"Where there is no malice there can be no offense.” - Sir Thomas More

This basic principle of law (regula iuris) is found in canon 1321 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law (CIC). Its legal implication was strengthened in the recent revision of the Penal Code (Book VI of the CIC) promulgated by Pope Francis in his Apostolic Letter motu proprio, Pascite gregem Dei. 

The Supreme Legislator revised canon 1321 to include expressly the presumption of innocence of the accused. While this was always the case, it has not, of recent, been the praxis or mentality of many officials and agents, including some Bishops, of dioceses in the handling of accusations of sexual misconduct, either with minors or adults, against clerics (bishops, priests, and deacons).

The presumption of imputability (which gives initial benefit to the "word" of the accuser) can be overturned. That is to say, it must be held in tension with the overarching presumption of innocence (which gives ultimate benefit to the "word" and reputation of the accused).

The blind eye of justice, therefore, requires the pursuit of the truth of the matter. A well-conducted preliminary investigation will produce acts and proofs (acta et probata) which must be weighed against the defense arguments and proofs (defensiones) without which the semblance of truth cannot be revealed nor the presumption of innocence upheld. Once a semblance of truth is revealed, a penal process for the determination of the truth of the matter and, if necessary and appropriate, for the imposition of penalties can be initiated. With the recent revision to canon 1341 CIC , the Supreme Legislator established that if there is a semblance a penal process must be initiated. The option to deal with the matter in a fraternal or pastoral manner remains available if, thereby, justice can be sufficiently restored, the offender reformed, and the scandal repaired.

Accordingly, the scale of justice will reveal the truth. It will determine in law and in fact (in iure et in facto) whether or not the alleged misconduct was committed with malice (ex dolo), i.e., freely, conscientiously, and deliberately and with the knowledge that one is committing an offense. If so, a just penalty can and should be imposed in accord with the law. If not, the innocence of the accused should be declared and every effort should be made to restore (if necessary) and to defend the reputation and good name of the accused.