http://apnews.excite.com/article/2012061...D41G2.html

Quote:LOS ANGELES (AP) - More than 35 years after William Lynch says he and his little brother were molested by a priest during a camping trip in the Santa Cruz Mountains, he will get his longtime wish to face the aging Jesuit in court for the first time. But it is Lynch who is going on trial.

Lynch, now 44, faces felony charges of assault and elder abuse after prosecutors say he beat the Rev. Jerold Lindner in front of startled witnesses at a retirement home for priests. In the months since his arrest, Lynch has refused to discuss a plea deal and has grown intent on using his own legal trouble to try Lindner in the court of public opinion in a potentially explosive proceeding likely to include testimony from Lynch, the priest and several more of his alleged victims.

Too bad I'm not on that jury.

Probably not the best idea to beat the shit out of the guy, but I agree with you. That man had it coming. It should be dismissed and I am sure someone can find grounds for dismissal.

Yeah, I can't agree that beating the guy up was the right way to go about it, but it is most definitely what I would have done.

had someone listened to lynch and his little brother, and taken them seriously when they complained, this ass whipping lindner took may have been diverted. he has some big balls to not accept a plea bargain and tho it's risky, he's dead right. so yeah, it wasn't right to whip an elder's (meaning age-wise) ass, but i understand and hope for his vindication.

I would've strangled the fucker to death with his own cock if he interfered with my family.

Dirty bastard...

Quote:It should be dismissed and I am sure someone can find grounds for dismissal.

Is the accused really rich? If so,he's in with a chance,if not, he's fucked. I guess he could plead temporary insanity,which would give a jury an excuse to acquit him.

He only needs one juror to see things his way.

"Mr.Lynch, could you please tell the court why you decided to brutally assault an old man who had spent his years selflessly serving the Church?"
"Yes sir, he fucked my little brother."
"AH-HA! Guilty!"

Really?

(June 19, 2012 at 8:15 pm)Minimalist Wrote: He only needs one juror to see things his way.

In Australia, majority verdicts are accepted in most criminal trials. I understand that in the US,less than a unanimous verdict will result a mistrial, but not an acquittal.

Correct. Then the prosecutor has to decide if he thinks he can do better next time.