The strongest evidence that anyone has brought up thus far against Fr. Joseph is the twenty thousand dollar check. Without that check I don't think there would be much of a case. However, if I were in his shoes, I can understand giving that check (if he did). If I had been close friends with a family for a while, and they accused me in private of molesting their teenage daughter when I hadn't, I would be very nervous. Even if I had done nothing, all they have to do is say that I touched her inappropriately, and all of society would turn on me as child molester. Everyone here attacking Fr. Joseph proves that one false allegation can destroy a man's reputation and life. They wouldn't need to prove anything. They merely need to claim it. What if the family who accused me said that all they wanted was money (to pay for the psychiatrist of course)? I can see giving them a $20,000 check and telling them to leave me alone. The check does not prove his guilt. It may simply prove that he did not want the false accusations brought to the public. That is reasonable, because as his attackers have shown, the public does not care for justice; they want a scapegoat to persecute. I know I would not trust the public to bring justice if a family falsely accused me, why should he trust them either?