PHILADELPHIA (PA)
Philadelphia Daily News
Christine M. Flowers
Philadelphia Daily News
THE LAW is not always just. Sometimes, it can be downright spiteful.
Take the case of Monsignor William Lynn, the first (but probably not the last) high-ranking clergyman to be convicted of child endangerment.
To our knowledge, Lynn never laid a finger on an altar boy, never downloaded porn to his computer, and never did any of the other horrific things that we now know happened over the past few decades. But he is being held responsible for those who did those things, because he didn’t do enough to protect the innocent from in-house predators. I get that there is a desire to hold someone accountable for the pain and grief caused by ignorance and omission.
What I don’t get is how a law that was never intended to apply retroactively could be used to convict a man who had a right to due process. The D.A.’s Office stretched it to its definitional limit by applying it to a supervisor like Lynn, particularly since the law in effect when the defendant was supposed to have looked the other way never contemplated that kind of prosecution.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.