| Bishop Accountability
|
|||||
61 L.A. priests face investigation Los Angeles Daily News Sixty-one current or former priests face investigation by the LAPD and the Sheriff's Department after 115 people filed complaints alleging they were sexually abused as youths, the Daily News learned Wednesday. Because of the volume of cases, both the Los Angeles Police Department and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department have assembled special teams of investigators assigned exclusively to the widening sex abuse scandal involving Los Angeles Archdiocese clergy members. "We have, in the past, investigated religious leaders, but the complaints against the (Archdiocese of Los Angeles) more or less exploded with all the allegations that happened in Boston," said LAPD Lt. Dan Mulrenin, who is heading that agency's task force. Officials said 59 people have lodged complaints with the LAPD against 40 priests, eight of whom might be deceased. The Sheriff's Department has received 56 complaints lodged against 21 priests, three of whom might be dead. A check with numerous other local law enforcement agencies within the Los Angeles Archdiocese's area, which includes Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, yielded no additional complaints. Mulrenin said the complaints were filed within the past four months, with most alleging molestation by a priest years, or even decades, ago. "There's strength in numbers," Mulrenin said, speculating on the reason for the explosion of complaints. "They realize that because of the exposure in the media, they're not isolated. Maybe a lot of them have been repressing it and now they feel compelled to have their stories brought to the attention of law enforcement." Mulrenin said the LAPD has sought information from the archdiocese, and "we continue to try to establish open lines of communication with them." Archdiocese spokesman Tod Tamberg said the church was not aware of all of the complaints being investigated by Los Angeles law enforcement, but said "a handful" of priests has been suspended as a result of allegations of sexual abuse. "It certainly is not 60 or even 30," he said. "Police don't have to tell us they're conducting an investigation so they would probably have more names than we do. Nevertheless, I can say with confidence that every single priest who has been found to have abused a minor has been removed from ministry." The probe into the Los Angeles Archdiocese is now nearing the magnitude of the scandal that has rocked the Archdiocese of Boston, where 85 clergy members are under investigation. Los Angeles County sheriff's Sgt. Dan Scott said that in following up on complaints, investigators are seeking corroborating evidence because the alleged incidents typically occurred so long ago. "We need something more than the victim's word on its own," Scott said. Mulrenin said his unit is treating each clergy sex abuse case just like it would treat any other sex abuse allegation. "We will go wherever the evidence leads us," Mulrenin said. "If someone is a child molester, irrespective of whether they're a priest, they need to be held accountable." Police have formally submitted one case to prosecutors to review for criminal charges, but no case has been filed to date. The District Attorney's Office has one year from the date the complaint was made to file charges. Also, under state law, clergy are required to report cases of sexual misconduct to police if the alleged victim was a child at the time the complaint was made. Mulrenin said investigators will try to determine whether church officials have complied with that law. Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, said the office has also assembled a special team to handle juvenile cases involving clergy. "We're reviewing these cases as they come in," Gibbons said. "We're working very closely with all law enforcement organizations that have investigations under way." She refused to say whether a grand jury has been impaneled to look into allegations of sexual abuse by priests. So far this year two San Fernando Valley cases have been made public. On June 8, Los Angeles police opened a criminal inquiry into allegations that Monsignor Chris Van Liefde, 53, of St. Genevieve's Catholic Church in Panorama City, engaged in "inappropriate conduct" 28 years ago. Van Liefde also served as the Los Angeles Fire Department's chaplain. The archdiocese has placed the pastor on administrative leave. In March, the Rev. Dominic Savino, president of Crespi High School in Encino, was removed after church officials found evidence supporting allegations of sexual misconduct with 10 teen-age boys between 1966 and 1979. The case also remains under investigation by authorities and the archdiocese. Tamberg said the archdiocese will cooperate with the investigations in anyway it can. "We welcome police involvement," Tamberg said. "If it's a false report, the police are the ones that are able to determine that very quickly and exonerate the person against whom the charges are made." Staff Writer Dana Bartholomew contributed to this story. Archdiocese Gives Files on Priests to Grand Jury By Richard Winton The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles has handed over the personnel files of three priests under criminal investigation for alleged sexual abuse of minors. But prosecutors won't see what is in those files any time soon. An attorney for the three priests filed a motion seeking a court hearing on whether the archdiocese's releasing of the files violated the priests' privacy. Until that hearing next month, the files will remain in the office of the county grand jury, which had subpoenaed them at the request of the district attorney's office. Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley turned to the grand jury for subpoenas last Thursday to obtain the personnel files after the priests' lawyer, Donald Steier, protested the disclosure. Archdiocese officials insisted that they always have favored the handing over of the files to prosecutors. "It is now an issue between the district attorney's office and Don Steier," said Michael Hennigan, attorney for the archdiocese. The district attorney's office declined to comment Wednesday on the battle for the records, citing rules governing grand jury secrecy. Cooley has gradually pressured Cardinal Roger M. Mahony to turn over information and records related to priests accused of abusive behavior toward minors. Cooley at one point accused the cardinal of delaying investigations by failing to turn over to police investigators vital information on abuse. That pressure culminated last Thursday when Bill Hodgman, head deputy in charge of the sex crimes unit, successfully sought the subpoenas from the grand jury for documents related to Father Michael Stephen Baker and Father Michael Wempe, both retired, and Father David Granadino. Steier's motion to quash the disclosure of the documents is set for early July before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Dan T. Oki, sources said. Because that hearing involves grand jury subpoenas, it will be behind closed doors, sources said. Court officials declined to provide any details about the proceedings because of grand jury secrecy rules. Steier contends that state and federal privacy laws protect his clients from the revealing of the files' contents, which include psychological evaluations. Mahony transferred Baker to several parishes after the priest told him in 1986 that he had molested young boys. He later approved a secret $1.3-million settlement with two men who had allegedly been abused by Baker in the 1990s. The cardinal has said that he erred when he transferred Wempe, who is accused of molesting children, to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center about 14 years ago without telling hospital officials. Wempe was among eight priests whom Mahony forced to retire earlier this year after the archdiocese adopted a "zero tolerance" policy for abusers following a lawsuit settlement All three priests named in the subpoenas are under investigation by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. Prosecutors are expected to seek subpoenas for personnel records of some of the 34 priests under investigation by Los Angles police, sources said. Mahony's Cronies: In covering up for predator priests, Cardinal Roger Mahony's stayed true to a prestigious old boys' network of fellow alums from St. John's Seminary in Camarillo [excerpts] By Ron Russell In Mahony's case, such bonds help explain why one of the most powerful hierarchs in the American Catholic church ... would go to great lengths to harbor pedophile priests while turning his back on their victims....
Leaders Humbled by Accusations, Debate By William Lobdell Dallas -- The result of the U.S. bishops' conference this week wasn't just a tougher policy on the sexual abuse of minors. It also produced a humbled group of church leaders. These are men who operate their dioceses independently and answer only to the Vatican. The cardinals among them are used to being referred to as "your eminence." But for two days, the 300 bishops fielded pointed questions from reporters, who outnumbered them nearly 2 to 1, heard tear-producing stories from victims of priestly sexual abuse and absorbed tongue lashings from church supporters whom they invited to speak. "What are [people] saying about you, the successors to the apostles?" said one of the critics, Scott Appleby, a professor at the University of Notre Dame. "I don't think the suspense will be broken if we admit that at this particular moment in American history, they are not comparing you to Christ and his apostles." In interviews Friday, many bishops said the unrelenting criticism was exactly what their group needed to hear after a half-year of mounting public outrage filtered through news media. "I approached the conference with a certain amount of dread," said Jaime Soto, the auxiliary bishop of Orange, which covers Orange County. "Now I feel a certain amount of relief at having been able to engage the victims and the issue together with my fellow bishops. It was anguishing and uplifting." Soto's change of emotions was mirrored by other bishops, who said the conference's opening day of victim testimony quelled any serious opposition to enacting a "zero-tolerance" policy for abusive priests. Bishop David E. Foley, from Birmingham, Ala., was moved by the way his colleagues became silent as the abuse victims told their stories. "And where there is silence," Foley said, "there is God. God speaks in silence." Bishop Edward J. O'Donnell of Lafayette, La., was moved the same way. "You have to be terribly stupid not to feel it." O'Donnell, a longtime backer of zero tolerance, said the victims' speeches also swayed bishops who thought some accusers had come forward for monetary gain or to hurt the church. The prelates "realized that we've got a serious problem of our own making. And we had an opportunity to do something about it," he said. In the end, Soto said, the events of the conference "made him soberly aware of my own humanity and the need for God's grace." The conference produced a different type of humbling experience for Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston. Once the most powerful Catholic leader in the nation, and still the longest-serving American cardinal, Law has been at the epicenter of the church's crisis since it was revealed in January that he moved a priest from parish to parish despite accusations that the priest had molested 130 boys. During the bishops' meeting, in which many bishops scheduled news briefings for reporters, the gray-haired cardinal remained sequestered on the second floor of the Fairmont Hotel. Law refused all media requests and traveled through the hotel lobby with a burly clergyman at his side. Law apologized in closed session to his fellow bishops for his role in the scandal, but offered only a few insignificant suggestions during the public debate. Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the conference, even gently rebuffed Law in the cardinal's final attempt to speak during the proceedings on sexual abuse policy. In the interest of time, Law was told, his testimony would not be heard. Law's lot probably won't get much better at the next conference of bishops in November. During that session, a subcommittee of bishops will present ways to hold prelates accountable if they harbor molesting priests. The conference produced plenty of evidence that Los Angeles Cardinal Roger M. Mahony, while tainted by the abuse scandal at home, remains an influential prelate. During a single lunch break Friday, for instance, Mahony squeezed in television interviews with CNN, Fox News, CBS and MSNBC. Later, he also helped reporters on deadline by holding a series of news conferences in the hotel's makeshift television studios and in his hotel suite immediately after the conference's final vote--a media-friendly gesture unusual for a cardinal or most bishops. The most damaging allegation against Mahony, as reported by The Times in May, is that he transferred Father Michael Stephen Baker to several parishes after the priest told him in 1986 that he had molested young boys. The cardinal later approved a secret $1.3-million settlement with two men allegedly abused by Baker in the 1990s. The archdiocese last month hired Sitrick and Co., a high-profile public relations firm, to boost its public image. In addition to two public relations specialists from the archdiocese, Mahony brought two Sitrick executives to Dallas. A diocesan spokesman said the Sitrick executives offered no public relations advice to Mahony during the two-day conference. In the conference proceedings, Mahony also found himself in the spotlight, forcefully advocating zero tolerance, sharing his experiences of being falsely accused of molestation, and even giving advice on how to speed up the bishops' lagging debate--which brought applause. Mahony also pulled off perhaps his biggest feat: getting a laugh out of the weary bishops. When one of his amendments had been misplaced, Mahony, looking bewildered for a moment, said he had given it earlier to someone in the hotel hallway who wore a "staff" member badge. Mahony said: "I hope it wasn't room service." U.S. Bishops Adopt Policy on Sex Abuse By Teresa Watanabe Dallas -- Under intense pressure to stem a spiraling sex abuse crisis, the nation's Roman Catholic bishops on Friday overwhelmingly approved their first national policy to oust all priests from public ministry who molest minors. In passing the policy by a vote of 239-13, the bishops closed a controversial loophole that would have allowed perpetrators of a past single offense to eventually return to a restricted ministry after treatment. But in a new wrinkle that outraged victims' advocates, the bishops left the door open for offenders to remain as priests with harsh restrictions that would ban them from wearing clerical garb, celebrating Mass and publicly presenting themselves as priests. The new policy contains no direct measure to penalize bishops who continue to reassign, rather than remove, errant priests, a demand that surfaced from victims and other dissident Catholics this week. The bishops did pass a separate motion to direct a conference committee to explore the issue of accountability. Despite the imperfections, several bishops hailed the new policy as an unprecedented document to protect children from sex abuse and seek healing and reconciliation with victims and their families. Among other things, the document morally obliges bishops in all 194 U.S. dioceses to report all allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities, requires the expulsion of offenders from public ministry and sets up a national lay review board. The board will publicly name in annual reports those dioceses that fail to comply with the policy--a sharp contrast from the tradition of clerical secrecy. The vote came after six months of ceaseless headlines that have chronicled a church pattern of protecting abusive priests. About 250 of the nation's 46,000 priests have resigned or been suspended during that time. Four bishops have resigned, two priests have committed suicide after being accused of abuse and another priest was shot. "Today the [bishops] took a profound step in a long and sorrowful journey for the entire church," said Bishop Wilton D. Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "The charter ... ensures that young people are protected, that victims are truly listened to and assisted, that all priests are trustworthy and that all bishops act responsibly." David Clohessy, director of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, called the new policy terribly disappointing because it did not eject all perpetrators from the priesthood or seek to remove derelict bishops. But the newly appointed chairman of the national lay review board, Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, moved swiftly to invite victims' advocates to serve as board members. At least one of them, Mark Serrano of the survivors network group, has agreed. Gregory and others said the uniform national policy was needed to prevent dioceses from ignoring guidelines on sex abuse that the bishops passed a decade ago. The lack of compliance led to tragic cases of predatory priests who were kept in ministry only to violate other victims, fueling widespread anger and an outcry for tough and sweeping reforms. What was billed as one of the most important debates in the history of the bishops conference began with a ringing declaration from Archbishop Harry Flynn, chairman of the committee on sexual abuse that drafted the policy. "This is a defining moment for us ... to root out a cancer in our church," Flynn told his fellow bishops. "The bottom line remains, and that is: No priest or deacon who has abused a minor can remain in ministry. As good pastors attentive to those we serve, we can do no less." However, the daylong debate revealed deep concerns and palpable tensions among bishops, who were caught between public expectations of reform and trepidation over subjecting priests to unjust actions. Nevertheless, provisions to soften the policy were turned back one after another as bishops repeatedly spoke out against what several of them termed wiggle room. In one exchange, some asked for amendments to require them to report to civil authorities only credible allegations, saying they did not want to stain the reputation of priests with false accusations. Others worried that the provision would break the bond of trust between priests and bishops. Cardinal Roger M. Mahony of Los Angeles, among others, countered that the public had criticized bishops for trying to handle the problem within the church--and in the process had delayed justice. (Mahony has been criticized for transferring a priest to several parishes in the Los Angeles Archdiocese after the priest told him in the mid-1980s that he had molested young boys.) Noting that he had been falsely accused twice of molestation, Mahony said immediate intervention by law enforcement had cleared him swiftly and publicly. "I welcome police intervention.... It helps us greatly," Mahony said. The new national policy will not greatly affect Los Angeles, because the archdiocese already requires the dismissal of any priest found to have sexually abused minors. After five hours of debate and earlier consideration of 107 pages of proposed amendments, the bishops adopted the policy. The policy will be forwarded to the Vatican, which must approve it to make it legally binding on all bishops. Father Thomas Reese, editor of the national Catholic magazine America, said the bishops' approval of a document containing provisions that some Vatican officials had publicly criticized, such as reporting all sex abuse allegations to civil authorities, marked a sea change in the American leaders' relationship with Rome. In the two decades he has attended bishops' conferences, Reese said, American bishops had usually treated any Vatican concern with great deference. But the only public reference any bishop made to Rome during their two-day meeting was a comment by Pope John Paul II: "There is no place in the priesthood or religious life for those who would harm the young." "The pope indicated that he trusted the U.S. bishops and told them to go home and fix this problem," Reese said. "The bishops basically said: If the Vatican doesn't agree with us, we'll go straight to the man in white." Reese said, however, that worries over Vatican reaction may have had led bishops to back off on an earlier draft provision that required them to seek to defrock any offender. He said some Vatican officials had expressed concern about an overly sweeping policy that could jeopardize the due process rights of priests. Numerous bishops disagreed with Reese's speculation. In supporting the new clause that would keep some offenders in the priesthood, Bishop David Foley argued that defrocking all offenders and throwing them into the community was irresponsible. Mahony said he expected that the only offenders who would not be forcibly defrocked were the very elderly or infirm, and Auxiliary Bishop Timothy Dolan of Pittsburgh said compassion for such men prompted him to support their retention in the priesthood. And Keating said he would, as review committee chairman, recommend to the Vatican the removal of any bishop who covered up abuse. Keating, a former FBI agent and local prosecutor, also said any cover-up could constitute obstruction of justice. Still, victims of abuse, who moved bishops Thursday with tearful testimony about their experiences, expressed shock and anger that perpetrators could still technically remain priests. "They're still in a place of honor and they still have access to families," said Peter Isely of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests. "Catholics need to voice their displeasure, because their money will be used to house and feed sex offenders." Times staff writers Larry Stammer and William Lobdell contributed to this report. Jury Demands Priests' Records By Richard Winton and Larry B. Stammer A grand jury issued subpoenas Wednesday to the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles to force it to hand over the personnel records of three priests under criminal investigation for alleged sexual abuse of minors. Los Angeles Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley turned to the grand jury to obtain the personnel files after a lawyer for the priests objected two weeks ago to the release of the documents. Cooley's office declined to comment, but two sources familiar with the process said the grand jury had acted. The subpoenas escalated pressure on Cardinal Roger M. Mahony, who was in Dallas as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops prepared to convene for the first time since the church was rocked by the sexual abuse scandal. Mahony's handling of two of the priests named in the subpoenas has been a point of controversy. Michael Hennigan, a Los Angeles attorney representing the archdiocese in the cases, said he had received subpoenas from the Los Angeles County Grand Jury for documents related to Father Michael Stephen Baker, who is retired; Father Michael Wempe; and Father David Granadino. Mahony said the archdiocese would comply with the subpoenas. But a lawyer who represents the individual priests said he will ask a judge to stop the documents from being handed over, contending that it would violate state and federal privacy laws. "We've had the files waiting," Mahony said. "What we've been reminding people is these priests all have attorneys, so it isn't our decision. The district attorney and their attorneys have to work this out. There are a number of ways to do it, and a subpoena is fine." Mahony said the files contain psychological evaluations, so it is no surprise that the priests' lawyers would object. Mahony transferred Baker to several parishes after the priest told him in 1986 that he had molested young boys. The cardinal later approved a secret $1.3-million settlement to two men allegedly abused by Baker in the 1990s. The cardinal has said he erred when he transferred Wempe, who is accused of molesting children, to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center about 14 years ago without telling hospital officials. Wempe was among eight priests Mahony forced to retire earlier this year after the archdiocese adopted a "zero tolerance" policy for abusers in the wake of a lawsuit settlement. Since then the archdiocese has placed a handful of other priests on leave because of allegations. One of them is Granadino, a priest at St. Francis of Rome church in Azusa and the subject of a county Sheriff's Department probe into accusations that he molested boys in Norwalk and Azusa. Mahony said he expects the documents to be handed over next week, barring objections. "We want these cases dealt with and justice done one way or the other to get it over with.... The one thing that does not help us is just to have this thing month after month after month." In a letter last month, Cooley threatened Mahony with a grand jury investigation unless the cardinal gave law enforcement agencies all documents related to the priests under criminal investigation for alleged abuse. The archdiocese agreed to turn over the documents. But prosecutors suspended a May 30 deadline because of the legal objections made by Donald Steier, the priests' attorney. Steier said Wednesday that he will file a motion to quash the subpoenas and ask a judge to hold a closed review of the files to hear his objections. Steier noted that in a 1995 molestation case involving Ted Llanos, a Long Beach priest who has since died, he succeeded in having a subpoena for documents quashed. He compared his philosophy to that of "individual police officers [who] assert similar objections when their personnel files are sought in litigation." The embattled bishop By Tom Kisken kisken@insidevc.com Thomas J. Curry knew the Rev. Michael Baker had a problem with children about 14 years before the Los Angeles area priest was ousted from the ministry after molestation accusations. Curry, now bishop of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties within the Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles, was vicar of clergy when Baker came to him in the mid-1980s after a sabbatical and acknowledged "a problem with regards to minors." Refusing to offer more specifics, Curry helped make controversial decisions to send Baker to a sexual disorders treatment center and allow his return to a limited ministry that ended two years ago after a complaint against the archdiocese from a pair of brothers who allege they were molested into the 1990s. During his five years of supervising the archdiocese's priests as vicar of clergy, Curry also dealt with the Rev. Michael Wempe, a former Ventura County associate pastor being sued by two men who say they were molested as children living in the Conejo Valley in the 1970s and '80s. Curry wrote letters to another accused priest, the Rev. Santiago Tamayo, advising him to stay out of the country and acknowledging the archdiocese was still paying his salary. As controversy blazes around Cardinal Roger Mahony and accused priests who once served in Ventura, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties, the flames have flickered near this respected, quiet auxiliary bishop from Ireland. Some go as far as to link him with the poisonous core of the scandals: leaders who opted to protect the church instead of cleansing it. "He's been in the middle of the conspiracy to keep the secret and conceal the wrongdoing and protect himself and obvious predators," said Jeff Anderson, a lawyer handling a lawsuit filed in May that accuses Baker of abusing four former altar boys and also alleges a cover-up that archdiocese officials have denied. "He is an aider and abetter to Cardinal Mahony." Curry said there was never any attempt to hide any person or crime. He said that in his years working with Mahony as vicar of clergy, pedophilia was viewed as similar to alcoholism -- a sickness that could, in some cases, be controlled with therapy, allowing people to continue as effective leaders in controlled, limited ministries. Now he thinks differently. In an interview at the former Santa Barbara convent that is now his home and office, the 59-year-old bishop defended himself but also talked about living with the allegations that a priest he helped send back into ministry continued to abuse children. "My reaction is I wish I could relive the past E If I had to do it again, we wouldn't have put people back in the ministry at all," he said, advocating the archdiocese's current policy of removing offending priests from ministry no matter when the abuse happened. The area priests with whom Curry has worked for about eight years as regional bishop under Mahony say it is inevitable his name has emerged in the flood of lawsuits and accusations because dealing with trouble is part of being vicar of clergy. They say his only mistake is in being judged today for decisions made more than 10 years ago. "There's been an evolution in how these kind of things are dealt with," said the Rev. Pasquale Vuoso of St. Sebastian Church in Santa Paula, referring to pedophilia and other sexual disorders. He characterized much of the criticism as Monday-morning quarterbacking. "Based on what we feel now, we're making judgments on what happened in the past." Anderson claims Mahony and Curry knew and concealed Baker's molestation.
He said that in Tamayo's case, Curry was part of a plan to keep the priest
quiet and out of the country. "Is water wet?" he said. Some observers say that if the accusations are true, Curry should resign. Others direct their anger not at the bishop but at his superior, Mahony, who made final decisions on reassigning troubled priests. Dan Crisafulli, a Catholic from Agoura Hills, knows nothing about Curry or his work as vicar of clergy but is enraged at a scandal he sees splintering the church. Ask him about the targets of his anger and he talks first of offending priests and then diocesan insiders. "I guess I'm angrier at the people who know that it's going on and cover it up," he said. "Who do you trust? I think people are to the point where they don't trust anyone." 'A very dirty job' Curry has a doctorate in history and has written two books exploring separation of church and state. Born in County Cavan, Ireland, he is a former associate parish pastor and high school teacher who was promoted to lead an archdiocesan program for clergy continuing education. He was nominated by fellow priests in 1986 to become vicar of clergy, a newly created position consolidating responsibilities previously shared by different offices. Answering to Mahony, newly named archbishop of Los Angeles, Curry had responsibilities that included assigning priests to parishes and dealing with any problems. "He had a very dirty job E the most difficult job in the diocese," said Paul Ford, a teacher at St. John's Seminary in Camarillo who has known Curry for 15 years. "When priests get in trouble or fall off the wagon, (the vicar) gets the call." He was among the first to know when priests were accused of sexual misconduct with minors. He said it happened fewer than a dozen times in his about five years as vicar. "We'd call the priests and present them with allegations and give them a chance to respond," he said. In most instances, the priests would challenge some of the allegations but admit to problems, he said. The policy that Curry helped create was to have the priests assessed by a mental health professional, usually at a sexual disorders treatment center. Baker and Wempe were both sent to the Servants of the Paraclete facility in Jemez Springs, N.M. The center became embroiled in its own controversies regarding former patients who allegedly continued to molest. It was shut down in the mid-1990s. But during Curry's tenure as vicar, the archdiocese relied heavily on center therapists in determining whether to reassign priests to ministry after going through the treatment program. "If they said 'yes, they're cooperating, yes, they're in fairly good shape,' we'd put them back, always in a limited capacity," Curry said, noting the intent was to keep the priests away from children's ministries. He consulted with Mahony on the final decision. For the Rev. Michael Wempe, limited capacity meant serving as a chaplain at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. Wempe, removed from ministry earlier this year by Mahony, served as an associate pastor at several parishes in and around Ventura County.Curry said he was told by another priest in the late 1980s that Wempe, then finishing a stint at St. Sebastian Church in Santa Paula, flatly refused to follow archdiocese policies. He was allegedly spending time alone in his room with children and even taking them with him on a vacation. Noting he wasn't aware of any specific molestation accusations against the priest, Curry said Wempe was sent to the New Mexico treatment center before being reassigned to the hospital. The bishop talked about Mahony's earlier reported claims he didn't realize Cedars-Sinai had a children's ward. "I just don't think we thought of that," Curry said. Though hospital officials say there were no complaints against Wempe during his about 14 years as chaplain, the alleged oversight has become almost a kick-me sign affixed to the archdiocese. Upon being told many people just don't believe the statement, Curry looked down at the table where he was seated. "I know, I know," he said, again asserting the story's validity. "That (the pediatrics ward) just didn't come up." To accept the words is to accept that archdiocese leaders are simple-minded, said Lee Bashforth of Newport Beach, who alleges that Wempe molested him and his brother when they lived in the Conejo Valley. He contends the reassignment was just one of many ways church leaders showed their priority was protecting the church. "These guys are a lot of things. One of the things they're not is stupid," he said. "It's just not reality." He doesn't know Curry but thinks people involved in the reassignment of offending priests need to pay a price. "Anybody who's been involved in the cover-up and reassignment of serial predators of children, their penalty should be for them to lose their position," he said, later returning to the point. "These are frigging animals on the loose they have responsibility for." Compelled to pay Curry said that if priests would have been accused of any kind of sexual misconduct after being reassigned, they would have been pulled out of the ministry. He said the archdiocese never used parish transfers to hide accusations. Because of pending lawsuits, Curry won't answer questions about whether there were investigations to look for possible victims of Wempe or Baker. "I think we were very concerned about the victims," he said. "This was new to most of us. We were learning how to respond." Curry also won't discuss reports that police were not contacted when Michael Baker admitted his molestations, except to say that a meeting where Mahony allegedly said authorities should not be notified is fiction. Curry did note that the California law mandating clergy report child abuse didn't come until 1997 and said that in his years as vicar of clergy, victims were told they had the right to decide whether to notify police. Anderson's lawsuits paint Curry as a participant in a conspiracy to hide the Rev. Santiago Tamayo, accused of being one of seven priests to molest a 16-year-old girl. Curry wrote a 1987 letter denying that priest, who had moved to the Philippines, his request to return to the archdiocese. He encouraged him to stay where he was and apply to work as a priest there. "While you are pursuing this possibility, the archdiocese would like to pay you a salary," Curry wrote in letters that have been included in several lawsuits. Anderson said Tamayo was paid to stay away to protect the archdiocese from liability and to avoid further scandal. Curry noted allegations against Tamayo had already been expressed, noting a lawsuit against the priest had been filed several years before his letter. It was dismissed because of the statute of limitations. He said there was nothing left to hide. "We believed there was no place for him in the archdiocese. We told him it was only going to cause more hurt," he said. Tamayo, now deceased, did eventually return to the United States and admitted to a sexual relationship with the girl. As far as the payments, Curry said, the archdiocese was compelled by canon law to continue Tamayo's salary unless he became a priest in another area or was expelled in a process that takes years. He said that if Tamayo had applied to become a priest in the Philippines, church officials there would have been told about the accusations against him. 'Baker was different' The bishop says it himself. "Michael Baker was different because he was the only priest who
turned himself in,"he said. "I had the idea that this man was really trying to turn his life around," he said, refusing to divulge any specifics of the conversation because of litigation. "I can say that I knew he had a problem with regards to minors. There's no question about that." Contacted over the phone at a residence in Long Beach, Baker offered comment only on his respect for Curry, deflecting all other questions. "All I can tell you that Tom, for me, is an absolute gentleman," he said. "He treated me with great honor and respect." Curry said that after Baker acknowledged his "problem," he received months of treatment in Jemez Springs and was deemed fit by a therapist to return to limited ministry. He also continued to receive counseling. Baker was assigned to ministries focused on geriatric issues, Curry said. After Curry left as vicar of clergy at the end of 1990, Baker was at several different parishes. In a threatened lawsuit against the priest, Mahony and the archdiocese that the alleged victims' attorney said was secretly settled for $1.3 million about two years ago, Baker was accused of molesting two brothers over a period of about 15 years that started before his treatment and continued well into the 1990s. Plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed in May by Anderson and others include a former altar boy who said he was molested by Baker from about 1990 to 1993 at St. Elisabeth Church in Van Nuys. Records from the archdiocese show that Baker began to live at the parish in 1988, when Curry was still vicar of clergy. Baker left St. Elisabeth in 1991 and returned the next year. Curry said he's not aware of the most recent allegation but summed up his reaction to the general accusations against Baker with these words: "Terrible. Sad. Appalled." He said he's not sure the alleged abuse is directly related to the decision to reassign Baker to the ministry but acknowledged feelings of responsibility, guilt and regret. "You did something that you thought was right at the time and it led to further problems," Curry said, noting Baker is the only priest he reassigned who was accused of continuing to molest. "I don't know of any others and I pray to God there aren't," he said. That the Baker case and the entire clergy abuse scandal have hit him hard shows in his tone of voice and his eyes when asked pointed questions about victims. "I have a deep sense of sadness I feel every single day," he said. "There's been so much hurt, so much betrayal, so much shock." Bashforth, the alleged victim, said he thinks anyone who reassigned molesting priests should lose his job. Anderson, the lawyer, said that if he was a shareholder in a corporation headed by Curry, he would ask for his resignation. Others couch their judgments on whether a cover-up is proven. "If they have betrayed the faithful, they should stand accountable, they should lose their jobs," said John Blewett, a conservative Catholic from Santa Paula. Several priests in Ventura County said they stand behind their bishop, adding they haven't heard any whispers among their ranks indicating any spreading distrust. "I'm sure he was doing the best job he could at that time," said Monsignor Patrick O'Brien of San Buenaventura Mission. "I'm saddened to see he is stressed. I've supported him. I've encouraged him. We're all stressed by the negative publicity." Curry said he hasn't seriously considered resignation. "I will deal with whatever comes," he said of the possibility. The bishop acknowledges regrets but said he followed the archdiocese's policies and never tried to hide anything. "I figure I did the best I could at the time and some times that wasn't good enough," he said. "These guys are a lot of things. One of the things they're not is stupid. It's just not reality. E Anybody who's been involved in the cover-up and reassignmentof serial predators of children, their penalty should be for them to lose their position. These are frigging animals on the loose they have responsibility for." Lee Bashforth, who alleges the Rev. Michael Wempe molested him and his brother when they lived in the Conejo Valley Curry's view on current issues Bishop Thomas J. Curry said he opposes a national Catholic proposal that would allow some priests who have sexually abused a child in the past to stay in the ministry. The plan would oust any priest who molests a child in the future. But someone accused of a single past offense could remain in the ministry at the discretion of a review board made up mostly of lay Catholics. The priest would also have to meet other standards, such as public disclosure of the offense, treatment and a diagnosis of not being a pedophile. When the proposal comes up this week at a highly anticipated national bishops meeting in Dallas, Curry expects to vote against it. Instead the auxiliary bishop for Ventura and Santa Barbara counties within the Archdiocese of Los Angeles said he favors the kind of policy used locally where leaders say any priest who has sexually abused a child in the past or present is removed. He said public scrutiny and anger over molestation would make it very difficult for any offender to win a community's trust and lead a ministry. The meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops begins Thursday and has been trumpeted as the stage where Catholic leaders will try to frame a national church policy for dealing with clergy abuse. For any plan to be mandatory for all dioceses, it would have to approved by the Vatican. Curry thinks bishops need to hammer out differences in interpretations of what constitutes "zero tolerance." He supports the concept of forming a commission to study origins of the scandal and long-term solutions. He noted the conference lasts just two-plus days and shouldn't be viewed as the solution for the church's problems. Some observers suggest the scrutiny of accused priests and alleged coverups will begin to subside after the conference. Curry isn't so sure. "I think it will settle down when there's no more revelations," he said. Bishop Thomas J.Curry Mahony Is Falsely Accused in PR Snafu By Beth Shuster Cardinal Roger M. Mahony's spin machine spun out of control Tuesday. A week after hiring the high-priced crisis management and public relations firm Sitrick and Co., the Los Angeles Archdiocese issued a news release announcing an allegation of sexual misconduct against Mahony, as well as the cardinal's emphatic denial. A man claimed that he was forced to inappropriately touch Mahony two decades ago in Stockton, the release said. But the alleged victim told The Times that he never made such an accusation. In fact, he said in a telephone interview, he has never met the cardinal. The man said he had sent the archdiocese in Stockton a letter earlier this week, saying that he was ashamed of the way the church has handled sexual abuse by priests. The man said he wrote, "I want to see his face in court," referring to Mahony, who was the bishop of Stockton from 1980 to 1985. Tod Tamberg, a Mahony spokesman, said the archdiocese learned from The Times late Tuesday that the Stockton man had not accused Mahony of any sexual impropriety. The archdiocese released a second news release, titled "Archdiocese Receives Independent Corroboration That Allegation of Sexual Abuse Against Cardinal Roger Mahony Is False." In the first news release, Mahony denied the allegation, saying that he has "never engaged in any sexual activity, abuse or misconduct with anyone throughout my 40 years as a priest and a bishop." Mahony said he urged his representatives to alert Stockton police and asked for "an immediate and full investigation." Mahony, in the release, pledged his full cooperation. Tamberg said Mahony learned of the allegation from archdiocese lawyers. They told the cardinal that the man's grandmother had reported to Mahony in 1982 that a priest molested him. After that conversation, the victim--who was about 10--alleged that Mahony took him aside and encouraged the boy to inappropriately touch him, according to the news release. "I do not know anyone by the name of the individual making the allegation, nor do I know his grandmother," Mahony said in his statement for the media. The 33-year-old Stockton man, whose name is being withheld at his request, said he had "issues" with Father Oliver O'Grady, a Stockton priest who was accused of molesting two brothers and was then moved to another parish by Mahony, where he continued to molest. O'Grady's victims won a $30-million jury verdict, which was later negotiated to $7 million. Mahony testified in the civil trial that he was unaware of the accusations against O'Grady when he transferred him. In April, a Fresno woman with a history of mental illness claimed that Mahony molested her 32 years ago. The cardinal, who denied the allegations, was cleared by police. Mahony Ads Seek to Reassure Public By Beth Shuster and Richard Winton Cardinal Roger M. Mahony will be featured this week in full-page ads in three Los Angeles newspapers, reassuring the public that he is taking significant steps to prevent future abuse by priests in his archdiocese. Written as an open letter to residents of Los Angeles and surrounding communities, Mahony repeats many proposals previously announced in news conferences and interviews. The cardinal's newly hired public relations firm, Sitrick and Co., is behind the ad campaign, believing that the cardinal "had a good story to tell" readers, said Tod Tamberg, the archdiocese spokesman. The ads will appear Thursday in the Los Angeles Times, Daily News and La Opinion and will cost less than $50,000, Tamberg said. The archdiocese, which is seeking a benefactor to pay for the ads, is attempting to show that "we're doing everything humanly possible to ensure that these situations do not occur again. Nothing from the past will be repeated again," Tamberg said. The ad comes a week before the U.S. Conference of Bishops in Dallas, which is expected to be dominated by discussions of the nationwide abuse scandal. About 50 former and current priests are under investigation by authorities in Los Angeles, Ventura and Santa Barbara counties for sexually abusing minors. Mahony last month apologized to priests and parishioners for reassigning one priest who continued abusing minors for more than a decade in the 1980s and 1990s after confessing to the cardinal, who ordered counseling for the man rather than firing him. In another case, Mahony apologized for transferring a priest accused of sexual abuse to Cedars Sinai Medical Center, where he served as chaplain. Mary Grant, Southern California organizer of Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, denounced Mahony's ad campaign. "They should be publishing an apology and contact number for the police," she said. "They should be placing an ad saying they have covered up clergy abuse for years. It should read: Parents beware." In the ads scheduled to appear Thursday, Mahony said there will be no exceptions to his zero-tolerance policy, which requires the firing of priests who abuse minors. He said he will urge the bishops next week to adopt a national policy "as comprehensive as the one in place here: zero tolerance--past, present and future.'' Mahony has called his policy the toughest in the nation, which was required by the settlement of a lawsuit in December. The victim in that case, Ryan DiMaria, was awarded $5.2 million from the Los Angeles and the Orange County archdioceses. The settlement also called for 11 changes to diocesan policies, including zero tolerance. In his letter, Mahony said he is creating a Clergy Misconduct Oversight Board, headed by Richard Byrne, the retired presiding Los Angeles County Superior Court judge. In April, Byrne helped arrange for an after-hours hearing when a lawyer for the archdiocese sought a court order to prevent The Times from publishing e-mails written by Mahony and other archdiocese officials. The Times prevailed and published the e-mails, which had been leaked to KFI radio. Under Mahony's proposal, the clergy misconduct board will be expanded to 15 members and be given "broad new powers to review and strengthen all of our programs to end sexual abuse." Tamberg would not disclose those powers. Nanette de Fuentes, a psychologist and founding member of the board, said she does not expect the group to function dramatically differently. The board will meet Wednesday to discuss the details of the proposed changes. "We feel positive," Fuentes said. "He wants to look at the mistakes and move forward." The cardinal also is calling for fingerprinting and criminal background checks for all priesthood candidates in the archdiocese. Further, Mahony said that any new allegations of sexual abuse will be referred immediately to police and the accused priest will be removed from active ministry until the case is resolved. "Sexual abuse is a grave evil, a sin and a crime," Mahony said. "I state to you unequivocally that it will not be tolerated.... There will be no exceptions." Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley has threatened to initiate a grand jury proceeding to recover all archdiocese documents related to past sex abuse. Times staff writer Glenn F. Bunting contributed to this report. My Hopes for Dallas By Roger M. Mahony The expectations surrounding the meeting in Rome on April 23-24 of the U.S. cardinals, the leaders of our bishops’ conference and members of the Roman Curia were enormously unrealistic. Those hopes ranged from a quick and final plan to end decades of child abuse in the church to a “Third Vatican Council look” at every conceivable issue facing the church across our country. Because few had their expectations met, many declared the meetings a failure and a setback. That is not the way I see it. I believe that several important things happened in Rome during those two days: Pope John Paul II spoke words of solidarity, prayer and pastoral concern to victims of abuse in the church. He made it clear that there is no room in the priesthood or religious life for anyone who would harm the young; and he expects the bishops of the church to take every possible step to put an end to abusive behavior. The leaders of various Vatican offices understood that child abuse is not a problem confined to the United States, but a worldwide problem for the church; many of them acquired insights into a terrible and hidden problem that has plagued the church for a very long time. They offered their assistance in crafting church processes for dismissing guilty clergy from the clerical state quickly and for making official visitation of seminaries and religious houses of formation. We were clearly sent home to prepare for the Dallas meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and to produce tangible results. I am convinced that the Holy See is waiting for the U.S.C.C.B. to develop a comprehensive plan that can serve as an impetus for other bishops’ conferences that have not yet put their own plans in place. The eyes of our Catholic people, and others around the world, have now shifted to Dallas. The Dallas meeting must be an overwhelming success, and we bishops must leave there in full agreement on a number of action steps. My personal hopes for the Dallas meeting are divided into three sections—six overall goals to guide us forward, six concrete action steps that I believe we must take and three longer-range agenda items that still need the church’s attention. Overall Goals 1. We as bishops need to acknowledge and apologize for decisions made in the past regarding priestly abuse that were not in the best interest of young people and the church. True, many of us made decisions based upon the best professional knowledge and advice available in past years, and that knowledge has grown and changed greatly since then. Our decisions in 2002 are far different from those of the 1970’s and 1980’s. But still, the overall healing of the church would be enhanced by our admission that at times mistakes were made. 2. A genuine expression of apology to all who have become victims of sexual misconduct and abuse in the church. We can never state often enough how deeply sorry we are for the immeasurable loss, pain and suffering so many have suffered over the decades because of clergy sexual misconduct and abuse. 3. We must renew our pastoral outreach to all victims and their families and extend opportunities for counseling and other needed personal services. The current national crisis has brought to the surface many hurting past victims, and they need the church’s collective care and concern. 4. We must be able to assure our Catholic people that their church is
a safe place for all, especially children and young people. No parents
or guardians should feel the slightest hesitancy in entrusting their children
to the church’s ministries and care. 6. We bishops must take the lead in organizing special days of prayer, healing and penance and invite all our fellow Catholics to join us as humbled disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. We must not, and cannot, seem to advocate some type of “corporate fix” to a terrible church problem. We bishops must enter fully into this purification process by emptying ourselves and acknowledging our sinfulness; only then will the redeeming power of the risen Jesus sustain us forward. Special days of prayer, healing and penance across the country will help the church greatly. Action Steps 1. National Lay Misconduct and Abuse Commission. One of the ideas that emerged in Rome and gained enthusiastic support is the establishment of a special National Lay Commission to help oversee the next steps in the process of correcting past problems and assuring against new misconduct in the church. The bishops should approve the establishment of such a national commission, and if possible, even announce some of its members at Dallas. These lay men and women should represent the wide spectrum of expertise needed to help shape the church’s full response to misconduct in the church, as well as represent the geographical regions of the country. Their charge would be to develop both the needed minimal national standards to handle misconduct allegations and accountability systems to make certain all dioceses are in full compliance. We have been blessed here in Los Angeles over the past 10 years with a nine-member board—seven laypersons and two priests—to oversee the development of our policies and to implement appropriate recommendations in cases of alleged abuse or misconduct. Their insights are invaluable to me, and many other dioceses across the country use similar lay boards with great success. Our board is being expanded to 15 members, mostly lay, with increased authority. 2. “Zero Tolerance.” I personally subscribe to a policy of total zero tolerance for anyone in church ministry or service who abuses a minor. Our Holy Father’s words were quite clear: “People need to know that there is no place in the priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young.” I interpret that to mean zero tolerance, past, present and future—no exceptions. Some may suggest possible “what-if” exceptions to full zero tolerance. But just ask any Catholic lay persons. They are adamant that the church must adopt a national zero-tolerance policy. A new threshold has been set, and I believe that our national standards should unequivocally call for zero tolerance. In a rare case, should a diocesan lay board decide to make an exception for very special circumstances, then so be it. But the national policy should be clear and consistent with the Holy Father’s call. 3. Minimum National Procedural Standards. It is important that at Dallas the bishops agree to all of the essential elements that would comprise national procedural standards. They would include such things as the expanded use of lay boards to handle such cases in the future, the need to work closely with law enforcement agencies at all levels and the like. These elements would build upon those already put in place over the past several years. These essential elements would be given to the national commission, proposed above, as part of their work. Those elements could be improved upon, added to—whatever is needed to make them most effective across the country to assure that everyone who comes in contact with the church’s ministries and apostolates is safe. 4. Systems of Accountability. One of the continuing calls from our Catholic people is for the establishment of systems of accountability to make certain that each diocese has in place the needed procedural standards and process to deal with allegations of misconduct and abuse, as well as to make certain that preventive systems are in place for seminarians and priests. The national commission could recommend some possible models, maybe small review teams functioning at the provincial level, to help everyone in the church know that the needed processes and standards are in place, are working and are kept up to date. I would welcome such systems of accountability, since they would help us bishops expand our systems of governance to be far more inclusive of the entire church. 5. Encouragement for Our Priests. Ninety-eight percent of our priests across the country are dedicated and virtuous. They have not been and are not now involved in any form of sexual abuse or misconduct. But all are being painted with the same broad brush: guilty until proven innocent. They are hurting, they feel ashamed of their fallen brothers, and they are taking the brunt of much public ridicule and criticism. We must reach out to them, encourage them, gather them for prayer and keep them involved with the overall purification and healing process. Our people overwhelmingly support our priests at the parish level, since they have experienced them to be dedicated, caring and hard-working priests of Jesus Christ. Surveys show that our priests enjoy a far higher level of support than we bishops. We truly need each other in new ways today. 6. Preventive Measures. The seminary visitations will be very helpful to make certain that all our seminaries and houses of formation have in place clear, stringent application processes. Once admitted, mature seminary candidates need a deep and thorough formation in human sexuality, in establishing healthy relationships in their ministry and in priestly chastity and celibacy. No one can be promoted to sacred orders who has not proven that he can maturely assume the duties of lifelong celibate and chaste living. Post-ordination programs must be enhanced and expanded to assist all our currently ordained priests. There has been unevenness over the years in seminary formation programs, and we need to reach out to our priests with ways to deepen their spiritual lives, to help them develop healthy friendships and working relationships and to offer support for their celibate lifestyle. Longer-Range Agenda It is my hope that we will be able to accomplish all of the above—maybe even more. The special committee headed by Archbishop Harry Flynn of St. Paul and Minneapolis has its work cut out for it, and I offer them my prayerful cooperation in moving a concrete agenda forward. There are three additional areas that need the church’s attention at the national level, which I mention here lest they somehow be forgotten. 1. Research Projects. The church needs to commission several top-flight research projects across the country to find out what factors led to this incredible betrayal within the church over a period of at least several decades. What questions need to be asked? What information needs to be gathered? How could priests, committed to modeling the life of the Good Shepherd, end up sexually abusing the most innocent of Christ’s flock? While our full attention at the moment must be focused upon reaching out to the victims and preventing any further abuse, we cannot leave aside the research projects that must be launched in a coordinated fashion. 2. Hemisphere Gathering. We are acutely aware that the problem of misconduct and abuse in the church is not confined to the United States. My experience in Los Angeles demonstrates that this is a worldwide problem for the church, and we have had too many experiences of misconduct by priests from other countries. Following up on the Special Assembly for America of the Bishops Synod in 1997, I recommend that there be a hemisphere-wide gathering of lay leaders, women and men religious, deacons, priests and bishops to discuss this phenomenon and to make certain that the church throughout America is taking all the necessary steps to prevent such misconduct everywhere in our hemisphere. The church in Canada, for example, has exercised excellent leadership over the years in developing national policies and strategies for dealing with this difficult problem. We have much to learn from one another, and we all have a collective responsibility for the church throughout the hemisphere. 3. Special Care Centers. Is there a need for the church in our country to create a few special care centers to house priests who have been found guilty of the abuse of minors and who have been removed entirely from ministry, especially since many are near or at retirement? Does the church have a role in providing a supervised setting for these men in their senior years? Would children be safer if such men were in special care centers instead of living in the broader community—often alone—without any church supervision? The question needs further exploration. We bishops are facing the worst scandal and calamity in the history of the church in our country. Its origins, repercussions and the loss of the church’s leadership role are unparalleled. The expectations and the longings of our Catholic people for our meeting in June are also unparalleled. We cannot fail. Those are my hopes for Dallas.
|
|||||
Bishop Accountability © 2003 |
|||||