Abuse lawsuit against the bishops update.
P.R./Newswire reports:
Double Murder in Wisconsin Prompts Lawsuit Against All US Bishops
But Delaware’s Top Church Official Will Be Removed As Defendant
Saltarelli’s Disclosure of Names of Alleged Predator Priests is the Reason
A family whose relative was
murdered by a priest and who has filed a non-monetary, first of its kind
lawsuit against the USCCB and all US Catholic bishops is releasing Delaware’s
Catholic bishop from the suit.
In August, 2006, the O’Connell family of Hudson, WI, filed a unique
lawsuit against all US bishops seeking a non-monetary injunction that would
force them to reveal the names of all proven, admitted, and credibly accused
abusive priests. Several weeks ago, Michael Saltarelli, Bishop of Wilmington
(DE) was served with that suit.
The family is now writing Saltarelli to advise him he will be dropped as a
defendant since Saltarelli recently disclosed names of 20 pedophile priests in
his diocese.
Releasing the names of admitted or convicted abusers is a no-brainer, but I have serious reservations about the notion of releasing the names of the accused–ordained or not–to anyone but the police. What’s the end-game here?
Anybody can file a lawsuit, for any reason whatsoever. I could file a lawsuit against travelpro for stealing my idea for a rolling suitcase and getting rich off it.
The question is, whether the claim will survive a motion to dismiss. I see real problems on jurisdiction grounds, and am not clear what the cause of action might be.
It seems to me this might be a publicity stunt.
Well, it certainly isn’t a garden variety suit. I am guessing that, if there is an ulterior motive, it is to force some arm of the church to compensate the family for an injury that would not normally be compensable (depending on the exact circumstances, intentional crimes committed by one’s employees and agents do not typically give rise to vicarious liability as they are almost always outside the scope of the person’s duties and are usually not considered to be foreseeable).
Still, part of me wonders whether the church will ever get past the scandal of priests abusing minors.
Tom Roberts introductory piece in NCR a couple of issues ago indicates clearly the reason this kind of approach is taken: there is still much hidden by the Church about what transpired and we could use a kind of truth/reconciliation commission to deal with it. Sans that, the only way to pry out the truth is through legal means.
Church leaders sometimes argue it’s greedy lawyers trying to intrude into the deep pockets of the church that’s at stake here.
That strikes me as patently false.
It’s hard enough for victims of abuse to come forward. John Jay studies (as noted by Ms. McChesney in the curren tAmerica) show very few suits brought that have little or no substantiation. And, in Wilmington, the bottom line was “credibly accused” priests -hardly frivolous.
Again, Roberts’ article hits the nail on the head -when the scabs of all the problems have been wiped away – including Bishop’s coverups and perhaps abuse or misconduct by themselves, then suits will precipitously drop and real healing begin.
Unfortunately, what the hierarchy and their lawyers hope for is growing ennui on the topic by the faithful.