BishopAccountability.org | ||
Bridgeport Diocese Defends Its Actions Critics Say Stop Legal Battle By Dave Altimari Hartford Courant May 27, 2009 http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-priest-abuse-0527.artmay27,0,2932095.story The Diocese of Bridgeport lashed back Tuesday at critics, who delivered a letter asking Bishop William Lori to stop the legal fight to keep thousands of pages of court files secret, saying that the diocese has done more than any other institution to deal with the clergy sexual abuse scandal. "Today's presentation at the Catholic Center overlooks the significant, thorough, and historical response of the Diocese of Bridgeport and its leader, Bishop William Lori, to the scourge of clergy sexual abuse," the diocese's statement said. The statement then went on to list a series of steps it has taken over the past few years, including training more than 90,000 adults and children to the warning signs of abuse and how to report suspected abuse, conducting criminal background checks on anyone who works or volunteers for the diocese, including priests, and hiring two full-time victim assistance coordinators. The diocese also indicated once again that it is reviewing its legal options following last week's state Supreme Court ruling that more than 12,600 legal documents from 23 lawsuits settled back in 2001 must be unsealed. "We appreciate that emotions run high on this topic," the statement said. "Our primary objection to the decision concerns judicial fairness, and the fundamental right of an individual or organization to fair adjudication in any legal proceeding." Members of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests [SNAP], including its national director who flew in from St. Louis, held a press conference Tuesday and then tried to hand-deliver a letter to Lori to reconsider the diocese's vow to continue fighting the legal case. "So we ask that you put the safety of children, the healing of victims and the overall benefit of the church itself (particularly the trusting, generous parishioners) above the short term discomfort of church officials who fear having to face tough questions — in the news media, from parishioners or in open court — about how much they knew and how little they did about these horrific crimes," the letter said. SNAP officials said that Lori and other bishops are not adhering to the Pope Benedict's message delivered last year on his trip to the United States imploring them to reach out to victims in a pastoral way and not in a way that involved legal maneuverings. "We are hoping you give our simple request some serious consideration. Please allow the court ruling to go forward so that light and truth can be shed on these cases," the letter said. "Continued secrecy, legal hairsplitting and delays, we believe, contradict the Pope's wishes. Connecticut kids will be safer and Catholics will be reassured, we feel, if you stop exploiting every legal technicality and maneuver your lawyers can dream up, and start acting more like a compassionate shepherd instead of a cold-hearted CEO, and let the truth emerge." The court ruled 4-1 to unseal the files. The decision will not become official until it is published in the Connecticut Law Journal on June 2. The church has at least 10 days after that date to file some kind of legal action that could include asking the Supreme Court to rehear the case with the entire court present rather than just 5 members. The justices rejected the church's main argument that Superior Court Judge Jon M. Alander, who ruled in 2006 that the files be unsealed, should have recused himself from making that decision because he was also serving at the time on a judicial committee reviewing public access to court documents. The court ruled that just because Alander was a member of the task force did not mean that he could not be fair and impartial. It also ruled that just because one of the other members of the judicial task force was a reporter from The Courant did not mean that Alander had a conflict. |
||
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution. | ||