THE DALLAS - OZVILLE CHARTER

ACT I
Scene: Bucolic street in Ozville; early afternoon; autumn day. Police Officer Kafka, Father Tom Jones
Kafka: Are you Father Tom Jones?
Jones: Yes, officer, I am.
Kafka: I am Police Officer Franz Kafka. Father, I must arrest you. A man claimed that you kissed him sexually twenty years ago, when he was in fourth grade.
Jones: That’s ridiculous, officer. What is his name?
Kafka: That will be told you in court. It’s not part of my job description.

ACT II
Office of the DA; June 14. Court bailiff; Father Jones.
Bailiff: Father, this way please. I would like to introduce you to District Attorney Franz Kafka.
Jones: You! Franza Kafka. The District Attorney? You were the police officer who arrested me. How can you be the DA?
Kafka: The Mayor of Ozville, Father, felt that the case would have better continuity if the police officer was deputized as DA. Be at the courthouse in a week.
ACT III
The Courthouse; June 21. Priest; judge.
Kafka: Good morning, Father Jones!
Jones: Good morning, Officer Kafka! Where is the judge?
Kafka: Father, I must apologize. I have been deputized to serve as judge. As I told you, the mayor likes continuity.
Jones:Well, that’s curious. Let’s get on with the trial. Where’s the jury?
Kafka: There is no jury, Father. You get ordinary people together, they might contradict the judge. That causes confusion. Unanimity is important.
Jones: Don’t I have a right to defend myself?
Kafka: By George, you’re right. Sorry, Father, I forgot. Of course, I will now hear your defense. Speak up.
Jones: The boy was in fourth grade. He had been bullied by older boys. He was crying. Sister Principal told him to see Father Jones in the Parish Center. He came over, quite upset. I gathered the little chap in my arms, maybe kissed him on the back of his head. Nothing sexual about that!
Kafka: The complainant claims it was sexual . How can you prove it was innocent?
Jones: How can he prove it was sexual? After twenty years, how could it be proved one way or the other? What about the presumption of innocence?

Kafka: Remember, Father, the Church is not a democracy. Separation of powers and presumptions belong to democracies. Sometimes the guilty are freed. We deputies screwed up in the past by hiding those guilty of abusing children. Now we must show the DAs, the media, and the trial lawyers, who caught us in the past and found us personally liable – to the tune of $2 billion of our citizens money – for not supervising and for covering up sexual abusers, that now we mean business! To demonstrate this, I now pronounce you guilty of causing an allegation nasty enough to cast a shadow on Oz. Although it is irregular, I also sentence you: You are hereby removed from priestly ministry!
Jones: Judge, I now appeal to the Appellant Bench.
Kafka: Very good. I approve the appeal. But I note in the interest of continuity, I am also the Appellant Bench and I affirm the judgment of the lower court.
Jones: Judge, I now appeal to the highest level, the Wizard of Oz.
Kafka: Good try, Father, but the Wizard of Oz is a long way off. To travel to the Wizard requires my approval of your advocate. I shall schedule hearings sometime next year to consider the

suitability of your Canonist Advocate.

Bailiff: Hear ye, hear ye. The Honorable Police Officer Kafka, District Attorney Kafka, Judge Kafka, Appellant Bench Justice Kafka, and Sentencing Justice Kafka have completed the work of the day. God help this Honorable Court!

* * * * * * * *
Mr. Tom Jones, age 56, is now a cashier at Wal-Mart’s in Oklahoma City. The Oz story is his true story with a fictitious name. The Archbishop of ____________was his arresting officer, prosecutor, judge, appellant bench, sentencing judge, and, as Tom reported, his executioner, placing the toxic needle in his arm.

* * * * * * * *

The USCCB must quickly revisit the Dallas Charter as to prosecution of alleged offenders, who may be innocent. It must create a visible source of independent appeal to replace what now ludicrously purports to be a judicial process.