Msgr. Lynn Sentenced to 3 to 6 Years in Prison

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: NBC10 Philadelphia

A Roman Catholic monsignor who became the first U.S. church official branded a felon for covering up sex abuse claims against priests was sentenced Tuesday to three to six years in prison.

Monsignor William Lynn of Philadelphia, the former secretary for clergy at the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, handled priest assignments and child sexual assault complaints from 1992 to 2004.
Judge M. Teresa Sarmina said Lynn enabled “monsters in clerical garb ... to destroy the souls of children, to whom you turned a hard heart.”

She added: “You knew full well what was right, Monsignor Lynn, but you chose wrong.”

A jury convicted him last month of felony child endangerment for his oversight of now-defrocked priest Edward Avery, who is serving a 2{- to five-year sentence after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting an altar boy in church.

Read more: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/breaking/Msgr-Lynn-Sentenced-to-3-to-6-Years-in-Prison-163531706.html

[dipsydoodle]

1. That tolled him off.

which made a change from the kids doing it.

[KansDem]

2. At one time he held a list of the names of 35 priests accused of raping boys...

...and did nothing.

More than a year after Msgr. Lynn took the helm of the clergy office, reports started to surface about allegations of priest sex abuse from past decades. The priest and an aide began an investigation of priest personnel files and in locked document archives at the archdiocesan headquarters in Philadelphia. They wanted to assess, Bergstrom said, "how bad is this problem?"

Their result, he said, were 323 files from which they compiled 35 names of priests with accusations or credible evidence of sexual abuse.

Their memo of Feb. 18, 1994, attached a list with the names, which was sent up through the archdiocesan administration of the time to Msgr. Lynn's superiors, including Cardinal Bevilacqua.

Although the cardinal ordered the memo shredded, a copy was placed in a locked box not discovered until 2006 and not produced for the court in the trial until recently.

--more--
http://catholicnewsherald.com/features/usworld/46-news/rokstories-usworld/1552-landmark-clergy-sex-abuse-trial-begins-in-philadelphia

3 to 6 years is too lenient!

[atreides1]

3. Hopefully this is just the beginning

Now let's see what happens with the rest!

[Coexist]

4. convictions are good.

a conscience would have been better.

[Tumbulu]

5. well, perhaps this will have an impact

maybe if the higher ups actually start going to jail, the really higher ups won't be able to make them do this- cover it up, reassign, etc.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. yeah!

i hope it is only a start

[closeupready]

7. But wait!! What does 'canon law' say? That trumps all here.

We can seek spiritual guidance from the Vatican on this, since it concerns the Church.

Big time.

[lark]

8. May he get his just deserts in prison

May he actually feel what the little boys felt when he allowed them to continue being raped and did nothing to protect him.

I'm just sick of these heinous fools.

[Marrah_G]

9. Not long enough

[malthaussen]

10. Definitely not long enough

But not so long ago, he wouldn't even have seen the inside of a courtroom. Might as well see this as a hopeful sign that there may be some improvement coming, although we need to remember that inertia is very hard to overcome.

-- Mal

[happyslug]

11. Now the appeal begin....

A defendant can NOT file an appeal till he or she if actually sentences. Once sentence then the appeal can begin. I suspect Lynn will be able to stay out of jail on bond till Superior court hears his case, and on appeal he had a good chance of reversal. On 2007 Pennsylvania strengthen its rule on who must report child abuse, but Lynn's position within the church changed in 2004, he cease to be in charge of of the office where child abuse cases went through., Thus under the previous law did he have a duty to report reports of abuse (he had no personal knowledge of the abuse, just reports that crossed his desk)l

Basically Lynn's legal argument was while he was in charge of Priests accused of child abuse, he had no legal duty to report it to anyone since he did NOT have direct contact with the children, That was the law prior to 2007. The law was changed in 2007 to include supervisors (Which Lynn had been) but he had stopped being a supervisor in 2005.

Was Lynn still legally liable for NOT reporting what he knew. but learned before the change in the law? The trial judge said, yes, his defense attorneys say no. It will be up to Superior Court to make a decision (I lean to Lynn winning on appeal, you can NOT change a law to make someone guilty of the law based on what he did or knew BEFORE the law was changed, when it is clear he was NOT guilty before the change in the law).

I also think the Judge knows this, thus the very heavy sentence compared to the actual perpetrator (Lynn was sentence to almost the same amount of time in jail). The Judge believes she will be reversed on appeal and thus want to appear to be tough on crime, knowing the sentence will NEVER be carried out. Judges are political animals, they want to appear tough in high profile cases. That gets them re-elected. In non reported cases, sentences are must lower, to reflect reality. i.e sending someone into the State system does more harm then good, keep the defendant in the county system by sentencing to one year or less. Quicker and easier for such people to adjust once released, and almost all prisoners are released sooner or later,