Posted on 12/26/2015 7:26:14 AM PST by marshmallow
A Catholic priest at the center of a contentious court case pitting the secrecy of the confessional against state laws designed to protect children is suing a Baton Rouge television station over the station's reporting of the case.
The Rev. Jeff Bayhi claims he has been defamed and is seeking damages from WBRZ-TV in 19th Judicial District Court.
In the underlying court case on which WBRZ has reported, Rebecca Mayeux claims when she was 14 she told Bayhi - her pastor at Our Lady of the Assumption in Clinton - that she was sexually abused by a now-deceased church parishioner. She alleges Bayhi neglected his duty under Louisiana law to report the alleged abuse to authorities.
"During this reporting, WBRZ-TV and its employees presented Mayeux's claims against Father Bayhi in such a manner as to create the impression that those claims were facts instead of mere allegations," lawyer Henry Olinde Jr. writes in Bayhi's suit against the station.
WBRZ news director Lee Polowczuk said Dec. 22 that the station's attorneys were reviewing the suit and he could not comment on the specific allegations in it. "We're confident the outcome will be in WBRZ's favor," he added.
Olinde declined to elaborate on the suit.
Bayhi, in response to the Mayeux lawsuit and in his suit against WBRZ, maintains that as a Roman Catholic priest he is bound by the sacred seal of confession and can neither disclose what happens in any confession nor confirm or deny that a confession ever took place.
"Should Father Bayhi violate that sacred seal in any way, his faculties as a Roman Catholic priest would be immediately and automatically suspended by the Vatican itself," Olinde points out in the priest's suit against the station.
(Excerpt) Read more at theadvocate.com ...
Well, reading down in the story, it does appear that the TV station may have put up a graphic that isn’t supported by any of the evidence thus far (On the other hand, it apparently alleged that she was molested by a deceased priest, and since the plaintiff is alive, they couldn’t have been referring to him). The problem he faces is how far the court will let the deposition go. Once he starts refusing to answer questions, his entire testimony could be thrown out. So the first battle will likely be over Motions in Limine and Motions to Compel in connection with the deposition.
Overlaying all of this is the fact that Louisiana law is different from everyone else’s in the US. Different tort rules, different rules on damages, and different trial practice.
Neither side has a great set of facts here, but from what little is out there, it appears that the broadcaster has a stronger case.
“If it wasn’t a proper matter for confession, then perhaps the privilege shouldn’t attach at all.”
No, all things said in confession are to be kept secret. It doesn’t matter if the thing said is pertinent to a confession of sin or not, You could say you like Australian Rules Football and the priest can never mention that to anyone.
In the girl's case, the Louisiana courts said it was a question of fact as to whether what was going on "were confessions per se". If the trial court has made findings on that, I haven't seen them.
Cross posted with my 23, or I would have included you in that response.
Which is what I meant by "cut and pasted"; an automatic, pre-programmed response with no regard to the facts.
And no, you did not read the article.
But for the priest to say that happened, even if it did, would be a breaking the seal.
You are correct in that there is not enough information given.
“In the girl’s case, the Louisiana courts said it was a question of fact as to whether what was going on “were confessions per se”.
Are they alleging it wasn’t an actual confession? If so, why should the mandatory reporter law applying to the confessional be brought up?
Freegards
Agreed that this is the first I have heard of the priest bringing a lawsuit of this catagory.
And I agree that there is not sufficient information. However if someone is making the statement of abuse that is not a confession, any human being, including a priest has the responsibility to direct the person to someone or an agency that can investigate.
I doubt anyone anyone would disagree with that. Even in the confessional - most would expect the priest to offer healthy advice. Advise her to inform police and her family
Maybe this priest did that - maybe not.
He’s not allowed to say either way.
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.