find a way to keep the Pope out of trouble."

Yeah, RIGHT. I'm guessing the fact that my church is $32 K "below target" is that others feel the same way.

[damntexdem]

5. Among other things, this shows the folly of considering the Vatican to be a country.

[TorchTheWitch]

10. also shows why the Vatican wanted to be a country

as it's own country the Vatican has no higher power to answer to about ANYTHING.

[DebbieCDC]

6. I hope this brings the catholic church down for good

They are running a huge ad campaign -- at least here in Western Washington (maybe nationwide) -- about "come home catholics". Every time I see it I want to hurl, touting how wonderful the church is and all the good it's done blah blah blah. Yeah pope ratzo try telling that to the thousands of kids that were abused by priests.

[MadMaddie]

16. I have seen them too

and they are pathetic.

[TorchTheWitch]

7. claiming immunity just screams GUILTY

[tonysam]

8. Lotsa luck trying to get him deposed.

It's not going to happen.

[gratuitous]

9. Interesting legal theory

It will bear watching to see if American courts recognize the Vatican as a sovereign nation, and who might be recognized as citizens of that nation. The employee question also has some interesting implications for control and assignment issues. After all, if the Vatican can fire or defrock a priest for failing to hew adequately to their protocols, can they make a credible case that the priests aren't their employees? And if the Vatican wins that point, can priests tell the Vatican to take a flying leap when the Vatican tries to enforce its doctrine or dogma on them? I think the Vatican is trying to have it their way on everything depending on the circumstances (situational ethics?).

[Sherman A1]

13. Agreed

It will be very interesting to watch the case develop. I believe that they will get the sovereign nation ruling as it's pretty much a no brainer, but the employee question will be much more dicey. After all who appoints the bishops and cardinals and who defrocks priests? If you can hire & fire, I believe you are the employer, As to the memo we will see.

[gratuitous]

14. I didn't mention it, but . . .

One of the implications of Vatican national sovereignty is who is a citizen? Is it determined by birth, vocation, appointment, or what? Can citizenship be revoked? Is there a civil authority for this sovereign nation? What characteristics does the Vatican share with other nations that we would recognize as "national" characteristics?

[Sherman A1]

17. All very good points!

As it will a huge effect on this case. Is the Pope a citizen of the Vatican? He was obviously born somewhere else so he must have been naturalized in some sense. Are the Cardinals who appoint the Pope citizens? If not how can they have the power to appoint a leader in a sovereign state. What of a priest, a nun, a lay worker?

And the final question is, just because a court in the US decides one way or the other, will the international community respect it's ruling (most likely not).

[Nikki Stone1]

15. That employee thing stuck out

They are not technically employees but there should be some kind of equivalency. If not, then you are right: the priests should be able to be able to franchise or something.

[myrna minx]

12. K&R. Unbelievable. n/t

[Rex]

18. Well he might have to touch a King James Bible.

Seriously, how weak.