Well, they certainly were “revealed” to us disinterested onlookers who were not present in court weren’t they?

[Daphne – You can read the full judgement on line. It should up soon. There’s no need to act so helpless, waiting to be spoonfed.]

… and no priests should abuse the minors left in their care.

I would leave the bastards out on the street once they are out of prison.

Regarding the lawyers: my thoughts exactly. It’s time the Curia issued a statement on the matter.

It looks like the page on the link you provided has since been removed.

Hardly. Do bear in mind that Pulis is only 65 years old.

One of the ex-rectors of St Aloysius’ College here fathered a child at 64 …

I had absolutely no doubt whatsoever that they would serve their sentence at Mount Carmel, even before tThe Times article revealing the guy’s psychiatric problems. That’s the way things are done on this island after all.

[Daphne – The psychiatric problems are in the 100-page judgement. They were not ‘revealed’.]

“Who would blame me if I come to the conclusion that the whole set-up of entrusting children and other vulnerable persons to the Church should be closely scrutinized by competent State authorities?…Is it assumed that the Church cannot err and that scrutiny by the State is unnecessary or uncalled for? I’m only asking since I am not informed”.

That’s not the problem. The problem is that the Church is providing a service (sometimes at a financial loss) that the State does not provide for. If the State puts “too much pressure” on them, they simply close down.

The Church has no right to interfere in the legal process. I don’t understand why you are blaming the Church for their appeal and the postponment of their incarceration.