BishopAccountability.org
	Wis. Justices Seem Skeptical of Ex-Priest's Appeal By Ryan J. Foley Belleville News Democrat January 5, 2010 http://www.bnd.com/326/story/1075080.html MADISON -- Wisconsin Supreme Court justices appeared unlikely Tuesday to overturn the sexual assault conviction of a former Jesuit priest even as his attorney insisted he was falsely accused. During oral arguments, attorney Robert Henak said the two alleged victims were lying about being assaulted by his client, Donald McGuire, a former spiritual adviser to Mother Teresa and her religious order of nuns. But a prosecutor responded Henak was unfairly attacking the victims. McGuire, who once commanded a worldwide following as a preacher and philosopher, is considered one of the most influential religious figures convicted in the Catholic Church's sexual abuse scandal. The men in 2003 came forward to report they were abused by McGuire during trips to a cottage in Fontana, Wis. in 1967 or 1968. At the time, McGuire taught the boys at the Loyola Academy in Wilmette, Ill. McGuire was convicted on five counts of indecent behavior with a child after a trial, which was attended by dozens of nuns and priests supporting him. He was sentenced to seven years in prison but allowed to remain free during his appeal. The Wisconsin case helped pave the way for federal prosecutors in Chicago to convict McGuire on charges of traveling outside the U.S. and across state lines to have sex with a teenager. He is serving a 25-year prison sentence and is currently being held at a medical center for federal prisoners in Springfield, Mo. Henak argued the 35-year delay between the alleged assaults in Wisconsin and the men reporting them violated McGuire's right to a fair trial, and he asked justices to throw out the conviction. Three priests who could corroborate McGuire's defense had died before the trial, and records that might have provided an alibi were unavailable, he argued. "Requiring this person to proceed to trial violates the fundamental conceptions of justice," he said. But several justices seemed dubious of that argument and unlikely to overrule past decisions that allowed similar delays in criminal cases where suspects left the state or victims waited to come forward. Justice Patrick Crooks said he found it hard to believe McGuire's defense was prejudiced by the delay since the accusers took the stand and were cross-examined. Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and Michael Gableman both questioned whether the deceased witnesses and destroyed records would really have helped McGuire if they were available. Justice Patience Roggensack repeatedly noted the delay was not the result of any prosecutorial misconduct, which has been required for a defendant to win a new trial in the past. An assistant attorney general, Daniel O'Brien, accused Henak of attempting to retry the case by questioning the credibility of the victims. He warned justices that throwing out McGuire's conviction would "throw cold water on prosecutions where the victims delay in coming forward." Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson questioned why the case was important to the 79-year-old McGuire since he was likely to die in federal prison anyway. Henak said his federal case was also being appealed, and McGuire wanted "exoneration from false allegations."
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.