Articles Posted in Priest Abuse

Published on:

Former Saint John’s Archbishop Alphonse Penney was aware of sexual abuse allegations against former Roman Catholic Priest James Hickey as early as 1980. This according to evidence filed by the diocese’s insurers who are seeking to deny responsibility for paying civil suits filed against the diocese by Hickey’s sexual abuse victims.

Testified Under Oath

perjuryHandsbehindback-thumb In 1992 Archbishop Penney testified during the Winter Commission investigation that he was not aware of any abuse allegations against Hickey until 1986.

Published on:

Charles Picot, a former Catholic priest employed by the Diocese of Bathurst in New Brunswick was acquitted of indecent assault against a former altar boy in March 2010. Picot had previously been convicted of other sexual assault charges involving other young boys.

The alleged victim appealed, and in a two to one decision Justice Bell ruled for the New Brunswick Court of Appeal that the trial judge didn’t properly consider all of the evidence. The Court of Appeal ordered a retrial.

It has come to our attention that Picot has now requested leave (permission) to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Published on:

Myths About Priest Pedophilia

A reader sent me a link to an article published by the Catholic Education Resource Center titled 10 Myths about Priestly Pedophilia. The article purports to correct some of the “myths” about Catholic priest sexual abuse.

Admittedly the article is rather dated. But some of the arguments it makes to defend the Catholic Church are still being made today. So I thought some of the wildly inaccurate claims in the article were worth addressing, and correcting.

Published on:

The Archdiocese of Boston recently decided to post the names of 159 priests who have been accused of sexual abuse. The Archdiocese also noted they have received allegations against 91 other priests. However, the names of the priests involved have not been made public. There is no indication if this is because the allegations have not been validated by the Church.

Change in Policy

The disclosure represents a rather radical shift in the traditional approach taken by the Catholic Church towards allegations of sexual abuse.

Published on:

Former Yarmouth priest Albert LeBlanc is facing 50 criminal sexual abuse charges involving allegations of indecent assault and gross indecency.

LeBlanc was scheduled to appear in court yesterday to schedule a date for his trial. LeBlanc did not atend court. Instead Yarmouth criminal defence lawyer Phil Star appeared for LeBlanc to set dates.

The trial has been scheduled to starty May 14, 2012 in provincial court.

The charges span more than 20 years, involving offences that are alleged to have taken place between 1964 and 1985.

Different Employers

Some of the charges relate to the time period that LeBlanc was employed as a priest in the Yarmouth Diocese. After he left the priesthood, LeBlanc worked as a caseworker for Family and Children’s Services in Yarmouth, and then started work as a probation officer in 1975.

Potential Civil Liability?

I have posted an article about the legal issues involved in the LeBlanc case on my Atlantic Canada Personal Injury Lawyer blog. Please take a look and let me know what you think.
Continue reading →

Published on:

Readers may be interested in my recent post to my Atlantic Canada Personal Injury Lawyer blog.

Vatican Denies Responsibility for Sexually Abusive Priests examines some recent American litigation against the Vatican and compares it to the situation here in Canada.

The post has been getting some interesting comments. Feel free to comment and share your thoughts.

Published on:

Is the church’s response real action - or window dressing?

Sexual abuse compensation claims have been filed against the Catholic Church in almost every province in Canada - and similar lawsuits are being filed in other countries around the world. But has the Catholic Church, as an institution, taken reasonable steps to address the problem of sexual abuse by priests?

Background

Before he became the current Pope, Bishop Joseph Ratzinger was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for more than 20 years. The role of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to “safeguard the doctrine on the faith and morals throughout the Catholic world” and deals with, among other things, priests accused of pedophilia.

Casting Blame

In the recent past, officials in the Catholic Church, including Pope Benedict XVI, have stated that the Catholic sexual abuse crisis was the responsibility of the media, homosexual priests, pornography and even the devil.

Reporting of Sexual Abuse

Sexual abuse litigation in the U.S. has uncovered a letter purportedly from the Vatican’s Cardinal Silvio Angelo Pio to Bishop Moreno of Tucson Arizona, which says in part: “To the second question (‘Should we allow or disallow civil lawyers from obtaining Father’s personnel records from our Chancery files’) we reply that under no condition whatever ought the afore-mentioned files be surrendered to any lawyer or judge whatsoever.”

The letter goes on to say: “Your Excellency should therefore make known immediately and with clarity that no priest’s files will be sent to any lawyer or judge whatever.”

Last year, the Vatican asked a court in Kentucky to strike a lawsuit that claimed Catholic bishops are employees or officials of the Church. Counsel for the Vatican denied the Pope has control over bishops, saying: “The pope is not a five-star general ordering his troops around.”

Liability in Canada

The liability of the Vatican has yet to be determined by a court in Canada. But based on existing case law, there is an argument to be made that, at least in Canada, the Pope would be found vicariously liable for the actions of Catholic bishops.

Supreme Authority

Canon law establishes the Pope as the supreme leader of the Catholic Church, responsible for prescribing what rules are to be followed by the faithful and to take what measures he deems necessary for the preservation and the propagation of the Catholic faith. Under Canon Law, bishops are ap­pointed by the Pope. The Pope is the sole authority over bishops and the only person who has the power to assign bishops to a diocese, remove bishops from a diocese and discipline bishops for misconduct.

In Doe v. Bennett, [2004] S.C.J. No. 17, the Supreme Court of Canada found the Catholic Diocese of St. George’s vicariously liable for sexual abuse by one of its priests, stating: “The relationship between the bishop and the priest in the Diocese is not only spiritual but temporal. First, the Bishop provided Bennett with the opportunity to abuse his power. Second, Bennett’s wrongful acts were strongly related to the psychological intimacy inherent in his role as priest. Third, the Bishop conferred an enormous degree of power on Bennett relative to his victims.”

One would think that the same reasoning would apply to hold the Pope responsible for the acts of bishops, because the Pope grants bishops “an enormous degree of power” over Catholics throughout the world.

Recent Developments

Two recent developments raise questions about whether the Catholic Church is prepared to accept responsibility for acts of sexual abuse by its priests.

Jay Report

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recently commissioned a report from the John Jay College of Criminology. The report, “The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950-2010” is almost Orwellian in the lengths it goes to direct attention away from the Catholic Church’s responsibility to abuse survivors.

Redefining Pedophilia

One of the most appalling examples of the report’s manipulation of facts is the researchers’ conclusion that it is inaccurate to describe sexually abusive priests as pedophiles because, according to the report, only 22 per cent of reported victims were under the age of 10. The problem is that according to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the definition of a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children under the age of 14.

According to statistics published in the John Jay report, if the authors used the medically accepted DSM definition of pedophilia, the percentage of so-called “pedophile priests” would increase from 22 per cent to almost 73 per cent of reported cases.

Another example of Orwellian “doublespeak” is where the authors of the report use the word “vulnerability” to describe the Catholic priests who committed sexual crimes against children.

Vatican’s Guidelines

Last month, the Vatican released guidelines to bishops for dealing with claims of priest sexual abuse. Cardinal William Joseph Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the guidelines were drafted to “facilitate the correct application” of the Pope’s instructions.

The idea that individuals are responsible before their god for their sins and before the law for their crimes is something that is universally accepted - except, it seems, by the Catholic Church. The Vatican stops short of ordering the bishops to comply with laws requiring the reporting of sexual abuse of minors.

The guidelines state: “Specifically, without prejudice to the sacramental internal forum, the prescriptions of civil law regarding the reporting of such crimes to the designated authority should always be followed.” [Emphasis added]

Unfortunately, the Vatican has missed two opportunities to take decisive action to address the sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church.

The Jay report identifies “egregious” failures by diocesan leaders to take responsibility for the harms caused by priest sexual abuse and “concerted efforts” to prevent allegations of sexual abuse from reaching law enforcement officials. But the report fails to explore what responsibility the hierarchy of the church has in the priest abuse crisis.

The Vatican’s guidelines recognize that child abuse is a crime. But the Vatican won’t order bishops to report crimes of sexual abuse. By recommending that bishops should comply with laws requiring reporting of crimes against children, instead of emphatically stating that bishops must comply with the law, the Vatican shows that the guidelines are simply a public relations exercise, rather than a legitimate attempt to address sexual abuse by priests.

Power and Responsibility

The Vatican and the Pope have an enormous degree of power over every bishop, priest and Catholic parishioner in the world. Perhaps it is time the Pope accepts the responsibility that comes with that power.

What do you think? Let me know in the comments…

This article originally apeared in the June 24, 2011 edition of Lawyers Weekly Magazine
Continue reading →

Published on:

Great article by Bob Weber of the Canadian Press about the hunt to bring Eric Dejaeger to justice.

Dejaeger a catholic priest, pleading guilty to sexually abusing nine children while he was in Nunavet. He was released after serving less than a year in jail. RCMP then charged him with three counts of indecent assault and three counts of buggery stemming from his time in Igloolik.

Dejaeger fled to Belgium after being charged. He lived freely and openly with the Oblates in Brussels despite the efforts of the Canadian authorities to extradite him to face charges.

Published on:

The Vatican’s Guidelines to Bishops for dealing with claims of priest sexual abuse has now been released.

Cardinal William Joseph Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, also released a brief letter accompanying the Guidelines.

Levada says that the Guidelines were drafted to “…facilitate the correct application” of the Pope’s previous instructions.

Published on:

Today Amnesty International published it’s annual report Amnesty International Report 2011: The State of the World’s Human Rights, which examines human rights offences in various countries throughout the world.

The report concludes:

“…the Holy See did not sufficiently comply with its international obligations relating to the protection of children”.