This expert panel discussion will walk through common child interviewing situations in family law matters, with a focus toward in camera interviewing and guardian ad litem investigations. The panel will discuss some "best practices" of child interviewing in the legal field so that lawyers, judges, and guardians ad litem can improve their skills in working with children. The panel will discuss how to prepare clients and their children for an interview, good techniques when conducting the interview to gain useful information, and how to minimize the emotional impact the interview will have on the child both before and after the interview.

Abigail J.W. Salawage, Esq.

Judge Annie R. Gómez Shockey became a Magisterial District Judge in January of 2018. Prior to taking the bench, Judge Gómez Shockey was a partner at the law firm of Wertime & Gómez LLP. While in private practice much of her work experience focused on child custody, divorce and child support matters. 

President Judge Meyers is requesting that any attorneys that have interest in serving as an Attorney Reviewer of the inventories and annual reports filed by guardians in the Guardianship Tracking System contact his Judicial Assistant, Kimberly Bowling at kgbowling@franklincountypa.gov or 717-261-3844. Attorneys who are appointed by the Court to perform the service are compensated at the court appointed rate of compensation of $65.00 per hour. For those attorneys who may have questions about the requirements of an Attorney Reviewer, President Judge Meyers would be happy to discuss the role with you.

more information contact: legalservicesbooksale@gmail.com

You can share these events on Facebook to help get the word out!

CLICK HERE to Register.

Visit www.tfec.org/angle to apply.

Know a student who is not yet in a 3-year J.D. program, but plans to attend? Please have them visit www.tfec.org/faerieanglereminders/ to sign up to receive annual reminders about the availability of this scholarship.

As you all know, we are having our Bi-Annual Bench Bar Conference this year at the Bedford Springs Resort. The date is October 7, 2022.

SUPPORT CIRCLES

Support Circles builds relationships that inspire and equip our community to overcome poverty. We initiate purposeful new friendships and partner with families to develop their own future stories, working to support them in meeting their goals.

Through this community initiative, we see people move into long-term stability as their dreams become a reality, identify common obstacles, and learn how to create a more vibrant community! In the Support Circles initiative, there are many opportunities for individual and community involvement to support this critical work.

The attached document outlines the updates for distance learning through the 2023 compliance period. The PACLE website has been updated. https://www.pacle.org/ Please click on the link below to read the guidelines provided by the PACLE Board. 

As you may be aware, the Supreme Court’s Elder Law Task Force recommended that the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania’s (AOPC) Office of Elder Justice in the Courts (OEJC) develop educational and training programs for guardians, judges, court administrative staff and others involved in guardianship matters. On behalf of Senior Judge Paula Francisco Ott, chair of the Advisory Council on Elder Justice in the Courts, I am pleased to advise you that the training for family/lay guardians, Fundamentals of Guardianship – What Family Guardians Need to Know, will be presented virtually each month in 2022 starting in May. While the training is especially important for newly appointed guardians, guardians who have been serving will also benefit from attending. Please note this training is not intended for professional/attorney guardians.

The virtual training will be presented free of charge by Joan Krechmer (LCSW-G), a professional, nationally certified guardian. The AOPC will be sending all family/lay guardians an invitation and instructions on how to register for a training session. A copy of the invitation and schedule are attached. You are encouraged to provide copies of the invitation to newly appointed guardians in your county.

Cognetti Law Group is seeking 1 or more associate attorneys interested in an opportunity to be part of a well-established family law firm. A quick path to partnership is available for the right candidate. Current book of business is a plus but is not necessary. 10 years of experience is preferred while 5+ years of intensive family law litigation would be considered. Must be in good standing with the PA Bar Association with no disciplinary actions against them. Applicant must be a team player with great communication skills and must be able to negotiate a case to a good settlement while also having the skills to try the case if necessary.

This position offers a base rate compensation, plus the opportunity for bonuses. Benefits include 401K, profit-sharing and a generous paid-time-off package. This is a full-time position from Monday through Friday.

If interested, please send cover letter and resume to Karrie Macknair at kmacknair@cognettilaw.com.

Job Type: Full-time

Pay: $100,000 - $200,000 annually

The complete member list is updated quarterly and available to you and your staff two ways.

You may download and print a PDF from the members' section of our website (log in required). Or you may email Amelia at director@franklinbar.org to receive a PDF or excel document anytime.

It is 1233, in the southeastern French town of Albi, where a group of black robed Dominican friars enter the town. At their side and critical to their purpose is a cannon lawyer, an expert in religious and theological law. They are there at the command of Pope Gregory IX and their mandate is clear. They know that the local clergy and gentry are unhappy at their appearance, ever jealous of their prerogatives. The average resident of Albi is ignorant of their purpose but have had every reason to fear the appearance of the Church’s representatives of late. Not four years before the savage Albigensian Crusade had finished bringing this land and its rulers to their knees. The Church launched the brutal twenty-year crusade, not against infidels but against fellow Christians known as the Cathars. While the crusade broke the political power of the Cathars, it did little to end their religious fervor. And that is why the Dominicans are here. The Cathar sect was long ago deemed heretical but all of the Church’s efforts to combat it have failed. The friars’ mandate is to return these wayward souls to what the Church has decided is the true faith, one way or another. They bring the judicial authority of the Pope to purge the Church of this existential threat. They are some of the first inquisitors of the Papal Inquisition and the residents of Albi would be wise to fear.       

This article will be limited primarily to a discussion of the two Medieval Inquisitions: The Papal Inquisition and briefly with the Episcopal Inquisition for context. These should not be confused with the Spanish Inquisition, Roman Inquisition, or other later inquisitions that were formed hundreds of years later and were far bloodier (perhaps the subject of a future article). In popular memory and media, the Inquisition is a centrally organized monolith that existed from the medieval period onward. This is far from accurate. In reality, the Inquisition was generally a decentralized group of individuals with little top-down organization. It varied dramatically in methods and organization across time and space. What most people probably imagine when you hear the word Inquisition comes from the reign of terror of the Spanish Inquisition. This secularly controlled inquisition was used by the Spanish Crown to purify Spain following the Reconquista. Its reputation is well earned, but it has many important differences from earlier inquisitions.

Heresy is adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma. This is more than being mistaken as to a matter of belief. Indeed, in a complicated religion like Christianity, theological mistakes were inevitable. Certainly, with Mass being said entirely in Latin, which almost no one outside of the church spoke, confusion was common. This left the average person or even seculars ruler, nearly wholly reliant on the Church for religious understanding (this was by design and gave the Church great power over temporal powers). When this counsel was unclear or not forthcoming people were left to their own devices. Even within the Church it was not always clear what beliefs were heretical. Great church councils not infrequently met to ponder the important issues of faith with the losers potentially being branded as heretics. What was important was that the Church had the final say on what was orthodox belief and what was heresy. The mistaken who accepted this judgment were rarely if ever punished. It was the person who either doggedly refused to recant or relapsed into heretical beliefs that was branded a criminal. 

Interestingly heresy was a secular crime long before it was an ecclesiastical crime. Following the Roman Empire’s conversion to Christianity heresy was made a crime against the state in 380 C.E. In 386 C.E., the first heretics were executed by Roman secular courts. It is not thought that this was a common practice and there was backlash against such harsh punishment for heresy.

Heresy would remain a secular crime in nearly every European country that converted to Christianity. There were two traditions of trial for heresy. The Roman tradition, on which later Inquisitions were widely based, and the Germanic tradition. The Germanic tradition, which became popular in much of western Europe following the decline of the Roman Empire, was accusatory. A private person accused another of heresy (or other crimes) at great risk to themselves. If the accused was acquitted the accuser would face criminal penalties similar or equal to what the accused would have suffered. Truth of accusation was not actually the point of these trials or ordeals. The reputation for truth of the accuser and the accused was the central issue, often proven by offering numerous witnesses to swear to the party’s truthfulness. The more truthful (or often more powerful and well connected) would prevail because their word was more valuable and trustworthy (even if they were in this case lying). The Roman tradition, from which the inquisition got its name, was concerned with establishing the truth of the accusations of heresy. Judges became the accusers who strove to actively discover the truth of the acquisitions through a process known as inquisitio. Witnesses would testify as to the crime and be rigorously examined by the judge. While the reputation for truthfulness of the witnesses was important, it was only one part of the calculation of guilt or innocence. At the time the first approved inquisition began the Germanic tradition was more common.     

Church efforts against heresy before the Inquisition had varied greatly but were generally more focused on reforming rather then punishing heretics. The secular courts were very harsh toward heretics and often made mistakes. Secular rulers and the communities they ruled often had incentive to deal harshly with supposed heretics. Heretics were often viewed as a threat to public order and harmony (they were, by definition, people who rocked the boat and were a threat to the established order). Accused heretics were often lynched without trial by their angry neighbors. Even when the accused was given a trial in the secular courts, they were judged by the local lord, who often would be unhappy at the disturbance their actions caused. This lord was unlikely to be an expert in cannon law or religious orthodoxy. They were far more likely to be wholly ignorant on either subject. The local lord could also confiscate the property of convicted heretics. This could lead to the punishment and even deaths of people the Church would not have considered heretical. Torture was commonly used in secular courts to extract confessions in many different types of cases, including heresy. This practice goes back to Roman law when the testimony of slaves was only admissible after its truthfulness had been confirmed by torture (the thinking was that only if the slave maintained their story under torture could it be considered reliable). Free men accused of capital crimes were also often tortured by Roman Courts to extract the “truth”. The attempt by the Church to assert control over heresy prosecutions would never be entirely successful, as local clerics and lords jealously guarded their authority in these cases. 

In 1184 Pope Lucius II issued a papal bull requiring local bishops to begin investing heresies in their domains. This is considered the beginning of the Episcopal Inquisition and was in response to the widespread Cathar and Waldensian Heresies. The Church had not dealt with such widespread heretical movements in centuries. These heresies were responses to the perceived moral corruption and worldliness of the Church and were seen as threats to orthodoxy and authority. Both were anticlerical and rejected the material excesses of the medieval Church (the Church hierarchy often suffered by comparison to their ascetic exemplars). The Cathars’ heresy revolved around their belief in Dualism. They believed that there was a primary good god (the Christian God) who created the spiritual world and the afterlife and a lesser evil god (Satan) who created the material world. This caused their most devout followers known as Perfects, to reject the material world as tainted by evil and focus on the afterlife.

These Episcopal Inquisitions were limited to Southern France, Northern Italy, and parts of Germany, and varied dramatically based on location. There was often significant reluctance to carry them out and perceived problems in the many judicial processes used. One major issue that would shape later inquisitions was that accusations were generally not kept secret. While this may have been fairer to the accused, it led to a lot of prominent witnesses being murdered in retaliation for their denunciations, which made it especially difficult to find witnesses against the powerful. The disorganized nature of these inquisitions prevented them from being widely effective and increased concerns about abuse.

In 1231 Pope Gregory IX reformed the process, offering more detailed guidance on how inquisitorial trials should be carried out. The Pope’s motive was twofold. The Church needed a more effective and consistent way of dealing with heretics and the Church wished to stop the extra- judicial killings of heretics. Pope Gregory’s new rules and guidance were designed to save the lives of accused heretics. Whether this succeeded is a hotly contested question among historians.  

The Pope began training and appointing specific inquisitors to travel to trouble spots similar to the circuit judges of the period. These were primarily Dominican (and later also Franciscan) friars or monks. From 1233 onward, to its height in the 14^th Century, this inquisition is generally called the Papal Inquisition. While the various inquisitors all acted with the Pope’s authority, they had few dealings with each other and little direct control by the Pope. In theory, they were independent of church hierarchies and secular rulers. In practice, they needed to work with and through these local authorities to be effective.

Any person who was accused or openly suspected of heresy would be summoned to the court. Refusal to appear was seen as evidence of guilt. The inquisitors would interview witnesses in secret and take written depositions. The witness’s identity was never disclosed to the accused who was often not told of what they had been accused. The accused was given the opportunity to give a list of mortal enemies. Accusations from anyone on this list were supposed to be disregarded by the court. This was a conscious effort to prevent people trying to settle grudges through the inquisition. Witnesses who were named as mortal enemies could suffer punishment. Once the investigation was complete a court would be convened. A notary would be present to record the entirety of the proceeding. While the courts were not public, representatives of the local church and community were present and sworn to secrecy. They would sign the transcripts of the hearings testifying to their authenticity. One interesting part of these transcripts (many of which survive) is that they contain some of the only firsthand examples of the words of medieval peasants; generally, only the words of nobles or churchmen survive from this period.

The accused could be confined and examined over long periods of time. The accused were allowed to have witnesses testify on their own behalf, but this rarely occurred. Few witnesses were willing to expose themselves to the inevitable suspicion of testifying on behalf of a suspected heretic. Initially the accused were allowed to have lawyers but for the same reasons few were ever able to retain a defense, but after 1254 the right to counsel was revoked for reasons that are not clear.

The inquisitors in Albi were forbidden to use torture under any circumstances as it was originally banned. Pope Innocent IV would reverse this decision in 1252, allowing torture in limited circumstances. Inquisitors themselves, like all Catholic clergy, were forbidden to draw blood so lay people would be employed for this purpose. Torture was only supposed to be used when “enough partial proofs to indicate that a full proof—a confession—was likely, and no other full proofs were available.” It could only be used once and for a limited duration. Finally, the means of torture were limited to methods that would not result in bloodshed, miscarriages, mutilation, or death. I doubt this restriction was much comfort to those being tortured, nor was it entirely successful. A confession extracted under torture was only admissible if it was made again the next day without the threat of torture.

A person could not be convicted of heresy unless at least two credible witnesses gave testimony against them. While this was the minimum, it was expected that most inquisitors would refuse to convict without far higher levels of proof. Pope Gregory imagined an inquisition that would endeavor “not to punish the wicked so as to hurt the innocent.” At any point in the process the accused or convicted heretic could appeal to the Pope, but this was only a practical option for the wealthy. While the church wanted to excise the perceived cancer of heresy, they preferred to scare the heretic back onto what they saw as the proper path. The entire inquisitorial process is designed not to kill heretic but to frighten and convince them back into line. When all questioning was complete, the judge would confer with the cannon lawyer and any other knowledgeable experts to reach a judgment. The strictures of cannon law would rarely help a Cathar because their heresy was rather explicit but could assist a less clear break with religious orthodoxy. 

If our Inquisitors from earlier did convict someone (considering that Albi was overrun with Cathars it would be difficult for them not to) they were forbidden to sentence them to death. Catholic clergy members were not permitted to kill. This did not entirely reprieve the convicted heretic, because the secular authorities did have the ability to execute heretics (and were usually happy to do so). Inquisitors had the ability to turn over convicted heretics to secular authorities, but evidence suggests they were often reluctant to do so. While sources from this period are far from comprehensive, it seems that the Inquisition’s bloody reputation during this period, while not unfounded, is exaggerated. Common punishments included: wearing a yellow cross on your clothing (which led to social ostracization lest you taint those around you), religious pilgrimages, scourging, imprisonment, and seizure of property by the secular authorities (it would often be shared with the Church). 

Trying to draw takeaways from the Inquisition is a difficult task. By modern standards, their methods and goals are abhorrent. Judged by the standards of their time, they were a rational, orderly, and consistent attempt to deal with something that most people agreed was a problem. The homogeneity of Medieval European society was taken for granted and seen as necessary. Heretics were and would continue to be executed by secular authorities with or without the efforts of the Inquisition. The scarcity of sources and partisan nature of those that are available further muddy the water. Many of the accounts of the atrocities of the inquisition come from the period of the Protestant Reformation. During this period, the Spanish and Roman Inquisition were both employed against Protestant converts (and countless others) and it is possible that their experiences colored how older events were retold. Many Protestant and Catholic sources from this period are efforts at propaganda, meant to demonize the opponents, each accused of heresy.  Furthermore, many of the primary sources for the activities of the Episcopal and Papal Inquisitions can only be found in the vaults of the Vatican Archives, which are not generally available to the public. Those historians who have been granted access to these records tend to conclude that fewer people died at the Inquisitors’ hands than is widely believed. Doubtless, many thousands of people were executed after being convicted of heresy by the Papal Inquisition, although the number could be much higher. The exact numbers will never be known. It is impossible to know if the calling of the Episcopal and Papal Inquisitions killed more heretics then their attempts at reforms may have saved. Regardless, the various movements against heretics boil down to society’s alarming tendency to violently suppress dissent and unpopular opinions. In a world where one’s political and cultural adversaries are so often condemned in the harshest terms, we would do well to remember those blacked robed Inquisitors walking into Albi.