[Vision2020] Church Battles Efforts to Ease Sex Abuse Suits

[Art Deco]

  [image: The New York Times] <http://www.nytimes.com/>

<http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&sn2=336c557e/4f3dd5d2&sn1=8a907ae1/15fbc62a&camp=FSL2012_ArticleTools_120x60_1787507c_nyt5&ad=BEMH_120x60_May4_NoText&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efoxsearchlight%2Ecom%2Fthebestexoticmarigoldhotel>

------------------------------
June 14, 2012
Church Battles Efforts to Ease Sex Abuse Suits By LAURIE
GOODSTEIN<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/laurie_goodstein/index.html>and
ERIK
ECKHOLM<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/erik_eckholm/index.html>

While the first criminal trial of a Roman Catholic church official accused
of covering up child sexual abuse has drawn national attention to
Philadelphia, the church has been quietly engaged in equally consequential
battles over abuse, not in courtrooms but in state legislatures around the
country.

The fights concern proposals to loosen statutes of limitations, which
impose deadlines on when victims can bring civil suits or prosecutors can
press charges. These time limits, set state by state, have held down the
number of criminal prosecutions and civil lawsuits against all kinds of
people accused of child abuse — not just clergy members, but also teachers,
youth counselors and family members accused of incest.

Victims and their advocates in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and
New York are pushing legislators to lengthen the limits or abolish them
altogether, and to open temporary “windows” during which victims can file
lawsuits no matter how long after the alleged abuse occurred.

The Catholic Church has successfully beaten back such proposals in many
states, arguing that it is difficult to get reliable evidence when decades
have passed and that the changes seem more aimed at bankrupting the church
than easing the pain of victims.

Already reeling from about $2.5 billion spent on legal fees, settlements
and prevention programs relating to child sexual abuse, the church has
fought especially hard against the window laws, which it sees as an
open-ended and unfair exposure for accusations from the distant past. In at
least two states, Colorado and New York, the church even hired high-priced
lobbying and public relations firms to supplement its own efforts. Colorado
parishes handed out postcards for churchgoers to send to their
representatives, while in Ohio, bishops themselves pressed legislators to
water down a bill.

The outcome of these legislative battles could have far greater
consequences for the prosecution of child molesters, compensation of
victims and financial health of some Catholic dioceses, legal experts say,
than the trial of a church official in Philadelphia, where the jury is
currently deliberating.

Changing the statute of limitations “has turned out to be the primary front
for child sex abuse victims,” said Marci A. Hamilton, a professor at the
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University who represents
plaintiffs in sexual abuse suits.

“Even when you have an institution admitting they knew about the abuse, the
perpetrator admitting that he did it, and corroborating evidence, if the
statute of limitations has expired, there won’t be any justice,” she said.

The church’s arguments were forcefully made by Patrick Brannigan, executive
director of the New Jersey Catholic Conference, in testimony before the
State Legislature in January opposing a proposal to abolish the limits in
civil cases.

“How can an institution conceivably defend itself against a claim that is
40, 50 or 60 years old?” Mr. Brannigan said. “Statutes of limitation exist
because witnesses die and memories fade.”

“This bill would not protect a single child,” he said, while “it would
generate an enormous transfer of money in lawsuits to lawyers.”

Timing is a major factor in abuse cases because many victims are unable to
talk about abuse or face their accusers until they reach their 30s, 40s or
later, putting the crime beyond the reach of the law. In states where the
statutes are most restrictive, like New York, the cutoff for bringing a
criminal case is age 23 for most serious sexual crimes other than rape that
occurred when the victim was a minor.

In more than 30 states, limits have already been lifted or significantly
eased on the criminal prosecutions of some types of abuses, according to
Professor Hamilton. The Supreme Court ruled that changes in criminal limits
cannot be retroactive, so they will affect only recent and future crimes.

In New York, the Catholic bishops said they would support a modest increase
in the age of victims in criminal or civil cases, to 28. But their
lobbying, along with that of ultra-Orthodox Jewish leaders, has so far
halted proposals that would allow a one-year window for civil suits for
abuses from the past. The bishops say the provision unfairly targets the
church because public schools, the site of much abuse, and municipalities
have fought successfully to be exempted.

The New Jersey proposal to abolish time limits for civil suits could pass
this summer, said its sponsor in the Senate, Joseph Vitale, a Democrat of
Woodbridge. The main opposition has come from the Catholic Church, he said.
Mr. Brannigan of the Catholic Conference has testified at hearings, and
bishops have “reached out to scores of legislators,” Mr. Vitale said,
warning that an onslaught of lawsuits could bankrupt their dioceses.

California was the first state to pass a one-year “window” law to bring
civil suits, in 2003, and those involved say that the legislation moved so
quickly that the church barely responded. But the experience proved a
cautionary tale for the church: more than 550 lawsuits flooded in.

Since then, only two states have passed similar laws: Delaware, in 2007,
and Hawaii, in April. Window legislation has been defeated in Colorado,
Ohio, Maryland, Illinois, Washington, D.C., and New York.

Joan Fitz-Gerald, former president of the Colorado Senate, who proposed the
window legislation, was an active Catholic who said she was stunned to find
in church one Sunday in 2006 that the archdiocese had asked priests to
raise the issue during a Mass and distribute lobbying postcards.

“It was the most brutal thing I’ve ever been through,” she said of the
church campaign. “The politics, the deception, the lack of concern for not
only the children in the past, but for children today.” She has since left
the church.

The Massachusetts Catholic Conference has spoken out strongly against a
bill that would eliminate both criminal and civil statutes of limitations,
but advocates still hope to win a two-year window for filing civil claims.

If that happens, “we’ll see a lot more victims come forward, and we’ll find
out more about who the abusers are,” said Jetta Bernier, director of the
advocacy group Massachusetts Citizens for Children.

The landmark trial of Msgr. William J. Lynn in Philadelphia, who is accused
of allowing predators to remain in ministry, almost did not happen because
of the statute of limitations.

A scathing grand jury report in 2005 described dozens of victims and
offending priests and said that officials, including Philadelphia’s
cardinal, had “excused and enabled the abuse.” But the law in place at the
time of the crimes required victims to come forth by age 23. “As a result,”
the report said, “these priests and officials will necessarily escape
criminal prosecution.”

But victims emerged whose abuse fell within the deadline and in 2011, a new
grand jury brought charges against Monsignor Lynn, who had supervised
priest assignments.

Pennsylvania expanded the limits, and for crimes from 2007 on, charges will
be possible up to the time that victims reach age 50. Advocates are now
pushing to abolish the statute of limitations for child sex abuse and open
a window for civil suits over long-past abuses. But the legislation appears
stalled in the face of church opposition.

The new archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles J. Chaput, who led the
successful campaign to defeat such a bill in Colorado, says that current
restrictions exist for “sound legal reasons.”

 Ghostery has found the following on this page:Facebook Connect
WebTrends



-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120614/45ff7e54/attachment.html>