Bronx priest ‘trafficked’ boy to child molester,
lawsuit alleges
By Kathianne Boniello, NY Post
A beloved Bronx priest intentionally steered a boy to a known molester in the 1980s, leading to months of sexual abuse, according to a new lawsuit in Manhattan Supreme Court.
Gruber was convicted of sexual abuse charges in the mid 1980s after another victim’s parents complained, sparking a police investigation that Jenik allegedly tried to derail by intimidating kids into silence, Ganley has charged.
“It was terrifying,” Ganley told The Post, adding, “He was really leaning on me, telling me, ‘You don’t want to do this, you don’t want to give a statement.'”
“Jenik, knowing that Paul Gruber was a sexual assaulter of young boys, trafficked [Ganley] to Gruber when he assigned this predator to act as [his] guidance counselor,” Ganley charged in court papers.
The bishop resigned from Our Lady of Refuge in 2018 after a “credible” allegation of child abuse from the 1980s surfaced against him.
Jenik denied the allegations when reached by The Post. “No, absolutely not, that’s bizarre,” he said.
The bishop insisted Gruber was not an employee and that he “just hung around a lot. We just didn’t want him around, period.” “We knew the guy was bad,” said the priest, who also asked of the allegations, “How far does this go back?”
Jenik’s exit from Our Lady of Refuge sparked a community protest on his behalf. The bishop was known for marching in the streets against drugs and crime.
Ganley is suing Gruber, Jenik and the Archdiocese under New York’s Child Victims Act, which opened a legal window to revive old sex-abuse cases.
Gruber, a tutor in Arlington, Virginia, could not be reached for comment.
Additional victims and witnesses have come forward, said Ganley’s lawyer, Craig Vernon, who added the lawsuit “allows Shawn to seek justice not only against the man who sexually assaulted him but also against the Priest who made it all possible.”
Ganley urged other victims to remember, “It is not your shame. I stand with you.”
Judge rules 86 child abuse lawsuits against
Long Island diocese can move forward
By Priscilla DeGregory and Bernadette Hogan, NY Post
The St. Agnes Cathedral in Rockville Centre, New York.Getty Images
A Long Island Diocese can’t postpone the 86 child sex-abuse lawsuits it’s facing as it tries to fight a law protecting underage victims, a judge ruled Thursday.
The Diocese of Rockville Centre filed its own lawsuit last November to fight the constitutionality of New York’s Child Victims Act that was passed in February 2019 allowing victims of childhood abuse — for a one-year period — to bring claims regardless of when the abuse occurred.
The Diocese, which serves more than 1.4 million Catholics in Nassau and Suffolk counties, has since asked for 86 sex abuse cases brought against it to be put on hold pending an appeal of their case fighting the CVA. The Diocese argued the stay was essential because the cost of fighting the appeal and the sex abuses cases all at once could drive it to bankruptcy.
Of course, the option is to stop fighting the case and do the right thing. But, I suppose that never occurred to you.
But Thursday Nassau County Supreme Court Justice Steven Jaeger denied the Diocese’s request for a stay in the sex abuse lawsuits citing that the Diocese isn’t likely to win its appeal and because the victims have already waited far too long to fight their cases.
“The Court finds that the delay in seeking justice has already been significant and further delay is not justified,” Jaeger’s decision reads. “Many CVA plaintiffs state they have been dealing with the effects of the abuse they were subjected to for decades and that this abuse was allegedly permitted to occur by the negligence, willful blindness and/or knowing cover-up by the Diocese and others.”
“This decision is a green light for all survivors in New York and paves the way for survivors to uncover the truth and reclaim some of their power,” said Jeff Anderson, a lawyer who represents hundreds of victims who are suing the catholic church.
There have been a total of over 106 lawsuits brought against the Diocese of Rockville Centre — including cases filed in other jurisdictions — after the August 2019 opening of the CVA one-year look-back period.
The deadline for the look-back period was extended until January 2020 due to court delays because of the coronavirus pandemic. The state legislature approved extending the deadline until August 2021 but the governor still needs to sign it before it goes into effect.
“The Diocese believes that a stay pending appeal is warranted, but respects the court’s decision,” Sean Dolan, a spokesman for the Diocese said in a statement.
“As has been made clear in its court filings, the Diocese also continues to confront the practical reality of being forced to seek Chapter 11 protection.”
Is that the Christian thing to do? Can you justify that when you stand before Jesus Christ? Good luck with that!
Rockville Center, LI
Ex-altar boy says he was abused by Cardinal McCarrick
and witnessed more abuse at beach house
Abbott Koloff, Deena Yellin, NorthJersey.com
Geoffrey Downs alleges that former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick sexually abused him when he was an altar boy preparing to celebrate Mass decades ago, and offered to bring him to a Jersey shore beach house for some "alone time."
Downs said he had a vivid memory of a beach house that was used as a retreat by the Metuchen Diocese because he'd been there a few years before with a group of altar boys -- and witnessed a priest sexually abusing a young boy.
This was the second lawsuit alleging child abuse at a Jersey shore home that was used by McCarrick and other priests, bolstering allegations made in another civil filing last month. In that suit, a man alleges that he was abused by McCarrick at a beach house where the prelate shared boys sexually with other clerics. The abuse alleged in that suit occurred in the early 1980s, about the same time as abuse alleged in the recent lawsuit.
Downs' lawsuit, which was filed Aug. 11 in Middlesex County, says he was abused by McCarrick in 1982 or 1983, when he was 15 or 16 years old, while he was an altar boy at St. Francis of Assisi parish in Metuchen. He said he didn't know the bishop but had seen him celebrating Mass at the parochial high school he attended.
Downs said he didn't talk about the abuse until recently when he began reading about others abused in the Catholic Church and "started realizing it wasn't an isolated incident." He said that the abuse was short-lived as he recoiled from McCarrick -- and then stopped going to church altogether.
His lawsuit says that he visited the shore house prior to being abused by McCarrick.
"A year prior to the abuse Plaintiff had attended an altar boy retreat at the Diocese Beach House and had observed another boy being sexually abused by an unknown priest," the lawsuit alleges.
In an interview, Downs said the visit might have been earlier, around 1980, which would have been a year before McCarrick took over as bishop. GHe said he does not remember McCarrick being there. He said his group of altar boys was getting ready to leave the house and another group had just arrived when he heard sounds coming from a room.
"The door was cracked," Downs said.
He said he saw a priest and a boy about his age, about 12 or 13. The priest was standing up, he said, holding the boy from behind while touching him in a sexual way. He did not recognize the priest or the boy. Downs said he ran when the priest turned toward the door. He said he does not remember the location of the home.
McCarrick was defrocked last year following years of allegations about improprieties with young children, becoming the highest-ranking American Catholic official to be punished over accusations of sex abuse.
FBI: Predator Priest in Ohio Abused Boys for Decades
SPOTLIGHT
Kate Briquelet
Senior Reporter
A Catholic priest in Ohio was arrested Tuesday for child sex trafficking and is accused of grooming and abusing at least two victims since the '90s.
Court filings describe how Zacharias preyed on two vulnerable boys and continued abusing them after they became adults by taking advantage of their struggles with addiction. One of the victim’s drug problems “stemmed from his confusion about his sexuality based on years of inappropriate touching by Zacharias,” an FBI agent noted in an affidavit.
Some evidence in the case even includes sickening videos Zacharias created with one of the victims, who kept the footage on a USB drive. “The great thing for you is that I actually paid you to make the videos and that you will one day ruin me with them and get rich,” Zacharias texted the victim in late July, according to an FBI affidavit.
No, you were ruined when you started abusing boys. Was the before or after you became a priest?
Authorities believe Zacharias victimized more children beyond the Findlay community and St. Michael parish. FBI Special Agent in Charge Eric Smith said the priest worked at a slew of Ohio churches, including St. Catherine of Siena in Toledo, St. Peter’s in Mansfield, St. Mary of the Assumption in Van Wert, and St. Ann and St. Joseph in Fremont. (The Roman Catholic Diocese of Toledo released a statement claiming these are the first known sexual abuse accusations against the priest, who was ordained in 2002.)
Emphasis on the qualifier 'first known'!
Worcester Diocese denies allegations in Holley case, asks for dismissal
Nicole Maxwell
Alamogordo Daily News
The Massachusetts-based Diocese named as a party in a child sexual abuse lawsuit along with two Alamogordo, NM churches, called for dismissal in its response to the complaint.
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester, in Massachusetts, said the statute of limitations had already expired in the case which accused a priest, Fr. David Holley, of sexually molesting children in Alamogordo.
How disgraceful when a diocese evades it's responsibilities to victims of pedophile priests on a technicality. There are no technicalities when you stand before God. By refusing to accept responsibility now, the church is deferring judgment until they stand before Jesus Christ. That's not a very wise choice.
Attorneys for the diocese also said in response that the lawsuit should have named the bishop and not the diocese. Holley had been incardinated — or working under the jurisdiction of — the Diocese of Worcester on May 15, 1967.
In New Mexico, the statute of limitations is six years from the date of an assault against victims between the ages of 13 and 18.
Of course, this is absurd. It should be closer to 60 years. Is this another case of the influence of the Catholic Church over state politicians? If so, they too should know that they must stand before Christ and give an accounting of their decisions in this lifetime.
The case was filed in the New Mexico Second Judicial District in Bernalillo County on March 31, 2020, and alleged that a victim was abused by Holley in Alamogordo in the 1970s.
The complainant, John Doe, named the Servants of the Paraclete, St. Jude Parish, Immaculate Conception Catholic Church and the Dioceses of Worcester, El Paso and Las Cruces as parties in the lawsuit.
Holley was sent to the Servants of the Paraclete for treatment of pedophilic behaviors before he was sent to Alamogordo, according to court documents. Doe alleged that while he was a parishioner at what was then St. Jude Mission, Holley and another priest Fr. Wilfrid Diamond, allegedly sexually abused him and others.
Holley was convicted of child sexual penetration in the New Mexico 12th Judicial District in 1993. He died in 2008.
Anyone with any knowledge of sexual abuse incidents is advised to call the local police department and then the Diocese of Las Cruces Victim Coordinator Yvonne Bower at ybower@rcdlc.org or call 575-523-7577.
Another Diocese seeks to avoid responsibility for children abused by pedophile priests
London, Ont Diocese takes child sexual abuse settlement challenge to Supreme Court
CBC News
Irene Deschenes at about 11 years old. (submitted by Irene Deschenes)
The Catholic Diocese of London is taking its fight against Irene Deschenes to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Deschenes was sexually abused by Father Charles Sylvestre between 1971 and 1973, while she was a student at St. Ursula Catholic School and a member of his parish in Chatham, Ont. She was 10 years old when it started.
Deschenes reported the abuse in 1992 and filed a lawsuit four years later. She reached a financial settlement with the Diocese in 2000 believing church officials did not know Father Sylvestre was preying on young girls.
He pleaded guilty in August 2006 to sexual assaults involving 47 victims, including Deschenes. All the girls were under the age of 18. Sylvestre died in jail in 2007.
"On assurance from the Diocese of London that it had no information or knowledge that the priest had engaged in sexual abuse of other girls prior to the time Irene was so abused in 1971, Irene accepted an out-of-court settlement," reads a statement released Wednesday by the group Advocates for Clergy Trauma Survivors in Canada (ACTS-Canada).
History discovered
In 2006, it came to light that the Diocese had received police reports in 1962 detailing allegations against Sylvestre of sexual abuse involving three young girls.
Irene Deschenes will now have to wait for a decision from the Supreme Court of Canada on whether her settlement can be reopened. (submitted by Irene Deschenes)
That prompted Deschenes to go back to court to reopen her settlement.
"This revelation (the 1962 police reports) contradicted the information that Ms. Deschenes relied upon during negotiations for settlement with the Diocese," said the ACTS-Canada statement.
A judge agreed that her case should be reopened, but the Diocese fought back, taking the case to the Ontario Court of Appeal.
In May, the Diocese lost its case, leading the way for Deschenes to move forward with her suit.
Instead, her fight continues. The Diocese is now seeking leave to appeal the Ontario Court of Appeal decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.
"I'm very disappointed that, once again, the Diocese of London continues to bully victims into submission," said Deschenes, in a written statement.
"Being abused as a little girl by a Roman Catholic priest was harmful enough. That the Diocese continues to use all its vast resources to continue to legally bully me is very painful. I recognize that they have a right to legally defend themselves, but is it the right thing to do?"
Diocese defends its decision
Officials with the Diocese of London issued a written statement a full week after filing the appropriate paperwork to seek leave for appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and a day after Deschenes went public with her concerns about the ongoing court battle.
"The Diocese of London continues to offer our prayers and support to victims of clerical abuse. In all cases we believe we have treated victims with the empathy and respect needed to help them receive justice and begin the healing process. Being fair and just means that settlements are reached based on the specific circumstances of each individual case, including that of Irene Deschenes. The Diocese believes there are important legal issues that need to be considered by the Supreme Court. The Diocese is very much aware of its responsibility to be a good steward of the resources entrusted to it. Because this matter is before the courts, no further comment is possible at this time."
Deschenes offered one line in reaction to the statement.
"In pursuing a further appeal the Diocese is trying to protect its own interests, not help victims," she said.
No kidding! this is even worse than the story just above. In this case, the Diocese flat-out lied to Deschenes. I don't see how the Supreme Court can even consider taking this case.
They talk about being good stewards with the Diocese resources, but the main resources are children, not money. They don't seem to get that. They have learned nothing except to be more protective of their money. They don't seem to know that they will have to stand before Jesus Christ? How can that be?
They talk about being good stewards with the Diocese resources, but the main resources are children, not money. They don't seem to get that. They have learned nothing except to be more protective of their money. They don't seem to know that they will have to stand before Jesus Christ? How can that be?
No comments:
Post a Comment