Home | Message Board Home

Nowhere in my message do I defend any of the monks. I agree that no stone should be left unturned. I also agree that the "eaten by turtles" is ridiculous. However, what are you saying? Are you saying that a monk abducted and killed Josh? Is that your theory? What possible motive would there be? The sex abuse scandal was wide open in 2002, it was already all over the media. The monks were already fully exposed as perpetrators, Josh wasn't uncovering anything that wasn't already in the media. What we do know is that Josh was participating in an illegal drinking party, and he had a fake photo ID on his computer, probably created for that person to buy alcohol or go to bars. It seems to me that reports vary on what the students were consuming. You talk about silence, how about the silence on drug and alcohol use at St. John's? Seems to me there is also a conspiracy of silence among the students about the party atmosphere. Students would have a very good reason to be silent about all this, underage drinking and drug use are illegal. Students making pot buys or ecstasy open up a door to the criminal drug community. 90% of all the pot and illegal drugs in Minnesota are handled by a single drug cartel. Do we know anything about how students doing pot or other drug buys opened up the impression that white kids with money attend St. John's? Is this idea any less weird than the Illuminati? Because the party atmosphere on these campuses is well established, and there is far more silence over this than there is about the criminal monks.

Contact Us