Former Hilo farmer Jay Ram, who is accused of sexual abuse by five of his sons, has been found living outside of Tampa, where he was finally served with the civil lawsuits.
One of Ram’s neighbors in Odessa, who spoke to the Tribune-Herald on the condition of anonymity, said Ram is living on a five-acre plot with “three young men or boys” whom he doesn’t let out on their own.
He’s also going by a new name. Not terribly surprising.
Ram had most recently been living on the island of Saipan. When the lawsuits became public and news started to spread, Ram sold his house at a loss and disappeared.
Blaire didn’t even have the decency to put Kelly on leave during the time period up to and during the trial. It’s one thing to support an accused priest, it’s another to flagrantly insult sex abuse victims and parishioners by allowing a credibly accused cleric to continue to work as a priest.
Stockton is also facing the problem of Oliver O’Grady, the serial predator whose victims are continuing to come forward. Blaire could have done a lot of things for these victims—encouraged them to come forward, worked with civil attorneys to get them counseling, or *GASP* been open and transparent with information. But no, he decided to spend his time and efforts supporting Michael Kelly. The victims? He simply didn’t care about them. Until he lost.
Blaire had plenty of money to fight victims … until he lost. Now that he says he broke, he suddenly is becoming very generous.
So, like Gallup, another diocese in the midst of the bankruptcy two-step, Stockton is seeking protection from the bankruptcy courts. Unfortunately for Catholics and victims of abuse, they went morally bankrupt decades ago.
Scroll down to the italicized section (emphasis is mine). It seems that all of the “Unknown real estate values” that Bishop Wall wrung his hands over were actually known and itemized in a 2012 audit. Judges have a tendency to come down hard on that kind of stuff.
Another note: Bishop Wall said he “doesn’t believe” that parishes can fire their pastors. Hmmm … maybe the folks in Gallup should give it a try.
Final note: I almost went to this hearing. I’ll be kicking myself for the next six months for changing my mind.
Published in the Gallup Independent, Gallup, NM, Dec. 28, 2013
ALBUQUERQUE — Bishop James S. Wall’s recent testimony during the Diocese of Gallup’s Unsecured Creditors Committee meeting raised questions about just how well prepared diocesan officials were when they filed their Chapter 11 petition.
Susan Boswell, bankruptcy attorney for the Diocese of Gallup. Or, as she is now known in Gallup Federal Court: Grabby McGraw
Wall and Christopher G. Linscott, the diocese’s recently hired financial consultant from Tucson, Ariz., offered sworn testimony about the Gallup Diocese’s finances at the public meeting, which was held in Albuquerque’s U.S. Bankruptcy Court Dec. 19. They were accompanied by Susan G. Boswell, the diocese’s lead bankruptcy attorney from Tucson, and Thomas D. Walker, its Albuquerque bankruptcy attorney.
Assistant U.S. Trustee Ronald E. Andazola, the Department of Justice official who conducted the meeting, asked the bishop what goals he had for the submission of a Chapter 11 reorganization plan.
“In terms of dates, not any hard dates,” Wall said. “As soon as possible.”
Andazola also asked Wall if the diocese was considering the liquidation of property to raise settlement money for clergy sex abuse claimants.
“I think we’re looking at everything. … We want to come up with a good fund,” Wall said.
Timing questioned
But just how long will Wall have to submit a reorganization plan and raise settlement money? The timeline requirements of the federal bankruptcy court system and the vocal expectations of attorneys representing sex abuse claimants may force some “hard dates” on the Gallup bishop.
Two of those attorneys, John C. Manly of California and Robert E. Pastor of Arizona, co-counsels currently representing 14 sex abuse claimants, questioned why the Gallup Diocese filed its Chapter 11 petition without first taking the time to assemble complete and accurate financial data.
Manly, appearing to scoff when Linscott and Wall could not provide a figure for the diocese’s net worth, asked them if they didn’t think it would have been “a good first step” to determine the diocese’s net worth before filing for bankruptcy.
Under questioning by Pastor, Wall admitted he had been considering Chapter 11 reorganization for a long time and had begun talking with bankruptcy attorney Boswell about two years ago. Wall also agreed that Manly and Pastor had met with Boswell and Deacon James P. Hoy, the former diocesan chief financial officer, to discuss the diocese’s possible bankruptcy plans 18 months ago, in June 2012.
Confidential document
Pastor raised the ire of Boswell when he produced a 12-page confidential financial document that he said included a list of all real estate the Gallup Diocese owns in Arizona and New Mexico, along with financial values listed for each property.
Wall has submitted a Statement of Financial Affairs to the bankruptcy court, which includes a list of diocesan-owned property, but without any financial values included.
According to Pastor, attorneys for the diocese produced the confidential financial document during litigation negotiations involving the first clergy sex abuse lawsuit Pastor filed in Arizona’s Coconino County Superior Court.
Earlier in the meeting, Andazola had similarly questioned why the Gallup chancery property had been valued at more than $315,000 in a 2012 fiscal year audit report, but was listed as having an “unknown value” in the bankruptcy documents.
When Pastor attempted to give Wall a copy of the 12-page confidential document to review, Boswell jumped up from her seat, grabbed the document, and threw it back on Pastor’s table. After some bickering between the attorneys on different types of real estate valuations, Boswell agreed to accept the document for Wall and provide a copy to Andazola.
Legal argument
Much of the meeting’s testimony focused on the more than 160 pieces of “trust” and “real” property listed by Wall in his Statement of Financial Affairs and the differences between real estate replacement value and market value.
Because the diocese has not maintained a record of all its properties or copies of all its deeds, diocesan officials said they had to ask county officials in both states to search land records for diocesan property. According to Boswell, the diocese is now trying to retain brokers who can determine the market value of key properties.
“To date it has been a challenge,” Boswell admitted, explaining that the diocese owns various properties in widespread locations.
Other testimony centered on the diocese’s legal argument that Gallup priests and Gallup parishes are somehow separate from the Diocese of Gallup.
“No they’re not employees of the diocese,” Linscott said of Catholic priests working in the Diocese. Later in his testimony, Linscott admitted some parishes might need to contribute money to the diocese for settlements with sex abuse claimants.
When Manly asked Wall how much money parishes can spend without approval from the chancery or if parishes can enter into contracts without the chancery’s approval, Wall admitted he did not know the answers.
“Well, they’re on the website,” Manly said, explaining the Gallup Diocese had the information posted online under its fiscal guidelines.
“Can parishes fire their pastors?” Manly asked the bishop.
“I don’t believe so,” Wall replied.
Walker, the diocese’s Albuquerque attorney, angrily objected twice to Manly and Pastor’s line of questioning during the meeting. At one point, Walker held out his right arm in a blocking motion toward Pastor and said, “This isn’t a deposition, do you know that?”
This first Unsecured Creditors Committee meeting exceeded its scheduled time and ran nearly four hours. It will reconvene at 10 a.m., Jan. 23, in Judge David T. Thuma’s courtroom, located in Albuquerque’s U.S. Bankruptcy Court, 500 Gold Ave. S.W. The newly appointed committee, composed of seven clergy sex abuse survivors from the Gallup Diocese, should have an attorney by that date who will be able to ask further questions about diocesan finances. The meeting is open to the public.
But what did he do? He cried “unfair!” Instead of signing SB131, the California Child Victims Act, and using it as a first-step rallying cry to change the laws that affect ALL institutions and give ALL victims rights in the courts, he decided that NO kids deserve justice.
Here is his logic: You stand on the side of a boat and have one life preserver in your hand. You have another life preserver next to you, that you only need to inflate. Inflating the life preserver will take you 15 seconds. But there are two children drowning. Instead of throwing in one life preserver and taking the short amount of time to inflate the second, you decide to let both children drown. Why? It’s unfair if one child has to wait an additional 15 seconds.
Minnesota should be an example to the nation. As should Hawaii. When victims have rights and a voice, crime and those who cover it up have nowhere to hide.
Here’s a recap from what we learned yesterday from Minnesota Public Radio (emphasis mine):
Archbishop John Nienstedt was in the middle of a heated political fight over same-sex marriage in February of last year when he learned of a disturbing secret, hidden in the basement of the chancery — pornography from a priest’s computer, some of which appeared to depict children.
Canon lawyer Jennifer Haselberger had uncovered several computer discs and a white three-ring binder kept in the basement archives of the chancery building — the headquarters of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. It was evidence from a 2004 internal investigation of sexually explicit images found on the computer of the Rev. Jonathan Shelley, then pastor of St. Jude of the Lake church in Mahtomedi, Minn.
Haselberger, a firebrand top official who joined the archdiocese in 2008, notified Nienstedt of the evidence, which included a report at the time from a private investigator that found that many of the depictions “could be considered illegal, because of the youthful-looking male image.”
According to church documents, the computer actually held child abuse images of boys under 14. You know, the illegal kind.
So what did Nienstedt do? He wrote letters and memos. Lots of them. He wrote to the Vatican, saying that the images could expose the Archdiocese to criminal charges. He wrote his deputies and they nit-picked over whether the images were “technically” child pornography (which many of them were). They hemmed and hawed over Canon law.
Did they call the cops? Hell, no. In fact, they fired the woman who eventually did.
Institutions like the Catholic church cannot be in the child sex abuse investigation business. Why? Because they don’t give a crap about kids. This case proves it. Again. Archbishop Nienstedt is morally bankrupt and a shame to every Catholic.
The church’s stance on child pornography is laughable (and downright dangerous). Remember: child pornography is/are photos of CHILDREN BEING SEXUALLY ABUSED. There IS a victim there. That’s why it’s a violation of federal law. However, time and time again (Kansas City, anyone?), church officials try to say it’s “not so bad” and a “victimless crime.” It ain’t. Just ask the kid in the picture. And what is especially galling is the fact that the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis says that they hold true to zero tolerance. No, they don’t. If you spend a year discussing whether something is child pornography but don’t report it, you tolerate sex abusers. And you should be criminally liable.
During this entire time, Archbishop Niestedt was using the bully pulpit to try and defeat marriage equality in the state, calling it “the work of Satan.” Really.
The ONLY reason this is coming out is because of Minnesota’s civil window for adult victims of child sex abuse.
Catholic bishops continually pontificate about how “abuse happens everywhere” and how they are being “unfairly targeted.” This case, once again, shows that the COVER-UP is equally horrific, sinful and criminal. If you commit a crime (as we are seeing here), law enforcement should target you. That is their job.
