A Pennsylvania family has revealed that they took a videotape of their teenage daughter having sex at their home with a Roman Catholic priest, Rev. Luis A. Bonilla Margarito. They allege that he is also the father of a child by the girl who was a senior at a Catholic high school in Reading.
The girl had the baby at 19. Margarito was only removed as chaplain of Reading Central Catholic High School and pastor of St. Joseph Church after the parents secretly video-taped him having sex with their daughter in the basement of their home. She was 18 at that time, but the family insists that the sexual relationship began when she was a minor.
The family alleges that they allowed her to continue to meet with the priest as part of her counseling for severe mental health issues as a result of prior sexual abuse by another adult male. She also suffered from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Source: Mcall
What a scumball. Now if only the parents had a little (violent) surprise waiting for the ‘Priest’ on his next visit.
Isn’t it illegal to take advantage of someone legally declared unable to take care of himself or give consent for sex.
@Otteray Scribe
If she had the baby at 19, then it follows she was underage at the time she got pregnant. Since they allowed her to be in counseling with the pedophile…
—
First off, a pedophile is somebody that has an attraction and preference for the pre-pubescent, which means prior to puberty (sexual maturity). Also, one can be a pedophile and not engage in sexual relations. If she had the baby at 19, the conception happened when she was 18, the age of majority.
As much as the Priest was reprehensible there is something fishy here, such as the possibility of parents setting up what they thinks is a big money lawsuit.
Catholics are generally obedient folks who wouldn’t question their priest’s actions no matter what their lying eyes see. Catholics who question are known as Lutherans.
ShireNomad, you are right on the dates. Too many hours at work, too little sleep makes one goofy. My bad.
grw, I went back and re-read the source story. Maybe you are seeing somehting I am not. The alleged seduction took place first when the girl was 17, she got pregnant at 18 and had the baby prematurely at 19. Sometime during this time the parents videotaped what they thought was a “counseling” session but turned out to be a lot more malignant that that. There is no mention of a second female having the baby.
Too sick for comment.
Maybe the vid was necessary to prove what they were saying. Aside from the power imbalance, who would believe them when he just said t’aint so. And the girlster sounds a tad fragile from the article….more info needed….
something sounds fishy with the parents. they made a video of their daughter having sex with a priest and nothing is said for two years?
pressure from the church?
at least this priest wasn’t having his way with little boys, progress I suppose.
rafflaw,
I’m not sure that Professor Turley meant what you think – did the parents allow the priest to ‘continue to meet’ with their daughter before or after they made the video tape? From what’s written here I’m don’t know which is the case.
It may not matter, but what is wrong with this picture? If it were my daughter, I’d be the one in the holding cell, charged with aggravated assault, manslaughter or murder. Just saying….is like Child Protective Services involved. I am sure, I could see using a taser in this situation. Against everyone involved, except the child.
What parent in their right mind(that may be the key)would not scream bloody murder if they caught the daughter,no matter what age, in bed with a priest? Then these same parents allow her to “see” the priest as part of a counseling regime? If this girl was underage I would think that DCFS should be called and the child should be removed immediately. If this priest did have sex with the girl when she was a minor, why haven’t charges been brought?
reread the item…a different girl had the child.
The source article says the affair began when she was seventeen. However, she already had her 18th birthday when her parents caught them in flagrante delicto. Still, I fail to understand why they took their complaint to the Diocese rather than to law enforcement.
Check your math. She was definitely at least 18 when she got pregnant.
The priest is at risk of being defrocked for violating his chastity vows, but any attempt to charge him with statutory rape will be met by any good defense lawyer with “now let me get this straight: you claim you believed my client was having sex with your underaged daughter… and you saw no problems in letting it continue.”
If she had the baby at 19, then it follows she was underage at the time she got pregnant. Since they allowed her to be in counseling with the pedophile after videotaping him tupping their daughter, the whole family needs to be in counseling–and not with a member of the clergy. There are enough problems to go around, and now there is a new soul in the family. One worries about what kind of upbringing the baby might have. Especially in the area of sex education.
One basic rule about sex offenders is that they do not need to have contact with their victim. In counseling at that? Holy crap!