Foxnews.com
Monday, November 5th, 2009

The Supreme Court has refused to block the release of documents generated by lawsuits against priests in Connecticut for alleged sexual abuse.

The justices on Monday turned down a request by the Roman Catholic diocese in Bridgeport, Conn.

Several newspapers are seeking the release of more than 12,000 pages from 23 lawsuits against six priests.

The records have been under seal since the diocese settled the cases in 2001. Courts in Connecticut have ruled that the papers should be made public.

The high court also refused to make a decision Monday on whether to hear arguments from a group of Chinese men who have been imprisoned at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp for more than seven years.

The justices reviewed the case last week, but made no announcement about how they will move on the petition from the Uighurs — whose relocation has been part of a larger headache for the Obama administration, which is trying to meet its self-imposed pledge to close Gitmo by January.  The Uighurs were picked up in Afghanistan following the Sept. 11 attacks, but have steadfastly maintained they had no role in supporting the Taliban or Al Qaeda.  The Pacific island of Palau has agreed to take 12 of the remaining 13 Uighurs on a temporary basis.  Last year, a federal judge in Washington concluded the men had been detained long enough and ordered that they be released into the United States. On emergency appeal, another court blocked that decision and eventually overturned the ruling. 

FOX News’ Lee Ross and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

BRIDGEPORT, Conn. (CNS) — Bridgeport diocesan officials said they were reviewing their options after a May 22 ruling by the Connecticut Supreme Court to make public sealed documents from settled sexual abuse lawsuits filed against priests in the Bridgeport Diocese.

The 4-1 ruling involves the release of documents from 23 lawsuits against six priests settled in 2001. In 2006, a Superior Court ruled that the files should be released but the diocese appealed the decision.

The Supreme Court’s decision to release the files would not take effect until it was published in the Connecticut Law Journal June 2.

According to a May 22 statement from the Bridgeport Diocese, church officials were "deeply disappointed" in the ruling.

The battle over the sealed documents began in 2002 when The New York Times filed suit to obtain the documents that it said were a key par of the church’s record of handling charges of clergy sex abuse. Three other newspapers joined in the suit: The Hartford Courant, The Boston Globe and The Washington Post.

About a dozen people, including members of the Survivors’ Network of those Abused by Priests, delivered a letter to Bridgeport Bishop William E. Lori May 26 urging the diocese not to appeal the release of the more than 12,600 pages of documents.

SNAP director David Clohessy personally handed the letter to a diocesan official at the Catholic Center, where the diocesan offices are located. The letter urged Bishop Lori to let the court ruling stand to allow parishioners and the public "the chance to learn the truth about the crimes that were committed and concealed."

Although the group did not meet with Bishop Lori, they were handed a statement by Joseph McAleer, a spokesman for the diocese, which outlined the work the diocese has done to assist abuse victims and prevent abuse.

"We appreciate that emotions run high on this topic," the statement said. It also added that the diocese’s objection to the recent court decision "concerns judicial fairness and the fundamental right of any individual or organization to fair adjudication in any legal proceeding."

"In a state where the Catholic Church has had to vigorously fight for its constitutional rights, we are going to continue to examine any and all legal options," the statement added.

It also faulted the ruling for ignoring the state’s statute of limitations on the unsealing of court documents.

"Sadly, the history of this case has been about access by the secular media to internal church documents of cases more than 30 years ago to suggest, unfairly, that nothing has changed," the statement said.

"This is despite the extraordinary measures the Catholic Church has undertaken over the past several years to treat victims with great compassion and dignity, and to put in safeguards and educational programs to ensure that such a tragedy will not happen again."

The New York Archdiocese also released a statement about the Connecticut court ruling since Cardinal Edward M. Egan, retired archbishop of New York, was bishop of Bridgeport from 1998-2000.

A May 22 statement by Joseph Zwilling, director of communications, said the sealed documents involved five priests who were accused of sexual misconduct prior to then-Bishop Egan’s appointment to Bridgeport. One of the priests died before the bishop was appointed to the diocese and the other four were sent to a top psychiatric institution for treatment and expert evaluation, the statement said.

"They were returned to ministry only upon the written recommendation of the aforementioned institution along with the advice of experienced members of both clergy and laity," the statement said. "At the time, this was the recognized professional manner of handling cases of sexual misconduct with minors."

When new information was received about the sexual misconduct of four of the priests, two were removed from ministry, one retired and another priest was permitted to continue in a restricted ministry in a home for the aged, according to the statement.

For More Information:
Kelly Clark, Esq.
503-306-0224
kellyc@oandc.com

Portland, Ore—Fr William McLeod, one of the most prolific abusers of children in the history of the Archdiocese of Portland, is the subject today of the latest post on the public service website www.archpdxpriestfiles.com, a site maintained by lawyers representing abuse victims.

The documents from the Archdiocese of Portland files, plus additional material gathered in litigation, were posted today, according to Kelly Clark, one of the lawyers responsible for the site. "Though he received far less attention than some of the other priests such as Fr Thomas Laughlin, Fr Maurice Grammond or Fr Aldo Orso Manzonetta, Fr William McLeod had nearly a dozen victims just that we know about, and he was responsible for incalculable damage to Catholic children," said Clark.

The website was initiated after the Archdiocese of Portland was ordered by an arbitrator, US District Judge Michael Hogan, to release files on abusive priests as part of the conclusion of the Archdiocese of Portland bankruptcy. The website so far has posted documents on three priests, namely Fr Rocco Perone, Fr Aldo Orso Manzonetta and Fr William McLeod.

More files on these and other priests will be posted in the future, according to Clark

###

He was ordained as an archdiocesan priest on May 22, 1937 at St. Patrick’s Seminary, in Menlo Park, California, and died March 24, 1969, in Medford, Oregon . In his 32 year career, Fr. McLeod was assigned to eleven parishes throughout Oregon.  His first assignment was in 1937 at St. Monica’s in Marshfield, Oregon, now known as Coos Bay.  McLeod was transferred to other parishes on a near-yearly basis until 1944 when he took a five year medical leave of absence at Mt. St. Joseph Residence, an extended care facility in Portland, Oregon.  Upon his release from Mt. St. Joseph’s, McLeod was assigned to St. Stephen’s in Portland, where he spent one year before being transferred in 1950 to Holy Cross.  In 1951 he was transferred to Immaculate Heart parish.  In 1952 he was assigned to St. Mary’s in Eugene where he spent two years before being transferred to his final assignment, Scared Heart parish in Medford, Oregon in 1954.  Fr. McLeod spent 15 years at Sacred Heart, dividing his time at nearby St. Joseph’s in Jacksonville. See Assignment Record.

Abuse Allegations 

Between 2000 and 2006, fourteen men came forward with allegations of sexual abuse by Fr. McLeod between 1940 and the mid-1960s. According to the victims’ testimony, McLeod followed a standard “MO” when grooming and abusing boys, usually between 10 and 17 years old: specifically, french-kissing, groping, and sexually gyrating against a boy while embracing him.  Common themes included summoning a boy to his rectory under the pretext of helping him with a project, or for confession.  Once there, McLeod asked about school work and grades or family matters then abruptly the discussion would change to sex, and Fr. McLeod began french-kissing and fondling the boy. He also would sometimes ask if the boy was circumcised, and then ask for a visual confirmation whereupon he would fondle the boy’s revealed penis.

During the 15 years Fr. McLeod spent at Sacred Heart in Medford, Oregon, he regularly took work party groups of children to help clean the nearby Jacksonville Church.  When they were finished, Fr. McLeod often returned all but one boy to his home or school, then went back to the Jacksonville Church where he would abuse the boy.  The history of Fr. McLeod’s sexual abuse history, according to victims, dates back as far as 1940, just three years after his ordination and during his assignment at All Saints Parish in Portland, when he abused a boy named “D.A.”  D.A. brought suit against the Archdiocese of Portland in 2001. See Complaint.

In early 2002, the Archdiocese attempted to have the case thrown out based on its argument that forcible french kissing of, and sexual gyrations on the then-adolescent boy, in the words of the Archdiocese “do not amount to child abuse,” within the meaning of the law.  A Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge disagreed with the defendants, ruling that it was up to a jury, not a judge, to decide whether such conduct is abusive.Plaintiff’s Response to Archdiocese’s Cross-motion for Summary Judgment.”

The Judge also rejected the Archdiocese’s claims that the Oregon Constitution’s and the U.S. Constitution’s religious liberty or due process guarantees should give the Catholic Church an automatic defense, and that Oregon’s child abuse law unconstitutionally discriminated against the Archdiocese.  For journalistic comment on argument that forcible French-kissing is not child abuse, see column by The Oregonian’s Steve Duin.

In January of 2003, another of Fr. McLeod’s victims, a 10 year-old altar boy in 1949, filed suit against the Archdiocese of Portland.  Plaintiff “C.M.,” alleged that between the age of 10-17, McLeod sexually abused and kissed him and fondled him over 50 times.

In 2006 four more men filed suit against the Archdiocese of Portland.  One plaintiff alleged that McLeod had abused him in 1945 while he was visiting his mother and father at their home in Portland.  Three others alleged abuse by McLeod between 1955-‘64.  One of these men was fondled and kissed by McLeod over 100 times.

The Archdiocese of Portland settled all claims involving Fr. McLeod, and listed him on their website as a priest against whom credible allegations of child abuse were made.

Read the files against Fr. McLeod here.

Father Rocco Francis Perone was ordained as a Paulist Priest on May 3, 1949, at St. Paul’s College in New York. Beginning in June, 1949, and throughout his career, he held five distinct positions in five different regions, until his retirement in August, 1989. His first assignment was at St. Mary’s in Chicago, Illinois. He was then transferred in 1950 to Portland, Oregon, to work at St. Philip Neri. Six years later, in 1956, he was suddenly transferred to Layton, Utah, to work at St. Rose, under the capacity of missions ministry. Then, between 1957 and 1988, he worked in missions out of St. Austin’s, in Austin, Texas. His final assignment was from 1988 to 1989, where he was assigned to St. Peter’s Parish in Toronto, Canada. See Assignment Record

The first known report of abuse was made by a boy’s mother in 1953, in Oregon. The 12-year old boy had been informed by Father Perone that a physical inspection of his genitals was necessary for a sports clearance. Infuriated, the boy’s mother called Father Quinn, the pastor of St. Philip Neri, in Portland — Father Perone’s church. The next day, in all-too-familiar Church protocol, Father Perone was placed “on a mission,” to Utah. The boy’s mother was prepared to testify to all this in 2002. The six short years he was in Portland, from 1950 to 1956, Father Rocco Perone, a “Paulist” priest (“OSP”), abused at least 15 boys, and quite possibly another half-dozen who never came forward—two of whom committed suicide. According to the victim’s testimony, Perone followed a standard MO when abusing boys: he called them up to the “Scout Room” (a storage room in the upstairs portion of a building at St. Philip Neri) and had them give confessions about their “impure thoughts.” He then asked the boys to “show” him, at which point he would sexually abuse them. He would bind the boys to sacramental secrecy, instilling divine fear in them should they speak up about it. 

Witnesses were also prepared to testify that the Paulist Fathers again received written complaints about sexual abuse of boys by Perone in 1956, while he was on “mission” in Utah. They nonetheless allowed him to stay in ministry. Father Perone’s victims from the 1950s continued to struggle many years later with the effects of the devastating abuse, as evidenced in one of his Portland, Oregon victim’s 1989 letter to the Father Gallagher of the Paulist Fathers.  ARCH 031; K.A. letter to Fr. Gallagher, dated 6/20/1989. To see Fr. Gallagher’s response to this particular victim’s letter, ARCH 028; response to K.A. To see the Portland Archdiocese’s action taken in response to their conversation with Father Gallagher, click ARCH 018; Lienert to Levada letter. Neither the Paulists nor the Archdiocese ever gave the requested notice, despite that they acknowledged it would help victims. ARCH018-019.

In Father Lienert’s own words, he states that the Church’s protocol for handling incidents of priests’ sexual abuse of children is that they remove the priest from the parish, get him therapy, and then make a determination of whether he can remain in ministry. Therefore, the Church acknowledged that its own policy was to leave the option open for allowing a priest who had been found abusing children to remain in ministry.  ARCH 012; Lienert memo to file dated 4/28/1989

Even after receiving an in-person admission to abusing two boys from Perone himself, the Paulist Fathers nonetheless decided to place him in a position in a parish in San Antonio, Texas, following his release from a Catholic-run sexual treatment program, on the condition that Perone not be allowed to have any contact with young people. ARCH 010; Lienert memo to file, 3/21/89. To our knowledge none of Perone’s parishes, including this one, were ever told of his prior accusations of abuse.

Continuing Deception by Archdiocese Even in Current Internet Postings

Incredibly, even after a decade of being held accountable for sexual abuse by its priests, the Archdiocese of Portland in its own website as recently as of today (11/26/08), continued to post documents in a deceptive fashion. One example is document no. ARCH014 As readers can discern from the narrative above regarding the correspondence between a Perone victim and the Archdiocese in 1989, the Archdiocese never, in fact, agreed to give the notice to St. Philip Neri parish or other parishes concerning Fr. Perone. They simply refused to do it. Yet, by posting this document at the very beginning of its website, taken out of context, the Archdiocese deliberately sought to make it appear that they did, in fact, give this warning.

What other possible reason could there be for the Archdiocese posting this document in isolation at the beginning of the material on Fr. Perone? Readers should not be deceived: document no. ARCH014 was the notice that K.A., a Perone victim, requested that the Archdiocese give in 1989. Despite discussion of the possible benefits of doing so, ultimately the Archdiocese decided not to give the notice. For the Archdiocese to post this notice conspicuously at the beginning of the Perone documents is nothing but misleading. 

Court Filings
Include: Complaint w/request for punitives; the Memo in Support of Punitives.

Father Rocco Perone Documents

Breakdown of Documents Released by the Archdiocese of Portland

Fr. Rocco Perone Documents provided by the Archdiocese of Portland

Newly released documents from the Portland archdiocese prove the Catholic Church lied about their knowledge of allegations of priest abuse.

The archdiocese agreed to release documents as part of its bankruptcy filings. However a federal judge had to step in to get these ones released.

In the 1950s, a child claims he was abused several times by Fr. Rocco Perone. The victim had correspondence with Fr. Chuck Lienert in 1989 about Perone, where it was learned a nun asked the victim when he was a child if had been abused by Perone.

In 2002, the archdiocese denied having received any complaints about Perone.

A new website has been created that posts and explains the documents, as well as a link to the archdiocese site on the abuse documents.

PORTLAND — Documents released by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Portland this week fall short of implicating higher-ups in trying to hide sexual abuse of young people by priests, a leading victim advocate said Friday.

Portland lawyer Kelly Clark said that while the documents revealed a certain amount of "stupidity or naiveté," they weren’t the "smoking gun" that would show church officials had covered up abuse, as advocates such as Clark had said they might be.

At a news conference Friday, Clark said additional documents released after pending litigation is complete might have such evidence.

A spokesman for the archdiocese did not respond to calls for comment.

Clark again raised complaints about former Archbishop William Joseph Levada, who now serves as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for the Vatican.

An employee at the Vatican said Friday night that nobody was available to comment.

Clark said he now understands that Levada and at least one other church official received "direct rumors, reports and allegations" about the improprieties of an Oregon priest, but Levada didn’t check the files on the priest.

Such allegations against Levada date back years. Clark said Friday that he was unable to say whether his understanding was a result of the new documents or those previously released.

The archdiocese released a number of documents this week after U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan ordered it to do so as a result of the settlement in 2007 of about 175 lawsuits for $50 million, putting an end to the first bankruptcy filing in the nation by a Catholic diocese.

Clark represented more than 40 victims.

Under the judge’s ruling, the archdiocese did not have to release documents that pertained to priests whose conduct is the subject of ongoing litigation. As litigation ends, those documents can be made public.

The documents were part of the 2007 agreement, in which the archdiocese paid $50 million dollars to settle 170 lawsuits.

The archdiocese put about half the documents on a webpage in the spring. But it refused to release others saying they weren’t relevant.

Judge Michael Hogan ruled Wednesday only some of the papers could be held back because of active litigation or jurisdictional issues.

Attorney Kelly Clark, who represented 40 victims, says they’ll be putting the new documents into chronological and geographic order.

Kelly Clark: "I would imagine people who would be wanting to be using this would be people who were themselves victimized, faithful men and women who simply want to know what about my parish?"

The church’s papers can be found at archdiocesedocuments.org.

The lawyers version, which will expand as documents are sorted, can be found at archpdxpriestfiles.com.

The order from U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan on Wednesday was a result of the settlement in 2007 of about 175 lawsuits for $50 million to end the first bankruptcy filing in the nation by a Catholic diocese.

After the settlement, victim advocates and church officials disagreed over how many documents to release.

Hogan’s order requires the archdiocese to release documents about allegations of sexual misconduct by priests involving minors and the knowledge of the archdiocese about the allegations, or its response to them.

He said the order doesn’t apply immediately in the cases of priests involved in a related dispute over disclosure or in pending litigation.

Hogan’s decision says names of victims have been redacted from the documents.

Portland lawyer Kelly Clark, who represented more than 40 victims, praised the decision and said it meant the archdiocese must release almost all of the disputed documents.

"This is a good day for survivors, and all the men and women abused as boys and girls by priests of this archdiocese can feel rightly proud that they have stood their ground and did not let the archdiocese back out of its commitments," Clark said.

He said a Web site is under construction that will organize the documents so readers can understand the history of cases and how church officials enabled or covered up abuse.

The archdiocese released a statement that said almost all of the misconduct occurred from 1940 to the mid-1980s.

"Today the Archdiocese of Portland has comprehensive child protection policies and programs," it said, including an Office of Child Protection and national programs to audit protections and ensure that people who work with minors are appropriately screened.

A former local priest is among Roman Catholic clergymen named in documents released Wednesday by order of U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan in connection with lawsuits filed by victims of sexual abuse.

The documents are the latest public disclosure from the April 2007 settlement of an Archdiocese of Portland bankruptcy case arising from 175 sexual abuse claims by former parishioners.

The archdiocese paid $77 million to settle the lawsuits in exchange for continuing its operations without selling any parish or school properties.

The latest documents became public after the Eugene judge arbitrated a dispute between abuse survivors and the archdiocese over the records. Hogan’s decision was lauded Wednesday in a statement by Portland attorney Kelly Clark, who represented more than 40 victims of what he called “pedophile priests.”

Clark said Hogan’s decision forced the archdiocese to release “virtually all of the disputed categories of documents, including those regarding priests who had ‘only’ one claim of abuse filed.”

“I don’t know whether I am more gratified that a common sense federal judge with some guts has stared down the archdiocese or more disappointed that it took all this to get the archdiocese to honor its promises to release the old files,” said Clark of the 18-month legal battle. “Either way, this is a good day for survivors, and all the men and women abused as boys and girls by priests of this archdiocese can feel rightly proud that they have stood their ground and did not let the archdiocese back out of its commitments.”

Among priests identified in the documents as being implicated in a single incident is the Rev. Louis Rodakowski of Vida.

A November 2005 letter to Rodakowski from a diocese official refers to an April 2005 claim from a woman alleging that the former priest who worked in parishes in Salem, Newport, Junction City, Eugene and Vida sexually abused her when she was a minor.

“It is my understanding that part of the allegation you denied and part you admitted, specifically that you touched the young woman improperly,” the Rev. Dennis O’Donovan wrote Rodakowski. “Because of the seriousness of this admission and according to the Bishops’ Charter of 2000 as well as our own Archdiocesan policy, you are hereby placed on administrative leave. I realize that you are retired, but this administrative leave means that you are not to offer any public Masses or offer any pastoral services until there is a canonical disposition of your case.”

O’Donovan also wrote that the case had been settled in the bankruptcy claims process.

The only other document citing Rodakowski was a 2005 internal archdiocese memo stating that the church officials had made a mandatory child abuse report to the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office regarding the accusations of sexual abuse against Rodakowski. State court records show that no criminal charges were filed.

Rodakowski’s career included leading the local St. Jude congregation during construction of its South Eugene church. Now 95, he lives in a small house overlooking the McKenzie River at the Goodpasture covered bridge.

In an interview there Wednesday, Rodakowski denied the abuse accusation.

“It was completely false,” he said, saying the young woman, whom he knew in Salem, accused him after he refused to lend her money. “I want to swear on it. I never fondled her — not at all.”

Rodakowski, who appears frail and uses a walker after suffering a stroke two years ago, said he could no longer recall when he served at various parishes. He said he did not recall acknowledging inappropriate behavior or being barred from leading public Masses or pastoral services.

In a statement, archdiocese officials thanked Hogan for “arbitrating this challenging case,” which required him to review thousands of pages of documents.

Archbishop John Vlazny agreed in April 2007 to the release of “relevant and appropriate documents” as “part of the healing process and in the interests of transparency.”

The archdiocese stressed that nearly all of the incidents of sexual misconduct cited in the documents occurred between 1940 and the mid-1980s. It said it now has comprehensive child-protection policies and programs in place and will continue to emphasize child safety.

Hogan agreed with church officials to withhold documents for priests with pending litigation, but only until those cases are resolved.

Clark announced the creation of a new Web site — www.archpdxpriestfiles.com — to make the released documents more accessible and understandable.

“We felt it was important,” he said, “in order to archive this issue, to present the material in a logical way, organized by priest and by parish, so the public can understand the history of the problem and, most importantly, the role of the bishops of the Portland Archdiocese in enabling and, in some cases, covering up, the child abuse problem.”