Readers question the Church's response to victims, Charlack's motivation for speed cameras

Readers question the Church's response to victims, Charlack's motivation for speed cameras

FEATURE, JULY 15, 2010
Support from a survivor: I write this with tears in my eyes, because I am a fellow survivor of abuse ["Sins of the Father," Nicholas Phillips]. Not from Father Cooper but from Father Norman H. Christian. I have felt exactly what John Doe is going through. I too was a John Doe for a long time. I want him to know that I and a great many others believe him.
Tim Fischer, via the Internet

Blame the sinner, not the church: The dead priest was the one who committed the crime and is responsible. He escaped worldly judgment and now faces eternal judgment.
Tim Rhyne, via the Internet

A no-brainer: Of course John Doe was sexually molested by this priest, and of course the archdiocese is responsible. We all know that sexual predators do not molest once, but many times, with many victims. The archdiocese knew about this priest and knew about his proclivities. John Doe was most probably not the first, nor the last, to be abused by him. It is sad that the men who are ordained to protect their flock care about nothing but their coffers. I hope the archdiocesan lawyer and the archbishop remember that they will come face-to-face with their maker someday, and although God is merciful, God is also just.
Gabe Azzaro, via the Internet

Skeptical of John Doe: "The other episode to surface during Doe's jolt of memory recovery occurred sometime later that summer, when Cooper managed to lure Doe back to the clubhouse." What??! How the hell did Cooper "manage to lure him back"? He is saying that after being raped a few months earlier, he went back! Why? That seems suspicious.
George Haberberger, via the Internet

Skeptical of the Church: The Church is trying to make the public believe that everything is OK now. But it's not all hunky-dory. The victims are still hurting, and the Church is either 1) ignoring them; or 2) fighting them tooth and nail.
Pam, via the Internet

DAILY RFT, JULY 13, 2010
A municipal cash grab: This is nothing more than a cash grab ["Charlack Will Use Speed Cameras on 170 Despite Criticism," Chad Garrison]. I have been driving that stretch of 170 for over three years now, at multiple times of day and night, and I have never seen an accident there. Doing this for safety, my ass.
KT, via the Internet

You have no right to speed: Who cares? Don't break the law, and you won't have a problem. Maybe if north St. Louis had some of these, they could afford to pay more police officers. So quit yer whining, lead-foots.
Anonymous, via the Internet

A biker's defiance: Did anyone really think Charlack's mayor and police chief would just come out and say, "Hell yeah, we're doin' it for the dollars!" I'll be taking the plates off my bike and making high-speed runs past the camera for my amusement.
b00y4h!, via the Internet

Scroll to read more St. Louis Metro News articles (1)
Join the Riverfront Times Press Club

Local journalism is information. Information is power. And we believe everyone deserves access to accurate independent coverage of their community and state.
Help us keep this coverage going with a one-time donation or an ongoing membership pledge.


Join Riverfront Times Newsletters

Subscribe now to get the latest news delivered right to your inbox.