Police Report on the Rev. Padraig (Patrick) Greene
Original post made by Jeb Bing on Nov 20, 2007
Crime: Lewd act in public, Sect. 314, Code P.C.
Address of occurrence: 6900 Broadway (Park)
Occurred on/from: 2 March 1999, 1350 (1:30 p.m.), Tuesday
"On 2 Mar 99 at 1350 hrs, I was assinged (sic.) to work in plain clothes at the North Oakland Sports Center (6900 Broadway). I entered the mens (sic) restroom and observed the suspect (Greene, Patrick J.) standing facing the urinal.
Mr. Greene was masterbating (sic.) with his left hand. Mr. Greens (sic) penis was erect and he was not urinating. I asked Green (sic) if he had come there for an "afternoon delight;" He said he was just relaxing (still masterbating) (sic.) Mr. Greene asked what I was there for and turned to face me.
He continued to masterbate (sic.). I responded "Whatever comes up." He replied "What comes up most (sic) go down."
I then took Mr. Green (sic) into custody."
A document from the Municipal Court on April 28, 1999 reports that Greene spent two days in custody, that bail of $1,000 was waived and that Greene was released to participate in the rehabilitation program.
On Nov. 17, 1999, after verifying that the rehabilitation program has been completed successfully, Judge Castellanos dismissed all charges.
on Nov 20, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Confused is a registered user.
I'm confused! So what child did Padraig Greene abuse or, for that matter, what adult?
Thank you, Jeb, for posting this police report and bringing to light the GROSS exaggerations, false accusations and misinformation being disseminated about Father Greene. Those responsible should open their Bibles to Exodus 20:16, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
on Nov 21, 2007 at 12:05 pm
aaronw is a registered user.
either way , what this "father" did was wrong and unexcusable. wether or not he was caught soliciting a minor. he was still caught masterbating in the public bathroom. with no concern that someone was speaking to him. he (Comment partially removed by Pleasanton Weekly Online staff)should not be aloud in the church. (Comment partially removed by Pleasanton Weekly Online staff)even if he only spent 2 days in custody, probably just in the holding cells as well. when i got a drunk in public back in 2000, i had to serve 3 days in custody. which one is worse? i think it's the lewd act. considering drinking is legal masterbating in a public bathroom urinal with people watching, in a facility known for soliciting minors. simply cause he had to settle (Comment partially removed by Pleasanton Weekly Online staff) he gets special treatment. i don't get it. but one thing that should never happen is allowing him into the pleasanton church. it is only a matter of time before a similar or much worse situation happends again. (Comment partially removed by Pleasanton Weekly Online staff)
on Nov 21, 2007 at 11:14 pm
PToWN94566 is a registered user.
I agree with Aaron (I came on this forum because the other one has 130 something comments- to many to read). But I am still very curious as to why it's ok to excuse and forgive a priest but if a teacher or any other community leader did this, it would be hell for them. WHY is it ok??? Because a religion says to forgive those who have sinned? Just because a minor wasn't involved doesn't make it any better or worse. And let me add:A good person that has no faith in religion is better than an evil one that does. All Priests that have done things to children or sexual acts in public not involving children, to me, are considered "evil."
I personally know families that will not return to St. Augustines/Elizabeth just because of this- not of fear or any worry that something may happen. Just because they do not have a need to belong to a community church that associates with these kinds of people. It's like locking an alcoholic that goes to A.A in a room each day for 5 hours with a case of beer. Eventually, he/she will crack and give in.