Originally Posted by Ed2020

No, he was head of the Vatican office responsible for investigating claims of child abuse. I'm not suggesting he should be prosecuted because he's the pope now; it's what he was (and did or did not do) then that's important.



If it was anyone else then there would be sufficient evidence for the police to initiate an investigation. The letters referred to may well still exist on file somewhere, the archbishop who objected to the "disciplinary hearing" being stopped may be able to provide valuable evidence, the testimonies of the victims may count for something as well.

And I'm certainly not arguing that he should be the only one to be prosecuted. Far from it. But if the claims are correct, and he deliberately covered it up, then he should be answering to the same authorities that you or I would if we had done the same thing.