Start with extracting a groveling apology from the owner, the editor, and the journalist. Pres. Harrison needs to dial back his social media responses.
That’d be great. There needs to be something very public, not a buried small retraction. I was thinking that settlement money going to a victims fund or to offset counseling expenses would be ironically good.
That would require showing that the error was intentional. President Harrison likely qualifies as a public figure due to his role, which would mean that a defamation suit would fall under the actual malice standard.
The paper accurately reported the story previously, using the court records. The snippet report not only got the accused wrong but also skewed some facts. The failure to issue an immediate correction does not help its case. It could be rank incompetence, which needs to be fully explained if it was not actual malice.
I'm confused. Harrison's letter doesn't say that he *had* suspended him, which would imply an earlier action, but that he suspended him, as in, today. This was evidently his first opportunity to do so, according to the Bylaws.
There should be nothing to "wend it's way through the courts". Mohr is either repentant (in which case he will confess any additional crimes involving children not in the charging documents, plead guilty to any and all crimes he is guilty of, and ask for the maximum punishment available for his crimes)or he is unrepentant (and will attempt legal maneuvers to minimize his consequences.)
Any legal maneuvering by his attorney that doesn't involve pleading guilty at his earliest opportunity will signal an unrepentant man. If he is unrepentant he needs to be excommunicated.
I'm pretty sure they're looking at the possibility of additional counts. They initially charged him with only one count, but I saw an update that mentioned that three victims have been identified so far.
Only two victim impact statements have been filed so far. It is reasonable to presume other charges may result based on devices and materials found at other locations. We will report if and when any other developments occur.
I’m sure there will be additional counts. What I’m speaking to is whether or not Mohr is, or will be, repentant. A repentant man would not wait for additional victims to come forward but would volunteer that information to the authorities and plead guilty to all resulting charges that would follow at the earliest opportunity.
What is absent from Harrison's statement is any indication that he advised Mohr to do the right thing and promise excommunication if he doesn't. His wording is such that it almost seems as if all things Mohr did to children in the darkness have been brought into the light, which is currently doubtful.
“Unfortunately, we will have to revisit this matter as it wends its way through the courts. But light has now been shown on what was done in darkness.”
He is also speaking as if he expects a drawn out legal process. It shouldn't be. Mohr can plead guilty at his first hearing and be sentenced at the next.
I don't think it is too much to ask that Matt Harrison address child abuse by a district president with as much fervor as he employed going after laymen who criticized the essays attached to Luther's Large Catechism.
While Mohr should and will be punished I would avoid declaring what repentance must look like in his case. Even with notorious sinners the shape of repentance is between them and the Holy Spirit.
If I am unfaithful to my wife on twenty occasions but she only catches me on two counts, I can not be truly repentant unless I confess to the other 18, both to her and to God. This would be especially damaging if she has a reasonable suspicion that I was unfaithful more than twice. Can I to lie to her when she asks if those 2 occasions were the extent of my transgressions because I can work the rest out with the Holy Spirit?
To expect that I can refuse to confess the sin against my wife to her, but go before God and expect my repentance to be genuine is ridiculous.
What good reason would there be, not only in regards to my wife’s peace, but in regards to the disposition of my immortal soul, to refuse a confession for the sake of repentance in this matter. The only reason to not confess would be a desire to avoid additional temporal consequences, which would indicate an unrepentant heart.
President Harrison and the Synod should sue the Post Dispatch.
Start with extracting a groveling apology from the owner, the editor, and the journalist. Pres. Harrison needs to dial back his social media responses.
I suspect if you were wrongly accused of something so heinous in such a forum, you might lose your bearing, also.
The senior officers for a corporation are never “off duty”.
That’d be great. There needs to be something very public, not a buried small retraction. I was thinking that settlement money going to a victims fund or to offset counseling expenses would be ironically good.
apology ashomology. money enough to end them.
Yes, out of existence, which is where they're headed anyway. But it would be good to give them a push.
That would require showing that the error was intentional. President Harrison likely qualifies as a public figure due to his role, which would mean that a defamation suit would fall under the actual malice standard.
The paper accurately reported the story previously, using the court records. The snippet report not only got the accused wrong but also skewed some facts. The failure to issue an immediate correction does not help its case. It could be rank incompetence, which needs to be fully explained if it was not actual malice.
At the very least gross negligence.
I'm confused. Harrison's letter doesn't say that he *had* suspended him, which would imply an earlier action, but that he suspended him, as in, today. This was evidently his first opportunity to do so, according to the Bylaws.
Thanks for the clarification, Pastor. It is unclear in the letter, but ITO bylaws that is the process.
There should be nothing to "wend it's way through the courts". Mohr is either repentant (in which case he will confess any additional crimes involving children not in the charging documents, plead guilty to any and all crimes he is guilty of, and ask for the maximum punishment available for his crimes)or he is unrepentant (and will attempt legal maneuvers to minimize his consequences.)
Any legal maneuvering by his attorney that doesn't involve pleading guilty at his earliest opportunity will signal an unrepentant man. If he is unrepentant he needs to be excommunicated.
I'm pretty sure they're looking at the possibility of additional counts. They initially charged him with only one count, but I saw an update that mentioned that three victims have been identified so far.
Only two victim impact statements have been filed so far. It is reasonable to presume other charges may result based on devices and materials found at other locations. We will report if and when any other developments occur.
I’m sure there will be additional counts. What I’m speaking to is whether or not Mohr is, or will be, repentant. A repentant man would not wait for additional victims to come forward but would volunteer that information to the authorities and plead guilty to all resulting charges that would follow at the earliest opportunity.
What is absent from Harrison's statement is any indication that he advised Mohr to do the right thing and promise excommunication if he doesn't. His wording is such that it almost seems as if all things Mohr did to children in the darkness have been brought into the light, which is currently doubtful.
“Unfortunately, we will have to revisit this matter as it wends its way through the courts. But light has now been shown on what was done in darkness.”
He is also speaking as if he expects a drawn out legal process. It shouldn't be. Mohr can plead guilty at his first hearing and be sentenced at the next.
I don't think it is too much to ask that Matt Harrison address child abuse by a district president with as much fervor as he employed going after laymen who criticized the essays attached to Luther's Large Catechism.
While Mohr should and will be punished I would avoid declaring what repentance must look like in his case. Even with notorious sinners the shape of repentance is between them and the Holy Spirit.
I disagree.
If I am unfaithful to my wife on twenty occasions but she only catches me on two counts, I can not be truly repentant unless I confess to the other 18, both to her and to God. This would be especially damaging if she has a reasonable suspicion that I was unfaithful more than twice. Can I to lie to her when she asks if those 2 occasions were the extent of my transgressions because I can work the rest out with the Holy Spirit?
To expect that I can refuse to confess the sin against my wife to her, but go before God and expect my repentance to be genuine is ridiculous.
What good reason would there be, not only in regards to my wife’s peace, but in regards to the disposition of my immortal soul, to refuse a confession for the sake of repentance in this matter. The only reason to not confess would be a desire to avoid additional temporal consequences, which would indicate an unrepentant heart.
In his letter Harrison stated, "I pray for those who have been harmed, for those who care for them, and I also pray for Michael."
Nothing was mentioned about Mohr's family, leading one to infer that Mohr was not married.
Looking at the quote now, I'm reading it as if he expects the victims to sue Mohr's congregation, the Central Illinois District, and/or the Synod.