Question about the story to Spotlight (2015)

I saw the movie, but don't remember how or even "if" it addressed the question.

It's a very valid question! I wonder the same thing and my only guess at an answer is:

1. Going to the police would make it public which parents might be reluctant to do because it would expose their child to questioning, exposure in the newspapers, or possible ridicule within or alienation from the community.

2. Similarly, the family is obviously Catholic, so going to the police might effect their standing in their religious community, ruin friendships with other church members, effect their businesses or risk excommunication from the church.

3. A lot of cops are Catholic and, depending on who a family would get to handle their case, the family might have found that the officer's loyalty is to the church. And thus they may have been afraid to take the matter to a legal system that might end up turning against them.

4. Families that did go to the police may have found that they weren't much help or weren't willing to take the investigation very far because they required more evidence (not just one person's word against another) and the legal process was just too slow, too complicated, was too influenced by the church or wasn't effective so they eventually gave up on the legal system.

And to add to what cap said, education is a big key. Catholic parents want their kids educated by catholics. It's an old boys club. Blow the whistle and the kids get kicked out of good schools. (that's the situation here. I dont know if north americans have religious schools)

At the end of the film, they show the cities that had corruption with these sexual assault cases. I saw a few cities from Canada. No country is immune to these acts, the church is too powerful.

How do they have money? Easy, it's a billion dollar 'industry'. They get tax breaks for everything, the church makes so much money they can afford the hush money to keep these families quiet. They mention this in the film when they go to see the Billy Crudup character, he plays a lawyer. The church offers a small settlement, promise to move the priest away from the area and that it will never happen again. These families BELIEVE that, because the church is telling them this.

Remember, they mention in the film how the priests target children from lower income families, broken homes. These people have blind faith in the church and honestly think they will do something to fix it. The church had their own way of doing things, within "house" as they say.

As for Boston, that city is deeply rooted in the Catholic faith. So to see people not go to the police, which is a shame and sad, is realistic. They mention, numerous times how people turn a blind eye to these acts because no one wants to believe it. People want to think that when a priest is removed, the problem is solved, at least for their own kid. They don't think about the next kid in another church in another city. To them, the problem is solved.

The beginning of the film, starts in a police station with a mother accusing a priest of molesting their child. So I'd say watch the film again and see what happens.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

Hmmm. Your post hs actually given me an interest in seeing this, TUS.

Probably more likely that at the high end, chief of Police/Mayor has connections with head of Church and there is no desire to "take on" the church, with such bodies being a bit interconnected. I'm not talking about a conspiracy here but rather chief of Police thinking that this is something that just happens and always has and the Church is a rather powerful body to take on.

If a parent goes to a cop and reports this then the cop will no doubt go up the command chain for direction, probably plenty of times this sort of thing was dealt with behind closed doors too as in the film, priest is transferred away, high ranking police informs head bishop or whatever that said priest is a "problem" and that problem will be dealt with.

So I would say plenty of times parents DID go to police but with little to no action taken.

__________________

Okay thanks. But how come the victims never went to the police though it seems?

I dont mean to come across as rude but are you reading the responses, pony? It's been answered multiple times by various Mofos.

I mean they basically make the bishop in this look like The Godfather. He would probably make any investigations go away.

Okay thanks. I am just wondering why the police would let it go, if they are not being payed a lot of bribery money. I mean sure it's embarrassing to the church, but sex crimes are always embarrassing to the perpetrators. The police cares about embarrassing criminals now? It just surprises me how they are so tough on crime in some instances and so pussy in others.

Or maybe I just don't know what the police were up against. Like for example, if the court were to prosecute a priest, what would happen to the court, that would be so horrible really?

Police are humans. Humans are corruptible.

It's more complicated than the usual crime [though it is a mundane crime] because it's centuries of establishment that passes on as a culture ["the priest is a man of god and god has mysterious ways, so don't question the priest about his actions"].

You have to look at it from the practical point of view. The church is pure politics and social conditioning. If you were to remove any other kind of political power out of the equation [your Parliament as an example], the church would be the State above the State itself [as it was for many Centuries].

__________________

Nothing would happen to the court if it got that far.

Well I figure since nothing would happen to the police and prosecutor, then what do they go to loose? I am just surprised that the police would be naive to believe that all priests are good men of God, since police are trained to know that not everyone is innocent and there is a lot of decent in the criminal underworld. They just seem so smart in many areas, yet very naive in this one.

Especially if they had 90 cases of it in Boston, or whatever the large number is... You think that that is a big enough number to suggest a pattern.

I have no idea what you're on about. You've been given answers to your question.

I think the problem you're having @ironpony is that you view Police as whiter than white, bastions of truth and justice who will vigorously pursue any wrongdoer, also I don't think you fully understand the politics of Police going after powerful institutions or whether there is a desire to prosecute said crime by the local prosecutor.

As Dani8 says this question has been given an answer.

I think it's been answered, but @ironpony is still trying to wrap their head around the thought process of the people involved, which is admittedly tricky, as an outsider.

I think a big part of it is not wanting the trouble. I think, if we're not victims of this kind of thing, it's easy to say "why don't they just report it?" But many rape survivors describe experiencing a sense of shame about what happened, even if they know, intellectually, they're not at fault. And coming forward means exposing that to the entire world, when most of them would probably prefer to never think about it again.

It's probably tough to do that even now, when these scandals are already well publicized and many people would be inclined to believe you, and it was probably much scarier back before either of those things were true. In some cases, they might not have had good reason to think they'd be able to muster the necessary evidence or be believed at all. So in addition to all the things I mentioned, they might have thought there was a chance they'd be called liars and not get justice, anyway.

As a very lapsed catholic to put my spin on it I think it's also because in congregations the congregation itself becomes the wider family (tribe), the parish priest becomes the head of the family, and parishioners dont want to be excommunicated from the family, especially with the older generations, so they shoved it under the carpet. Also, how many kids come forward with the news - they're the ones who are usually victim shamed and told they caused it, which comes out when they unclose it decades later. My husband was brought up in an Anglican family and he said the same thing happens. The old three wise monkeys maxim. Shut up, turn a blind eye, and it will all go away.

Okay thanks for the input. Sorry if I came off as stubborn about it. I guess I just feel that the movie misplaces a lot of the blame. The movie makes it seem like it's the church's fault, when most of the victims failed to report it to the police, or if they did, the police failed to do their jobs. So I thought the reason why most priests got away with it, was cause of the police investigations being poor, and the victims not doing all they can, but rather the movie blames the church, when it's not the church's job to deal with rapists, at least not in my opinion. It seemed like they were asking the church do so something that was out of their element, instead of going to the professionals that are trained to deal with rape cases specifically, and those are the people who the responsibility should lie with.

But the movie didn't portray it that way.