Lawyers in abuse case claim Salinas PD is too tight with accused priest to investigate.

Damned If They Do: Diocese administrator Tom Riordan says “We’re criticized if we don’t do an investigation, and we’re criticized if we do an investigation.” Photo by Nic Coury.

Separating Church and State

Lawyers in abuse case claim Salinas PD is too tight with accused priest to investigate.

By Sara Rubin

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Attorneys representing the victim of alleged sexual abuse at the hands of a Catholic priest have asked the Salinas Police Department to recuse itself from the case, citing an entrenched relationship between law enforcement and the alleged perpetrator.


“We believe the Salinas PD has an unavoidable conflict in this case,” lawyers John Manly and Vince Finaldi wrote in a Feb. 22 letter to Salinas Police Chief Louis Fetherolf and Deputy Chief Cassie McSorley. 

Salinas police would not comment on the letter. “We’ve investigated our own employees, so I don’t know what the conflict of interest would be,” says police spokesman Lalo Villegas.


The priest, Rev. Edward Fitz-Henry, served as a chaplain or quasi-chaplain for Salinas police, and as a San Benito County sheriff’s chaplain for 15 years until he resigned that role last month.


If the investigation fell under jurisdiction of the San Benito sheriff, the department would pass it to another agency. “We would probably not investigate… so there’s no perception of impropriety,” says Sgt. Scott Becker. 


Before the Diocese of Monterey suspended Fitz-Henry last month, he had been a priest at Mission San Juan Bautista since 1996, with the exception of a two-year stint at Madonna del Sasso from 2005 to 2007. The alleged abuse took place at Madonna.


The Diocese began investigating in January, an effort led by recently retired Salinas police sergeant Don Cline.

Finaldi says the Diocese’s inquiry is contaminating witnesses and undermining detectives’ ability to conduct a fair criminal investigation. Villegas, whose wedding Fitz-Henry officiated, agrees. “Why was the Diocese approached first?” he says. “In circumstances like these, the police department would be the first one notified.” 

SNAP says church unduly influenced state Sen. Jim Sullivan

Sen. Jim Sullivan

WAUWATOSA — Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) questioned Thursday whether state Sen. Jim Sullivan allowed his Catholic faith to influence his legislative actions on a measure concerning child victims.

The Wauwatosa Democrat described the allegation as groundless.

The measure at issue is the Child Victims Act, a bill that would have made it easier for victims of clergy sexual abuse to file lawsuits. The now-dead measure, first introduced in 2008, would in part have erased the statute of limitations on civil lawsuits against child sex abusers. That could have led to a flood of lawsuits against several Wisconsin churches.

The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests alleged that the reason Sullivan opposed the measure was because he feared that his church would deny him communion, a sacred Catholic rite.

As proof, SNAP distributed a Dec. 16 e-mail that lobbyist Joe Strohl had written to a colleague. In it, Strohl wrote of a conversation he had with Sullivan the previous day about the lawmaker's opposition to the bill.

"As he said, 'he still takes communion every Sunday' and wants to be able to keep doing that," Strohl wrote.

Sullivan confirmed with The Associated Press that he made the comment, but said it was being misinterpreted.

"Never, ever has anybody ever threatened to withhold communion or any other sacraments from me or my family," the senator said.

He said he opposed the Child Victims Act because statutes of limitations are fair and important protections for defendants accused of having committed a crime decades earlier.

"You have to be able to weigh the needs of those seeking justice with the need to mount a vigorous defense," Sullivan said.

Strohl, the lobbyist and a former Democratic Senate leader, told AP he wrote the e-mail after a client had asked him to solicit Sullivan's stance on the Child Victims Act.

When Sullivan made the communion comment there was nothing in his tone or body language that suggested he was being threatened or pressured to oppose it, Strohl said.


Comment by "schmenz" :

"Where do I begin to comment on this amazing article?

Let's begin with the Holy Communion issue: Senator Sullivan should be denied the Sacrament absolutely, for his open support of both pro-abortion and pro-homosexual policies. He is a disgrace to the Church and as he receives this Sacrament unworthily so he shall be judged - as will the priests who give it him, knowing his actions.

The statements that he would be denied the Sacrament for voting on this victim's rights issue, and that he was pressured by the Church, are absolutely, positively ridiculous. Sullivan knows he would not be denied Communion for that, and so should the writer of the article. Since over 90% of the abuse cases involve homosexual preying on adolescent boys the real reason Sullivan is voting that way most likely has to do with his support of the sodomy lobby.

Sullivan is perhaps the worst mealy-mouthed wardheeler of the bunch. He wouldn't be influenced by any church, least of all his own."

Abuse victims reject Jesuit payout offer

A body representing former pupils sexually abused by Jesuit priests in Germany rejected on Thursday an offer of 5,000 euros (6,832 dollars) in compensation per victim as woefully inadequate.

"The sum is totally insufficient, either to compensate for the damage caused or to signal a recognition of guilt," Thomas Weiner from the Eckiger Tisch (Square Table) told the Frankfurter Rundschau daily.

Instead, victims should receive on average a payout of 80,000 euros each, he said, 16 times the offer announced by Jesuit orders on Wednesday.

A spokesman for the order in Munich said the Jesuits had sent the offer in letters and emails to the around 200 victims who had come forward, in which it was noted that the sum "could never compensate for the suffering incurred."

Recipients had attended Jesuit schools across Germany, where revelations a year ago of sexual violence against students brought a scandal plaguing the Roman Catholic Church to Pope Benedict XVI's native country.

The spokesman in Munich, Thomas Busch, said the payout would not be made for another two to three months while the Jesuits sought a comprehensive offer with other Roman Catholic institutions.

The German Bishops Conference has not yet taken a decision on the matter.

Germany has faced revelations over the past year that hundreds of children were physically and sexually abused in institutions throughout the country, all but a handful run by the Roman Catholic Church.

The Church in Germany has said it failed to investigate properly claims of abuse and that in some cases there was a cover-up, with paedophile priests simply moved elsewhere instead of being disciplined and reported to the police.

It has also faced accusations of foot-dragging on reparations for victims, most of whom suffered their abuse several decades ago, too long ago for criminal charges to be brought.

The 83-year-old pope is due to visit Germany in September in his first state visit since becoming pontiff in 2005. He has made two private trips in 2005 and 2006.




© 2010 AFP

Republican candidate for Senate Ron Johnson Testified To Protect Catholic Church From Sex Abuse Lawsuits

As a member of the finance council for the Catholic Diocese of Green Bay until he resigned to run for Senate this year, Ron Johnson served alongside a bishop named Robert Morneau who, as a Church leader, had been made aware over two decades ago of the abusive tendencies of Rev. John Feeney.

Rev. Feeney was convicted in 2003, before Johnson joined the council, for sexually assaulting two brothers in the late 1970s. But according to documents obtained by the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests (SNAP), the Church sought to cover up his crimes, which one reverend called "sexually very inappropriate."

Seven years later, Johnson testified before the Wisconsin State Senate against legislation to eliminate the statute of limitations for such crimes, making it easier for victims of sexual abuse to seek damages from the Church or any other culpable institution.

The testimony first arose in the context of the race in a June article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and has been dogging Johnson more or less ever since. His connection to Morneau raises questions about how familiar Johnson (who is not a Catholic) was with the diocese's hidden scandals. Those questions couldn't come at a worse time for the GOP hopeful, who leads Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) in the polls ahead of the November election.

TPM contacted numerous attorneys, advocates, and other members of the finance council of the Diocese of Green Bay to explain the finance council's role at the church, and the information it was privy to with respect to sexually abusive clergy. What we learned suggests that it's very difficult to separate Johnson's role as finance committee member from his role as legislative witness seeking to protect the Church from future lawsuits, when he told the panel, "I urge you to defeat this legislation."

Johnson insisted at the time that he testified as an active member of the business and non-profit community -- not specifically, and most pressingly, as a representative of the Catholic Church. But the road he took to testifying at the Madison statehouse in January of this year belies that contention.

Deacon Tim Reilly, Director of Administration for the Diocese of Green Bay told TPM that the Church played a significant role in getting Johnson to the state capital. According to Reilly, the Church didn't support the legislation and wanted to raise public awareness of its objections. So the diocese arranged for a meeting with Randy Hopper, the state senator in the Oshkosh area who sits on the panel that was deciding whether this legislation would go to the floor for a vote. Some 20 people met at St. Rafael's Parish in Oshkosh, several of whom spoke -- including Johnson. His arguments were among the most articulate and persuasive to the group, so Hopper asked him to go to Madison and testify -- the sort of not-quite-lobbying that happens in Washington and in state capitals around the country all the time.

Reilly reiterated to TPM that Johnson was not speaking specifically on behalf of the church. "He was speaking on his own behalf, as a concerned citizen, that this would adversely affect the Catholic School System and the Boys and Girls Club and the YMCA and other non-profits without government protection."

That beggars belief, according to experts and clergymen.

"He can't be testifying just as a concerned citizen," says Father Tom Doyle, a priest who presciently warned the Catholic Church about the looming sex abuse scandal years ago. "If he was a member of the finance council of the diocese, the senator picked him out not because he was concerned about the Boys and Girls Club.... I don't know of any instance where a layperson, on his own, without any connection with the Church administration has come forward to testify."

Doyle admonished that, though many finance councils around the country are intimately familiar with diocesan secrets (both good and bad), they are in some instances left in the dark by their bishops. He has no direct knowledge of what the finance council knew in Johnson's case.

After learning of Johnson's testimony in news reports a former Johnson supporter named Todd Merryfield -- one of Feeney's victims -- appeared on MSNBC to announce that he'd renounced his support for the Tea Party-backed candidate.

For Merryfield and others who advocate on behalf of abuse victims, legislation extending the statute of limitations in child abuse cases was and remains a key legislative goal, and Johnson's successful attempt to kill it is a nearly unpardonable sin. But in addition to seeking penance from Johnson, and calling on him to press the Church to release information about priest abuse, they want to know what he knew when he testified in January.

"We don't know exactly what he knew," Merryfield told TPM in a phone interview. "It just seemed a little strange that he was in a position of knowledge being on the finance council, having to sign the checks to everyone being paid."

The issue has taken on greater salience as Johnson's lead over Feingold has grown. But for victims, the question of whether Johnson was acting as a dispassionate citizen and member of the business community, or as an agent of the Church, is the most crucial.

"These pedophiles that they have hidden away, they pay their room and board, living costs," Merryfield said, speculating that Johnson "has to know who they are because he has to write the checks to somebody."

According to Peter Isely, SNAP's Midwest Director, "It's something of a mystery what this finance council does," though, he says, it's one of the most important positions in the diocese.

Jim Stang, an attorney for official committees of abuse survivors in six Catholic affiliated bankruptcy cases, told TPM that these finance committees -- mandated at every diocese in the country -- are well-positioned to know about the skeletons in the Church's closets. When a case is settled, for instance, it would be in the financial interest of the Church, and therefore the council, to know of any other potential victims, and therefore lawsuits.

"It would certainly be in the area of finance committee's appropriate inquiry to ask," Stang said.

Ultimately, though, Stang said it should come as no surprise that Johnson's testimony so closely mirrored the Church's position.

"I think you'd have to live in some kind of plastic bubble to not make the association between statute of limitations reform and the financial impact on the diocese," Stang said. "It's certainly the argument the Church has been making for years."

According to the 2004 John Jay Report, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Diocese of Green Bay received 59 allegations of sexual abuse by 35 diocesan priests during the 52 year period of the inquiry, 1950-2002.

Furthermore, the diocese is currently involved in two lawsuits, which, according to Reilly, is just the sort of potential liability the Church would bring to the attention of the council. "I also would say we have two lawsuits going on and depending on how they're settled, depending on whether the judge rules in our favor and how the jury rules, this is the potential financial risk that might be out there in the future," Reilly said. "In the case of the two litigations that we're involved in right now, I feel very strongly that we are on the correct side of the truth, but I said to the council, I need to make everybody aware that there are two lawsuits coming on so it's not a surprise. Nobody likes surprises."

In the past several days, Johnson has claimed in statements to reporters in Wisconsin that he never argued the legislation should fail -- only that he cautioned against some of its provisions. "I sought to warn legislators of those consequences in order to correct legislative language so that any bills that passed would punish the perpetrators," he insisted. In fact he urged state senators to vote down the legislation, claiming that, among other things, it would benefit trial attorneys and do more harm than good to children left in the lurch when organizations get sued and go under.

Now, under attack, he is demanding full transparency from the Diocese of Green Bay.
"I call upon the Green Bay Diocese to provide the utmost transparency in order to answer any lingering questions or doubt among victims of child abuse and those who seek to prevent child abuse in the future," Johnson said.

The Johnson campaign did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Article Source