|
Monday, June 26, 2006
Seares: Seduction, not child abuse?
By Pachico A. Seares
News Sense
MIGHT not Fr. Joey Belciña get off the hook easier with the charge of child abuse than with qualified seduction?
Anti-Child Abuse Law covers sexual intercourse with “a child exploited in prostitution.”
Was complainant, whom prosecutors said Fr. Joy had sex with, exploited that way as a minor?
Anti-Child Abuse Law punishes “those who engage in or promote, facilitate, or induce child prostitution.” As to the sex act, it must be with “a child exploited in prostitution.”
Fiscals ruled that the priest had sex with complainant, believing her claim and rejecting his denial. No rape but, as to one sex act when she was under 18, they saw child abuse.
Proof
So they dropped rape but kept child abuse. But can fiscals prove the woman was exploited in prostitution?
I’ve heard of priests in small parishes barely surviving on meager income but Danao City isn’t even remotely poor. A priest pimping on the side is unthinkable and deeming her a prostitute is outrageous.
Why not qualified seduction instead? The elements are there: virginity (presumed, not necessarily physical), sex act, age (12 or over, less than 18), and abuse of authority or confidence (priests listed, along with persons in authority, teachers, and guardians).
Or do they want Fr. Joy to walk?
He has suffered enough. Or maybe not—he seems not to show suffering, especially when he relishes fans’ adulation.
For Bisaya stories from Cebu. Click here. (June 26, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here.
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
