He claimed that back during the 1997-98 school year when he was a 10-year-old altar boy in fourth grade, Father Andy lured the boy up to his room in the rectory at St. John Cantius Church in Bridesburg. Then, according to the alleged victim, the priest locked the door, shoved the boy down on the bed, tore off his clothes, and tried to jam his penis in the boy's mouth.

 

Fourteen years later, the alleged victim came forward to publicly accuse the priest after he had a dream where the priest was supposedly attacking the victim's 5-year-old nephew.

 

At Father Andy's first trial, on Feb. 27, 2014, the alleged victim was red-faced and dabbing his eyes with tissues when Assistant District Attorney Kemp asked, "Why are you doing this?"

"So this does not happen to another little boy," he responded. Then he told the jury he had not filed any civil lawsuit against the archdiocese.

On cross-examination, defense lawyer Richard J. Fuschino asked, You say you're not suing the archdiocese for money, but didn't you go see a lawyer to check out a possible civil lawsuit?

"I went to see a lawyer," the alleged victim said. But it was for his own protection, he said. He did not file any civil lawsuit. He was not seeking money from the archdiocese.

"I have a full-time job," the alleged victim told the jury. "I don't need money. I have a very successful career."

At Father Andy's second trial, on Feb. 27, 2025, the alleged victim again testified that he was not in this for the money. "I don't need to, I have a pretty successful career," he said. The only reason why he's doing this, he testified, is to make sure "another little kid doesn't go through this."

 

On March 6, 2015, when Assistant District Attorney Kemp gave her closing statement in the second criminal trial of Father Andy, she stated that the alleged victim didn't file a civil lawsuit against the church because he wasn't after money.

 

 "He wants nothing from this man," Kemp said, while angrily pointing at the defendant.

As far as the civil case is concerned, the alleged victim is in it for the money this time around but he still wants to remain anonymous.

On July 10th, in John Doe's lawsuit, lawyers Brian D. Kent, Jeffrey F. Laffey, and Samuel I. Reich wrote that John Doe is a "pseudonymous designation for a plaintiff who was a victim of sexual abuse while he was still a minor." The pseudonym was being used in the complaint "to protect the health, safety, welfare, and privacy interests of this plaintiff." The alleged victim's "identity will be made know to the defendants by private, non-public communication," the lawyers wrote.

In an interview, lawyer Brian D. Kent said whether his client was pursuing Father Andy in the criminal or civil courts, his motive was the same.

"The chief motivating factor behind this lawsuit is holding those people responsible," Kent said. "His chief motivation has never changed," Kent said of his client. "He wants the people who are responsible to be held accountable."

"I don't see any contradiction," Kent said. The two criminal trials ended in hung juries. Regarding the civil case, "This is the last opportunity that he's going to have to hold these people responsible," Kent said.

Trevan Borum, Father Andy's lawyer in the second criminal case, said, "I would like to say I am shocked at this turn of events -- unfortunately I am not. Not even a little."

Borum called the alleged victim's claim that it wasn't about the money "a bold-faced lie."

"He intentionally deceived the jury to secure a conviction to cash in on his civil suit," Borum said of the alleged victim.

"Despicable."

Borum said that Assistant D.A. Kemp knew that the alleged victim had seen a lawyer.

"What exactly did she think they were talking about," Borum said. "She's not an idiot. She either knew it was a lie or she just didn't care to bother to dig at all. Which was the way she investigated her whole case. Ignore anything that doesn't fit the script."

Kemp could not be reached for comment.

The lawsuit filed on behalf of John Doe claims that school and the church under Lynn and the archdiocese "had a history . . . of transferring priests . . . who were known and/or suspected to have engaged in inappropriate conduct with children, including, but not limited to, sexually abusing young boys."

The archdiocese and Lynn "failed to sufficiently and adequately investigate" Father McCormick's background, the suit alleges. "Specifically, it is believed and therefore averred that Defendants knew, and/or had reason to know, that McCormick was a pedophile, child molester, and/or sexual predator who posed a danger to children."

"It is believed and therefore averred that Defendant Archdiocese knew that McCormick had began masturbating to pornography at age seven years old and masturbated one to two times a day through adulthood because he 'likes it,'" the complaint states.

The complaint alleged that the archdiocese "forced McCormick to submit to a polygraph examination concerning the Archdiocese's concerns/suspicions that McCormick may be a pedophile."

The complaint states that in bold print that "McCormick failed the polygraph issued by the Archdiocese specifically relating to his answers concerning whether he had ever abuses children and whether he had watched child pornography. [emphasis added]."

But the archdiocese took no action and allowed "McCormick to remain in ministry until the February 2011 Grand Jury Report was issued," the complaint states. The complaint further charges that Msgr. Lynn and the late Cardinal Anthony J. Bevilacqua had exhibited "callous indifference" to the "safety and well-being of children."

Borum, however, said that the lawsuit is in error and that Father McCormick did not fail the lie detector test administered by the archdiocese. Instead, the retired FBI agent in charge of the test concluded "the exact opposite," Borum said.

"I also had Father McCormick take polygraph exam prior to trial at his request," Borum said. "He passed with flying colors."

"I shared the results of my test with Ms. Kemp prior to trial," Borum said. "She couldn't have cared less."

Kemp could not be reached for comment.

As the result of "forcible oral rape, Plaintiff sustained severe psychological and emotional distress, including post-traumatic stress disorder, manifested by physical ailments and complaints, including, but not limited to, sleeplessness, loss of appetite, attempted suicide and drug addiction," the complaint states.

"Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life, and has suffered and continues to suffer spiritually," the complaint states.

The "significant emotional and psychological injuries" have "dramatically transformed" the alleged victim's personality, the complaint states. "Plaintiff turned to marijuana use at the age of eleven and began using prescription painkillers. He also attempted suicide."

The archdiocese and Msgr. Lynn, according to the complaint "knew that at least 120 members of its clergy and teaching staff had reportedly sexually molested children, committed acts of violence upon children, or otherwise preyed upon children." But they did nothing to protect children, the lawsuit charges.