First criminal hearing for Bishop Finn moved to January

by Joshua J. McElwee on Dec. 14, 2011

The first hearing in the criminal case against Bishop Robert W. Finn, head of the Kansas City-St. Joseph diocese, has been postponed until Jan. 12.

Both Finn and the diocese were charged in October by authorities in Jackson County, Mo., with separate counts of failing to report suspected child abuse in the case of Fr. Shawn Ratigan, a diocesan priest who was arrested in May for child pornography.

The hearing was originally scheduled for Dec. 15. Mike Mansur, the communications director of the Jackson County prosecutor’s office, told NCR the delay came at the request of the bishop’s lawyers.

News of the delay comes about a month after Finn dodged separate charges of failing to report abuse in Clay County, Mo., by agreeing to give the prosecutor there wide-ranging oversight of diocesan review procedures in the county.

The diocesan chancery is located in Jackson County. The parish where Ratigan last served as pastor is in Clay County.

Do you mean a Preliminary

Submitted by Alexandra Higgins (not verified) on Dec. 14, 2011.

Do you mean a Preliminary Hearing in a Criminal Case? The expression "criminal hearing" is a poor choice that reflects bias, not accuracy.

It seems from the above that

Submitted by Mirek Lobasz (not verified) on Dec. 14, 2011.

It seems from the above that NCR never used "criminal hearing." "First hearing in a criminal case" is quite accurate in this case and not biased at all. This is not a civil suit. The bishop has been charged "criminally" for breaking a child pornography law.

Perhaps Alexandra finds

Submitted by charles j scanlon (not verified) on Dec. 15, 2011.

Perhaps Alexandra finds offense in Joshua writing the more comprehensible "first" rather than "preliminary," offending thus his reader's level of literacy, but not mine, as God knows I require all of the clarity I can get!

Why is it that Bishop Finn

Submitted by Patrick OMalley (not verified) on Dec. 14, 2011.

Why is it that Bishop Finn isn't charged with destroying evidence in a felony case? He had Ratigan's computer full of child porn and told the family to take it (according to the family), although Finn says they asked for it.

He then said the diocese "made a copy".

This is destruction of evidence.

We know that

- the computer was full of child porn
- it contained a strip tease of a 2 year old girl out of a diaper, with full genitalia exposed in the final picture
- the diocese lied to a police friend, asking if a naked picture of a 2 year old relative was considered child porn (when it wasn't a relative)

This is all part of the Catholic church's own "Graves Report", mostly on Page 90.

There was obviously more on that computer. Why isn't Bishop Finn charged with destroying the evidence??

wait and see . . .

Submitted by charles j scanlon (not verified) on Dec. 15, 2011.

wait and see . . .

Bishop Finn personally never

Submitted by Louis E. (not verified) on Dec. 18, 2011.

Bishop Finn personally never even saw Ratigan's computer.

You definitely don't know

Submitted by Neil Allen (not verified) on Dec. 20, 2011.

You definitely don't know that. You only know what he says he saw. He says the family asked for the computer back. The family says Finn forced them to take it. You just have to decide whether you think Finn is telling the truth. I know he'd lie about this, and I bet he was involved with everything all along, including the phone calls in December.

If he gets anything more than

Submitted by Jim McCrea (not verified) on Dec. 15, 2011.

If he gets anything more than a mild slap on the wrist, I will be very surprised.

Holy Orders has its privilege, you know.

Post new comment

NCR Comment code:

  1. Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  2. Use appropriate language. Avoid vulgarities and slurs.
  3. Keep to the point. Deliberate digressions don't aid the discussion.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
(if you have one; if not, leave this blank)
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <font> <swf> <swf list>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use <swf file="song.mp3"> to display Flash files inline

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This is to prove you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.