Question One: How can you possibly create a legal defense in a court of law, eight years after the clergy sex abuse crisis erupted publicly in 2002 that shockingly claims a Bishop is not an employee of the Pope?
Question Two: If a Bishop is not considered an employee of the Pope/Vatican, then why did California Diocese of Orange Bishop Tod Brown write to the Pope asking him to extend his retirement age from 75 years old to 80 years old? See "5 More Years for Bishop Brown" published by the California Catholic Reporter on May 18, 2010 (http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=db1a01f3-3ef0-4f9e-9cea-8a8aa499192a).
The media recently reported that you are the father of a son and a graduate of UC Hastings School of Law. Obviously, you are prepared to represent a legal Goliath in U.S. courts. As a non-attorney, I perceive that while you and others defend the Pope and Vatican in courts of law, with intent to escape monetary responsibility for heinous sex crimes that destroyed the lives of thousands of children, adults, families and employees for decades, the protections and civil rights of children, adults, families and those who protect them as mandated reporters are repeatedly placed at serious risk.
Without going into details, if you would like documentation supporting the fact that the business and employment practices within the Catholic Church, The Vatican, Pope Benedict, Bishops, etc., do not mandate compliance with civil statutes relating to the reporting of sex abuse crimes and protections of Whistleblower employees who report child endangerment, as mandated by law, please advise. I have eight years of letters and documents supporting the statements herein.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
