Victim speaks out against lies by the left

It seems those hoping to replace Judge Prosser know no limits in the hate they will try to create. Here’s the whole story.

I am disgusted by the disregard liberals show for the truth. I used to bend over backwards sometimes to defend their right to speak. It’s harder to do the more they outright lie. I pray they are not rewarded.


  1. The letter does not represent the “whole” story. I don’t believe what the victim is saying today. I’m not saying he’s lying…I’m just saying he’s making assumptions that aren’t fact. But…if by chance Prosser did make up some story about wanting to protect the victims from testifying because of their “young age”…or Prosser really thinks teenagers are too young to testify against a repeat sex offender/pedophile…then he needs to step down immediately.

  2. mew, aren’t you something. A victim to a crime signs a letter explaining he’s been misrepresented in a hateful political advertisiment, but you, in your omniscience, knows he’s wrong.

    Randy’s right. The stupid vat is already full.

  3. I’m not sure where the lie is. Mr. Prosser had the chance to stop a child rapist, did not, and more children were raped. What part of that is not true?

  4. Can’t get over the fact this one boomeranged, huh?

    Prosser worked in the best action of the children involved given what he had in available for prosecution. I know. It’s probably a foreign concept to someone like yourself.

  5. What are you talking about? Is any part of that statement false? And was Prosser’s work “in the best action of the children” the rapist encountered later?

    Answers please.

  6. You are misrepresenting the situation. That’s what the victim says, not what I say. You can kindly get a grip on your hysteria and find something else to do.

    Liberals must live off the adrenaline rush. You are screeching about everything, all the time. It’s really gets old.

  7. Point to anything I’ve written that even approaches hysteria. I have misrepresented no fact. Why is it impossible for you to admit that one of your own screwed the pooch?

  8. You assume Prosser had the ability to prosecute given the facts provided at the time. It’s a huge assumption, and may be incorrect, but that doesn’t stop you from spewing. Assuming facts that do not exist with such haste equals hysteria as I judge the situation.

    I have just watched the fourth news report stating the advert is incorrect. I think you lose.

  9. jimspice says:

    How about something we can both agree upon. Wouldn’t it have been nice if Prosser would have been able to successfully prosecute the rapist?

  10. Cindy…all you have to do is research the case a little to see this letter does not tell the “whole” story as you claim. I’m trying to be delicate in regards to Troy Merryfield…but he has been quoted as saying something completely different about Prosser just a few years ago. As far as I’m concerned…Prosser is partially responsible for a pedophile having the ability to abuse more children. Prosser scared the Merryfield family into not pursuing criminal charges.

    I do not like the ad…only because I know it has to be hard on the Merryfield family…and I understand why Troy Merryfield is upset…but that does not change the facts of the case.

  11. Prosser didn’t say he didn’t have enough to prosecute. He told the family the brothers wouldn’t be believed over the pedophile priest. Who is/was he to make that prediction? Isn’t that precisely why we have trials? Who knows…maybe the priest would have confessed his sins. But…Prosser didn’t even try…or if he did try…he was grossly incompetent.

  12. jimspice, yes, that would have been wonderful. The whole priest abuse story is despicable. However, implicating Prosser as letting one get away appears to be unreasonable, and should have not been done in the advertisement we’re discussing.

  13. mew, because you were there? You are pretending to have information you can not possibly possess. The victim came forward, I can only assume with a great deal of pain attached, to call the advertisement out of context. Do you demand to continue to damn the victim in this matter? How unkind you must be to do so.

  14. OK, here’s the statement from the commercial, that if true, is the clincher. Prosser failed to ask the police to investigate. He could have done more. He didn’t.

  15. If is a really big word for only two letters. Prove the if and we’ll chat again.

  16. Cindy…I’m not damning the victim. I am going to say this once more. Troy Merryfield was quoted as saying exactly what the ad says about Prosser just a few years ago. What don’t you get about that? Are you saying you don’t wonder why he feels differently now?

    The information is out there. Much of what I know came from Prosser and the Merryfields. You are assuming the lie that there wasn’t enough to prosecute is true. The Merryfields weren’t the pedophile priest first victims…what if they would have investigated and found more victims to collaborate the Merryfields accusations? The point is…Prosser didn’t even do that much.

  17. I am saying I don’t question the victim. Period. You, however, feel very comfortable in doing just that over and over again.

    Do I know you? I’d have to admit, I doubt I would like you if I do.

  18. Yikes Cindy. Harsh. And this coming from someone who prefers to refer to rapists as abusers.

  19. Cindy…no, we don’t know each other. Maybe if you read this article you will feel differently about Prosser…but then maybe not. Hopefully the link will work.

    I really don’t care too much if you like me or not. I don’t think I said anything bad or insensitive. I have compassion for and sympathize with the victim…but Prosser did allow a pedophile priest go free and he needs to be held accountable. I don’t know how he should be held accountable…but covering-up for him isn’t it.

  20. Prosser is really no longer the issue. The victim’s statement should be honored.

    Are you the kind of person who thinks the rape victim deserved it? I can’t believe you will so willingly put politics above what this victim is saying. Kind of disgusting, but I think I’ve make it clear I’m not impressed.

    jimspice – asking you to prove an if before I debate it is harsh? What kind of pansy world do you live in anyway?

  21. I think the victims’ statements in the 70’s should have been honored…but that’s just the way I am. I think when two teenage boys come forward and say their priest molested them…the prosecutor should honor those victims by holding the molester responsible…but again…that’s just the way I am.

  22. We would all like to have held the molester responsible earlier rather than later. You assume there were grounds to do so. There is no proof that was the case. All of your argument is built on wishful thinking. Not uncommon for the left, but certainly time consuming.

    Would you mind slipping into reality now and then?

  23. Cindy did you notice how the left is saying what Chris Abele did 10 years ago does not matter but what Prosser did 30+ years ago does.

    You may as well beat your head against a wall rather than try to have an honest discussion with a liberal

  24. Ooh. That’s an excellent point.

  25. You won’t hear me defending him. I still plan on voting for him, but I’m not happy about it.

  26. Uhoh. I’m not sure who “him” is this time.

  27. John Foust says:

    So how are we to interpret the 2008 statements of the victim?