Posted on 02/11/2012 10:13:46 AM PST by RnMomof7
Some 200 Catholic priests suspected of sexual abuse are living undetected in communities across California, according to an attorney who represents hundreds of plaintiffs who sued the LA Archdiocese for molestation they say was inflicted on them by priests and clergy of the church.
Ray Boucher has mapped sixty locations where suspect priests live, in cities and towns from northern to southern California, and provided those locations to NBC4 exclusively.
“Many if not all these priests have admitted to sexual abuse,” Boucher said. “They live within a mile of 1,500 playgrounds, schools and daycare centers.”
Since none of the priests has actually been convicted of sex abuse, none can be identified under Megan’s Law, or their whereabouts revealed in related public databases.
“What the issue is here, is how you weigh the right of the people,” said Boucher, who is also one of the attorneys representing students in the Miramonte Elementary School sex abuse scandal. “In particular the right of children to be protected from molestation versus the right of privacy."
Among Boucher’s many clients in the church action are Manuel Vega and Dan Smith.
Vega is a former police officer from Oxnard who took special interest in sex crimes investigations because, he says, he was sexually abused as a teenager by his parish priest.
“He forced me to masturbate while he took pictures of me,” said Vega, who believes that the public is often too squeamish to recognize what child molestation actually entails – and thus not properly outraged by it.
“When we talk about sexual abuse we’re talking about sodomy,” he said. “There’s pubic hair, there’s sweat, there’re smells, there’re grunts.”
Dan Smith, another alleged abuse victim, is reeling from the recent collapse of his marriage which he blames in part on the psychological effects of the molestation he says he suffered as a child – at the hands of his local parish priest.
“He would rape me and then say this is what God’s love feels like,” Smith said, struggling to hold back tears more than twenty years after the alleged incidents.
Both men helped make legal history by joining 500 other plaintiffs in suing the LA Archdiocese for sexual molestation, with Boucher as their lead attorney.
In 2007 the LA Archdiocese reached an unprecedented $660 million settlement with many of the plaintiffs without admitting any wrong-doing.
It also agreed to let the courts decide which of the case-related church files should be made public, including those identifying alleged and admitted predators.
But according to Boucher and court documents, the Catholic Church has since engaged in a cover-up. By Boucher’s account, Church officials allowed priests suspected of sexually abusing children to retire, flee the country or hide in rehab clinics until the statute of limitations on prosecution ran out.
“What the church did is take these guys and send them off to facilities where they treat pedophile priests without ever alerting police,” Boucher said. “By enabling these priests to be hidden for so many years the church protected them from being prosecuted.”
Meanwhile legal disputes delayed the release of the promised personnel files, and Donald Steir, an attorney for several priests, went to court to argue that those who’ve been accused but no convicted should have their names and privacy protected.
“They are being punished as if they have been convicted, or at least that’s the desire – to punish them,” Steir said. “That’s not fair.”
“It’s difficult if you represent an alleged terrorist or a pedophile, because people don’t really care about the rights [including privacy rights] for these type of people,” Steir said. “But once we erode the rights of a group of people we don’t like, we effectively have started down a path where other people’s rights can be similarly denied.”
The courts, expressing concern for children, overruled most of these arguments and similar ones by the Archdiocese, which declined to comment for this story.
And a judge has ordered release of some personnel files, set for some time in the coming weeks. But he also credited the church for its increased sensitivity in dealing with molestation cases and decided to withhold the names of church officials who handled the earlier cases.
It is a ruling that reminds Boucher of the breakdown in accountability in the Penn state pedophile scandal. “Look at Penn State and see how important and significant it is when people in authority enable sexual abusers to continue,” Boucher said. “That underscores how significant it is to get these names out.”
Under the judge’s ruling the church can also keep secret, subject to further court review, the names of priests who have not been convicted and who have only one or two allegations against them or have allegations disputed by the church.
To Smith that seems like a formula for further cover-up by church officials.
“If their interests were to protect the kids, they would have released the documents,” Smith said. “As a parent not knowing who your neighbor is -- that is really scary.”
Many of these unidentified priests are included in Boucher’s location map.
“The danger” said Vega, “is that you have a person who has this sickness in them who is amongst the children.”
The plaintiffs in the church scandal are planning to appeal the latest rulings to assure broader disclosure of suspects’ names and locations. But Boucher warned this could take time, allowing suspects to keep their privacy protected, as well as their undetected presence in neighborhoods across California.
I made no accusation whatsoever.
I observed the fact, demonstrated on this forum, that many protestants object to the mere mention of protestant molesters.
I offer one possible explanation of that fact ... not an accusation, merely reporting on appearances.
For what possible good reason would a protestant object to the mention of protestant molesters?
Hmmmm?
The adherents of protestantISM have some explaining to do.
Or, they could resort to expelling the verbal equivalent of squid ink.
Their choice.
The protestant reaction to my comments has been very interesting ... and very damning of protestantISM.
Oh well ...
Back to observing.
No lupie...they do get it.. they just are using the usual tactics to beat around the bush and protect themselves from the obvious decisions they would otherwise have to make make regarding their church.
It's not about denominations, schools, the press, lawyers or other institutes who have to address the issue...and they do address it...... It's about the long term cover-up and continued efforts to fight, deny, and move the blame somewhere other than where it belongs....all the while still pro-claiming their Priests represent Jesus Christ while using that position to feed their demented perversions, then finding safe-harbor behind the curtain of church leadership.
The points mentioned in the post had nothing to do with you....rather the article and the sexual perversion within the catholic church and coverup...as well as the denial and blame shifting which catholics continue to do to avoid the obvious.
Once again this lays on the doorstep of the catholic church to address and no amount of diversion is going to let them escape the outcome.
I had said elsewhere ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2841532/posts ) that the typical Roman Catholic response to pedophilia was to defend priests who are accused of it, to downplay pedophilia when it’s found within Roman Catholic leadership.
This thread is a perfect example. Instead of damning pedophiles, Roman Catholics defend their priests.
Your religion is sick. You need a reformation. 77 posted on Sunday, February 12, 2012 9:47:18 PM by Theo (May Rome decrease and Christ increase.)"
-------------------------------------------------- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2831799/posts?q=1&;page=401
And my comment proved your assertion false. I went on to show that Scripture FORBIDS necromancy, or communication with the dead. Those who seek to communicate with those who have died receive terrible punishment. But you go ahead and speak with those who’ve died. Good luck with that. Again, Scripture CLEARLY forbids “praying” to anyone who has died, be they a saint or a sinner. 402 posted on Thursday, January 12, 2012 2:25:38 PM by Theo (May Rome decrease and Christ increase.)
_______________________________________________
Um. Yes, of course. So is that the entirety of your reply? Sounds like you’ve acquiesced. Nice.
388 posted on Thursday, January 12, 2012 1:58:06 PM by Theo (May Rome decrease and Christ increase.)
__________________________________________________
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2828933/posts?page=28#28
"
Ping to my reply to Cronos’ whining about my semantic faux pas. 28 posted on Thursday, January 05, 2012 3:58:28 PM by Theo (May Rome decrease and Christ increase.)
______________________________________
I see lots of pronouns in this poster's comments. I thought those weren't allowed? Whatever shall the religion moderator do with him?
So typical of protestantISM. ProtestantISM's position may be summarized as: "Let's talk about the filth in your house ... but don't you DARE mention the open sewer that I live in!!!"
ProtestantISM reminds me of Leftism ... the adherents of neither ideology seem capable of self examination.
Pity.
Bye ...
You are directly demeaning me, but using cute phrases to avoid “technically” doing so. That is not permissible on religion threads. I’ll let the religion moderator decide what to do with you."
FROM THE RELIGION MODERATOR'S HOMEPAGE: "When in doubt, review your use of the pronoun “you” before hitting “enter.”
My comment didn't use the word "you." Not even once.
No doubt you have viable documentation of the above.
Patiently waiting........................................
Here’s your statement
>> >>So ... it seems that some protestants think that child molesting is perfectly fine ... if the molester happens to be a protestant.<<
Trying to hide behind that carefully chosen word “seems” doesn’t work when making insinuations.
I’ll repeat my challenge.
>> Find one comment by one Protestant who has ever said or intimated that child molestation by anyone is “perfectly fine”.<<
You also said:
>> and also protest mightily against the mere mention of child molesters who happen not to be Catholic.<<
So I will add another challenge. Show where any Protestant “protested mightily against the mere mention of child molesters who happen not to be Catholic”.
You also didn’t answer the question of whether or not the Catholic Church should be held to a higher standard since they claim “vicar” of Christ and that they are the only true church on earth.
You can “observe” all you want but when you make comments without being able to back up your assertions you remove yourself from observer status.
I am aware that the Unitarian Church does not endorse the doctrine of the Trinity, but since you've added the caveat 'biblical' Unitarian inyour tagline, I wondered if you disagree with the mainline Unitarian doctrine.
My challenge; find a comment where a Catholic is defending a pedophile. Not a priest accused but not found guilty, find a comment made defending a convicted pedophile.
What is a pedant, pedant?
I have seen no statement by a Catholics to that affect nor have I said or intimated anything like that. I see Catholics defending the church for not taking stronger action against pedophiles. So why would I have to find a Catholic defending a pedophile? Are you simply trying to deflect or obfuscate?
Something you see when you look in the mirror?
In another case a Pope had a long dead Pope dug up and tried for heresy. ^o)
This sort of fever is dangerous.
“I’ll repeat my challenge.
>> Find one comment by one Protestant who has ever said or intimated that child molestation by anyone is “perfectly fine”.<<”
Which pope was dug up and which pope had him dug up?
Stephen VI did. Formosus was the Pope he had dug up.
Very well said! As Christians, we should be "above reproach" in all we do and we should avoid any "appearance of evil", especially those called to the ministry. When Jesus warned us of sure persecution from the world, he said that they would "say all manner of evil against you falsely" for His sake. It's supposed to be false, not true. Those who do such evil should face the consequences of their actions. The upright Christian should be on guard at all times, knowing that the evil one would love nothing better than to catch someone in a compromising situation. Be sure your sins will find you out, we are reminded. Ministers of the Gospel should be extra vigilant.
Cute.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.