Thursday, November 18, 2010

Should Sex Abuse Justify a Vigilante Attack?

Time Magazine

It is a dark story with an even darker twist: William Lynch, 44, was arrested last month for going into a northern California nursing home, luring an elderly priest into the lobby and beating him bloody. Lynch insists that when he was 7 years old the priest, Jerold Lindner, 65, had sexually molested him.

After Lynch was arrested, the blogosphere lit up with messages of support — and protests that he was being charged for a beating that many regarded as well-deserved payback. When Lynch was arraigned in a courtroom in San Jose, Calif., last week on suspicion of assault, his backers marched with signs attacking the Catholic Church's handling of sexual abuse in its ranks and proclaiming "Free Willy."

Lynch has vowed to fight the assault charge against him and to make Lindner — who has denied abusing him or anyone else — the issue. "Somebody needs to be a face for this abuse, and I'm prepared to put myself on the line," he told the Associated Press. [...]


  1. Only problem is this guy might be lying. If this priest was known to have abused him and got off on some type of technicality I would say this would be more justified, but the way it looks, 37 years ago? I am not saying he is lying but I would need a lot more details to get behind him.

  2. E-Man: Well said. Many of today's accusers against the Orthodox Rabbis might well be lying as well.

    Thanks for pointing out this sometimes overlooked point.


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.