See, I think that is the thing. Why would the priest lie on the witness stand to save these punks? Maybe he felt responsible for not taking care of them as youngsters so they wouldn't pull that prank to begin with, then he didn't know about what went on in the boys' home and although now they are gangsters, he feels that at least he can save them to some degree, although it is a small save.
You are right: I don't believe he would do that, being a priest. If he did, he'd have to have some sort of reason and the film should say why. Maybe what I just said above is an example.

Yes, a priest would surely learn in the seminary that one may not do a wrong act in order that good may come of it
This is how I saw it too. He was a man of faith and conviction and he chose the lesser of two evils, lying on oath to help bring to light the sickening child abuse the murdered guard had commited.
Duty Now For The Future

Yes, a priest would surely learn in the seminary that one may not do a wrong act in order that good may come of it

Even Jesus would have lied in court to defend John and Tommy.

This message has been deleted.

Ditto. Same here! Great movie.

"And the Father did do right by me".
Well he certainly did not do right by the general population whose safety the justice system is supposed to protect. I'm not sure if it never occurred to De Niro's character, or if he just didn't care, but what his perjury accomplished, was letting two hardened criminals back on the street - guys who were clearly beyond the point of any "reforming" and were more than likely to commit further crimes, including murder. And all this for some vague, abstract sense of "revenge" which, in reality, was such a small victory considering they never even got back to the system that facilitated and covered up the abuse (even Ferguson's testimony where he admitted his guilt was wiped off the records and legally never happened).
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

I also believe that 'right' is also supposed to be just. And the Father did do right by me. They killed an evil person in my eyes and it was justified. The abuse and rape of many young helpless boys for years on end should be punishable by death in the way I view morality. I don't normaly condone the death penalty but in cases such as these, it would not bother me in the slightest. There is a hilosophy that morals are objective and should be done no matter what in spite of circumstances. I do not agree with this time of morality. In this case, we are putting lying above above everything else moral. IMO there are times and situations that lying is the immoral thing to do. For example I would lie of robber asked me "where my family was" because the safety of my family is more important then telling the truth. Not to say lying just for the sake of getting out of a bad situation so you don't face the consequences is moral either. I believe that for each situation there is objective moral and ethical choices to make. (I would still categorize is as moral relativism though) I think the move did a great job showing the struggle with the Fathers decision. In the end the 2 men did end up dead and I believe in the sleepers universe, karma was at work because the 2 men were not good people. Its hard to say how their lives would have turned out if they didn't go to the reform school and if the 2 men who killed the gaurd would still uave turned out bad.
On a side not I just read a week ago that there was a reform school (forgot where) that found over 100 graves at a reform school, many unmarked. Stores of rape and abuse just like in this movie were reported. And just like in the movie, a lot of the parents of the deceased children were told they died on influenza.
Has anyone in this family ever even seen a chicken?

"Right" is suppose to be what is just, but it's certainly unjust to let someone get away with murder. I think the point of the film is that blood is thicker than water. A concept I don't agree with, by the way. The priest lied to protect one of his own. The residents of Hell's Kitchen stood together and achieved an injustice that squared things in their minds. So according to the movie logic, it was the right thing to do.
What ruined the movie for me is that I couldn't identify with a single character. All these stars seemed to have been flung together with the expectation that the result would have to be good. Or if not good, at least profitable. That part's probably right.

Right you are. It is the ultimate act of protection of his boys and revenge on the system. Rather than betray his oath, he stood up for right.

De Niro's character perjuring himself actually made the movie resonate deeper with me.
The most powerful weapon on Earth is the human soul on fire. Ferdinand Foch

This message has been deleted.

Father Bob lying under oath did not ruin
Sleepers
. He understood the experiences the group had gone through in being repeatedly raped/assaulted. By defending John and Tommy, it meant their revenge was not in vain. Of course this relies heavily on audience's emotiveness of the group's victimisation.
"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not".

It was a surprise indeed. I'd expected the priest to do something like twist the truth, but I guess this is the whole point of his relationship with Shakes, like when Shakes asked him to lie to the parents just to comfort them.