Confused about motive in Crews case
I have some puzzling questions regarding the Father Crews case.
If the family of the alleged victim kept their information secret for 42 years, then where was their concern for the several hundred boys who were to come under the priest’s influence over the next two-plus decades of his tenure at Hanna Boys Center?
And why have we never heard of even one more allegation against the priest, but rather have read numerous accounts of Hanna boys praising the Father for his efforts to guide them toward productive lives?
Did the accusers wait for their victim-relative to die before coming forward due to embarrassment?
If so, wouldn’t this eclipse compassion for any more potential victims, thereby making them appear more concerned with appearance or reputation than with children’s safety? How is that much different from the Catholic Church, Boy Scouts, the military, some universities, Hollywood and other media moguls, among other organizations that shielded perpetrators from the law?
Since concern for other children seems not to have been a priority in their belated decision to accuse the priest, could there be a money motive somewhere in the shadows? Will the accusers kindly step forward from the shady portals of the past and explain in the light of the present day why they waited so long, and what their real motive may be?
I’m not to good at puzzles, so I need a little help here.
Dorothe A. Prior