JPIIPPA Religious Leaders Battle Abuse Bill in New York

Those Opus Dei lawyers are working round the clock to block this NY bill. The Opus Dei controls the wealth of the Vatican and the Church. see The John Paul II Millstone www.jp2m.blogspot.com

The vatican is the richest "corporation" in the world. The concern that a church headquarters would need to be up for sale should victims of sexual abuse sue suggests a great deal about how funds are used. Having treated a number of victims of priest sexual abuse in my private practice, I can't stress enough how damaging it is to be abused from this group, and how great the shame is. Bravo to any victim that finally finds the courage to come forward. NO amount of money will ever compensate for the trauma, but considering how abusers were shifted from place to place as accusations emerged, the larger body of the church needs to assume responsibility for their role.
— Mcacho, Maine

Dennis Poust, spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference, worries that this bill is designed to "bankrupt the Catholic Church." This sounds like an admission that Church-affiliated sexual abuse cases not yet brought to trial due to the current statute of limitations are likely not small in number. If Church representatives are proven guilty in court, who cares how many years it's been since the crimes were committed? Let the Church go bankrupt. The widespread sexual abuse of children by "spiritual" leaders is sickening. Jeanne



Religious Leaders Battle Abuse Bill in New York
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/nyregion/12abuse.html?_r=4&pagewanted=all

By PAUL VITELLO
Published: March 11, 2009

Roman Catholic and Orthodox Jewish officials in New York are mounting an intense lobbying effort to block a bill before the State Legislature that would temporarily lift the statute of limitations for lawsuits alleging the sexual abuse of children.
Skip to next paragraph

Nathaniel Brooks for The New York Times

State Senator Thomas K. Duane, who met on Wednesday with the New York Coalition to Protect Children, is the sponsor of a bill that would suspend the statute of limitations on abuse claims.

Readers' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (175) »

A perennial proposal that has been quashed in past years by Republicans who controlled the State Senate, the bill is now widely supported by the new Democratic majority in that chamber, and for the first time is given a good chance of passing.

If signed by Gov. David A. Paterson, a longtime supporter, the bill would at minimum revive hundreds of claims filed in recent years against Catholic priests and dioceses in New York, but dismissed because they were made after the current time limit, which is five years after the accuser turns 18. Similar legislation has passed in Delaware and in California, where a 2003 law led to claims that have cost the church an estimated $800 million to $1 billion in damages and settlements.

The rekindled prospects of the New York bill, known as the Child Victims Act, come at a delicate juncture for the Archdiocese of New York, the nation’s flagship see, where Cardinal Edward M. Egan is scheduled to hand over the reins in April. His successor, Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of Milwaukee, was so hard hit by settlements for past abuse by priests in that archdiocese that he was forced to put its headquarters up for sale.

“We believe this bill is designed to bankrupt the Catholic Church,” said Dennis Poust, spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference, a group representing the bishops of the state’s eight dioceses. He said that Cardinal Egan and Bishop Nicholas A. DiMarzio of Brooklyn visited Albany this week to voice their opposition, and that a statewide network of Catholic parishioners had bombarded lawmakers via e-mail.

But while the Catholic Church is leading the opposition, in recent months a loose coalition of disparate groups has also joined the effort. They include leaders of the Hasidic and Sephardic Jewish institutions in Brooklyn, which could face equally costly abuse claims. The New York criminal defense bar opposes lifting statutes of limitation as unfair to the accused, who must defend themselves against claims of transgressions decades old.

Under the Albany measure, which Assemblywoman Margaret M. Markey, a Queens Democrat, has shepherded to Assembly approval in each of the last three sessions, people claiming they were sexually abused as children would be given a one-year exemption from the statute of limitations. Regardless of how long ago the alleged abuse occurred, they could file suit in civil court.

At the year’s end, time limits on such claims would be restored, but with a wider window: Instead of a five-year period after turning 18, victims would have 10 years to file claims.

The bill would not lift the statute of limitations for criminal prosecutions of child abuse, which in most cases are the same as for civil complaints. For violent assaults like rape, there are no time limits on prosecution.
Many children’s advocates say guilt, shame and fear of the emotional toll on family members have often deterred victims from reporting sexual abuse until well into adulthood. The revelations of past abuse by priests that became a national scandal starting in 2002 prompted some to seek redress, only to discover they were barred by the statutes of limitation.

Marci A. Hamilton, a professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University who has argued that states should remove all statutes of limitation on child sex abuse claims, said the principle is comparable to the way industrial pollution is treated under the law. “The consequences of toxic pollution may not be known or felt for years after the fact,” she said. “The same is often true for children who are sexually abused.”

But opponents of such unlimited time frames of liability contend that decades-old memories of childhood events are not reliable.

Foes of Assemblywoman Markey’s bill also say it unfairly singles out religious and private institutions, while leaving public schools virtually immune to the same potential liability.

The disparity is built into the legal protections granted under existing state law to all public workers and agencies: to sue a public employee or agency for damages of any kind, a person is required to file a claim within 90 days of the alleged injury. A victim of childhood sex abuse by a public school teacher, for instance, has 90 days after turning 18 to file notice of a claim.

Since the Markey bill would not extend that window, opponents claim that it discriminates. The Rev. Kieran E. Harrington, spokesman for Bishop DiMarzio, said that “a fair piece of legislation would treat all victims equally, and this bill does not do that.”

In response to those objections, Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez, a Brooklyn Democrat, introduced an alternative bill last month that would eliminate the proposed one-year suspension of the statute of limitations. Under his measure, the window for filing claims would be extended to seven years after the accuser turns 18, rather than the 10 years in Assemblywoman Markey’s bill.

Though he voted for her bill twice in past sessions, he said he had not realized the inequities in the new law until after a series of meetings he held in recent months. They included face-to-face talks with Bishop DiMarzio, he said, as well discussions with civil liberties advocates, members of the Legal Aid Society, and representatives of the Sephardic Community Federation and the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg, Brooklyn, which is in his district.

“You have three or four times as many kids in the public schools as in the Catholic schools,” Mr. Lopez said. “How is it fair if the law only penalizes these religious and private schools?”

Senator Eric T. Schneiderman of Manhattan, chairman of the Senate Codes Committee, which is scheduled to take up the bill as early as next week, said the disparity might be addressed in future legislation. But he added, “Just because it does not broaden the rights of victims 100 percent does not mean we should not try to broaden their rights somewhat.”

In past years, Assemblywoman Markey’s bill was never scheduled for discussion in any Senate committee, reflecting the unwavering opposition of the longtime Senate Republican majority leader, Joseph L. Bruno. He did not seek re-election in November, when Democrats won control of the Senate; the new majority leader, Malcolm A. Smith, supports the bill.
Asked for Archbishop Dolan’s view of the bill, and its potential impact on his tenure in New York, a spokesman for the New York Archdiocese said Wednesday that the archbishop was not immediately available to comment. Archbishop Dolan spoke out last year against similar legislation in Wisconsin. But at a news conference last month, he said he had not had time to study the New York bill.
Calls to representatives of the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg and the Sephardic Community Federation on Wednesday were not returned.
Senator Thomas K. Duane, a Manhattan Democrat and the bill’s lead sponsor in the Senate, said he was “extremely optimistic” about its chances.
He said that opponents’ claims of unfairness were not compelling, and that warnings of bankruptcy for religious institutions, which he dismissed as unlikely, missed the point.
“It’s not about money,” he said. “It’s about giving people the right to seek justice.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: March 14, 2009
An article on Thursday about efforts by some religious leaders to block a bill before the New York State Legislature that would temporarily lift the statute of limitations for lawsuits alleging the sexual abuse of children misstated the position of the New York Civil Liberties Union. The organization has taken no stance on the bill; it has not opposed it.
=========

Comments

March 12, 2009 8:14 am
Link
"'We believe this bill is designed to bankrupt the Catholic Church,' said Dennis Poust, spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference, a group representing the bishops of the state’s eight dioceses."

How can anyone bankrupt the Catholic Church?!? Has anyone been to the Vatican? They have more art than the Louvre does. The Catholic Church has so much in its pockets, not just in art, but in gold and real estate too. They own some of the best real estate in the world.

Catholic Church as bankrupt, ridiculous.
— Frank Long, Baltimore, MD
March 12, 2009 8:22 am
Link
It is not surprising to see that the Catholic Church is leading this fight. Their leaders long ago abandoned the teachings of Christ in their quest for money and power. When Jesus died, he did not even have a burial shroud. Maybe less money and power will restore the actual teachings of Christ as the center of this institution. "Put you first, therefore, the Kingdom of Heaven, and all these things will be granted to you."
— Norm, Scurry, Texas
Recommend Recommended by 18 Readers
44.
EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
March 12, 2009 8:26 am
Link
Dennis Poust, spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference, worries that this bill is designed to "bankrupt the Catholic Church." This sounds like an admission that Church-affiliated sexual abuse cases not yet brought to trial due to the current statute of limitations are likely not small in number. If Church representatives are proven guilty in court, who cares how many years it's been since the crimes were committed? Let the Church go bankrupt. The widespread sexual abuse of children by "spiritual" leaders is sickening.
— Jeanne C., Moscow, ID
Recommend Recommended by 35 Readers
78.

EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
March 12, 2009 8:33 am
Link
The vatican is the richest "corporation" in the world. The concern that a church headquarters would need to be up for sale should victims of sexual abuse sue suggests a great deal about how funds are used. Having treated a number of victims of priest sexual abuse in my private practice, I can't stress enough how damaging it is to be abused from this group, and how great the shame is. Bravo to any victim that finally finds the courage to come forward. NO amount of money will ever compensate for the trauma, but considering how abusers were shifted from place to place as accusations emerged, the larger body of the church needs to assume responsibility for their role.
— Mcacho, Maine
Recommend Recommended by 28 Readers

121.
EDITORS' SELECTIONS (what's this?)
March 12, 2009 11:01 am
Link
I find it unsettling that sexual abuse by clergy members is not considered as violent a crime as rape, which carries no time limit on prosecutions, and that the religious institutions responsible for sweeping the abuse under the rug (or directly hiding it) for decades seek continuing protection under the law. If these organizations had been protecting their flocks rather than the wolves, they would not be in this position. I believe there should be no statute of limitations on these crimes and that the perpetrators governing organizations should be held criminally liable, but this bill is a good first step. Hats off to Senator Duane and the others who are supporting it.
— Doug Brandt, New York
Recommend Recommended by 22 Readers

=================

See Benedict XVI-Ratzinger, God's Rottweiler www.pope-ratz.blogspot.com

Vatican Backs Excommunications Stemming From an Abortion

By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: March 7, 2009

ROME (Agence France-Presse) — A senior Vatican cleric on Saturday defended the excommunication of the mother and doctors of a 9-year-old girl who had an abortion in Brazil after being raped. The child was pregnant with twins.

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Roman Catholic Church’s Congregation for Bishops, told La Stampa, an Italian daily newspaper, that the case was sad, but that “the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated.”

The regional archbishop, José Cardoso Sobrinho, excommunicated the mother for authorizing the operation. He also excommunicated the doctors, who carried out the operation for fear that the 80-pound girl would not survive a full-term pregnancy.
“God’s law is above any human law,” Archbishop Cardoso said Thursday.

The girl’s stepfather, whom she accused of sexual abuse, has been jailed.
The case has incited fierce debate in Brazil. Abortion is illegal there, but exceptions are allowed in cases of rape and when the mother’s life would be endangered by giving birth.

One of the doctors involved, Rivaldo Albuquerque, told Globo television that he would keep going to Mass, regardless of the archbishop’s order.
The girl, who was not identified because she is a minor, was found last week to be four months pregnant after being taken to the hospital for stomach pains.

John Paul II Pedophile Priest in San Antonio, Texas, today

Letter to Archbishop Gomez

February 25, 2009

Dear Archbishop Gomez:

We are men and women who were molested by clergy. We belong to a nationwide support group called SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAPnetwork.org). Our mission is simple: to protect the vulnerable and heal the wounded.

We are writing about two credibly accused clerics - one who has spent years in your archdiocese (Fr. Charles Miller) and one who was recently transferred there and lives in a parish today (Brother Richard Suttle). We worry about the safety of unsuspecting families who have been and are near these dangerous men even today. We are appalled by your silence about them and their crimes. We have warned San Antonio citizens and Catholics about the suspended sex offenders. We are sad and frustrated that you refuse to do so.

Please understand that the phrase "credibly accused" is not ours. It's the phrase used by church officials who looked into child sex abuse allegations against these clerics. And it's a phrase backed up by documents. We have, and have made public, two church statements admitting that the allegations against both clerics are 'credible.'

(We know these aren't admissions by the accused, nor are they guilty verdicts by juries. But we also know that rarely are suspended child-molesting clerics are 'cleared' and restored to ministry. We also know that at least three individuals have accused one of them of abuse. And we know that it's always best to err on the side of safeguarding many innocent and vulnerable kids over shielding the reputation of one powerful adult.)

In the last two weeks, we have publicly disclosed at news conferences that credible child sex abuse allegations have been made against two the clerics. That burden shouldn't fall to us. That's what you should have done already. That's what you should do even now. Instead, you seem comfortable following the passive, irresponsible, failed patterns of the past, choosing to sit behind your desk and essentially do nothing to find and help members of your flock who might have been wounded by these men or to protect those who might be at risk of being wounded by them even now.

Today, we urge you to
-- oust Suttle from the San Antonio parish where he lives now,
-- reach out to anyone who was hurt by either of the two credibly accused pedophiles,
-- apologize and explain why you're keeping secret about the two accused sex offenders, and
-- disclose the names & whereabouts of any other child-molesting clergy who are or were here (whether diocesan or religious order, whether living or dead, whether ordained or lay).

This isn't rocket science, Archbishop. It's not costly, it's not controversial, it's not unprecedented. It IS, however, what a responsible shepherd would do. It IS what you promised repeatedly - being open and transparent. It IS the bare minimum you should do to help protect the vulnerable and heal the wounded.

We feel that parishioners have a duty to ask their friends, family members and others if they were victimized, by these two or other clergy. (Often, men and women who have been sexually assaulted are fearful of disclosing their pain and do so only when approached directly but gently by someone they know and love.) You should prod parishioners to do this. And you should use your considerable resources - archdiocesan newspaper, parish bulletins, employees and websites - to do this. It's what Jesus would do.

We also feel that parishioners and the public have the right to know why you recklessly and quietly allowed Suttle to move into a San Antonio parish, and why you let him remain there now. They also deserve an apology.

Finally, please do not insult your flock by hiding behind an artificial, self-serving distinction between archdiocesan and religious order staff. Child sex abuse is just as hurtful regardless of who signs the predator's checks. Church employees function in your archdiocese with your approval. Religious orders do too. So you are not powerless and shouldn't pretend to be.

If a Jesuit moved to San Antonio and opened an abortion clinic, you would not be silent. If a Dominican were transferred to San Antonio and lobbied for the death penalty, you would not feign impotence. If a Christian Brother moved to San Antonio and started performing gay marriages, you would not ignore it.

When Claretians secretly move an accused predator into San Antonio and when Marianists secretly move an accused predator out of San Antonio, your silence endangers your parishioners and others.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Barbara Garcia-Boehland of San Antonio, San Antonio SNAP Director (210) 725 8329, David Clohessy of St. Louis, SNAP National Director (314) 566 9790 cell, Barbara Dorris of St. Louis, SNAP Outreach Director (314) 862 7688

SNAP, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, 6245 Westminster, St. Louis MO 63130

Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests
www.snapnetwork.org

======
Victims group delivers letter to archbishop

By Abe Levy - Express-News

A victims advocacy group is asking for an apology from San Antonio Archbishop Jose Gomez for what it described as his inaction and silence in dealing with two Catholic clergymen whose religious orders recently found claims of them each having sexually abused a teen-ager to be credible.

Barbara Garcia-Boehland, local director of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, hand-delivered a letter addressed to Gomez at the archdiocesan headquarters Wednesday afternoon. A department director for the archdiocese told her Gomez was not in the office but assured her the letter would be delivered.

Garcia-Boehland said she left phone messages and has written letters for the past couple of weeks to Gomez about her concerns but has received no response. The letter she sent Wednesday raised the same concerns that Gomez and other Catholic officials were not doing enough to hold two clergy accountable for their abuse.

Brother Richard Suttle of the Claretian Missionaries of the U.S. Western Province lives and studies here in San Antonio and sexually abused a teen in the early 1980s in Arizona, according to a public notice from the Phoenix diocese.

Also, Father Charles H. Miller of the Society of Mary worked at St. Mary's University for more than two decades and was let go in 2007 after his religious order found a claim that he sexually abused a teen in 1980 to be credible. Last year he was moved to Rome.

Both religious orders barred the men from public ministry and placed them on a restrictive plan that monitors their whereabouts.

Garcia-Boehland said Gomez should move to revoke their ministry credentials. She also questioned why Gomez didn't initiate steps to make these matters public once he knew they were credible.

A call to the archdiocese spokesman was not immediately returned.
Web Posted: 02/25/2009 3:55 CST http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/Victims_group_delivers_letter_archbishop.html

Comments:
mostserene4:41 PM
That is not the point. The point is for the letter writer to force the archbishop as a representative of Rome to recognize the unpleasant reality of abuse and the failure of the church as an institution to address criminal and immoral behavior of the clergy.