In the latest attempt to sue the Church, a US Lawyer is attempting to demand that the US State Department waive the Pope's diplomatic immunity. Daniel Shea, a Catholic educated lawyer is leading the effort to have the US ignore the usual procedures associated with the sovereignty of foreign countries by not granting the Pope diplomatic immunity. This raises some questions, first and foremost, even if the US for some reason decides to not recognize Vatican City as a sovereign country (it is), how is this going to force the Pope to show up for trial? He is the head of a foreign country, one that the US isn't eactly going to be inclined to invade to capture him. Besides which, this would involve convincing the Italians to allow us to do this. And since President Bush doesn't seem to like the idea in the first place, I just don't see this happening.
Mr. Shea surely knows that he won't be accomplishing anything with this (even the Supreme Court and the UN aren't likely to side with him on this one). No, this whole business amounts ot little more than throwing mud at the Vatican in an attempt to damge its reputation. Shea's affiliates are mostly anti-Catholic to begin with, his actions here re not more than a shallow attempt to hurt the Church in whatever way he can. Shea is the kind of scum that brings disgrace upon the legal profession.
This will never happen. This clown is one of the self-agrandizing bastards that's made me hate every lawyer I see. He knows going in he'll lose, but the decision isn't the point. This gets his name out there, and some firm will snatch him up, and he'll make big money and blah blah blah.
ReplyDeleteShaekspear had it right when he wrote "First, we kill all the lawyers".
I wouldn't go quite that far. I do know a few people in the profession that are decent enough. They're just becoming fewer and more far between. Especially in the case of trial lawyers.
ReplyDeleteI dont even know what diplomatic immunity is. I'm 17 should I know what that means by now? LOL (^_^)
ReplyDeletemaybe....(+o+) It sounds bad though.
Diplomatic immunity basically means that we can't just demand that the person show up in court. In effec the person is given "immnity" to lawsuits and prosecution in a foreign country and is given "safe passage" through that country. There are a lot of good reasons for doing this (for example, to prevent a person from being prosecuted for breaking a law that he or she didn't know about). Diplomatic Immunity was actually agreed upon as internation law during the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), but the concept has been with us for much longer than that. Also, the person's home country may waive the immunity (usually if the person has comitted a serious crime such as murder). In the pope's case, though, this isn't going to happen (he is the head of his country, the Vatican City) because the case in question is pretty ridiculous. He's basically just looking for a way to exploit the Vatican for his own personal gain (and judging by his associates, he wouldn't be the least bit sad if he actually manages to damage them in any way).
ReplyDeleteBilly D. I have a t-shirt with that quote on it and a picture of a sword with a drop of blood falling from it... I love that shirt.
ReplyDeleteHaha. OK, not ALL lwayers. Actually, I have a friend who happens to be a prosecuting attorney for our fair city. His specialty is going after the child molesters. Tough and sickening work, but he does it every day, and I do have a lot of respect for him.
ReplyDeleteBut defense lawyers and trial lawyers...
Remember that the lawyers who defend against the ACLU are generally defense lawyers... they can't all be bad.
ReplyDelete