On July 2, Peoria County Judge Rebecca Steenrod
dismissed all the suits except the one filed by one who is still a minor and apparently did not use recovered memory within the suit.According to the State Journal-Register (July 3), Judge Steenrod
described their arguments of delayed discovered of the abuse as ‘incredible.'.
This case is somewhat different than most recovered memory cases, because the plaintiffs were trying to walk a fine line.A source close to the case originally had told me that it was not a case of repressed memories (contrary to what the court documents filed by the plaintiffs indicated), but one in which they knew they would been abused, but have not known of the psychological damage it had done to them.This same argument was apparently used in court before the judge threw it out.
While the Catholic diocese did settle out of court, apart from Monsignor Goodman, and while I received an e-mail from (apparently) one of the plaintiffs who claimed this proved his
accusations to be true, I must point out that the church did this against Goodman's wishes and also must point to the Dow Corning case in which the large company settled a suit by people with breast implants because fighting the suit would have cost more than settling, even though the scientific evidence showed no cause and effect relationship.In other words, contrary to what the e-mail said, it proves nothing unless there is some actual evidence involved (I responded and asked about such evidence, and even though he
offered to debate me, he
has not replied back at all).