Testimony in Blackwell case didn't go by the book

Gregory Kane in the Baltimore Sun raises some points about potential anti-Catholic bigotry influencing the judicial process. Who is gonna argue against a person accusing a Catholic priest of child molestation? Interesting read; in the hopes of fair-minded citizens participating in a trial like this, where does bigotry begin while searching for truth and justice.//JW sends.

DID DEFROCKED Roman Catholic priest Maurice Blackwell walk out of a kangaroo court last week?

Well, maybe kangaroo court is a little harsh. But there are those who believe that Blackwell - who was convicted last week of abusing Dontee Stokes - didn't get a fair trial. Not surprisingly, one of them is Blackwell's lawyer, attorney Kenneth W. Ravenell.

"He obviously didn't receive a fair trial," Ravenell said yesterday. "It's really difficult for anyone in this climate to receive a fair trial."

The climate Ravenell referred to is the one in which nearly every Catholic priest is under scrutiny, suspected of possibly being a child molester by virtue of his occupation. That suspicion lingers, no matter how many Catholics say time and again that the priests they knew growing up were straight shooters, moral and honest men who would never molest a child.

But in the current climate - and admittedly, the church itself is to blame for much of it - we even had potential jurors saying they couldn't be objective because of the religion of the defendant and Stokes, the state's star witness. Who would have thought that in the year 2005 some folks would openly confess to anti-Catholic bigotry?