PHILADELPHIA (PA)
Philadelphia Inquirer
By Tom Ferrick Jr.
Inquirer Columnist
Here is a case to ponder over your coffee and bagel.
In a nearby community, folks are outraged over a scandal involving a baseball coach accused of sexually abusing a boy on one of his teams.
The incident happened years ago but came to light only recently because the victim - now in his 30s - stepped forward to confront the man, known as Coach Brad.
After the case is publicized, other victims come forward. Investigators find a half-dozen credible cases of sexual abuse but cannot prosecute - the statute of limitations has run out.
Denied their day in criminal court, the victims file a civil suit, seeking damages from Coach Brad. They say the incidents - involving fondling and oral and anal sex - profoundly harmed them. Some took to drugs, some to alcohol; some suffer from mental illness.
At the trial, the coach's elderly father shows up to make a personal plea. The father, a wealthy man, is beloved in the community because of his generosity.
He tells the judge that his son's assets are tied to a family trust. If the jury awards the victims a large settlement, the trust will have to be used to pay it.
The father tells the judge that if the trust is depleted, its many charities will suffer: agencies that aid the elderly and the homeless, the poor and needy children in the community.
It's your call
Don't create a second set of victims, the father tells the judge. Please dismiss this suit.
If you were the judge, what would you decide?
This is a hypothetical case, but if it sounds familiar, there's a reason.
Change the name from Coach Brad to Father Brad. Make the number of known perps 63; have the victims number in the hundreds. Substitute Cardinal Justin Rigali for the father and - voila! - you have the Philadelphia clergy-abuse scandal.