Category: Uncategorized

  • QUIZ: How safe is your child’s school?

    My inbox fills up this time every year with emails from panicked parents who write and ask me if their school is a safe place for their kids. Sometimes, I can give parents a history of accused or arrested predators who have worked or volunteered at a particular campus, but that usually doesn’t tell the whole story.

    Abuse and cover-up thrive because of an administrative and organizational attitude. “Safe environment” programs and background checks are useless unless this attitude is changed from the top down AND the bottom up.

    But how do you know the attitude of your school?

    hands

    I do not provide answers to the questions I give below. You will see that many of the positive and negative scenarios I pose apply equally to public and private education. My goal here is to create a discussion and and a starting point for parents who—for way too long—have simply not known the right questions to ask. While there are no right or wrong responses, your answers will clue you in to your school’s “attitude” and whether or not it is a place where transparency, accountability and child safety can thrive.

    Questions to ask yourself about the safety of your child’s school

    1) Are pastors, teachers and/or administrators hired without input from parents?

    2) Does campus leadership have to answer to an off-site administrator? If so, are problems dealt with swiftly, openly and according to the law and common sense … or behind closed doors? Are wrongdoers held accountable?

    3) Is there someone on campus (a priest, rabbi, etc) who has an implied, religious or real power over students and staff? If this person is disobeyed, is it considered a sin or an affront to God?

    4) Are parents discouraged from being on campus?

    5) Has there been a recent large turnover of teachers and administrators beyond normal attrition, pregnancy and retirement?

    6) Have other issues been handled “in secret” because of a fear of scandal or the concern that people “just won’t understand”?

    7) Have there been incidents of embezzlement at the school? How long did it go on? (Embezzlers often feel that they are ‘owed’ money for work they do above and beyond the call of duty. In many cases, it’s because they have covered for the crimes of others. Also, in numerous cases in the Catholic Church, predators have embezzled money to pay for gifts for victims, trips and to cover their tracks.)

    8) Does “zero tolerance” only apply to students? Or only to SOME students?

    9) Have there been rumors of the harassment of parents who complain or of teachers who raise red flags? Have you been able to substantiate these rumors?

    10) Have you done a google news search of the school, including the search terms “lawsuit” and “arrest”?

    11) Do you just have a gut feeling?

    12) Have long-time families left the school and enrolled their children elsewhere?

    14) Is the school open to new ideas and input?

    15) Are administrators dogmatic when they should be flexible?

    16) Are teachers easily transferred or removed with little to no explanation to parents.

    17) Is your school considered a “dumping ground” for bad teachers and administrators?

    18) Are teachers retained solely to to tenure or union affiliation? 

    I could provide explanations for these questions, but that would make this blog post a book-length manuscript. If you have specific questions, please leave them in the comments.

    I realize that many parents to not have educational options for their children. But the more we address the issues, the more we can empower parents to demand safe and transparent schools.

     

  • SB 131 Passes Senate Floor – Now On To The Governor

    SB 131 – the Child Victims’ Act – has become the “little bill that could.” Despite great odds and millions of dollars spent on lobbying to kill the bill (by Roman Catholic and USA Swimming officials), SB 131 passed the senate floor vote 21-8 and is heading to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk.

    There is talk that California’s bishops have heavily (and personally) lobbied Brown, a former Jesuit seminarian, to veto the bill.

    Brown needs to know that this anti-crime bill—which holds wrong-doers accountable and protects kids RIGHT NOW—is a top priority for California.

    Tell Governor Brown you support SB 131. You can write his office directly here.

  • Diocese of Gallup to declare bankruptcy

    The Diocese of Gallup, which owns parishes and employs priests in both New Mexico and Arizona, has said that it will declare bankruptcy to avoid embarrassing civil child sex abuse and cover-up trials.

    Published in The Gallup Independent, Gallup, NM, Sept. 3, 2013 (the paper does not publish stories online):

    Diocese of Gallup to file bankruptcy

    Mounting clergy sex abuse legal claims spark Chapter 11 reorganization

    By Elizabeth Hardin-Burrola

    Independent correspondent

    GALLUP — Catholics across western New Mexico and northern Arizona received bombshell news while attending Mass over the Labor Day weekend.

    The Diocese of Gallup announced it will petition for Chapter 11 reorganization in federal bankruptcy court because of mounting clergy sex abuse legal claims, according to a statement issued by Bishop James Wall.

    “After considering all of the options and consulting with advisors inside and outside the Diocese, I have determined that filing a petition for Chapter 11 reorganization for the Gallup Diocese of Gallup (sic) is the most effective and thoughtful course to take in light of the claims from those who were abused,” Wall stated.

    Priests across the diocese, which includes parishes in six counties in New Mexico, three counties in Arizona and seven Native American reservations, were given the task of delivering the bad news by reading the bishop’s letter during weekend Masses.

    With this announcement, the Gallup Diocese will become the ninth U.S. Roman Catholic diocese or archdiocese to seek financial reorganization through bankruptcy court as a method of dealing with clergy sex abuse claims and their associated costs. Two Catholic religious orders have also done so.

    “Under Chapter 11, the Diocese will have the opportunity to present a plan of reorganization that provides for a fair and equitable way to compensate all those who suffered sexual abuse as children by workers for the Church in our Diocese those who are currently known, those who haven’t yet made the decision to come forward, and those who might come forward in the future,” Wall said.

    The bishop promised to “be open and transparent” during the bankruptcy process. He said he would be available to meet with concerned individuals or groups, and he invited people to email or write him about the decision.

    “It is very important to me that you all understand that I have not taken this step to avoid responsibility for what happened or to hide anything,” he said.

    Questions about the bishop’s announcement were emailed to the diocese Sunday. The Rev. Tim Farrell, the diocese’s media liaison, said he forwarded the questions to the bishop, who agreed to provide responses. However, Farrell said, the bishop recently returned from a vacation in Spain and first needed to consult with his diocesan attorneys about his answers.

    ‘Not coincidental’

    Robert Pastor, a Phoenix attorney who has filed 13 clergy sex abuse lawsuits against the diocese, expressed surprise at the announcement when contacted Saturday. He said he has not received notice from diocesan attorneys about their intent to file the Chapter 11 petition.

    Pastor’s first lawsuit, which involves abuse allegations against the late Rev. Clement Hageman, is scheduled to go to trial Feb. 11, 2014. As part of discovery for that case, the Gallup bishop and the Rev. Alfred Tachias are scheduled to be deposed Sept. 18. Tachias served as an assistant to Hageman in Kingman, Ariz., where Hageman allegedly sexually abused many Catholic school children and altar servers.

    “If the diocese files a petition for bankruptcy, typically any case pending in any state or federal court will be stayed or put on hold,” Pastor said in an email Monday.

    As a result, all of Pastor’s clergy abuse cases, the upcoming deposition of Wall and Tachias, and the scheduled trial could be halted.

    Pastor described the timing of the bishop’s letter, less than three weeks from the bishop’s scheduled deposition, as “not coincidental.”

    “We have seen time and time again that Catholic bishops will file bankruptcy to avoid having to answer questions about a systemic and cultural pattern and practice of covering up clergy sexual abuse,” he said. “Our clients deserve to hear their Bishop explain under oath why so many pedophile priests were allowed to hurt children even though the bishop knew these priests were a danger.

    “Chapter 11 bankruptcy was designed to help companies restructure debt,” Pastor added. “Bankruptcy was never intended to be a tool to help Catholic Bishops hide other perpetrators or the knowledge it had about pedophile priests working in the diocese.”

    Advocates’ concerns

    A number of national advocates for clergy sex abuse survivors were contacted by email about the Diocese of Gallup’s decision. Several of them expressed concern that abuse survivors might miss the “bar date” that will be set once the Chapter 11 process begins. It is the date by which claims against the diocese must be filed.

    “The negative aspects are that if survivors do not come forward soon they are forever time barred,” Patrick Wall said.

    Patrick Wall, a former Catholic priest not related to the Gallup bishop, works as an advocate and researcher for Jeff Anderson & Associates.

    Joelle Casteix is the Western Regional Director for the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. “If victims are not ready, not aware or not healthy enough to come forward by the bar date, they lose the opportunity to expose their abuser and hold wrong-doers accountable,” Casteix said.

    “The bar date and notification will be important early concerns, because of the size of the diocese and the special effort that will be required to reach a far-flung and diverse population,” Terence McKiernan, president and founder of the Bishop Accountability website, said. Noting the bishop’s mention of victims “who might come forward in the future,” McKiernan said, “It is also important that Bishop Wall make good on his commitment to honor future claims.”

    Casteix and McKiernan, both citing examples from the bankruptcy cases of the Diocese of San Diego and the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, expressed concern that the Gallup Diocese might attempt to hide some of its assets or divert money or assets to other entities. In addition, McKiernan said, Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome E. Listecki has fought to disallow claimants, prevent the release of documents and avoid the release of an accurate list of accused clergy.

    “Given these precedents, Bishop Wall will be closely watched in the early stages of the Gallup reorganization, to determine whether he is seeking a ‘merciful and equitable’ reorganization, as he says in his letter, or whether he will resort to the tactics developed by the Milwaukee archdiocese,” McKiernan said.

    Open and public

    The Chapter 11 bankruptcy process holds some positive features for abuse survivors, the advocates agreed.

    David Clohessy, director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said a higher percentage of victims receive some financial help through the bankruptcy court. And Patrick Wall said abuse survivors whose claims were previously barred by the statute of limitations in both Arizona and New Mexico can come forward.

    Bankruptcy court hearings are open and public, Casteix said, and witnesses and whistleblowers tend to be more inclined to come forward and report.

    “Survivors will have an opportunity during the reorganization to require a full release of pertinent documents, a full listing of accused clerics, a binding commitment to reporting and transparency, and other nonmonetary conditions of settlement,” McKiernan said.

    Patrick Wall said it remains to be seen whether the Gallup Diocese will finally release the results of its audit of priest personnel files. In 2009, James Wall announced the review of more than 400 personnel files, and he promised to publicly release the audit’s findings about abusive clergy. More than four years later, he has yet to release the information.

    Pastor said he expects that to happen now. “I expect the bishop to release the names and files of pedophile priests,” he said. “Anything less would be just another attempt by the Catholic Church to hide the truth.”

    Pastor, a former prosecutor, said he also expects the Gallup Diocese to turn over information to law enforcement officials about the whereabouts and alleged crimes of living and credibly accused clergy.

    “We not only will insist, but I believe the law in Arizona requires that they inform law enforcement,” he said.

     

     

  • Damien Memorial Fudges Grant Application, Swindles $1.5 Million from State

    What do you do when your umbrella organization files for bankruptcy (to avoid costly sex abuse civil trials); ten of your former teachers are exposed as perpetrators; and at least 15 former students come forward to say they were sexually abused by your teachers and brothers?

    Swindle the state of Hawaii out of $1.5 million, of course.

    Damien Memorial School, Honolulu’s hotbed of alleged child sex crimes, has just been granted $1.5 million in state (read: taxpayer) money for capital improvements. The problem? Damien fudged on the application, dramatically and untruthfully understating the legal mess they are facing because of child sex abuse and cover-up.

    Damien Memorial: We will be just as conscientious with taxpayer dollars as we were with your child's safety.
    Damien Memorial: We will be just as conscientious with taxpayer dollars as we were with your child’s safety.

    From page 11 of the application, dated January 2013:

     

    Litigation

    The applicant shall disclose any pending litigation to which they are a party,

    including the disclosure of any outstanding judgment. If applicable, please

    explain.

    Three lawsuits are pending against Damien and the Roman Catholic Church in

    Hawaii for which Damien has denied all allegations and is represented by

    counsel for the Diocese. No judgments have been entered.

     

    There is no mention of the 15 legal claims that were pending against the school at the time. (the $16.5 million settlement was not announced until May 2013). Nor is there any mention of the fact that victims still have the right sue the school and a civil window granting them the right to do so.

    The school could be on the hook for millions in compensation for the kids who were sexually abused by priests and brothers while they were Damien students. But the Christian Brothers of Hawaii have no problem raiding public coffers – money much better used for the public schools in the state.

    Damien officials KNEW that were knee-deep in legal trouble when they filled out the grant application. But did they disclose? No.

    No matter your opinion of Damien, factual omissions on applications for public monies are wrong, immoral and illegal. Besides, if Damien officials are “omitting” facts for money, what else will they “omit” as more victims assert their legal rights?

    The grant monies should be rescinded immediately. A criminal investigation, perhaps?