Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (8162)	4/10/2002 1:03:34 PM
From: jcky	Respond to of 21057

That's sound fair, or is it just?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (8162)	4/10/2002 1:06:34 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The standard for a new trial based upon new evidence varies from state to state. Generally you have to show the evidence is new, material, and could not have been discovered at the first trial. JLA

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (8162)	4/11/2002 9:22:32 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I'm watching a priest/psychologist, a Father Rossetti, on CNN right now who is providing some interesting numbers. He says that two thirds of priests who abuse children were victims themselves as children, 1.6 to 2 percent of priests have been sexually active with children, and that all but 2-3 percent (I didn't catch the exact number) of priests who are treated are able to go on and lead celibate lives. I thought you might find the numbers interesting. They're smaller than the impression one gets from the news. He also mentioned something that hadn't occurred to me. He said that the reason the Church is adjudicating so many of these cases rather than reporting the offenders to police is that the statute of limitations has run out before the victims come forward. FWIW.