Court to Hear Sexual Abuse Cases This Fall

This is another of several items from a special issue of our Catholic Herald dealing with the potential financial impact of cases against our Archdiocese in the California courts involving claims of sexual abuse of minors by one of our priests who was transfered there. Among the many bad things leading up to this is bad public policy.

The archdiocese was named in the lawsuits under a controversial law passed by the California Legislature in 2002, allowing victims of past sexual abuse cases to sue dioceses for failure to report and discipline priests who committed the abuse, regardless of the statute of limitations.

While creating retroactive civil liability might be constitutional, that wouldn't make it just.

More than 800 people have filed lawsuits under the one-year statute suspension, including more than 500 who have sued the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

Apparently all of whom, while competent adults, let the existing statute of limitations run on their potential claims.

Nine of the ten California lawsuits involving the Archdiocese of Milwaukee arose from allegations agaist Fr. Siegfried Widera. Fr. Widera had sexually abused minors while serving in our Archdioces.

Widera was sent for therapy and then assigned to St. Andrew Parish in Delavan where he re-offended in 1976.

After discovery of his re-offense, Widera temporarily left the parish. He took up residence with one of his family members in Orange County, Calif. While there, Milwaukee archdiocesan personnel conferred with his treating psychologist who recommended Widera not serve in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee for the foreseeable future. The psychologist reported, however, this did not mean ruling out the possibility of a return to such work in the future, in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee or another diocese.

These kinds of descriptions raise the question whether the responsible Church officials just deferred to professional opinions rather than considering them in reaching their own decisions.

While in California, Widera sought and was granted a return to ministry in the Diocese of Orange. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee made contact with the Orange Diocese and provided a written description of his circumstances.

The alleged inadequacey of this description is one ground for our Archdiocese's potential liability. There's a second.

Eventually, Widera was incardinated in the Orange Diocese, where he is alleged to have abused victims while serving in a parish.

"The lawsuit alleges our archdiocese bears responsibility for the abuse Widera committed in California because he was a priest of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee," said Jerry Topczewski, Archbishop Dolan's chief of staff.

It is this second allegation that appears to include liability arising during the term of Archbishop Weakland.

Mr. Topczewski goes on,

"Between now and the trial date, depositions will be taken and other pre-trial activity will occur."

If he means discovery is just starting now that a trial date has been set in a few months, that's pretty strange.

"During this period, we hope to work with the California victims/survivors to reach a fair and just settlement that will help them find some sense of resolution."

Why couldn't this have been done much earlier?

After the trial concludes or if settlements are negotiated beforehand, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee could face serious financial consequences.

Have I mentioned that this seems to me a reason to try to resolve these cases sooner, rather than later?

"Over the next few months we will face major decisions affecting our archdiocese for years to come, regardless of how the cases are resolved," Topczewski said.

Shouldn't the need to make these decisions have been apparent no later than the 2002 change in California law? The more they explain, the harder it is to understand why they're doing what they're doing. For example,

"What we can do financially is limited because the archdiocese has limited resources," Archbishop Dolan said. "We have been energetically offering those resources during the past four years in mediation and to seek resolution with any victim/survivor of clergy sexual abuse."

If you can credibly juxtapose "energetically" and "during the past four years".

So far, we have reached such resolution with more than 100 victims/survivors.

Where our Archdioces uses an "independent" mediation system that it commissioned.

We intend to offer those same resources to victims/survivors in the cases in California.

One of these days?

Archbishop Dolan discusses the possibility of bankruptcy, but goes on,

"Right now, our focus is on the victims/survivors and they have our profound apology for the abuse they suffered."

That's nice, but they and we would like their claims resolved.

"Every effort is being made to keep all archdiocesan stakeholders updated on developments in the California case," Topczewski said. "The need for openness is paramount as we work together to address all the related financial and pastoral issues associated with the impact this case will have on the archdiocese."

How about scanning everything that's been filed in abuse cases and posting it on the Archdiocese's web site, including any depositions of Archbishop Weakland and Bishop Sklba that had been under seal. If the transcripts are all shredded, just post a note to that effect.