Kansas City Bishop Indicted For Failure To Report Child Abuse

From the Kansas City Star: Bishop Robert Finn on Friday became the highest-ranking Catholic official in the nation to face criminal prosecution in the decades-old child sexual abuse scandal — an action that stunned many inside and outside the church.
A Jackson County grand jury on Oct. 6 secretly indicted both Finn and the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph on misdemeanor charges of failure to report child abuse in a case involving a priest facing child pornography charges.
As Finn and the diocese denied wrongdoing Friday after appearing in court, news of the charges roiled the nation and the Catholic world.
“This is historic,” said the Rev. Thomas J. Reese, author of “Inside the Vatican: The Politics and Organization of the Catholic Church.”
“In terms of the Catholic Church, this is an extraordinary move which is going to signal that the times have changed,” said Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. “Neither people nor government are going to put up with any kind of activity that looks like a coverup.”
The charges were announced Friday at a news conference by Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker.
“This is a significant charge,” Baker said. “To my knowledge, a charge like this has not been leveled before.”
Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/14/3208377/grand-jury-indicts-bishop-finn.html#ixzz1Y32uaEBI
I have no doubt that Bishops around the country and world have hidden child abusing priests. No doubt about it at all, but in this case, is this a publcity stunt by the prosecutor in Kansas City, MO.?
First, again from the article: The indictment alleges that Bishop Robert Finn and the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph had “reasonable cause” to suspect child abuse related to the Rev. Shawn Ratigan, but did not report it between Dec. 16, 2010, and May 11, 2011.
Except the pervert priest was not charged with child abuse. He was charged with child pornography. There were no allegations of child abuse, other than he acted inappropriately around children which did not rise to child abuse.
The other problem I have is the prosecutor took the easy way out. She went to a grand jury to get the indictment and as many people know, if you present the evidence right, you can indict a ham sandwich on a criminal charge.
It is difficult to tell what is child porn and what is not and what is abuse and what is not. For instance, in the movie "Good Morning Vietnam", there is a scene where two kids are taking a shower completely naked with frontal nudity. Is that child porn? Do you report those people? If someone watches the movie more than twice, can they be charged with watching child porn? How about the TV show "Dance Moms". Those kids are darn near porn stars in the way the act and in their costumes. Then you have commercial for some kids clothes, which could be pornographic. It's a tough call, especially when there are unidentified victims.
The Diocese turned in the pervert priest, maybe late but they did turn him in. They consulted a cop about the pictures and while the diocese could have done a better job, they did approach law enforcement.
The prosecution also did not charge anybody else in the case. (the Diocese was also indicted) What about the other people involved in the case? Other priests, school officials etc. Why was just the Bishop indicted unless you want to be a grandstanding prosecutor.
Even the Kansas City Diocese said that they handled the case badly, but does this rise up to a criminal case? Based on the article, evidence and other articles I have read, this seems like a grandstanding case by the prosecutor. A civil case, perhaps if there is an identified victim, but a criminal case, no.