The Archdiocese of Philadelphia has settled a civil lawsuit brought by an accuser whose testimony helped convict two Catholic priests and a former parish-school teacher on sexual abuse charges, and aided in the unprecedented prosecution of a church administrator for covering up the priests’ crimes.
In filings Tuesday, Common Pleas Court Judge Jacqueline F. Allen said the plaintiff – a 26-year-old man identified only as “Billy Doe” – had “settled any and all claims” against the archdiocese and two former church officials. The terms of the deal were not disclosed.
A spokesman for the archdiocese did not return calls for comment Wednesday, nor did lawyers for Doe.
Their agreement – first reported by the legal blog BigTrial.net – is at least the third this year between the church and its accusers.
Previous agreements have contained clauses barring the parties from discussing their deals publicly.
Doe’s story was arguably the most disturbing in a landmark 2011 report by a Philadelphia grand jury outlining decades of clergy sex abuse in the region.
He told grand jurors he was passed among three men and repeatedly sexually assaulted while serving as an altar boy at St. Jerome’s parish in Northeast Philadelphia in the late 1990s.
Doe’s tearful testimony at a 2013 trial helped convict two of his abusers – the Rev. Charles Engelhardt and Bernard Shero, an English teacher at the parish school.
The abuse destroyed his life, Doe said in his lawsuit, and led to years of drug abuse, behavioral problems, and suicide attempts.
Lawyers for the priests and the archdiocese have questioned Doe’s story and motives for years, accusing him of fabricating his claims to cash in by suing the church.
Engelhardt died in prison last year while serving a six- to 12-year sentence. Shero, who was sentenced to eight to 16 years, continues to appeal his case.
A third abuser – Edward V. Avery, now defrocked – pleaded guilty in 2012 and was sentenced to five years in prison. He has recanted his confession, but remains in prison.
Prosecutors also pointed to Doe’s abuse in building their case against Msgr. William J. Lynn, who in 2012 became the first Roman Catholic Church administrator in the United States convicted of enabling sexual abuse of children by priests. He, too, is appealing his case.
This week’s court filings in Doe’s civil case indicated that he would not only drop his suit against the archdiocese, but also against two other named defendants: Lynn and the estate of the late Cardinal Anthony J. Bevilacqua, who headed the archdiocese at the time of Doe’s abuse.
Shero, Avery, and Engelhardt’s estate remain parties to the lawsuit. A trial is scheduled for November.
In an extraordinary admission of wrongdoing, a priest sought by authorities in New Jersey has acknowledged engaging in a sexual encounter with a 15-year-old boy, but he deflected blame for the incident by saying the teen “wanted” it and had “evil in his mind.”
In a telephone interview with NJ Advance Media, in e-mail exchanges, and in a lengthy post on Twitter, the Rev. Manuel Gallo Espinoza said it was a “mistake” to have sexual contact with the boy in the rectory of a Plainfield church in 2003. He said he fled to his native Ecuador after the victim told a nun and another priest that Gallo Espinoza raped him.
I didn’t force him to do anything he didn’t want,’ he reportedly told the journalist.
“One thing that I am conscious (of) is he was at that time a teenager, and it is a big mistake for me. But I didn’t force him to do anything he didn’t want,” Gallo Espinoza wrote. “He was older (sic) enough to walk away, but I think that I was attracted to him, that is the only explanation that I can think right now.”
Gallo Espinoza added: “He had something evil in his mind. He approached me many times.”
The 51-year-old priest, who was not questioned by detectives in 2003 because he could not be located, is now the subject of a criminal investigation by the Union County (N.J) Prosecutor’s Office.
The agency reopened the long-dormant probe after inquiries by NJ Advance Media, which reported late last month that Gallo Espinoza returned to the United States in 2005 to work as a teacher. He said he went back to Ecuador when his visa expired last year and that he remains there now.
Gallo Espinoza said he does not consider himself a “pedophile person” and that he learned a lesson from the encounter.
“I made a mistake once and that’s (sic) was all,” he said.
David Clohessy, director of the St. Louis-based Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, called on police and prosecutors to pursue criminal charges against the Newark archdiocesan officials who helped Gallo Espinoza evade the law.
“It’s heartbreaking to learn that, once again, New Jersey Catholic officials told a predator priest to flee the US to evade police,” said Clohessy. “And it’s equally heartbreaking to learn that the priest later returned to the US and got a job around kids and remains a teacher even now.”
Asked by e-mail if he realized he was committing a crime by having sex with a 15-year-old boy when he was 40, Gallo Espinoza responded, “I just came fr (sic) my country and really in Ecuador a person at 15 years old is not consider (sic) so innocent.”
He added that he had not had sex with other minors.Gallo Espinoza’s accuser, Max Rojas Ramirez, said the priest raped him in a bedroom of the rectory at St. Mary’s Church in Plainfield shortly before Easter in 2003. Ramirez, now 28 and living in Elizabeth, was an altar boy and a member of the parish’s youth group at the time.
He said Gallo Espinoza attacked him weeks after he told the priest in confession that he was confused about his sexuality. Ramirez flatly denies Gallo Espinoza’s contention that he sought anything more than counsel.
“I saw him as a priest, and that’s it,” Ramirez said. “I didn’t even know who was in the confessional when I went in there.”
One thing that I am conscious (of) is he was at that time a teenager, and it is a big mistake for me. But I didn’t force him to do anything he didn’t want.
– The Rev. Manuel Gallo Espinoza, accused of raping a teen in 2003
He added that he was gratified Gallo Espinoza admitted the encounter, saying it shows he has been telling the truth.
NJ Advance Media published Ramirez’ name at his request.
In March, Ramirez filed suit against the Archdiocese of Newark, saying it was responsible for the priest’s behavior and should have established stronger protections. The incident took place just a year after the nation’s bishops — badly shaken by the church’s sex abuse crisis — established a landmark document known as the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.
Gallo Espinoza made reference to Ramirez’s lawsuit in his correspondence, saying the victim had revived the issue after 12 years to cash in.
“The explanation that I find to begin again with this incident after many years is ‘EASY MONEY,’” Gallo Espinoza wrote.
He repeatedly blamed his use of alcohol the night he took Ramirez to the rectory, saying he drank too much because he was depressed, lonely, and homesick.
In later e-mails, Gallo Espinoza sought to retract his admission, saying he was so drunk he didn’t remember the incident and simply accepted Ramirez’s claims.
Gallo Espinoza, who had served at St. Mary’s for three years leading up to the sexual encounter, said he wanted to speak out to prove that he is a good person and that he is not a danger to others.
“I want people (to) know that a mistake made in my life doesn’t define myself that way,” he wrote in an e-mail. “I am a man dedicated to teach doing my best to help students to get ready to be successful in life.”
He said he continues to teach in Ecuador.
He added that stress from the incident has contributed to lasting medical problems, chiefly gastritis and colitis.
It was not immediately clear how Gallo Espinoza’s admission will affect the criminal investigation. Mark Spivey, a spokesman for the prosecutor’s office, declined to comment on the status of the probe or on the priest’s statements. The criminal statute of limitations on sexual assault was abolished by the state Legislature in 1996.
Should the prosecutor’s office charge Gallo Espinoza in absentia, it faces the hurdle of extraditing him. The United States and Ecuador do have an extradition treaty, but a 2012 analysis by the online magazine Slate found the South American nation to be among the least cooperative partners.
Beyond the fate of Gallo Espinoza, the circumstances of his departure raise new questions about those who were made aware of it early on.
Ramirez has said that within days of the attack, he reported it to Jeivi Hercules, his godfather, and Antonino Salazar, then the leader of the charismatic youth group at St. Mary’s. Both men confronted the priest, Ramirez said.
Shortly afterward, he said, Salazar brought him to a Catholic Charities office, where Ramirez told a nun and a priest what had happened. The account is confirmed by a transcript of an interview Salazar gave to police in 2003. It was Catholic Charities that ultimately notified the prosecutor’s office, records show.
While the circumstances of Gallo Espinoza’s abrupt departure have never been fully disclosed, he said in the telephone interview it was Salazar and Hercules who told him to run. Hercules, who has since entered the priesthood, is now parochial vicar at Queen of Peace Church in North Arlington.
“They said, ‘You’re going to get in big trouble. You better leave. … God prays for you. Go back to your country,’” Gallo Espinoza said.
Before leaving, he said, he attended confession with another priest and admitted what he did.
Gallo Espinoza said he then bought a plane ticket. He did not inform Archbishop John J. Myers or any other official of his plan to run.
Hercules has not responded to numerous requests for comment. Jim Goodness, a spokesman for the archdiocese, said the priest would not consent to an interview.
Salazar’s wife said the couple would have no comment.
Gallo Espinoza said he wanted to speak with Ramirez to apologize and to “clarify things.”
“You know my truth, and I don’t want to make this situation bigger, but to look for a humble solution,” he wrote in an e-mail. “… God bless America. I love it with all my heart.”
The Archbishop of Glasgow has spoken of the Scottish Catholic Church’s ‘pain and shame’ after release of McLellan Commission report
Archbishop Philip Tartaglia has offered a “profound” apology to victims of “criminal and sinful” abuse within the Catholic Church in Scotland.
The Archbishop of Glasgow, who is the president of the Bishops’ Conference for Scotland, also said the Church is “pained and shamed” by incidents of abuse that have taken place within it.
Archbishop Tartaglia was speaking at St Andrew’s Cathedral, in Glasgow, earlier today.
The apology comes after the McLellan Commission delivered its report on all aspects of safeguarding policy, procedure and practice within the Catholic Church in Scotland.
The commission, led by Dr Andrew McLellan, made eight key recommendations, including making “support for the survivors of abuse… an absolute priority for the Catholic Church in Scotland”.
The McLellan Commission was created in 2014 to investigate how the Scottish Church handled abuse cases
Justice must be done – and seen to be done – for those who have survived abuse within the Scottish Church, an independent report has said.
The McLellan Commission, which published the report today, was established in 2014 with a remit to undertake a critical review of all aspects of safeguarding policy, procedure and practice within the Catholic Church in Scotland.
Dr Andrew McLellan, chairman of The McLellan Commission, has made eight key recommendations to Scotland’s Catholic bishops to help improve the current standards of safeguarding within the Church.
Dr McLellan told a press conference that “the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland should make a public apology to all survivors of abuse within the Church” and that the apology must be made in a way that is “unmistakeable and unequivocal”.
“The bishops have said from the outset that they will accept our recommendations,” he said.
“That means that three things will happen. First, and most important, a beginning will be made to heal the hurt and address the anger which so many survivors feel. Second, the Catholic Church in Scotland will begin to confront a dark part of its past and find some healing for itself. Third, a significant step will be taken in restoring public credibility for the Catholic Church.”
Dr McLellan added that the report gives the Catholic Church “an unrepeatable chance to make things better”.
The McLellan Commission report has recommended that “support for survivors of abuse must be an absolute priority for the Catholic Church in Scotland in the field of safeguarding” and that the policy and practice manual, Awareness and Safety in our Catholic Communities, should be “completely revised or rewritten”.
“Justice must be done, and justice must be seen to be done, for those who have been abused”, the report said, and it also specified that justice must be done for those against whom allegations of abuse are made.
There must be external scrutiny and independence in the safeguarding policies and practices of the Church, the report said, and “effectiveness and improvement must be measured at every level of safeguarding in the Church”.
The McLellan Commission report said that a “consistent approach to safeguarding is essential: consistent across different parts of Scotland and consistent across different parts of the Church”.
The report also recommended that “the priority of undertaking regular high-quality training and continuous professional development in safeguarding must be understood and accepted by all those involved in safeguarding at every level”.
A further recommendation was that “the Church must set out a theology of safeguarding which is coherent and compelling”.
Dr McLellan said that there was a “unanimous agreement” among members of the commission about its recommendations.
“Nothing in our independent report is more important than our first recommendation: that support for the survivors of abuse must be an absolute priority for the Catholic Church in Scotland,” he said.
“This is the greatest challenge facing the whole Catholic Church in Scotland. Change will come when the whole membership of the Church own this desire for change and embrace the agenda set out in our report. If the Catholic Church in Scotland grabs this opportunity, then the Church will be a safer place for all.”
Each of the eight key recommendations is followed by a number of subsidiary recommendations.
“The report has recommendations which can be measured. One year from now, or three years from now, the Catholic Church will be able to demonstrate how much progress has been made against our recommendations,” Dr McLellan added.
To fulfil its remit, the commission assessed existing safeguarding arrangements and met with survivors of abuse within the Church. The commission also assessed the quality of support available to survivors.
Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, the president of the Bishops’ Conference for Scotland, will respond to the commission’s finding at a Mass in Glasgow later today.
The Bishop of Chur, Vitus Huonder, has apologized to gay people after citing controversial Bible passages in a speech he gave at a Catholic forum in Germany at the end of July.
The bishop, well known for his ultra-conservative views, kicked up a storm when he quoted passages from the Old Testament saying that homosexual behaviour was an “abomination” and should be punished by death.
In a three-page letter sent to 800 of his colleagues, including priests and employees, on Wednesday night, Huonder apologized “to everyone who felt injured by my speech, in particular those of homosexual persuasion”, reported Swiss news agency ATS on Thursday.
The 73-year-old said it was a “mistake” to write his speech purely “on a theological and academic level”.
He also regretted writing it during the summer holidays when there was no one around to read it over for him, reported ATS.
“My colleagues would have drawn my attention to the danger,” he said.
On Monday Swiss Gay Federation Pink Cross filed a criminal complaint against the bishop for his comments, saying that he was indirectly “inciting people to crimes” with his remarks.
A private individual from St Gallen has also filed a complaint.
If the bishop is found guilty he risks up to three years in prison.
Contrary to politicians and judges, bishops are not immune from prosecution.