THE DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH Page Response of the Diocese of Pittsburgh 222 Response of Myles Eric Diskin 350 Response of David F. Dzermejko 354 Response of Reverend John P. Fitzgerald 359 Response of Rita Flaherty 369 Response of Reverend John A. Geinzer 375 Response of Father Robert F. Guay 377 Response of Reverend Bernard J. Kaczmarczyk 380 Response of Edward L. Kryston 383 Response of the Executrix of the Estate of. Father Donald Mcllvane 385 Response of Arthur R. Merrell 389 Response of Reverend Thomas M. O'Donnell 401 Response of Paul G. Spisak 404 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY IN RE SUBPOENA 801 SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY CP-02-MD-571-2016 NOTICE: 1 RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH TO REPORT OF THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY 219839275 222 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 40Th STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY IN RE SUBPOENA 801 SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY CP-02-MD-571-2016 NOTICE: 1 RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH TO REPORT OF THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OPENING 3 II. PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE 4 III. CLARIFICATIONS 8 A. IV. The Inaccurate Attribution of the 'Circle of Secrecy' to Cardinal Wuerl 8 B. Use of Euphemisms 10 C. Diocesan Investigations 10 D. Treatment Providers 11 E. Public Disclosure.., 12 F. Financial Support 12 G. Reports to Law Enforcement 12 H. The 'Secret Archive' 13 CLERGY CASES 13 A. Ernest Paone (deceased 2012) 13 B. George Zirwas (deceased 2001) 15 C. Richard Zula (deceased 2017) 15 219839275 223 V. LISTING OF CLERGY 16 VI. CONCLUSION 16 TABLE OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH TO SUBPOENA OF THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY (March 5, 2018) B CORRESPONDENCE FROM JOSEPH D. ICARABIN DATED JUNE 21, 1993 (PGII CF 0009332) C MEMORANDUM FROM FATHER DAVID ZUBIK DATED AUGUST 5, 1994 (PGII_CF 0012144-47) D CORRESPONDENCE FROM BISHOP AUGUST 26, 1994 (PGH_CF 0012141) E CORRESPONDENCE FROM FATHER JANUARY 30,1996 (PGH_CF_0012127) 219839275 .2;24 DONALD ROBERT VVUERL DATED GUAY DATED 40TH COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 IN RE SUBPOENA 801 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY CP-02-MD-571-2016 NOTICE: 1 RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH TO REPORT OF THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY I. OPENING The Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh recognizes and appreciates the efforts of the 40th Statewide 'Investigating Grand Jury. The Grand Jury Report ("Report") describes the tragic reality of child sexual abuse by members of the clergy. The Diocese of Pittsburgh grieves for the victims of abuse, and offers its sincerest apology to the victims and their families. The Diocese of Pittsburgh recognizes the pain suffered by the victims and their families. While we pray for their recovery, we are also open to them. We are open to meet with them, to hear their voices, to share their concerns, and to provide assistance, pastoral or otherwise, in helping them heal. We invite victims and their families to set aside any hesitancy they may have, and ask them to come to us so that we may walk with them in their journey. It is never easy to admit failures. It is clear that historically there have been failures with regard to clergy sexual abuse. Church leaders should have always been victim focused, treating victims with compassion and care in every instance. Swift and firm responses to allegations should have started long before they did. Protections and safeguards for God's children should have been implemented long before they were. Because of this, victims and their families suffered. And for that, we again deeply apologize. And to our faithful, we apologize that you 219839275 225 must once again endure the pain of revisiting the details of these abusive acts. To the people of the Commonwealth, you should know that the serious efforts to prevent and combat child sexual abuse, which the Diocese of Pittsburgh initiated decades ago, will continue without compromise. And finally, the Diocese of Pittsburgh is hopeful that anyone who reads the Report also gives a considered review to this Response, as well as to the statement attached hereto. H. PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE The Report is correct when it recognizes that "much has changed over the last fifteen years." The Diocese of Pittsburgh has not been idle in facing the problem of clergy sexual abuse. In fact, for 30 years, the Diocese has engaged in ongoing and relentless pursuits to prevent and combat clergy sexual abuse. These pursuits include: Requiring background checks by the Pennsylvania. State Police, the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for anyone seeking to work or volunteer in a Catholic parish, school, or institution. Since 2003, 72,657 people, including clergy and laity, have undergone child protection training and background checks, as required by the Diocese of Pittsburgh's "Policy: Safe Environments for Children;" Strengthening and improving psychological screening measures for those who wish to be ordained; Establishing a policy for responding to allegations of child sexual abuse (1986); Creating an Independent. Review Board (1989) consisting of experts on child sexual abuse which advises the Bishop; 219839275 242 6 Hiring a full time Diocesan Assistance Coordinator (1993) who oversees the pastoral response to victims who bring allegations of sexual misconduct to the Diocese of Pittsburgh, which includes facilitating access to therapy for victims; Revising and publishing policies related to clergy sexual misconduct (starting in 1993); Establishing a toll -free abuse hotline that directly connects to the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator's office (2004). The hotline is widely publicized by the Diocese in the Pittsburgh Catholic newspaper and in parishes by at least bi-weekly publication in bulletins. It is also required to be clearly posted in the entryways and offices of every parish and school in the Diocese of Pittsburgh; Consolidating its safe environment efforts in a new Office for the Protection of Children and Young People in 2007. The full-time Director of this Office trains a Safe Environment Coordinator in every parish and school, whose responsibility is to confirm that all background checks are performed so that known abusers are kept out of ministry, and that allegations of abuse are reported to child protective services and Diocesan officials; Opting to undergo an annual, independent onsite audit of its adherence to the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People every year since audits began in 2003. However, in 2008, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops established that each diocese would only have an onsite 219839275 227 audit every three years. Therefore, in each of the intervening years, two - person teams from the Diocesan staff visit approximately 50 parishes and schools to test their adherence to child protection procedures and to coach them on how to improve where necessary. In the findings of each of the independent, onsite audits, the Diocese of Pittsburgh was commended for its policies and practices established to help prevent the sexual abuse of minors; Expanding "The Catholic Vision. of Love" program to include a kindergarten through 12th grade curriculum on how to identify, avoid, and report predators (2011). These units are required to be taught annually to the more than 50,000 students in Diocesan schools and religious education programs; and Requiring mandated reporter training of all clergy, staff members, and volunteers who have regular contact with children. This includes all religious education teachers, school janitors, and cafeteria workers, among others. 219839275 The policies, procedures, and efforts of the Diocese of Pittsburgh have been substantial and effective. The following graph highlights the effectiveness of these measures by showing the sharp decline in incidents of abuse, beginning the in 1990s, the same time these policies took effect: Diocese Pittsburgh - Reported Incidents by Decade of Occurrence 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1940's 1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's 2000's 2010's The offenses set forth in the Report are primarily from the 1960s through the 1980s. It is heartbreaking for the faithful to revisit these tragic events. Today, the Diocese of Pittsburgh handles allegations of child sexual abuse very differently than it did 40 years ago. The Diocese of Pittsburgh has made the protection of God's children of utmost concern, and the Diocese allows no clergy member to serve in public ministry if he has admitted an allegation of abuse, or if a credible allegation has been made and substantiated. The Diocese of Pittsburgh cooperated with the Grand Jury Investigation by producing over 85,000 pages of hard copy documents, as well as 26 gigabytes of electronically -stored information. In February 2018, the Office of the Attorney General ("OAG") served upon Bishop David A. Zubik a subpoena that requested a description of the actions taken by the Diocese to 219839275 2-R9 address child sexual abuse. The OAG outlined three (3) acceptable responses to the subpoena: (1) providing live testimony; (2) asserting Fifth Amendment rights; or (3) providing a statement to be read in its entirety to the Grand Jury. Due to the breadth of the subpoena's request and the necessary response, the Diocese of Pittsburgh chose to submit a statement to be read in its entirety to the Grand Jury. The Diocese of Pittsburgh's statement, dated March 5, 2018, is attached hereto as "Exhibit A." The statement describes, in detail, the actions taken by the Diocese of Pittsburgh to address and combat child sexual abuse. The Diocese of Pittsburgh is hopeful that anyone who reads the Report also gives a considered review to this Response, as well as to the statement attached hereto. M. CLARIFICATIONS The Diocese of Pittsburgh wishes to clarify or correct certain assertions within the These clarifications and corrections are set forth below. The Diocese of Pittsburgh Report. provides this information for the purpose of reassuring its faithful, not for the purpose of criticizing the Grand Jury. A. The Inaccurate Attribution of the 'Circle of Secrecy' to Cardinal Wuerl The Report alleges a "circle of secrecy" and attributes it to Pittsburgh's then -Bishop Donald Wuerl. This is not accurate. The Report identifies seven (7) factors that the Federal Bureau of Investigation feels arose repeatedly in relation to Diocesan responses to child abuse complaints. (Rep. 297-99.) The Grand Jury described this "constellation of factors" as the "circle of secrecy." The Report then incorrectly attributes the "circle of secrecy" phrase to Bishop Wuerl. The relevant records are related to Reverend Joseph D. Karabin. (Rep. 674-77.) On June 21, 1993, Karabin wrote to Bishop Wuerl seeking to have his restricted ministry reversed and to 219839275 -213.0 be placed in active ministry in a parish. See correspondence from Joseph D. Karabin dated June 21, 1993 attached hereto as "Exhibit B" (labeled for the Grand Jury as "PGHCF_0009332"). Handwritten notations jotted in the margin of the letter reflect the Diocese of Pittsburgh's response to Karabin's request. Specifically, Karabin, who had been in a 12 -step recovery program for the prior eight (8) years, was informed that he would have to disclose to the prospective parish the reasons his ministry was restricted and the fact that he was in a recovery program. Twelve -step recovery programs require participants to honor the principle of anonymity. As the notations indicate, absent full disclosure concerning his past-which would require Karabin to disclose his treatrnent-he would not be permitted to return to parish ministry. The Report's interpretation of the handwritten notations is incorrect for a few reasons. First, the phrase "circle of secrecy," which relates to Karabin's recovery, is misused to allege a broad conspiracy in the Church. The notes bear no connection to the seven (7) factors identified by the FBI. Second, the misuse of the phrase "circle of secrecy" obscures the fact that the writer of the notation was confirming that the issue of Karabin's recovery from alcoholism and sexual misconduct would have to be disclosed before he could be returned to ministry. Despite Karabin's willingness to make a disclosure, he was not returned to parish ministry. Finally, the Report provides no evidence that the phrase "circle of secrecy" describes the way the Diocese of Pittsburgh addressed allegations of child sexual abuse. There is also no indication that the Grand Jury was ever provided with any evidence as to whose handwriting is on the letter. The. Diocese of Pittsburgh unequivocally states that it is not the handwriting of Bishop Wuerl. In fact, we have confirmed that the notation was written by the Secretary for Clergy at the time. The attribution of the "circle of secrecy" phrase to Bishop 219839275 231 Wuerl is simply unfounded. The Diocese of Pittsburgh appreciates the opportunity to offer this clarification. B, Use of Euphemisms The Report makes the sweeping allegation that euphemisms were used to describe sexual abuse as a strategy to hide child sexual abuse. A fair reading of the Diocese of Pittsburgh's files, which were submitted to the Grand Jury, demonstrates detailed and graphic descriptions of abuse, as provided by the victims. in fact, the Report borrows from these detailed descriptions to make its points elsewhere. We acknowledge that we did not describe the incidents in most graphic terms every time we referred an allegation to the District Attorney or discussed the matter in internal correspondence. The terms and phrases that describe the removal of a priest from ministry have changed over the last three (3) decades. What we did not always say until 2004 was that the priest was removed from ministry because of a finding of a credible allegation of sexual abuse. We do so today and have done so consistently since 2004. C. Diocesan Investigations The Report indicates that abuse investigations are not conducted with properly trained personnel. The Diocese of Pittsburgh cannot and has never performed criminal investigations; rather, since 2002, it has turned credible allegations over to the appropriate district attorney. Since 2007, it has turned over all allegations to the appropriate district attorney. Our internal assessments only address suitability for ministry. However, for over 25 years, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has employed the professional expertise of a masters -level, licensed social worker who presently has 42 years of experience. She is compassionate and caring, as reflected in the case files quoted in the Grand Jury Report. She has spoken with every victim who has come forward since 1993. 219839275 The depth and breadth of the assessments performed by the Diocese of Pittsburgh is extensive and actually demonstrated within the Grand Jury Report. Specifically, the case summaries included in the Report outlining allegations regarding individual clergy members are based largely on the Diocese's reports of its inquiries. Although we take issue with many of the conclusions recited in these summaries, the selected facts upon which they are based came directly from the documented results of assessments performed and provided by the Diocese of Pittsburgh. Finally, since 1989, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has engaged an Independent Review Board, whose membership has included a former United States Attorney, several lawyers, a clinical psychologist, and several parents of victims. The Independent Review -Board provides the Bishop with advice on issues related to clergy sexual abuse, among which is the suitability of a priest for active ministry. The Independent Review Board conducts a comprehensive factual review and analysis outside the influence of the Bishop. D. Treatment Providers The Diocese of Pittsburgh utilizes the expertise of accredited, licensed psychiatric facilities. In connection with a facility's evaluation of an alleged abuser, a "self-report" is typically a part of the initial intake, much as would occur when any person visits with their physician. However, the "self-report" is not the singular basis for the diagnosis. The Diocese of Pittsburgh provides extensive collateral. information to the treating facility. As a matter of protocol, a treating facility utilizes a professional team to conduct extensive interviews and standardized testing recognized by the American Psychiatric Association. In short, it is erroneous to assert that such a complex matter as making a psychiatric diagnosis would rely solely on a "self-report," which would be akin to a physician making a diagnosis and prescribing treatment based only on a patient's self-completed intake form. 219839275 E. Public Disclosure The policy of informing parishioners of an allegation against their priest has evolved over time, an evolution that is not unique to the Diocese of Pittsburgh or to the Catholic Church. Consistently since 2004, if an allegation is levied against a clergy member who is assigned to a parish, the parishioners are informed that the priest has been removed pending further investigation of the allegation. Our regular practice has included letters read from the pulpit and placed in the bulletins of affected parishes, pastoral visits, press releases, articles in the _Pittsburgh Catholic newspaper, notification to all clergy by fax or e-mail, and notification to the appropriate District Attorney and child protective services. F. Financial Support The Diocese of Pittsburgh is required by canon law to provide some level of support to all clergy whether disabled, retired, removed from ministry, or even convicted of crimes. The Diocese of Pittsburgh must comply with canon law. This requirement reflects the Catholic understanding that, by ordination, the priest and the Church to which he is ordained have a mutual obligation to each other. Even, if the priest fails in his responsibility to the Church and its faithful, the Church must still maintain some limited support for his essential needs. G. Reports to Law Enforcement Generally, allegations of abuse fall into two categories. First, there are allegations made by or on behalf of a current minor. The Diocese of Pittsburgh has complied with Pennsylvania law by reporting all allegations of sexual abuse where the victim is currently a minor. Second, there are allegations made by adults who claim to have been abused by clerics when they were minors. Since at least 1993, we encouraged all victims to report their allegations to law enforcement. Beginning in 2002, we reported all credible allegations to law enforcement 219839275 gi34 no matter how long ago the abuse occurred. Beginning in 2007, all allegations, credible or not, are reported to law enforcement. FL The 'Secret Archive' The Diocese of Pittsburgh does not keep records related to clergy sexual abuse within a "secret archive." The secret archive is a secure file drawer containing only two documents: (1) the last will and testament of the Diocesan Bishop; and (2) the succession plan if the Diocesan Bishop were to become incapacitated. Records pertaining to clergy misconduct, as well as any other sensitive medical or psychiatric issues requiring privacy, are contained in confidential files. Confidential files are restricted files, not "secret files." The restriction is on who may have access to the files. They are housed in the Clergy Office. The treatment of these files is consistent with the best practices, personnel policies, and confidentiality requirements of the human resource departments of most organizations. IV. CLERGY CASES As previously noted, the Diocese of Pittsburgh recognizes and appreciates the efforts of the Grand Jury. However, the Diocese feels that a fair analysis of the problem of clergy sexual abuse requires the following clarifications to certain aspects of the Report. A. Ernest Paone (deceased 2012) Ernest Paone was ordained in 1957. As noted in the Report, there were allegations of Paone abusing children in the 1960s. In 1966, Paone was placed on an indefinite leave of absence, and he relocated to Southern California. to live with his brother. No one still involved with the Diocese of Pittsburgh is able to speak to the thinking or decision -making of the Diocesan leadership 50 years ago. 219839275 -235 In 1991, in response to a request from Paone, Bishop Wuerl informed then-Bishop Daniel Walsh of the Diocese of Reno -Las Vegas that he had no objection to Paone exercising priestly ministry in the Diocese of Reno -Las Vegas. At that time, neither Bishop Wuerl nor anyone in the Clergy Office was aware of Paone's file and the allegations lodged against him in the 1960s. Our research indicates that because he had been outside of the Diocese for nearly 30 years, Paone's files were not located in the usual clergy personnel file cabinet. This earlier handling of Paone's records was a failure of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, and the Paone case would certainly not be handled in the same manner today. Upon being hired in 1993, the Diocese of Pittsburgh's Diocesan Assistance Coordinator began systematically organizing all of the clergy files. This included the creation of "confidential files," which were designed to identify and catalog allegations of misconduct. When in 1994, the Diocese of Pittsburgh received a complaint about abuse committed by Paone in the 1960s, the Diocese drew on the newly reorganized files and found the previous allegations from the 1960s. See memorandum from then -Father Zubik to Bishop Wuerl dated August 5, 1994 attached hereto as "Exhibit C" (labeled for the Grand Jury as "PGH CF 0012144-47"). Paone was then sent to St. Luke Institute for an evaluation, and Bishop Wuerl sent letters notifying the relevant Dioceses in California and Nevada of the 1994 complaint. Specifically, on August 26, 1994, Bishop Wuerl wrote to the Diocese of Reno -Las Vegas saying that had he known in 1991 of the allegations, he would not have supported Paone's request for a priestly assignment. See correspondence from Bishop Wuerl to Bishop Walsh dated August 26, 1994 attached, hereto as "Exhibit D" (labeled for the Grand Jury as "PGH_CF_0012141"). 219839275 Thereafter, on January 30, 1996, Father Robert Guay, then -Secretary for Clergy, informed the Diocese of San Diego that Paone did not possess the faculties of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. See correspondence from Father Quay dated January 30, 1996 attached hereto as "Exhibit E" (labeled for the Grand Jury as "PGH CF 0012127"). In summary, immediately upon learning of the 1994 complaint, the Diocese of Pittsburgh informed the relevant Dioceses about the allegation. Thereafter, the Diocese acted repeatedly to keep Paone from active ministry wherever he was located. B. George Zirwas (deceased 2001) We would like to address the victim named "George," who courageously appeared before the Grand Jury. As we understand it,.George has never approached the. Diocese of Pittsburgh about the abuse he suffered. We sincerely apologize to George and extend an offer to him to meet with us. We invite anyone who has yet to come forward to contact us and tell us their story. Today, we would have handled the Zirwas case much differently. We would have immediately removed Zirwas from ministry and reported the allegation to the appropriate District Attorney. The case would then have ultimately been presented to the Independent Review Board for a recommendation to the Bishop on Zirwas' suitability for ministry. C. Richard Zula (deceased 2017) Richard Zula was ordained in 1966. The Diocese of Pittsburgh first received an allegation against Zula on September 25, 1987. Zula admitted the abuse. He was immediately removed from ministry, never to be returned. Accordingly, his faculties were removed and he could not identify himself as a priest, either by title or attire. 219839275 - P7 Once Zula returned from a psychiatric treatment center on January 13, 1988, he made several requests to be assigned or transferred outside of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. The Diocese of Pittsburgh summarily denied all of Zula's requests for assignment or transfer. The Report takes issue with the fact that the Diocese of Pittsburgh paid for professional medical help for Zula and continued to provide him with sustenance. Canon law required the Diocese of Pittsburgh to support Zula. Contrary to the Grand Jury Report's inference, Bishop Wuerl never offered Zula any amount approaching $180,000. The approximately $11,000 he was paid reflected the $500/month in sustenance payments that accumulated while Zula was incarcerated. Finally, at no time did the Diocese of Pittsburgh advocate for a lighter sentence forZula, nor did it request that a psychiatric report be prepared or submitted on Zula's behalf for sentencing purposes. V. LISTING OF CLERGY As of this writing, the Report includes an appendix with a list of priests who are identified as offenders. Several are in active ministry. Given that there is an appeal before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, we are not now able to offer clarifications. However, we can say that those in active ministry are there because the allegations against them were determined to be unsubstantiated. VI. CONCLUSION The Diocese of Pittsburgh acknowledges the sad history recounted in the Grand Jury Report, both of the abuse that occurred at the hands of priests and the failure, at times, of leaders in the Church to respond with the compassion and care that is the standard today. For the harm inflicted by these actions we again apologize to the victims who suffered the abuse, to their families and loved ones who have shared in their burdens and have supported them with love and 219839275 -1238 encouragement, and to anyone whose faith and trust in God or in the Church has been shaken. We pledge to remain firmly committed to the protection of children and promise to enhance our programs and efforts to prevent child sexual abuse in our Church and across our society. Finally, we continue our prayers for victims and all who are affected by this tragedy. Respectfully submitted, CLARK HILL PLC Robert J. Ri sq. (Pa. I.D. Io. 58651) earn, Esq. (Pa. I.D. No. 204162) Brandon J. One Oxford Centre, 14th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15219 412-394-2440 iTidgeclarkhill.com bverdrearn@clarkhill.com Attorneys for The Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh 219839275 -17239 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH TO REPORT OF THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY has been served via FedEx upon the following: Daniel Dye, Esq. Jennifer Buck, Esq. Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General 16th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 ddye@attorneygeneral.gov Julie Horst Executive Secretary for the Grand Jury Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General 16th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 obert J. Ridg 219839275 a, I.D.N 58651) 241 1 EXHIBIT A COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY IN RE SUBPOENA 801 SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DIET. 2016 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY CP-02-MD-571-2016 NOTICE: 1. RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH TO SUBPOENA OF THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY EXHIBIT l'gl 2193402.15.2 A 242 COMMONWEALTH OF PM-SYLVANIA. STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND MO IN RE SUBPOENA SOil - -SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.O. MISC. DIM.201,6 COURT OF,COMMON ?LEAS OF ALLEGHENY 'COUNTY 'CP-02-1),-571-a16 NOTICE: 1 RESPONSE OF THE CAittOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBITRGH TO SUBPOENA OF THE.4011' STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND J-URY TAICIII OF-CONTENTS I, OPEN-R.1G- H. 'PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE III, , ' , 1***3 , 4 A. Safe Environment B. Diocese, .of Pittsburgh and the Charter C. Diocese of Pittsburgh's. Code of 1.'astoraI Conduct D. Audits -Of Compliance with the Charierfort1w Protection of Childreft , Young People 7 , , . .. .. ............ 10 HISTORICAL RESPONSE TO. ALLEGATIONS OF C-LERGY id- IV. , Cf .11 0T0 ''' A. Initial Policy B. Putting Children First C. Independent Review Board ...11 1 11. J 11 ,F 1 ' ... .. .. 6( ati,.. ..... 41-1. . ... fririVVi..k.i fol2 ................. 13 .EVOLITnON.OF TEA policy. FOB TBE PROTECTION OF . ,0 CHILDREN:, A. 14 The Pastoral Procesg- 14 1. Publication of Clergy Sexual- Mi4eonduct Policy ii. Employment of DioeeSan, ,Assistanee Coordinator 2193'40215 243 0 15 Responding to Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse D. 1, Initial Repponse to an Allega.tion IL Reporting to Civil Authorities....,. 1.11. Evaluating Allegations .. , , y ..I Y. CARE ANTI ASSISTANCE FOR VICTIM VI. PUBLIC APOLOGY YOT CLOSING- el r . t _ TABLE OF rOttrilliV" :-_ '' r''',:',- --"' : ' ":-:, - .: : '; .16 .4, 43 Bishop Wuer1 and the Diocese of Pittsbu-rgh Intervene at the Holy See. (44 eV. C. d6 e ,4korl4 . : t. et .ts e r 22 ': -,* EIS -.:-Ii.Egclitg:TiOiv , ,. . ..'...:,, -,..*- - ' . A POLICY: SAFE. ENVIRONMENTS-Fog LE_w_,DNEN. B. CODE C POLICY FOR CLERGY SEXUAL MISCONDUCT D 'POLICY FOR ALLEGATIONS. OF sExua, ABUSE, OF IVIENORS BY COURCHPERSOMEL OTHER THAN *CLERICS 0, NEWS ARTICLES E ORDER OF REFERENCE or PASTORAL CONDUCT . .._ _ 21930215. 244 , ' The Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh recognizes end appreciates the efforts $tatewide Investigating Grand Any end the '0.ôe of the 4tiorney General of the 40th MAW). The Diocese of Pittsburgh and the Most Reverend David A. Zubik partieularly appreciatd the- Grand ,Tury'a invitation to submit a written 'response to the (rand YarY. Subpoena dated Fehmat. 9, 2018. In accordance with the °AO's: direction., this statement describes the actions taken by the Diocese ofPlitsborgh to address n'hill sexual abuse. OPENING T. The abuse of children. by WIYOictei including :clergy and other representa.tives .of the Catholic Church, is a devastating tragedy. As soc.i.ety an-d the Diocese ofPItthtrgh have come to better understand root causes of abuse and the harm that victims suffer, the Diocese Tim and will continue to take swift and definitive action to reach out to victims and to make farther stride,s in preventing abuse, Over thirty years ago, the Diocese of Pittsburgh. was among the first to. adopt a. policy concerning :Child sexual abuse by :clergy. filcerthen, the Diocese haastrived to 'exceed what is .required Under state. law and the Charter for ire Protoodon has beeti and is the goal of the Diocese against whom a 'credible 'allegatio The ;Diocese of Childron ana Young Peopte..4 It of Pittsburgh that there be no cleric. in active ministry frhid sex.U4 abuse lag. been made. of Pittsborgli ling. and will continue to provide conScientious care and to implement best practices to ensure that its parishes ,and schools are safe .environments for children and young people. -As, Bishop Zubik has previously stated, and reiterates here, the Diocese of Pittsburgh and all diocese's xciust realize. that we can never go too. far in Boling to: prevent -the abuse of children. .(See Jason Cato, Diocese more respotzswe to Catholic Church TribLive.com, March 5,201.6;) .s.et I See httkilivww.useeb.orgitssues-and-c-tetionichild-and-youtkproteetionIchattencfin. 219340215 -.3 - 245 This. statement detail.s the Diocese of Pittsburgh's actions to address child sexual abuse within the Diocese, and provides information relevant to its historical response to child sexual abuse. In addition, it is appropriate to mention the Diocese of Pittsburgh's response to individual victims. As such, added to this statement .is -a component dealing. with the Diocese's concern and care for vietirrl (Section V), which is at the apex. Of the 'Wogs of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. The Diocese begs the indulgence of the Grand Juiy for-this addition to the requested information. n. PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND YO(JNG PE.OPIX A. Safe Environment Programs/Policies The safe environment programs implemented by the Diocese of Pittsburgh. include training and 'background checks for all Diocesan -related persomel-elergy staff; and volunteers-and annual age -appropriate training for all children in Diocesan schools and religious education programs. The age-appropriate training for children focuses on how to identify,. avoid, and report possible predators. The Diocese of Pittsburgh's safe environment policies are designed to meet or exceed the requirements of Pennsylvania law and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' June 2002 Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People., and to keep Diocesan. parishes and schools safe for children and young people. /11Particular, we present the following examples of our POlioies and practices: Since 2007, 72,657 people, including clergy, and laity who have sought to work or volunteer in Diocesan parishes and schools, have undergone child_ protection training and background checks, as required by the Diocese of Pittsburgh's 219340215 -4 246 'Policy:: Safe Environments for auldren."2. Of these 72,657 people, -45 were rejected and denied the opportunity o wolkor -volunteer -due to a pasthistory of child abuse-e.r sex crimes, Furthermore, 376 wete tea-Acted in their roles tine to some -other past violation of law unrelated to child abuse or. sex alines. of Pittsburgh In. 2007, the Diotese ;centralized its online child: protection database of all clergy, employees; and volunteers who serve in our parishes and schools. .Th6putpose a the database is to track which personnel have up-to- date :clearances and training. This database is continually updated by Safe Envirotiment Coordinatorsin our parishes and schools, and is monitored by the staff of our Office for the Protection of Children: and Young People, (discussed in greater detail below). Since 1998, the Diocese.of Pittsburgh 1-1- encouraged adults who were abused as minors to report the abuse, to the .sisill.anthnritie43' and ptior tb this date, the Diocese repOtted allegationS of sexual abuse of Ourtent thinors to: the -civil authorities. In 2:002, the. Diocese began reporting all credible allegations ,of ..1;inse made by adults who, wen abused. a Man' Ora to the autlifatitia. Iii 2007,, the Diocese ;committed to reporting all allegations 'of sexual. _abuse made by adults who were abused as ninorsfvhother medible.ornot: In; COM111.1anQe with Pennsylvania law, the Diocese of Pittsburgh requires background .checks ,on staff Members and volunteers who have direct 'contact: with children, rent "Policy Safe Enviroomenis for Children" is attached hereto as -"Exhibit A." A. copy of dm. Drocese's became cifoctive on July 1, 2004,.aud was revised cm April 4, 2008, and October 1, 2015; effectivbisIdventer 2015. "Civil authorities" refers to civil law authorities, including -those responsible for criminal prosecutions, 2 219340215 - S 247 n 1, In, 2015, Permsylvotia changed its law to mat date that.FBIbacWound checks that include fnagezprinting, are required of any employee who has direct contact with children. The Diocese of Pittsburgh has complied -with this amendment- th Pennsylvania law.4 TO make frngerprinting more convenient, the Diocese of Pittsburgh purchased a mobile fingexprinting unit, which. was taken to parishes and schools, However, recent vendor Chang% b7 the Connnotwealth caused the 'Diocese to discontinue this. service. Nonetheless-, all required Engerprinting continues at various Connnonwealth..-approved sites. permsyhrania law requires. only specific certified professionals-such as teachers and social WOrkers-to take mandated reporter 'training. The Diocese of Pittsburg.h, howeverrequires it ofall clergy, stafe members, and volunteers who have regular contact 'with children. This inPli teaCherS,, school religious .edncatiOn janitors, 'and cafeteria. Workers, .among others. The Pennsylvania Farnily Support Alliance, :a .secular non-profit that provides mandated reporter trairiing -throughout Pennsylvania, has applauded '`.the of Pittsburgh for taking DiceeSe 4 strong stand in proteding Cfrildren by ensuring that all their employees and volunteers who have contact withchildren. .rezeiry -abuse." 3 hours of in-petson timining :on how to recognizTh and report' child. The. statement goes on:, 4Eyelyone has a role -to play in protecting children from. abuse.- the Diocese of Pittsburgh is stepping Iv to.the plate and .an -g, Pennsylvania taking that role seriously.7 Maven Evans, Directot Family-Snppoft Afljançe, Feb. 21, 20110 The Diocese of Pittsburgh's policy tracks PernisylArania Ili* in Veiniitting voltnneerswho have been Commonwealth residents for at least 10 years. 4 219340215 - 6- 248 thi enipt1oiifro.fraorptiiitittg: for Anyone who wishes to serve as. either an employee or volunteer in one of the Diocese of Pittsb-urgh's polishes, schools, or institutions must participate in "Protecting God's Children" training,$. either online. or at a workshop. Since 2003, more than 70,000 people have participated in this -training. In 1905, the Diocese of Pittsburgh established "The Catholic Vision of Love" program, whose pmpose was to present a Catholic understanding of sexuality for students in. grades, 6 through 12. This included units on the prevention of child sexual abuse. In 2011, the Diocese of Pittsburgh expanded "The Catholic Vision of Love" program to include a kindergarten through 12th grade curriculum on how to identify, avoid,. tad report predators, These nrrits are required to be taught .annually to more than 50,000 students inDiocesan schools and religious ethics:don programs-. Parents must also participate in the training to enable them to discuss the program with their children, and students are not permitted to opt out of thig program. S. Diocese of Pittsburgh .and the .Charter As previously noted, the child protection. policies of the Diocese of Pittsburgh meet or exceed the requirement of the Charter for the Protection of:Children and Young People. The Charter is a comprehensive set of procedures established by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in June 2002 foracldressing allegations of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic clergy; After the June 2002 ineeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the bishops presented to the Vatican a set of norms that required any cleric who was.known to have committe_d sexual abuse of minors to be removed from ministry.. The Vatican declared that these The Protecting God's Children program is designed to teach priests, deacons, Staff, velunteers, and parents to recognize the warning signs of child sexual abuse and to respend approprhitely, The program and training service was created by The National Catholic Risk Retention Group, Inc; under the name "VIRTUS." 5 219340215 _'7- 249 norms would. be Church law for the United States. The Diocese of Pittsburgh, through then- Bishop Donald Wueri, led the fight to establish thiS Mel/tick, US. Bishops get tough ori =Mate nationwide (See Aim Rodgers- ahuset% Pittsburgh Post-Gazette,. Tune15, 2002.) The Charter also. Includes guidelines tOr reconciliation, healing, accountability, and -prevention of fixture acts of abuse,. Some distinctions betWeelt the ChaPtees, reqUireinents Eid the Diocese ofPittsburgh's policies are: The .Cliail4r requires olOgy, -eMployees, and Some -volunteers to undergo a single background:Check, The Diocese -of Pittsburgh requirea-three:badkground ,checks by the folio -wing: the PenxisylVenia State POlice, the Permsyivania Departmentof Human. Services, anti the Pederal Bureau of Investigation. TheDiocese of Pittsburgh requires background checks and training of not only its clergy, but of far more- employees and yolunteere than. Tequired by the .Chaner, including anyone who could be prceiVed as a representative of .the Church ----such as a lector or choir member. The that requires; only That diocese;s report abuse allegations in which the. victim is -stilt a minor. Once again,. in cases of a.cwent minor, the Diocese o.f Pittsburgh reports all allegations to the Civil authorities. In ackTition, since 2007, the Diocese of Pittsburglithas required that all allegations made by adults who were abused. as minors,..whether credible or not.f. be reputed to the proper -civil atithoiities. In 1989 .the Diocese of Pittsburgh created what IA ladW knoWil as the Independent Review Board,6 whichis a panel ofvoltnteers with. experience and 6 This was originally called the "Assessment Board" and has also been Imam as-the "Diocesan Review Board," 219340215 -8250 expertise in a range of disciplinesrelevant to. -the /problem of child sexual_ abuse. The Board was established to provide the Bishop with advice on issues related tO clergy sexual abuse, among which is the suitability of a priest fOr active ministry, The Board was created U years 'before- it was riwidated by the Charteli. 'C. Diocese oiPittslyurgh5s,Coae of Ra.storal Conduct In August. 2(43, the Diocese of Pffb pblisfh1,epfPastorH cob.dua..,i1It get in. writing -and 6Oclifiecl. the standards and expectations for all those who act in the name of Om Diocese cifPittsburgb.. It has been refined .and expanded tWi:ce!---it. 2008 and 2017, It applies to bishopg, priest, deacons, and religious and lay meinbers Of the. Christian faithful 'who assist in providing pastoral care. The Code of Pastoral Conduct addresses -a broad array of personal conduct issues for clergy, employees, and 'volunteers of the Diocese of Pittsburgh mid its parishes.. Specific provisions ofthe Codes offer guidance on interaction with Children, youag pPopie., :and. vulnerable adults. Among other safeguards, the Cade identifies eamp1eff bf apptoptiat6 and itiapproptiate forms of physical contact.viith minors, stipulates thatpersonnel in the presence of minors shoto be within eyesight of another responsible adult, prohibits. private conitnuniCations with ntinor8 thrOdgh spdial nieclia and other electronic means, and provides that personnel ate expected to k110141 JilArtriatary reporting.reguirements and the sexnal misconduct policies Piftsbur 7 A copy of the Diocese's current Code-or-Pastoral Conduct is attached hereto as 'Exhibit B," 219340215 -9k-. 251 of the Diocese of D. Audits of Compliance with the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People. The Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People requires that each -diocese undergo an onsite audit by an: independent auditing firm every three years. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that each diocese within 1.. United States is compliant with the Charter. The audits begin with volumes of information Submitted to the- auditors before their-visit, The onsite portion of the audit begins -and ends with interviews of the Bishop, and includes-interviews with key Diocesan officials and the Chaiiperson ofthe Independent Review Boar& The audits entail visits to Diocesan parishes and schools chosen by the auditors,. without advarwe notice. Visits to parishes and schools are not mandatory under the Charter, but the Diocese .of Pittsburgh has consistently requested such visits. In the past, a diocese could opt to undergo an onsite audit every year under the. Charter. From 2003 to 2008, the Diocese of Pittsburgh opted to undergo an onsite audit each year. As -of 2008, t.he'LLS. Conference of Catholic Bishops established that each diocese would only have an onsite audit every three yeas, In each of the intervening years, all -dioceses are required to submit documentation to the independent auditors verifying their compliance with the -Charter. The Diocese has been fully compliant in. these:matters. The most recent independent audit of the Diocese of Pittsburgh!s Cbmplia'nce with the Charter contineted by Stonebridge Partners in October 2017 fOund that for the audit period, 38,993 active clergy, employees, and volunteers have valid background checks and certification in appropriate child protection training. This number includes 100% of active clergy. Furthermore, as indicated in the 2017 audit, 50,453 children received safe environment training, with the goal of teaching them how 219340215 to: identify., avoid, and - 10 252 report possible predators. In the findings of each ofthe independent, onsite audits, the Diocese its policies and practices established to help prevent the of Pittsburgh was commended for sexual abuSe of minors. In addition to the external, independent audits, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has historically done much to oversee and enforce :its safe environment programs and compliance with the mandates of the Charter. While the safe environment programs had e3dsted for years, the Diocese of Pittsburgh consolidated its safe environment efforts in a new Office for the Protection of Children and Young People in 2007. The full-time Director of this Office trains a Safe Environment Coordinator in every parish and school, whose responsibility is to confirm that all baakgrouncl checks 'aid performed so that known abnsers are kept out of ministry, and that allegations of abuse are reported to Diocesan officials. The Office for the Protection of Children and Young People also organizes internal audits of the parishes and schools of the Diocese of Pittsburgh in the two years between the Charter's mandated triennial independent midi s. TWo-person teams from the Diocesan- staff visit approximately .50 parishes and schools in each of these years to test their adherence to child protection proCedures, as outlined in Dioce,san polities, and to coach them on how to improve where necessary. The Diocese of Pittsburgh was one of the first !dioceses in the country to establish this procedure. HI. HISTORICAL RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS OF CLERGY SEXUAL ABUSE A. Initial Policy Fifteen years before the establishment of the Charter of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Diocese of Pittsburgh adopted a policy for responding to allegations of child sexual abuse, The' initial Diocesan "Policy: For Clergy SeXual Misconduct,' as. it is formally known, was Created in 1986 and formally adopted in February 1987. (See Eleanor Bergholz, A greater openness, Pittsburgh Post -Gazette, Aug. 25, 1987.) 219340215 -11- 253 The Diocese of Pittsburgh's Policy for Clergy Sexual Misconduct has been under continual review since 1988. (See Ann Rodgers-IvielniCk, Diocese ?wises policy for- plea misconduct cases; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, March 11, 1993.) It has been amended six times in March 1993:, October 2002, August 2003, August 2006, March. 200L and .April 2014. Each of the specified revisions was done to strengthen the policies and, procedures necessary to improve the Diocese of Pittsburgh's response to victims. Moreover, these re -visions have been perfonried as the Diocese, together with Society as a whole, has. over the years come to better undelstcald root .causes of sexual abuse and the harm that victims. suffer, All revisions to the policy have been made publicly available.8 B. Putting Children First In, 1988, then-Bishop of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, Donald We Wuerl, now Cardinal Wuerl, against the advice of legal counsel, and accompanied by his Administrative -Secretary, Reverend David A. Zola, now Bishop Zubik, visited two brothers who reported that they were abused. by Diocesan priests. Their family was- present, as, well. The visit With the two brothers and their family permanently changed the Diocese of Pittsburgh's approach to allegations of clergy sexual abuse of minors. It was a watershed moment. From that; oint onward, under the direction of Bishop Wuerl, the Diocese moved aggressively in response to allegations- of Child abuse, naking the protection of children 4. top priority. The. Diocese -of Pittsburgh has made every effort to uphold and strengthen this policy. 11A copy. of the Diocese's current Policy for Clergy. Sexual Misconduct is attached hereto as "Exhibit C." A copy of 'the Diocese's Policy for Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Chdreh Personnel Other Than Clerics is attached hereto as; "Exhibit p." 9 The priests were tem.oved from public ministry in response 'to the allegations, and none of the priests ever returned to public .ministry. Twe ofthoSe priests Were convicted and imprisoned. 219340215 - 12 - 254 Shortly after Bishop Wuerl and. Father Zubiles Visit with the family of. the abused clergy of the Diocese of brothers, Bishop Wuerl called a. Pittaburgh in the fall of At the meeting, Bishop Wuerl outlined the Diocesanp&iey for 1914.8. mandatory meeting With the OlitiTe responding to allegations of clergy misconduct, declaring that sexual contact with a minor was not .siniply 4 moral .offense, but. 4 'Orime trader Charoh 1a end eiVil la* Mot Woad result in permanent removal oin.:mitlistry and possible imprisonment. At accused priest could expect to be removed from ministry if. an.ellegation appeared creolible. Bishop Waal also revealed his intention to meet or speak with victinas of Clergy sexual abuse who wished to speak with hirn,,a practice, that Bishop. Zubik caiTies Jon to this day, C.. In :Independent Review B:Card 1:98g, the Diocese of Pittsburgh 'nnounced that it would convene a group laypersons and pastors to prOvide ad-Vice and assistance where abuse occurred. Orl.-the prevention of -sexual abuse,- and to offer healing (Sec Bishop to form :committee to ;real' hqrm of allegations, Pittsburgh Catholic, "Oct. 28, 1588.) This. resulted. in: the creation of the Independent ReVieW . cixi 1989, The Independent Review Board is a panel of volunteers with. experience and expertise in a range of disciplines relevant to theprdblera of child sexual .abuse. It was esta.blished.to assess individual allegations. and to: advise the -Bishop on issues related to clergy sexual abuse, among which are the credibility offb.e allegation and the suitability of the priest.for active ministry. :Lay menibers of the Bbant were not requited to be Cathblici but were chosen based on. their expertise and expoiencea. Shortly after its creation, parents: of abuse victims were appointed to the Board. Since its, inception, the chair of many Board me.efings has been Fredelick W Thieman -a former chief prosecutor and United States Attorney for the Western Distriet f Peim'sylvailia. The Board 219340215 - 13 255 was created J:3 years before it was mandated for alldioceses in the United States by the -Charter jar the ..Protettion øfChildren and:Young PeQpie injune2002. Since 1993, the Diocese oflaitttbnrgb. has maintained a roster of individuals who have For each case in which been appointed to serve on the Board for five-year renewable nallegation against there i elaic, five: individuals :firb chosen. frotn the case. Pour of 'the individuals are lay .people, and one is a priest. to review the Ofthe four lanersons,. one must have pro.fessional expertise relaidng to the sexual atoso ,t3f mijci. The prieat must be a pastor. As explained, the Independent Review Board review allegations of abuse and makes recommendations to the Bishop. Mr. Thieman, the chair of manyBoardmetings, has noted that the Board has 'extreme independence" from Diocesan influence; and the 'Treedom to reach whatever :decisions we wanted. to. reach, based :on the best evidence (Ann Rodgers and Mike ..A.quflina, Something Moro Rafilarat -Tb MiSAOP1 bf13.iishop, Archbishop- an ci Cardinal Dovald Marl, The Lambing pre,ss, M15, p IV. 1Q1.): EVOLUTION OF Tw POLICY FOR TIC PROTECTION OF GELHAVEN A. The Pastoral Process 1. Pulilication of ClergySexual ninonduct Policy On March 8, 1953., the Diocese of PittsbUtir officially published its revised Clergy -Sexual Misconduct Policy, holding a press conference to announce its contents and to distribute copies to the media." Specifically, the policy prtrvided that no cleric against whom. there Was an admitted or :credibly established allegation of sexual :misconduct with a minor may .serve in any POIaliontaistty. The. Bishop 410 has the anapritylo tovve.an offending priest torn miniary; 'The Clergy Sexual Misconduct Policy was also printed in: theTittsburgh Catholic on. March 12, 1993. 2193419215 -14256 regardless of whether there kris been a conviction or finding of liability in the orhninal or civil courts. These Dioeesan principles remain unchanged to this day." ii. Employment of Diocesan Assistance Coordinator In 1993, the Diocese of Pittsburgh hired Rita E. Flaherty, MSW, LSW, as the "Diocesan Assistance Coordinator," a position which Ms. Flaherty still holds to this day.I2 The Diocesan Assistance Coordinator oversees the pastoral response to victims who bring allegations of sexual miscondlict to the Diocese of Piftsburgh. In addition to faCilitating access to therapy for victims, the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator's responsibilities include, in pertinent part: Receiving allegations of sexual misconduct; Assisting with and reviewing actions taken in response to allegations of sexual misconduct; Updating accused clergy's personnel files, specifically noting steps taken in response to allegations; Preparing reports for the Clergy Task Force; is and, Serving as staff to the Independent Review Board. Since. 2004, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has maintained .a toll-free abuse hotline that directly connects to the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator's office. The hotline is widely publicized by the Diocese in the Pittsburgh Catholic newspaper and in parishes by at least bi- The policy did not address sexpal activity between consenting adults. Rather, it focused on minors, noncorisenting adults, and adults over whoM a cleric had spiritual or tulminiatrative authority. In 2014, the policy was amended to include specific protections for "vulnerable adults." See EX, C. 12. M$. Flaherty's position has also been termed to as the "Process Manager" and the "Ministerial Assistance Coordinator." 13 The Clergy Task Force is a team of Diocesan staff members, both priests and laity, who assist the Bishop in determining an appropriate response to any allegation of serious wrongdoing by clergy, and in determining whether changes should be made to policies regarding clergy misconduct. Clergy Task Force members include the Vicar General (a cleric with canonical authority to- act in .the Bishop's absence), two clerics in charge, of the offices that deal With clergy-rolated matters, the canon lawyer in charge of the Diocese's Canon Law Department, the civil attorney who represents Diocesan parishes and schools, and the Diocesan spokesperson, among others. 11 219340215 - 15 - 257 weekly publication in bulletins. It is also required to be clearly posted in the entryways. and offices -of every Parish and school in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. B. Responding to Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse Initial Response to anAllegation Since. 1988, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has. Mandated :a prompt response to all allegations of sexual abuse. Any priest, deacon, or Diocesan or parish/school employee who receives a complaint that a cleric has sexually abused a current minor must im_mediately notify the proper civil authorities and the Diocese. Beginning in 1993, when an adult alleges that he/she was abused as a minor, the Diocese of Pittsburgh mandates that two priests from the Clergy Office, as well as the Diocesan Assistance' Coordinator, are required to first interview the person bringbag the allegation, and then, to conduct a-separate inteiviewof the, accused cleric.. The objective of the initial interviews is to assess the credibility of an allegation. Credible allegations lead to the removal of clerics from public ministry. If an allegation, is deemed not credible after a review of all available information, including the results of any civil investigation, -the matter is not pursued further, and the parties .are infornied of the decision. ii. Reporting to Civil Authorities Since at least 1993, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has encouraged and supported all individuals bringing allegations of sexual abuse to report the abuse to the proper civil authorities.14 This policy was adopted before the 13. Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People in Tune 2002, and was implemented 14 DI some instances, where necessary, the: Diocese of Piitstnggh has teported.allegations to the civil authorities over the objection of the person bringing the allegation. The Diocese' reserves this right when it receives allegations. The Diocese also complies with Pennsylvania law by reporting all allegations of abuse of a current minor. 219340215 -16 - 258 after a meeting with the District Attorney of Allegheny County and other counties to ensure that victims would: be treated with sensitivity during any investigation or prosecution. (see Ann Rodgers-Melnick, Zappala, Wuerl de, ne policies, roles in abuse cases, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, April 17, 2002; Steve Levin, Diocese expands meetings with district attorneys, Pittsb-argh Post Gazette, April 26, 2002) Generally, allegations of abuse fall into two categories: First, there are allegations made by or on behalf of a call:en-LW:nor. The Diocese of.Pittsburgh has. complied -with Pennsylvania law by reporting all allegations of sexual abuse where the victim -is currently a minor, Second, there are allegations made by adults who -cisitni to have been. abused by clerics -when they Were minors, Beginning in 2002, all credible allegations Were reported to the civil authorities. Beginning in 2007 all allegations; credible or not, are reported to the civil authorities. iii. Evaluating Allegations The Diocese of Pittsburgh's evaluation of and response to the issue of clergy sexual abuse has progressively evolved since the Mid -1980s. Beginning in 1988, the focus of the Diocese of Pittsburgh has been 011 putting the safety, of children first. -Where clergy admit to committing abuse, or once allegations of abuse by clergy have been judged credible, the priest is removed from public ministry. If an allegation involves a current minor, the cleric is immediately removed from ministry and the allegation is immediately referred to civil authorities. During the civil process, the priest remains barred from ministiy. Only after the civil process is complete, does any canonical process begin. If the cleric is convicted, the canonical process begins td remove- hird from the priesthood. If the cleric is acquitted; then a canonical process begins to determine whether he is suitable for ministry. 219340215 17 - 259 While all allegatio.ns of child sexual .abuse are tgkpa seriously and receive appropriate ettentien, the standard for determining whether an allegation is deemed credible has become increasingly deferential toward adult victims of childhood sexual abuse.° initially, the Diocese of Pittsburgh sopeA to cletormire whether an allegation Plight or might notbe truO, andif the answer was affirmative .or inconolusive, the cleric was removed from Ministry. By the early 2000s, the Diocese of Pittsburgh semblance of truth to an allegation. removed. krom: mink* and the began a practice of detemining whether there was. any If the answer was .afGrthatiVe case was referred to the cii Or inconclusive, the. cleric was ii authorifiep. *teeming in 2007, upon the reassignment of BiShop Zubik to Pittsburgh, the Diocese begat forwarding all allegations of abuse of current adults who were abused as 211illOrS to the civil authorities, whether the. allegation was considered. creable or not; Intetnelly, once an allegatien is received by the Diocese of Pittsburgh,. the Clergy Task Force is convened :to offer a: recommendation on placing the 'cleric :on a .dminiStrative leave that reetnoves Ids ability to fahction Eva,. plieSt or deaeon, The Qlorgy Task.Force.directS the Clergy Office to arrange for a meeting with the cleric, offers logistical asiistance. on .infsatroing Pgishionqrs, and Wangs fox a psychological .041X1.04141, Ace.IVed P1' undergo a forinal psychological avaltration by medical and psychiatric exports at pected to a. facility selected by the Dio-cese. The accused cleric is required.to grant the treatinent fa.cility permission to. share the results of the evaluation with, appropriate Diocesan personnel. Once the pSychological evaluation is complete, ti* matter is referred to the Independent ReView Board.I6 tPtt1i1s complied With: PannaylVania law by i.eporfing allaltegaticus of:Atop ota -CUirmt 15-11b Diocese minor. "If the Oconsed clede refuges In undergo a psyehOggibal Oghlatinti, the Itidependent Review Board will tgopeed without this evaluation and the.prleat remains ca:gdo-iii0gtrative 21934M5 -18260 The Independent Review Board le:views relevant documentation and Jacks' from. the victirn,,the accused priest, and any other pertinent witnesses that either party may :present. At the end of its deliberations, the Independent Review Board will offer findings relative to the Credibility .of the allegation, as well as.t retoniMendatdott n thesuitability øf an for the cleric. Dating the entire evalvniion vocesS4Dio0esat-QffiClidS ate required to Oatinually update the person: who .brOught the allegation tegatcling the process of the investigation and the Bishop's decisioos concerning the accused cleric. :C., Bishop Wtter1 and the Diocese ofFitiSbUrgh Intervatb at the lEtay See November 198$, a 19 year -old male filed a civil la.wsuit claiming that a priest had Molested hirn frOm the age -of 12, Bishop Wnefl sent the priest for at evaluation, and he was never returned to ministry. Following 411 appeal by the priest; in March 1993, he Vaticat's highest comt the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatma, ordered Bishop. Wueti to :retain the priest to ministry.. He was instructed. to accept the priest in good _standing, give him an assifonne4t, allow hiln to say Mass publicly, and allow him to wear clerical garb, bested,. Bishop Wued took the .extraerdinary step of petSOnally traveling to ROmb to petition: the Vatican court to rehear the case. This action demonstrated Bishop Wuerl's commitment to protect children from the harm of sexual .abuse. In October 1995, because of Bishop Wuerl's detennirrationto cmobat the sexual. abuse of .titors, the. Vatican court reversed itself aftet reviewing the case again, tiled that Bishop Wuki had been Coirect in removing the priest froth ministry. It was the first time in history that the Signatura reversed its deasion. Sorge believe that this ruling inadc. it easier for bishops to remove priests 'front mioistry. 219340215 CARE AND ASSISTANCE FOR VICTIMS . For the. past three. 3) decades, the Diocese of Pittsburgh's policy and practice has been to respond with .compassion and respect whenever someone comes forward with an allegation of sexual abuse. Pastoral concerns take priority over legal concerns, The Diocese -of Pittsburgh has upheld the. practice of responding to victims 'where they are" in terms of their needs, always acknowledging how difficult and painful it is for them to come forWard and speak about the abuse they suffered. We .can only hope to bring healing when we are able to listen with an open mind and open heart. With that in mind. Bishop Zubik continues the practice initiated by Bishop Wiled of meeting or speaking:with any victim who wishes: to speak With him-. Since. 1993, -with the full time employment .of the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator, the Diocese of Pittsburgh has offered continual care and support to victims and their families, By its own policy, the Diocese of Pittsburgh strives to offer immediate assistance to a person, and their family, who briuga An allegation of 'sexual naiscondnet, The Assistance Coordinator is typically the first Diocesan official to speak with Victims. Sometimes the first contact from a victim or family member happens through a phone call, email, or letter. A personal meeting is always attempted at a. location most convenient for the ahkrOs at a tinae when they feel ready -to talk in person. In many of these situations, -the Assistance Coordinator-has maintained personal contact With the victim for decades. Sometimes this contact relates to their personal struggles about their past abuse while often,. the contact is more in. line with celebrating their accomplishments or those of their children, or acknowledging their clay -to -day .challenges and respOnsibilities. Caring for Vietirn8 must not be viewed as an obligation or burden, but rather seen as- a ministry of healing, wherein we are given the opportunity to walk with those who have beenharmed so they 219340215 -2.0- 262 can feel heard, respected, and believed. Iii instances too numerous to mention, the Diocese has reached out in unconventional ways to assist victims and their families. While the Diocese of Pittsburgh most frequently responds to victims- with an offer of pastoral support and/or psychological counseling, many films the victim does not feel the' need for th-is type of help. There are others, however, who require significant assistance with psychological care, which the Diocese ofPittsburgh offers to provide. In 2001, the DiOcese of Pittsburgh. established .aii. Outreach Fund to resolve the abuse elaigisgf numerous plaintiffs presented in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. These claims included allegations from as far back as the 1950s-, with the most recent claim of abuse baying allegedly occurred in 1994.. The Diocese of Pittsburgh established an Outreach Fund, notwithstanding viable defenses, and without significant investigation into the metitscof the claims. The Diocese :also declined to utilize any type of loss matrix or calculator in resolving- the claims: Instead, the funds were distributed by an independent, retired judge, after giving the plaintiffs the opportunity to tell their story, PUBLIC APOLOGY VI. As part of a continual outreach -to victims of sexual abuse and other mistreatment, Bishop Zubik lifis twice held a "Service of Apology.' "For whatever way any member ofthe church has hurt, offended, dismissed or ignored any one of you,. I beg you -the church begs-ybii - for forgiveness," Bishop Zubik told several hundred people inside St. Paul Cathedral in Oakland at the first such service in 2009. (Amy IVICConnell Schaarsmith, :Bishop Zubik apology, Pittsburgh Post -Gazette, April 8, 2009.) 219340215 -21 263 104 setilice of Bishop Zubikheld a similar service during Lent 20I6, as part ofPope Francis's "Year of Mercy." Opa,WIFIleifield, Nearly 1.00 Partshiooers Gather For Bishop Zubiles "Service af .Apdlogy, CBS Pittsburgh, Maych 21-s.2016.) V]L CLOSING Since at least 198E., the Diocese id Pittsburgh has attempted to do: its utmost to place -the interests of children and 'victims abovcall otbet concerns:, and to advocate fOr protecting children and young pod-pie. For the past three decades, the DioceSe. of Pittsburgh has been willing to work with or sou t input about its responses to the probleni of clergy sexual abuse froni its fathfilL including parents a yiptitas, ptuide experts, and public officials. N:Ofei:Of .60 affortS, ,greal or small, can take away the harm that has been dope to :those who have suffered sexual: dime In. the Diocese of Pittsburgh, we continue, through all of efforts., to offer healing and hope to those who have been abused and to attempt to restore trust in the Church, Because of the Diocese of PittsburghN dedication to the po.ttio f obi cien peOple, the Diocese welcomes every opportunity to haproVe. To quote Bithop 'Zubik from his Sttvibd ofApology in2009 to all hurt by anyone in the Church at any time and in any way: To those of you vAin are here tonight Who have inAny way been the victims of any abate sexual or otherwise, whether as a child, or as an adult, or as a parents or sibling, or friend who shared in the pain of that someone you. love I ask you, the Much .4.4c4 you, for fintvexiess, Pot Whateifer -ways any representative of-the Chinch has hurt, offended, disntissed, ignored, any one of you --I ask you, the Church asks. you, for forgiveness, . 219340215 -22 264 With all the love in my heart and with all the sincerity in my soul, you .can. be assured that I will do all that I am able to do to restore your trust in the Church and to work_ together with you to reflect the very love, compassion, mercy of Jesus Himself in and through the Church. This Statement is Respectfully and Humbly Submitted, Most Reverend David A, Zubik Bishop of Diocese of Pittsburgh 219340215 -23 - 265 Effective Date: July 1, 2004 Revised: Revised: Revision Effective: April 4, 2008 October 1, 2015 November 1, 2015 EXHIBIT A Policy: Safe Environments for Children Table of Contents PURPOSE 2 APPLICABILITY 2 DEFINITIONS 2 Church Personnel 2 Child, Children or Minor 2 Diocese 2 Safe Environment Coordinator 2 POLICY AND PROCEDURE 3 Required Background Checks and Certifications 3 Catholic School Employees 4 Responsibility for Assuring Compliance 5 Prospective Church Personnel 5 Certification Renewals 6 Continuing Compliance Obligations 6 Responsibility for Criminal Background Check Costs 6 Transfer of Background Checks 6 Grounds for Denying Employment 7 Independent Contractors 8 APPENDICES: A: Background Checks by Ministry 9 B: Volunteer Disclosure Statement Application Form 10 C: Disclosure Statement Application Form for Minors 12 D: Individuals Required to Obtain Online Mandatory Reporter Training 15 E: Process for Evaluating Records 16 F: Letter Restricting Ministry with Children 17 G: Affidavit of Compliance for Independent Contractors 1 267 To take reasonable measures to assure that Church Personnel, as defined below, comply with all required certifications and background checks to permit the necessary assessment of suitability for contact with children with the purpose of providing a safe environment for children.: A le II A ; All Church Personnel are required to obtain certain certifications and background checks as set forth below. Upon obtaining the results of any background check that contains reports of any convictions for any Disqualifying Offense, as listed on pages 8 and 9, that person is not eligible for hire or for retention. The Diocese has determined that, minimally, this policy applies to those Church Personnel or their equivalent as named in Appendix A. In keeping with the purpose and spirit of this policy, and in light of the definitions provided below, a pastor or administrator may deterMine that the policy also applies to positions not listed in Appendix A. When in doubt, the pastor or administrator is urged to apply this policy to the fullest extent possible in the interest of protecting children. DEFINITIONS Church Personnel: All bishops and priests (active and retired), religious men and women on assignment in the Diocese, deacons and seminarians; All diocesan, school and parish employees. This would include any individual 14 years of age or older applyingfor or in a paid position as an employee responsible for the welfare of a child or having contact with children. All school volunteers; and All diocesan and parish volunteers who perform they have direct access to children. a service where Child, Children or Minor: All persons under the age of eighteen. Diocese: The Pittsburgh Catholic Diocese, including parishes, schools, and institutions that are directly accountable to the Diocese. Safe Environment Coordinator: The person appointed by the pastor, principal or administrator to oversee compliance with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People and the Diocese's Safe Environments Policy. 2 268 POLICY AND PROCEDURE Required Background Checks and Certifications The following criminal background checks ("Background Checks") must be completed by all Church Personnel prior to commencing service: Pennsylvania State Police Criminal Report 2. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services Report (Child Abuse) 3. FBI Criminal History Report (Fingerprinting) 1. Exception to FBI Criminal History Report for Eligible Volunteers A volunteer may be excused from the FBI Criminal History Report requirement if he or she has been a Pennsylvania resident continuously for the previous 10 years, has not been convicted of a "Disqualifying Offense" as listed on pages 8 and 9 and signs a Volunteer Disclosure Statement Application to this effect (see Appendix B). Volunteers who are current residents of Pennsylvania (but have not been residents for the entire 10 years prior) need only obtain an FBI Criminal History Report once at any time since establishing residency in Pennsylvania and, thereafter, must complete a Volunteer Disclosure Statement Application Form. Exception to FBI Criminal History Report for Minor Employees Employees ages 14-17 do not need an FBI clearance if: Minor has been a Pennsylvania resident continuously for the past 10 years, and Minor and his/her parent or legal guardian signs a Disclosure Statement Application for Minor Employees (see Appendix C) that the minor has not committed child abuse or been convicted of "Disqualifying Offense" as listed on pages 8 and 9. Exception to Background Check Requirements for Adult Students 18+ year old high school students do not need to obtain Background Checks to be in contact with children during their school -related volunteer activities if: The student is currently enrolled as a student in the school; The student is not responsible for the child's welfare (i.e. care/ supervision in lieu of a parent); The student is volunteering for an event occurring on school grounds; The event is sponsored by the school in which the student is enrolled; and The event is not for children who are in the care of a child-care service. 3 269 The diocesan policy requires that the following also be completed: 4. Database Application database application must be completed by all Church Personnel, Database applications can be obtained online through the diocesan website at www.diopitt.org under the Office for the Protection of Children and Young People. A 5. Diocesan Code of Pastoral Conduct Acknowledgement All Church Personnel are to receive, be oriented in, and electronically sign the "Acknowledgement of Receipt" page from the diocesan Code of Pastoral Conduct. 6. Reporting of Child Abuse and the Child Protective Services Law of Pennsylvania Acknowledgement All Church Personnel are to receive, be oriented in, and electronically sign the "Acknowledgement of Receipt" page from the diocesan Reporting of Child Abuse and the Child Protective Services Law of Pennsylvania brochure. 7. Protecting God's Children (Virtus®) Training All Church Personnel are to complete the Virtus® training program, Protecting God's Children, at either a diocesan sponsored class or through the Virtus® online training course within 90 days of commencement of service. Information about live classes offered throughout the Diocese and online training can be accessed through the diocesan website at: www.diopitt.org and clicking on the Safe Environment link. 8. Online Mandated Reporter Training For Mandated Reporters The following individuals designated under Pennsylvania law as mandated reporters must complete the online Mandated and Permissive Training Course offered by the University of Pittsburgh within 90 days of commencement of service: All clergy, all school employees, all school volunteers and all other employees and volunteers who are responsible for the welfare of a child or have regular contact with children (including, at a minimum to those individuals or their equivalent named in Appendix D). Information about the online training can be accessed through the diocesan website at: www.diopitt.org and clicking on the Safe Environment link. as Catholic School Employees In addition to the above mentioned Background Checks and certifications, employees of the Catholic Grade Schools and Catholic High Schools of the Diocese of Pittsburgh will be required to have Act 24 clearances and to follow the requirements of PA Act 168 and Act 126. Currently, the online Mandated Reporter Training Course offered by the University of Pittsburgh meets Act 126 requirements and could satisfy one five (5) year training cycle requirement. Please consult with the Office for Catholic Schools for the Diocese of Pittsburgh for further clarification and assistance by calling (412) 456-3090. 4 270 Responsibility for Assuring Compliance with Background Check and Certification Requirements The General Secretary of the Diocese or the pastor/parish life collaborator/ deacon administrator/school principal/administrator, in his/her respective role, is responsible for ensuring compliance with these policies. To assist in discharging this responsibility, every diocesan parish, school and institution is to name a safe environment coordinator who will ensure that all Church Personnel have completed all required training and obtained necessary Background Checks and certifications. All records of compliance with these policies, including the signed "Acknowledgement of Receipt" from the Code of Pastoral Conduct and Mandated Reporter and Child Protective Services Law brochure, records of attendance at the Virtus® Protecting God's Children Training Course and the Mandated and Permissive Training Course, and Background Check reports, are to be provided to the safe environment coordinator. The safe environment coordinator is then responsible for tracking records of compliance in the diocesan -wide database established for this purpose. Annual Verification The pastor/parish life collaborator/deacon administrator/ school principal/administrator will be required annually to complete and sign a verification letter affirming that the parish, school or institution has implemented all aspects of the diocesan safe environment policy. Limited Database Access Write access to the diocesan -wide database developed for tracking compliance with this policy is restricted to the safe environment coordinator, school principal (or principal's delegate) and/or catechetical administrator. Write access to the database cannot be delegated to other staff both for reasons of confidentiality and for reasons of quality control of the data. Write access to the database is part of an administrative oversight responsibility and should be treated as such. Giving access to the database to anyone other than those specified in this policy is to be considered a grave matter that is subject to appropriate disciplinary action. Prospective Church Personnel Prospective Church Personnel (paid or volunteer) must have all required Background Checks and certifications in place prior to being offered a position or commencing service in the Diocese except for Protecting God's Children training and Mandated and Permissive Training, which must be completed within ninety (90) days of commencement of employment or service. 271 All prospective and current Church Personnel are to be informed as Church Personnel is contingent on the results of any background investigation and successful adherence to these policies. that functioning Certification Renewals The Pennsylvania State Police Criminal History Report, the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services Certification, and the FBI Criminal History Report must be renewed every five (5) years. A Volunteer Disclosure Statement Application Form must be signed by applicable Church Personnel every five (5) years. Volunteers who are current residents of PA (but have not been residents for the entire 10 years prior) need only obtain an FBI report once at anytime since establishing residency in PA and, thereafter, complete a Volunteer Request for Waiver Form every five (5) years. Continuing Compliance Obligations All Church Personnel must notify their employer or administrator in writing within 72 hours after an arrest or conviction for a Disqualifying Offense (as listed on pages 8 and 9) or notification of listing as a perpetrator of child abuse in the Pennsylvania statewide database. The employer or administrator who is responsible for hiring or the approval of volunteers must demand that an employee or volunteer produce new Background Checks if the employer or administrator has a reasonable belief that the employee or volunteer has been arrested for or convicted of a crime that would require disqualification from employment or approval as a volunteer or that the employee or volunteer has been named as the subject of an indicated or founded report of child abuse. Responsibility for Criminal Background Check Costs All prospective paid Church Personnel (employees) are responsible for the cost of obtaining required Background Checks. Background Check renewal costs for paid Church Personnel shall be the responsibility of the parish or diocesan office. Schools may, as a part of its personnel policies, stipulate that employees are responsible for such renewal costs. The parish, school, or applicable diocesan office shall pay the cost for obtaining required Background Checks for all volunteers. Transfer of Background Checks For all Church Personnel other than volunteers: Background Checks may be transferred to another entity of the Diocese during the length of time such Background Checks are current. Background Checks from a non -diocesan entity cannot be transferred. For all volunteers: Any volunteer who obtained their Background Checks within the previous 5 years (60 months) may transfer the Background Checks from non -diocesan entities. 6 272 Grounds for Denying Employment Disqualifying Offenses Current and/or Prospective Church Personnel shall not be hired, approved for service as a volunteer, or continue employment or volunteer service where the criminal Background Checks disclose a conviction of a "Disqualifying Offense" as listed below: + An offense under one or more of the following provisions of Title 18 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes or equivalent crime in another state, territory, commonwealth or foreign nation: Chapter 25 (relating to criminal homicide). Section 2702 (relating to aggravated assault). Section 2709 (relating to stalking). Section 2901 (relating to kidnapping). Section 2902 (relating to unlawful restraint). Section 3121 (relating to rape). Section 3122.1 (relating to statutory sexual assault). Section 3123 (relating to involuntary deviate sexual intercourse). I Section 3124.1 (relating to sexual assault). Section 3125 (relating to aggravated Indecent assault), Section 3126 (relating to indecent assault). Section 3127 (relating to indecent exposure). Section 4302 (relating to incest). Section 4303 (relating to concealing death of child). Section 4304 (relating to endangering welfare of children). Section 4305 (relating to dealing in infant children). Section 5902(b) (relating to prostitution and related offenses). Section 5903(c) or (d) (relating to obscene and other sexual materials and performances). Section 6301 (relating to corruption of minors). Section 6312 (relating to sexual abuse of children), or an equivalent crime under Federal law or the law of 11 another state. An offense designated as a felony under the Act of April 14, 1972 (P.L. 233, No. 64) known as "The Controlled Substance, Drug Device and Cosmetic Act." committed within the past five (5) years. Being named in a statewide database as a perpetrator of a founded report of child abuse, Procedure When Volunteer Approval is Questionable When there are any questions or concerns regarding whether or not the results of a criminal Background Check poses a threat to children, the procedures set forth in Appendix E will be followed. In light of the USCCB Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People as well as the accompanying Essential Norms, any question or concern regarding whether a conviction poses a threat to children will be resolved in favor of protecting children. When there are questions regarding whether or not a criminal conviction poses a threat to children, the individual concerned must not begin his/her ministry until the matter can be resolved. Under no circumstances should anyone on the staff of the parish provide legal counsel on any matter relating to the implementation of this policy. All questions. should be referred to the diocesan Director of the Office for the Protection of Children and Youth. Failure to Comply With Policy Grounds for Dismissal Failure to comply with these policies by Church Personnel shall be grounds for dismissal of any employee and shall preclude a volunteer from engaging in Church activity of any kind that involves possible contact with children. Only the diocesan bishop can determine suitability to hold ecclesiastical office. Accordingly, if a person who holds ecclesiastical office fails to comply with these policies, the general secretary or his designee will handle the matter in accord with universal Church law and the policies of the Diocese. independent Contractors Independent contractors, such as a janitorial service or food service company, who have direct access to children on parish, school or diocesan property or through parish, school or diocesan -related programs, are to verify that their employees have obtained all necessary Background Checks and are required to submit an Affidavit of Compliance With Required State and Federal Criminal Background Checks as set forth on Appendix G. 8 274 APPENDIX A Background Checks by Ministry (includes the equivalent of these positions) Fund Raising WorkerNolunteer (e.g. bingo, Altar Server -Adult 33 2 Athletic CoachNolunteer - School/CYO 34 3 Athletic Trainer 35 Janitor/Maintenance Worker 4 Bereavement Team CoordinatorNolunteer 36 Lector/Reader 5 Bus Driver 37 Liturgical Art and Environment Coordinator/ Volunteer 6 Business Manager/Bookkeeper 38 Organist/Instrumentalist 7 Cafeteria Worker 39 Outreach CoordinatorNolunteer 8 Campus Minister 40 Parish Advocate- Persons with Disabilities 9 Cantor 41 Parish Advocate - Tribunal 10 CatechetIcal Administrator 42 Parish Employee 11 Catechist 43 Parish Finance Council Member 12 Catechist Alde 44 Parish Nurse 13 Catechumenate Director 45 Parish Safe Environment Coordinator 14 Catholic Committee on Scouting Leader/Volunteer 46 Parish Pastoral Council Member 15 Chaperone 47 Parish Social Minister 16 Child Care Giver (e.g. cry room, pre/after school program, babysitter, etc.) 48 Parish Wedding Coordinator 17 Choir Director - Vocal/Bell 49 Pastoral Associate/Minister 18 Choir Member- Vocal/Bell 50 Pastoral Health Care Minister 19 Coordinator of Evangelization 51 Playground Monitor 20 Coordinator of Liturgy 52 Preschool Employee 21 Deacon - Permanent/Transitional 53 Preschool Volunteer 22 Diocesan Bishop 54 Refugee Sponsorship CoordinatorNolunteer 23 Diocesan Priest Incardinated in the Diocese and On Assignment or Retired in the Diocese 55 Religious Men and Women On Assignment in the Diocese 24 Diocesan Priest Not Incardlnated In the Diocese and On Assignment or In Residence In the Diocese 56 Respect Life Coordinator/Legislative Advocate 25 Diocesan Employee 57 Sacristan 26 Director of Music Ministry 58 Secretary- Parish/Religious Education/School/ Youth Ministry 27 Elderly Outreach CoordinatorNolunteer 59 Seminarian 28 Elementary/Secondary School Board Member 60 Trainer -Youth Altar Server and/or Lector 29 Elementary/Secondary School Employee 61 Usher/Greeter/Minister of Hospitality 30 Elementary/Secondary School Volunteer 62 Youth Minister 31 Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion 63 Youth Ministry Volunteer 32 Family Life MinisterNolunteer 1 9 275 festival, fish fry, etc. Housekeeper/Cook aa 1 1 . DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICATION FOR VOLUNTEERS Required by the Child Protective Service Law 23 Pa. C.S. Section 6344.2 (relating to volunteers having contact with children) I swear/affirm that I am seeking a volunteer position and AM NOT required to obtain a background check through the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as: the position am applying for is unpaid; and I have been a resident of Pennsylvania during the entirety of the previous ten-year period. I swear/affirm that have NEVER been named as a perpetrator of a founded report of child abuse within the past five (5) years as defined by the Child Protective Services Law. I swear/affirm that I have NEVER been convicted of any of the following crimes under Title 18 of the Pennsylvania consolidated statues or of offenses similar in nature to those crimes under the laws or former laws of the United States or one of Its territories or possessions, another state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a foreign nation, or under a former law of this Commonwealth: Chapter 25 (relating to criminal homicide) Section 2702 (relating to aggravated assault) Section 2709 (relating to stalking) Section 2901 (relating to kidnapping) Section 2902 (relating to unlawful restraint) Section 3121 (relating to rape) Section 3122.1 (relating to statutory sexual assault) Section 3123 (relating to involuntary deviate sexual intercourse) Section 3124.1 (relating to sexual assault) Section 3125 (relating to aggravated indecent assault) Section 3126 (relating to indecent assault) Section 3127 (relating to indecent exposure) Section 4302 (relating to incest) Section 4303 (relating to concealing death of child) Section 4304 (relating to endangering welfare of children) Section 4305 (relating to dealing in infant children) Section 5902(b) (relating to prostitution and related offenses) Section 5903(c) or (d) (relating to obscene and other sexual material and performances) Section 6301 (relating to corruption of minors) Section 6312 (relating to sexual abuse of children), or an equivalent crime under Federal law or the law of another state. I I 10 276 I have not been convicted of a felony offense under Act 64-1972 (relating to the controlled substance, drug device and cosmetic act) committed within the past five years. I understand that I shall not be approved for service if I am named as a perpetrator of a founded report of child abuse or have been convicted of any of the crimes listed above or of offenses similar in nature to those crimes under the laws or former laws of the United States or one of its territories or possessions, another state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a foreign nation, or under a former law of this Commonwealth. understand that if I am arrested for or convicted of an offense that would constitute grounds for denying participation in a program, activity or service under the Child Protective Services Law as listed above, or am named as perpetrator in a founded or indicated report, I must provide the administrator or designee with written notice no later than 72 hours after the arrest, conviction or notification that I have been listed as a perpetrator in the Statewide database. I understand that if the person responsible for employment decisions or the administrator of a program, activity or service has a reasonable belief that was arrested or convicted for an offense that would constitute grounds for denying employment or participation in a program, activity or service under the Child Protective Services Law, or was named as perpetrator in a founded or Indicated report, or I have provided notice as required under this section, the person responsible for employment decisions or administrator of a program, activity or service shall immediately require me to submit current background checks obtained through the Department of Human Services, the Pennsylvania State Police, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The cost of background checks shall be borne by the employing entity or program, activity or service. understand that if I willfully fail to disclose information required above, I commit a misdemeanor of the third degree and shall be subject to discipline up to and including denial of a volunteer position. understand that the person responsible for employment decisions or the administrator of a program, activity or service is required to maintain a copy of my background checks. I hereby swear/affirm that the information as set forth above is true and correct. I understand that false swearing, is a misdemeanor pursuant to Section 4903 of the Crimes Code. I I I I Printed Name Signature Witness Printed Name Witness Signature Date 11 277 AEI I A # . II a1 DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICATION TOR MINOR EMPLOYEES Required by the Child Protective Service Law 23 Pa. C.S. Section 6344.2 (relating to minor employees having contact with children) swear/affirm that I am seeking a paid position and AM NOT required to obtain a certification through the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as: I am between 14 and 17 years of age; and I have been a resident of Pennsylvania during the entirety of the previous ten-year period or, if not a resident of Pennsylvania during the entirety of the previous ten-year period, have received a FBI Fingerprint Check at any time since establishing residency in Pennsylvania and have attached a copy of the certification to the employer. I swear/affirm that I have NEVER been named as a perpetrator of a founded report of child abuse within the past five (5) years as defined by the Child Protective Services Law. swear/affirm that I have NEVER been convicted of any of the following crimes under Title 18 of the PennsylVania consolidated statues or of offenses similar in nature to those crimes under the laws or former laws of the United States or one of its territories or possessions, another state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a foreign nation, or under a former law of this Commonwealth: Chapter 25 (relating to criminal homicide) Section 2702 (relating to aggravated assault) Section 2709 (relating to stalking) Section 2901 (relating to kidnapping) Section 2902 (relating to unlawful restraint) Section 3121 (relating to rape) Section 3122.1 (relating to statutory sexual assault) Section 3123 (relating to involuntary deviate sexual intercourse) Section 3124.1 (relating to sexual assault) Section 3125 (relating to aggravated indecent assault) Section 3126 (relating to indecent assault) Section 3127 (relating to indecent exposure) Section 4302 (relating to incest) Section 4303 (relating to concealing death of child) Section 4304 (relating to endangering welfare of children) Section 4305 (relating to dealing in infant children) I I - 12 278 Section 5902(b) (relating to prostitution and related offenses) Section 5903(0 or (d) (relating to obscene and other sexual material and performances) Section 6301 (relating to corruption of minors) Section 6312 (relating to sexual abuse of children), or an equivalent crime under Federal law or the law of another state. have not been convicted of a felony offense under Act 64-1972 (relating to the controlled substance, drug device and cosmetic act) committed within the past five years. I understand that I shall not be approved for service if I am named as a perpetrator of a founded report of child abuse or have been convicted of any of the crimes listed above or of offenses similar in I nature to those crimes under the laws or former laws of the United States or one of its territories or possessions, another state, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a foreign nation, or under a former law of this Commonwealth. I understand that if I am arrested for or convicted of an offense that would constitute grounds for denying participation in a program, activity or service under the Child Protective Services Law as listed above, or am named as perpetrator in a founded or indicated report, must provide the administrator or designee with written notice no later than 72 hours after the arrest, conviction or notification that I have been listed as a perpetrator in the Statewide database. understand that if the person responsible for employment decisions or the administrator of a program, activity or service has a reasonable belief that I was arrested or convicted for an offense that would constitute grounds for denying employment or participation in a program, activity or service under the Child Protective Services Law, or was named as perpetrator in a founded or indicated report, or I have provided notice as required under this section, the person responsible for employment decisions or administrator of a program, activity or service shall immediately require me to submit current background checks obtained through the Department of Human Services, the Pennsylvania State Police, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The cost of background checks shall be borne by the employing entity or program, activity or service. I understand that if I willfully fail to disclose information required above, I commit a misdemeanor of the third degree and shall be subject to discipline up to and including denial of a volunteer position. understand that the person responsible for employment decisions or the administrator of a program, activity or service is required to maintain a copy of my background checks. I I 13 279 I hereby swear/affirm that the Information as set forth above is true and correct. I understand that false swearing is a misdemeanor pursuant to Section 4903 of the Crimes Code. Check one that applies: I have been a resident of Pennsylvania during the entirety of the previous ten-year period. have NOT been a resident of Pennsylvania during the entirety of the previous ten-year period but have received a FBI I 1 Fingerprint Check since establishing residency in Pennsylvania and have attached a copy of the certification. Printed Name signature Parent/Guardian Printed Name Parent/Guardian Signature Witness Printed Name Witness Signature Date 14 280 I a Altar Server - Adult Athletic CoachNolunteer Bus Driver Cafeteria Worker Catechetical Administrator Catechist Catechist Aide Catholic Committee on Scouting Leader/Volunteer Chaperone All Clergy and Religious Deacon-Permanent/Transitional Diocesan Bishops o Diocesan Priest lncardinated in the Diocese and on Assignment or Retired in the Diocese Diocesan Priest not Incardinated in the Diocese, on Assignment or in Residence in the Diocese Seminarians Religious Men and. Women on Assignment in the Diocese Childcare Giver (e.g. cry room, pre-/afterschool program, babysitter, etc.) Music Ministry Staff, Paid and Volunteer Parish. Nurse Parish Safe Environment Coordinator Parish Social Minister Pastoral Associate/Minister Pastoral Healthcare Minister Playground Monitor Preschool Administrator/Aide Sacristan Trainer - Youth Altar Servers and/or Lectors School Employees School Volunteers Youth Ministry Volunteers 15 281 A $ I The Director of the diocesan office for the Protection of Children and Young People will review all records found and dates of occurrence as a result of Background Checks. If any information is incomplete or unclear, the Director will contact the firm that conducted the Background Check for clarification or rechecking of original sources. If the applicant's duties and extent of contact with children cannot be determined from reviewing the database application, the safe environment coordinator wilFbe contacted. Any applicant whose background search reveals a conviction for any abuse of children ,(physical, sexual or mental) shall automatically receive a "rejected" status and be prohibited from employment or volunteering within the parishes or institutions that are part of or related to the Diocese of Pittsburgh. If the records found are of a more serious nature (i.e., drivin under the influence, illegal use of a controlled substanc9, etc. and the violation(s) are recent (within 5 years) or the individua has had more than one violation (regardless of time period), the matter will be presented to an Examination Board consisting of the Vicar for Canonical Services or his designee, a representative from the Legal Department,the Director of the Office for the Protection of Children and Young People, the Vicar for Clergy Personnel or his designee, a representative from the Secretariat for Evangelization and Catholic Education, the Secretary for Parish Life or his designee, and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator. The Examination Board will deterine whether the applicant should be given an "approved" "rejected" or "restricted" status. The pastor and sate environment coordinator will be notified of the board's decision. If the decision recommends/directs a "restricted" status, the employee or volunteer would have to agree in writing to the restriction and a copy shall be kept on file by the safe environment coordinator. (See Appendix F for the template for giving notice of a restriction.) If the records found are minor in nature (i.e., traffic violations) and unrelated to duties of the applicant, the applicant shall be given an "approved" status. In all instances, the safe environment coordinator should be informed of all records found and be responsible for informing the pastor. The pastor or program director may be more restrictive than the diocesan -assigned status (e.g., rejecting someone whom the diocese has restricted) but he/sffe cannot assign a status that is less restrictive than the diocesan -assigned status (e.g., restricting someone whom the diocese has rejected). In the event that a pastor or an applicant disagrees with the report of the records found or how the process for evaluating records was handled, he/she shall have the right to file a written appeal to the diocesan Office for Administrative Procedures within 30 days of beinginformed of the decision for resolution. The decision of the Office for Administrative Procedures is always final. 16 282 a I PARISH LETTERHEAD Date Mr. /Ms. Address Dear Name: As you are aware from our previous discussion, a record was found in the background check completed as part of your application. The Information found requires that your ministry in our parish as a be restricted. This restriction does not prohibit you from all ministries in our parish; it only restricts you specifically from This decision has been made with careful thought and only after consultation with the Diocesan Office for the Protection, of Children and Young Peoplp. Among the many responsibilities of my pastoral ministry is the safeguarding of children in our parish. believe that have no other option in this situation but to be extraordinarily I I cautious. This restriction shall remain in force until further notice. You may be assured that this matter shall be kept in strict confidence by me. By your signature at the bottom of this letter you verify that you have been informed of this restriction and you agree to abide by it. Should you choose not to abide by the restriction, further ministry in the parish will be prohibited. am grateful for your cooperation in this matter as we work for the benefit of all members of our parish family. I Sincerely yours in. Christ, Name (Print Name) copy of this correspondence. , acknowledge to have received a Signature Date 17 283 A i I Type or Print Name of Parish/School/Pre-School Type or Print Street Address of Parish/School/Pre-School Type or Print City, State, Zip Code of Parish/School/Pre-School ********************************** COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIRED STATE AND FEDERAL CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS The undersigned, being duly sworn according to law, does depose and state that the following is true and correct: am a management level employee and duly authorized representative of the below named vendor of goods and/or services, or Independent contractor, to the parish/school/preschool named above. I I have been duly authorized by my employer to execute this Affidavit on behalf of my employer and to birid my employer to the terms, conditions and requirements of this Affidavit. acknowledge that my employer and I have been informed that condition of doing business, and continuing to do business, with the above named parish/school/pre-school, that I must complete background evaluations for all employees and other duly authorized representatives of my employer, who will in any way come into contact with children and young people of the parish/school/pre-school. I as a 18 284 The background evaluations to be completed, paid for, filed with the authorities, written responses obtained from the authorities and the originals or copies of such written responses to be retained in our files concerning the subject employees before any employee and other authorized representative of my employer are permitted to come into contact with children and young people of the parish/school/pre-school, shall consist of the following: Pennsylvania State Police Criminal Report Pennsylvania Department of Human Services Report (Child Abuse) FBI Criminal History Report (Fingerprinting) acknowledge and agree to immediately notify the above named parish/school/pre-school if the criminal report discloses a criminal record and/or the child abuse report discloses that an employee is listed in a report of child abuse. I also acknowledge and agree that we will not send the subject employee to the parish/school/pre-school. I acknowledge and agree that if the parish/school/pre-school requests copies of the criminal report and child abuse report on any or all of our employees, that we will provide copies upon receipt of such request. I acknowledge and agree that all criminal report and child abuse report checks on our employees will be not more than five (5) years old, if the same pre -date this Affidavit. I I acknowledge that my employer and I have been informed that this is an ongoing responsibility, and that any new or additional personnel or other authorized representatives of my employer shall be subject to the same above referenced background evaluations. acknowledge that my employer and I have been informed that failure to comply with these requirements may lead to a termination of my employer's business relationship withthe parish/school/pre-school. I In order to induce the parish/school/lore-school to continue our business relationship, warrant and represent to the parish/ school/pre-school that we intend, to undertake all actions necessary to achieve immediate compliance with the above requirements, and that the parish/school/pre-school may rely upon this Affidavit and the warranties and representations set forth herein. I 19 285 I have read the above and it Is true and correct, Signature of Management Level Employee of Vendor or Independent Contractor Print Name of Person Signing Name of Vendor of Goods and/or Services or Independent Contractor Address of Vendor or Independent Contractor Telephone Number of Vendor or Independent Contractor Brief Description of Goods and/or Services FurniShed by Vendor or Independent Contractor: SWORN TO and subscribed before me this day of 20 (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC. My Commission Expires: 20 286 ll- .- CATHOLIC DIOCESE 0F PITTSBURGH 111 Boulevard ofthe Allies Pittsburgh, PA 15222 @201 7 287 Code of Pastokal Conduct Issued: August 2003 Revised: June 2008 & August 2017 CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH EXHIBIT 288 -1 This Code of F!astoral Conduct is based on a model dated March 17, 2003 and provided by the National Catholic RIM< Retention Group, Inc The Diocese Of Pittsburgh expresses its sincere gratitude to the National Catholic Risk Retention Group, Inc. for its work In providing a model and Its willingness to allow that model to be used as a basis for this Code. 289 To Clergy, Religious and Laity of the Diocese of Pittsburgh: In one of Jesus' most important parables for those engaged in ministry within the Church, He spoke of himself as the Good Shepherd who would lay down his life for his flock. As we follow Him, we are all called to be good shepherds, who protect the lambs from predators. In order to do so we sometimes have to change our procedures and our assumptions. This is the second revision and a significant expansion of the first Code of Pastoral Conduct that the Diocese of Pittsburgh promulgated in 2003 and updated in 2008. It set in writing and codified the standards and expectation for all those who act in the name of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. It was first drafted as a direct response to the mandate giVen by the bishops of the United States in our Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People to publish clear standards of ministerial behavior for clergy and all other Church personnel. However, its scope is significantly broader than child sexual abuse. The Code of Pastoral Conduct sets boundaries for conduct with both adults and children, addresses issues such as workplace harassment and violations of confidentiality. This is because, in the 14 years since it was first published, we have learned more about how to protect everyone children, vulnerable adults and Church personnel from situations that can lead to hann. This new edition addresses behavior that may be neither illegal nor sinful, but which is inappropriate for anyone working in the service of the Church. While it does not exhaust what is expected from those who care for others in the name of the Church, it is a succinct yet thorough statement of expected behavioral standards for all Church personnel. - - This document applies to bishops, priests, deacons, religious and lay members of the Christian faithful who assist in providing pastoral care. As Bishop of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, I am grateful for your service to the Church and for yolk willingness to protect all who are entrusted to the care of the Church. Your written acceptance of this document is testimony of your commitment to this effort. You are answering the call of Jesus to tend His lambs and protect them against any who would harm them. I ask you to see this Code of Pastoral Conduct as a helpful instillment that will aid you in that duty, protecting both you and those you serve as you go about our shared mission of bringing the love of God to all in our care. Grateful for our belief that "Nothing is Impossible with God," I am Your brother in Christ, Most Reverend David A. Zubik Bishop of Pittsburgh 290 Code of Pastoral Conduct For Church Personnel Within the Diocese of Pittsburgh Table of Contents Letter from the Diocesan Bishop I. Preamble II. Responsibility 1 1 Ill. Pastoral Standards 1 1. Conduct for Pastoral Counseling and Spiritual Direction 1 2. Confidentiality 2 3 Conduct With Children, Young People and Vulnerable Adults 3 4. Sexual Conduct 6 5. Harassment 7 6. Records and Information 7 7. Conflicts of Interest 8 8. Reporting Misconduct 9 9. Administration 9 10. Church Personnel Well -Being Appendix: Procedural Guidelines for Violation of the Code 10 10 Acknowledgement of Receipt of the Code of Pastoral Conduct * For purposes of this Code of Pastoral Conduct, the term "Church personnel" includes any person who performs tasks for the Church under the auspices of the Diocese of Pittsburgh or one of its parishes. This includes bishops, priests, deacons, seminarians, those in consecrated life, lay employees, and contract employees who are employed by the Diocese of Pittsburgh or any of its parishes or schools, together with those persons who provide volunteer services to/for the Diocese of Pittsburgh or any parish or school within the Diocese. 291 I. Preamble All Church personnel are to conduct themselves in a manner that upholds Christian values and conduct. Church personnel, as referred to herein, are any persons who perform tasks for the Church under the auspices of the Diocese of Pittsburgh or one of its parishes or schools. This Code of Pastoral Conduct provides a set of standards for conduct either in providing or in supporting the pastoral care of the Christian faithful and all others, The code does not present an exhaustive list of expectations, standards, or requirements. Rather, this code accompanies the universal law of the Church, civil law, and diocesan policies. Church personnel are to be aware of and committed to all of these norms that govern pastoral conduct. II. Responsibility Responsibility for adherence to the Code of Pastoral Conduct rests with the individual. Church personnel who disregard this Code of Pastoral Conduct will be subject to remedial action up to and possibly including dismissal. Corrective action may take various forms - from a verbal reproach to removal from the ministry depending on the specific nature and circumstances of the offense and the extent of the harm. (See Appendix for Procedures) III. Pastoral Standards The public and private conduct of Church personnel can inspire and motivate people, but it can also scandalize and undermine people's faith. Church personnel are, at all times, to be aware of the responsibilities that accompany their work. They are to know also that God's goodness and grace support them in their ministry. Church personnel must first recognize that they are disciples of Jesus Christ and members of His Church. Therefore, in order to effectively serve others, Church personnel must first have an intimate relationship with Our Lord and they also need to ensure the stability of their own spiritual, physical, mental and emotional health. 1. Conduct for Pastoral Counseling and Spiritual Direction Church personnel must respect boundaries in ministerial behavior, in particular with regard to pastoral counseling and spiritual direction. 1.1 Church personnel are not to step beyond their competence in counseling situations and are to refer clients to other professionals when appropriate. 1.2 Church personnel are to consider carefully the possible consequences before entering into a counseling relationship with someone with whom they have a pre-existing relationship (i.e., employee, professional colleague, friend, or other pre-existing 1 292 relationship). [See Section 7.2.2] 1.3 Church personnel are not to record these sessions in any audio or video format. 1.4 Church personnel are never to engage in sexual intimacies with the persons they counsel. This includes consensual and nonconsensual contact, forced physical contact, and inappropriate sexual comments. 1.5 Church personnel assume the full burden of responsibility for establishing and maintaining clear, appropriate boundaries in all counseling and counseling -related relationships. of any kind (i.e., touching, hugging, holding) between Church personnel and the persons they counsel can be misconstrued and is to be avoided. 1.6 Physical contact 1.7 Sessions are to be conducted at appropriate times and in professionally appropriate settings where the counselor is visible to other people, such as an office that has an uncovered window. 1.7.1 No sessions are to be conducted in private living quarters. 1.7.2 Sessions are not to be held at places or times that would tend to cause confusion about the nature of the relationship for the person being counseled. 1.8 Church personnel providing pastoral counseling or spiritual direction are to maintain a log of the times and places of sessions with each person being counseled. 1.9 All counseling sessions are to have a fixed duration, with a parting of the ways immediately upon conclusion of the counseling session. 2. Confidentiality Information disclosed to Church personnel during the course of pastoral counseling, advising, or spiritual direction is to be held in the strictest confidence possible. 2.1 Information obtained in the course of individual or group sessions is to be confidential, except for compelling professional reasons or as required by law. 2.1.1 If there is clear and imminent danger to the client or to others, Church personnel may disclose only the information necessary to protect the parties affected and to prevent harm. 2.1.2 Before disclosure is made, if feasible, Church personnel are to inform the person being counseled about the disclosure and the potential consequences. 2.2 Church personnel are to discuss the nature of confidentiality and its limitations with each person in counseling. 2 293 2.3 Church personnel are to keep minimal records content of sessions. of the 2.4 Knowledge that arises from professional contact may be used in teaching, writing, homilies, or other public presentations only when effective measures are taken to absolutely safeguard both the individual's identity and the confidentiality of the disclosures. 2.5 While counseling a minor (i.e., anyone under the age of 18) in a formal setting, if Church personnel discover that there is a serious threat to the welfare of the minor and that communication of confidential information to a parent or legal guardian is essential to the child's health and well-being, Church personnel are to: Attempt to secure consent from the minor for the specific disclosure; Disclose only the information necessary to protect the health and well-being of the minor if consent is not given; and Consult with the appropriate Church authority, such as one's immediate supervisor, before disclosure. obligations are independent of the confidentiality of the confessional. A priest can never disclose anything revealed in the These Sacrament of Confession, not even with the penitent's permission. Further, all others who in any way (e.g., inadvertent overhearing) have information received through the confessional are obliged to secrecy. (Canon 983) 3. Conduct With Children, Young People and Vulnerable Adults Church personnel working with children, young people and vulnerable adults are to maintain an open and trustworthy relationship between youth or vulnerable adults and adult supervisors. personnel are to be aware of their own and others' vulnerability when working alone with youth. Church personnel are to use a team approach to managing youth activities. 3.1 Church 3.2 Physical contact with youth can occur (a) only when completely appropriate, and (c) in public. Some FORMS of physical contact include, following: Shoulder to shoulder hugs Pats on the shoulder or back Handshakes "High -fives" and hand slapping Verbal praise 3 294 be misconstrued and is to nonsexual, (b) otherwise examples of APPROPRIATE but are not limited to, the Holding hands while walking with small children Sitting beside small children Holding hands during prayer Pats on the head when culturally appropriate Examples of INAPPROPRIATE FORMS of physical contact not to be used, include but are not limited to the following: Kisses on the mouth and inappropriate or lengthy hugs or embraces Holding minors, above the approximate age of 5, on one's lap Touching buttocks, genital areas, or breasts and touching knees, thighs or legs as a sign of affection. Showing physical displays of affection in isolated areas of the premises such as bedrooms, closets, employee only areas, or other private -rooms. Sleeping in bed with a minor, youth prvulnerable adult. Wrestling with minors, youth or vulnerable adults except for legitimate sports coaching, in which case another adult should be present. Tickling and piggyback rides, Any type of massage given by an adult to a minor, youth or vulnerable adult. Any display of unwanted affection towards a minor, youth or vulnerable adult. Actions that include compliments relating to sexual attractiveness or sexual development. Students or vulnerable adults should only receive assistance with their attire ( e.g. buttons, ties, shirts) if they are physically unable to adjust it themselves and when another adult is present as a witness. 3.3 There must be clear social boundaries between adults who serve the Church and minors or vulnerable adults for whom they have professional or volunteer responsibility. of TWO: Personnel must be aware of their own vulnerability to accusation when working alone with minors and vulnerable adults. The "Rule of Two" protects both Church personnel and those they care for: Any time that an employee or volunteer is acting as an agent of the Church in the presence of minors or vulnerable adults, there must always be another responsible adult within eyesight of their interactions, At least two adults must be present for any activity that a parish, school or diocesan institution sponsors for minors, and the number of adults must rise with the number of minors. The only exceptions to this rule are (1) when a priest hears the Sacrament of Confession and (2) during regular diocesan school classes conducted on the grounds of a parish, Catholic school or other diocesan institution. 3.4 The Rule 4 295 3.4.1 Meetings with youth should take place in appropriate areas of church or school property, such as an office, social hall or youth meeting room, that is visible to other people. 3.4.2 Meetings between Church personnel members and youths off-site must be for an organized group activity, held in a public area, with at least one other adult present and for which parents have given written permission. 3.4.3 When meeting one-on-one with youth, Church personnel are to do so in a place that is visible to others, and must keep a desk, table or at least three feet of space between themselves and the young person. 3,4.4 Access to school sports locker rooms, theater dressing rooms or other places where minors may be in a state of undress is limited to coaches, athletic directors, trainers, medical personnel, theater directors, designated costume supervisors and cleaning crew. A list must be kept of those authorized persons. Other school staff members and parents are barred from those areas while they are in active use. Under no circumstances is anyone allowed to take a photo or video in areas where minors or adults may be changing clothes. 3.5 Meetings with unchaperoned youth or vulnerable adults in private living quarters is prohibited. 3.6 Church personnel should limit their contact with minors to cona group social media page/account that (1) has been approved by his/her supervisor and (2) has multiple Church personnel as administrators and monitors. No private communication should occur through social media. tent on 3.6.1 Correspondence should be directed to a youth's parents/ guardian. It is not appropriate to engage youth via phone, text or social media. 3.6.2 Any group e -malls to minors should be (1) exclusively workrelated and (2) sent via "blind copy", so that e-mail addresses are not distributed among the group without permission. 3.7 Church personnel are to abstain from (a) the use of alcohol when working with youth or vulnerable adults, and (b) the possession or use of illegal drugs at all times, 3.8 The possession or use of firearms when working with minors or vulnerable adults is prohibited except in the case of a federal, state or local law enforcement officer in good standing who is legally carrying a weapon related to his/her job. 3.9 Church personnel are not to share private, overnight accommodations with individual young people. This includes, but is not limited to, accommodations in any Church owned facility, private residence, hotel room, or any other place where there is no other adult supervision present, 5 296 ' In rare, emergency situations, when accommodation is necessary for the health and wellbeing of the youth, Church personnel are to take extraordinary care to protect all parties from the appearance of impropriety and from all risk of harm. A team approach to managing emergency situations is to be used, 3.10 4. Sexual Conduct Church personnel are not to exploit the trust placed in them by the faith community for sexual gain or intimacy. 4.1 Church personnel who are committed to a celibate lifestyle are called to be an example of celibate chastity in all relationships at all times. 4.2 Church personnel who provide pastoral counseling or spiritual direction services are to avoid developing inappropriately intimate relationships with minors, other Church personnel, or parishioners. Church personnel are to behave in a professional manner at all times. 4.3 Church personnel should not seek emotional support from parishioners, subordinate employees, or persons to whom they give spiritual guidance; instead, they should turn to other networks within the diocese. 4.4 No Church personnel may exploit another person for sexual purposes. This also includes the viewing of pornography. 4.5 Viewing or possessing child pornography is a crime under federal law; allegations regarding this type of behavior will be reported immediately to the proper civil authorities and to the appropriate person in charge (i.e., pastor, principal or supervisor). 4.6 Allegations of sexual abuse involving a minor are to be taken seriously and reported first to the proper civil authorities (ChildLine: 1-800-932-0313 or www.compass.stat.pa.us/cwis) and then to the appropriate person in charge (i.e., pastor, principal or supervisor). 4.7 Allegations of sexual misconduct (i.e., sexual abuse, sexual exploitation or sexual harassment) involving adults are to be taken seriously and are to be reported to the appropriate person in charge (i.e., pastor, principal or supervisor), who may also report the allegation to the proper civil authority. 4.8 Church personnel are expected to know the obligations of the Child Protective Services Law and the reporting requirements that are mandated by it. Additionally, the policies of the Diocese regarding sexual misconduct and sexual abuse are to be obeyed, to protect the rights of all involved. 4.9 Church personnel are to review and know the contents of the child abuse regulations and reporting requirements for the state of Pennsylvania and are to follow those mandates. (Reference reporting of Child Protective Services Law of Pennsylvania) 6 297 5. Harassment Church personnel are not to engage in physical, psychological, written, or verbal harassment of staff, volunteers, or parishioners and are not to tolerate such harassment by other Church staff or volunteers. personnel are to maintain a professional work environment that is free from physical, psychological, written, electronic, or verbal intimidation or harassment. 5.1 Church a broad range of physical, written, or verbal behavior, including, without limitation, the following: Physical or mental abuse; Racial insults; Derogatory ethnic slurs; Unwelcome sexual advances or touching; Sexual comments or sexual jokes; Requests for sexual favors used as a condition of employment, or to affect other personnel decisions, such as promotion or compensation; Display of offensive materials. Defamatory gossip or otherwise maligning an individual to other employees, except for formally reporting a serious concern to a supervisor or to civil authorities. Inappropriate social media postings. 5.2 Harassment encompasses 5.3 Harassment can be a single severe incident or a persistent pattern of behavior where the purpose or the effect is to create a hostile, offensive, or intimidating work environment. 5.4 Allegations of harassment are to be taken seriously and reported immediately to the appropriate Church authority such as the pastor, principal, catechetical administrator, or the Vicar for Clergy, Vicar for Canonical Services, or the Superintendent of Catholic Schools. Diocesan policies are to be followed to protect the rights of all involved. and Information Confidentiality is to be maintained in creating, storing, accessing, transferring, and disposing of Church records. 6. Records Sacramental records are to be regarded as confidential. When compiling and publishing statistical information from these records, great care is to be taken to preserve the anonymity of individuals. 6.1 6.2 Access to sacramental records is restricted for 100 years from the date of the creation of the record. After 100 years, access to the information in the sacramental record (but not the record itself) can only be provided in accord with diocesan policy. 7 298 6,2.1 Information regarding adoption and legitimacy remains confidential, regardless of age. 6.2.2 Only Church personnel who are authorized to access the records and supervise their use are to handle requests for more recent records. Parish financial records are confidential. The financial information is made available to the Parish Finance Council and, in summary form, to the Parish on a yearly basis. The Diocesan Financial Policies are to be observed. Contact the Diocesan Office for Civil Legal Services upon receipt of any request for release of financial records, 6.3 6.4 Individual contribution records are to be regarded as private and to be maintained in strictest confidence. 7. Conflicts of Interest Church personnel are to avoid situations that might present a conflict of interest. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest can call integrity and professional conduct into question. personnel are to disclose to the appropriate Church authority (such as one's immediate supervisor) all relevant factors that potentially could create a conflict of interest. 7.1 Church 7.2 Church personnel are to inform all parties when a real or potential conflict of interest arises. Resolution of the issues is to protect the person receiving ministry services. 7.2.1 No Church personnel is to take advantage of anyone to whom they are providing services in order to further their personal, political, or business interests. 7.2.2 Church personnel are not to provide counseling services to anyone with whom they have a business, professional, or social relationship. When this is unavoidable, the client is to be protected. The counselor is to establish and maintain clear, appropriate boundaries. 7.2.3 When providing pastoral counseling or spiritual direction to two or more people who have a pre-existing personal or business relationship, Church personnel are to: Clarify with all parties the nature of each relationship, Anticipate any conflict of interest, Take appropriate actions to eliminate the conflict, and Obtain from all parties written consent to continue services. 7.3 Conflicts of interest may also arise when Church personnel's independent judgment is impaired by: Prior dealings, Becoming personally involved, or Becoming an advocate for one (person) against another. 8 299 In these circumstances, Church personnel are to advise the parties that he or she can no longer provide services and refer them to another competent individual qualified to provide assistance. 8. Reporting Misconduct Church personnel have a duty to report their own ethical or professional misconduct and the misconduct of others. Church personnel are to hold each other accountable for maintaining the highest ethical and professional standards. When there is an indication of illegal actions by Church personnel, Church personnel are to notify the proper civil authorities immediately and the Diocesan Office for Civil Legal Services. 8.1 8.2 When an uncertainty exists about whether a situation or course of conduct violates this Code of Pastoral Conduct or other religious, moral, or ethical principles, Church personnel are to consult with the appropriate Church authority (such as one's immediate supervisor), 8.3 When it appears that the conduct of Church personnel is in violation of this Code of Pastoral Conduct or other religious, moral, or ethical principles, such conduct shall be reported to the appropriate Church authority, such as one's immediate supervisor. If the immediate supervisor has no direct superior at that location, it shall be reported to the Diocesan Legal Office. 8.4 Allegations of sexual abuse involving a minor, even if uncertain, are to be taken seriously and reported first to the proper civil authorities (Childline: 1-800-932-0313 or www.compass.stat.pa.us/ cwis) and then to the appropriate person in charge (i.e., pastor, principal or supervisor). 8.5 The obligation of Church personnel to report client misconduct is subject to the duty of confidentiality. However, any agreement or duty to maintain confidentiality is to yield to the need to report misconduct that threatens the safety, health, or well-being of any of the persons involved except as provided for in Section 2.5. Administration In the recognition of the dignity of the human person, employers and supervisors are to treat Church personnel with justice, dignity and respect in the day-to-day administrative operations of their ministries. 9. other administrative decisions made by Church personnel are to meet civil and canon law obligations and also reflect Catholic social teachings and this Code of Pastoral Conduct. 9.1 Personnel and 9.2 Church personnel are not to use their position to exercise unreasonable or inappropriate power and authority. 9 300 Personnel Well -Being Church personnel have a duty to be responsible for their own spiritual, physical, mental and emotional health. 10. Church 10.1 Church personnel are to be aware of warning signs that indicate potential problems with their own spiritual, physical, mental, and/or emotional health. 10.2 Church personnel are to seek help immediately whenever they notice behavioral or emotional warning signs in their own professional and/or personal lives, 10.3 Catholic Church personnel are to address their own spiritual needs by regular participation in the sacramental life of the Church through frequent reception of the Eucharist and the sacrament of Confession or Reconciliation. They also should participate in activities of spiritual development such as times of recollection and retreat, spiritual direction, and the like. APPENDIX Procedural Guidelines for Violation of the Code of Pastoral Conduct the immediate supervisor of a Church personnel employee or volunteer receives information that an employee or volunteer's conduct constitutes an alleged violation of the Code of Pastoral Conduct, the immediate supervisor must immediately inform the proper ecclesiastical authority (for example, in a parish this would be the pastor). Any alleged or suspected child abuse must be immediately reported to ChildLine (1-800-932-0313 or www.compass.state.pa.us/cwis) and then to the Office of the A. When Diocesan Assistance Coordinator. If the pastor commits an alleged violation of the Code of Pastoral Conduct, is complicit in it, or is involved in any way, the matter will be handled by the Vicar for Clergy in accord with the universal law of the Church and the policies of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. B. Upon receipt of information regarding a violation of the Code of Pastoral Conduct, the proper ecclesiastical authority will consult with the Diocesan Legal Office, which will then coordinate the appropriate response and investigation. C. the person harmed by the alleged violation or the person accused believes that the procedures followed or the facts gathered in the investigation, which resulted in a determination, were faulty or incomplete, he or she may appeal the determination by utilizing the due process procedures of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, which are administered by the Office for Administrative Procedures. D. If 10 301 CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH Acknowledgement of Receipt of the Code of Pastoral Conduct In accord with my role as Church personnel, and in witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I will conduct myself with integrity, acting in a manner that is consistent with the discipline and teachings of the Catholic Church. I will guide my behavior by civil and canon law, by the policies of the Diocese of Pittsburgh and by the Code of Pastoral Conduct by... 1. Respecting the rights of each person and advancing his or her welfare during the course of counseling, advising or spiritual direction. 2. Holding in the strictest confidence information disclosed during the course of counseling, advising or spiritual direction. 3. Maintaining an open and trustworthy relationship when working with youth, free from inappropriate behavior that would put them at risk. 4. Honoring the trust placed in Church personnel by not exploiting others for sexual gain or intimacy. 5. Providing a professional work environment that is free from physical, psychological, written or verbal intimidation or harassment. 6. Maintaining confidentiality in creating, storing, accessing, transferring and disposing of Church records. 7. Avoiding situations that might present a conflict of interest, 8. Reporting to proper authorities my own ethical or professional misconduct and the misconduct of others. 9. Treating Church personnel justly in the day-to-day operations of work and ministry. 10. Being responsible for my own spiritual, physical, mental, and emotional health. HAVE CAREFULLY READ, UNDERSTAND, AND HEREBY COMMIT TO CONDUCTING MYSELF AS A PRIEST, PARISH ADMINISTRATOR, DEACON, SEMINARIAN, CHURCH EMPLOYEE OR VOLUNTEER IN ACCORD WITH THE DIOCESAN CODE OF PASTORAL CONDUCT. I (Name) (Parish, School, Office or Program) (Position) (Date) "111111111111111kr RETURN ONESIGN D ORIGINAL TO THE PARISH OR DIOCESE THE OTHER COPY. 302 CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH Acknowledgement of Receipt of the Code of Pastoral Conduct In accord with my role as Church personnel, and in witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I will conduct myself with integrity, acting in a manner that is consistent with the discipline and teachings of the Catholic Church. I will guide my behavior by civil and canon law, by the policies of the Diocese of Pittsburgh and by the Code of Pastoral Conduct by... 1. Respecting the rights of each person and advancing his or her welfare during the course of counseling, advising or spiritual direction. 2. Holding in the strictest confidence information disclosed during the course of counseling, advising or spiritual direction. 3. Maintaining an open and trustworthy relationship when working with youth, free from inappropriate behavior that would put them at risk. 4. Honoring the trust placed in Church personnel by not exploiting others for sexual gain or intimacy. 5. Providing a professional work environment that is free from physical, psychological, written or verbal intimidation or harassment. 6. Maintaining confidentiality in creating, storing, accessing, transferring and disposing of Church records. 7. Avoiding situations that might present a conflict of interest, 8. Reporting to proper authorities my own ethical or professional misconduct and the misconduct of others. 9. Treating Church personnel justly in the day-to-day operations of work and ministry. 10. Being responsible for my own spiritual, physical, mental, and emotional health. HAVE CAREFULLY READ, UNDERSTAND, AND HEREBY COMMIT TO CONDUCTING MYSELF AS A PRIEST, PARISH ADMINISTRATOR, DEACON, SEMINARIAN, CHURCH EMPLOYEE OR VOLUNTEER IN ACCORD WITH THE DIOCESAN CODE OF PASTORAL CONDUCT. I (Name) (Parish, School, Office or Program) (Position) (Date) 303 - r5 CATHOLIC DIOCESE 0F PITTSBURGH 111 Boulevard ofthe Allies Pittsburgh, PA 15222 @201 7 304 Issued: March 1993 Revised: October 2002 Updated: August 2003 Updated: August 2006 Updated: March 2008 Updated: April 2014 CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH EXHIBIT 5 1 Clergy Sexual Misconduct The teaching of the Church, particularly her moral teachings rooted in Scripture and Tradition, serve as the basis for this policy. This teaching recognizes the dignity of every human person. Because of our desire to protect the rights and dignity of every person in the Diocese of Pittsburgh entrusted to the care of a priest, most especially the safety and wellbeing of children, the following procedure will be followed whenever an allegation of clergy sexual misconduct is reported to the Diocese, This policy is intended to complement and at the same time be in compliance with both the Code of Canon Law, the Motu Proprio Normae de Gravioribus Delictis Congregationi Pro Doctrina Fidel Resenfatis and Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It is also in conformity with the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People and the Essential Norms for Diocesan/ Eparchial Policies Dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests, Deacons or Other Church Personnel established by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. The following principles guide the policy and its application: Children come first. The safety of anyone entrusted to the care of a priest, especially children, is the first priority in any pastoral assignment. Concern for the victims. We are always concerned about victims who have suffered abuse and their families. The Diocese offers pastoral and spiritual support to victims and their families as well as psychological counseling. All allegations reported. All allegations of sexual abuse of minors are turned over to the proper civil authorities. Suitability for parochial ministry. No cleric against whom there is an admitted or established allegation of sexual misconduct with a minor may serve in any Ministry. It is the role of the Church alone to determine the suitability of a cleric for ministry. This policy will be reviewed every two years to ensure its effectiveness. In an attempt to review the serious matter of clergy sexual misconduct and how the Church addresses it, this diocesan policy is presented under two aspects: 1) The Pastoral Response and 2) The Administrative Process. 306 The Pastoral Response I. The Policy on Clergy Sexual Misconduct of the Diocese of Pittsburgh is concerned with allegations that a cleric (a priest or a deacon) has engaged in either sexual misconduct with a minorl , a vulnerable adult', or nonconsensual sexual misconduct with an adult'. Allegations of consensual sexual misconduct by clergy will be addressed by the Vicar for Clergy. Recommendations for appropriate spiritual and/or psychological assistance will be made as needed. The goal of the Diocese in this policy is to respond to allegations in a way that is pastorally and canonically effective in application. The prompt response of the Diocese to complaints of sexual misconduct by clergy will include among other steps: A. for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator of the content of the allegation in order to begin the determination of its credibility as regarding the suitability of the clerk for any ministry (cf. An examination by the Vicar Administrative Process); B. All allegations of sexual misconduct against minors will be turned over to proper civil authorities; in addition, the diocese encourages and supports the complainants to report the matter in question to the proper civil authorities; C. D. E. Designated diocesan officials - usually the Vicar for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator - will interview the person who made the allegation, and/or the alleged victim and where appropriate, that person's parents, as well as the cleric against whom the allegation was made; addition to turning the allegation over to proper civil authorities, actions which may also be taken as a result of these interviews may include: (I) immediate removal of the cleric from his diocesan assignment; (2) a complete medical and psychological assessment; and/ or (3) ongoing treatment; (4) and an assessment of the allegation and fitness for ministry by the Clergy Task Force and the Independent Review Board; Allegations cannot be received in confidence given the obligation and/or need to report this information to proper civil authorities; In F. Assistance to the complainant and his or her family by offering pastoral and spiritual support and psychological counseling as needed; G. Recognition of the civil and canonical rights of all involved; 2 307 H. Assistance to parishes .or communities affected by the allegations through the help of a Pastoral Support Team, which will provide appropriate spiritual and psychological help; Availability of the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator to assure that appropriate assistance continues to be made available by the Diocese. I. Footnotes 'Sexual misconduct with a minor (an individual under the age of 18) includes sexual molestation or sexual exploitation of a minor, viewing of child pornography, and other behavior by which an adult uses a minor as an object of sexual gratification. In Church law, the transgressions in question relate to obligations arising from divine commands regarding human sexual interaction as conveyed to us by the sixth commandment of the Decalogue. Thus, the norm to be considered in assessing an allegation of sexual abuse of a minor is whether conduct or Interaction with a minor qualifies as an external, objectively grave violation of the sixth commandment (USCCB, Canonical Delicts involving Sexual Misconduct and Dismissal from the Clerical State, 1995, p.6). A canonical offense against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue (CIC, c 1395§2; CCEO §1) need not be a complete act of intercourse. Nor, to be objectively grave, does an act need to involve force, physical contact, or a discernible harmful outcome. Moreover, "imputability [moral responsibility] for a canonical offense is presumed upon external violations...unless it is otherwise apparent" (CIC, c. 1321 §3; CCEO, c 1414 §2); cf. CIC, canons 1322-27, and CCEO, canons 1413, 1415, and 1416. 18 years or older whose ability to perform the normal activities of daly living or to provide for his or her own care or protection is impaired due to mental, emotional, physical, development disability, brain damage or the infirmities of aging. 'A person to rape, "non-consensual sexual misconduct" also includes any breach of professional trust which has as its intent sexual contact. This would include sexual activity with a parish employee or an individual with whom the cleric is providing spiritual direction, counseling or ministry. 3In addition II. The Administrative Process Phase One If an allegation is lodged against a cleric regarding sexual misconduct with a minor or non-consensual sexual misconduct with an adult, the Vicar for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator must be notified immediately, an investigation is initiated, and the following steps will be taken. It should be noted that the steps presented in this policy should not be construed as a presumption of guilt of the accused cleric. A. Those making the allegation will be interviewed by the designated diocesan officials, normally the Vicar for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator. Both the substance and the source of the allegation must be shared with the cleric against whom the complaint is lodged. 3. 308 No allegation can be received in confidence given the obligation and/or need to report this information to the proper civil authorities. If the allegation appears to have merit, the canonical administrative process begins when the allegation is confirmed in writing. B. C. The cleric must be apprised of the allegation during a separate interview conducted by the appropriate diocesan officials, normally the Vicar for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator. The cleric must be informed before he responds to the allegation that he has a right to canonical counsel, if he chooses. He will be assisted in identifying such counsel, if necessary. If the cleric against whom an allegation is made is a member of a religious community on assignment or in residence within the Diocese, the Vicar for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator will review the allegations made and the diocesan process with his religious superior. Cases of this nature are within the jurisdiction of the religious community of which the accused is a member. D. matter of policy, all allegations of clergy sexual misconduct with a minor, no matter how long ago the alleged misconduct occurred, are reported to the proper civil authorities. As a Phase Two After interviewing both the complainant and the accused cleric, the designated diocesan officials, normally the Vicar for Clergy and the Diocesan Assistance Coordinator, must determine action to be taken based on the credibility of the allegation. A. First Scenario If, after careful review of all available information, including the results of the civil investigation, the allegation is judged to be without merit, the matter will not be pursued further and the parties will be informed of this decision. Appropriate steps will be taken to affirm the cleric in his ministry and to repair any damage to his reputation. B. Second Scenario When the preliminary investigation of an allegation against a cleric is doubtful or there is a semblance of truth, the cleric is immediately removed from his diocesan assignment and placed on an administrative leave of absence. 4 309 1. The allegation is referred to the Clergy Task Force and the Independent Review Board to assess the allegation and the cleric's fitness for ministry. 2. Limitations are placed on the ministry of the cleric such but not limited to, the following: prohibition from performing any public celebration of sacraments or sacramentals; prohibition from wearing clerical attire; prohibition concerning living in a certain place or territory; and revocation of diocesan faculties. as, 3. The cleric is urged to undergo, as soon as possible, a complete medical and psychological assessment at a facility selected by the Diocese. Likewise, the cleric is to grant permission that the results of this assessment be shared by the treatment facility with the appropriate diocesan authorities. 4. Those making the allegation will be appropriate update on the process. 5. If either the Clergy Task Force or the Independent Review Board reviews the allegation and recommends to the Diocesan Bishop that the cleric should not be returned to ministry and the bishop accepts the recommendation, one of the following will occur: '1) The cleric may be offered the opportunity to withdraw from priestly ministry; 2) The cleric may seek a dispensation provided an from the obligations arising from the priesthood; or 3) The diocese will initiate a canonical process. 6. C. When the accusation has proved to be unfounded, every step possible will be taken to restore the good name of the cleric, and he will be returned to ministry. Third Scenario Where sexual abuse by a cleric is admitted or is established after an appropriate investigation in accord with canon law, the following will pertain: 1. The offending cleric will be permanently removed from ministry and the appropriate canonical process will be applied. 2. An offending cleric will be offered professional assistance for his own healing and well-being, as well as for the purpose of prevention. 3. In every case, the processes provided for in canon law must be observed, and the various provisions of canon law must be considered (cf. Canonical Delicts involving Sexual Misconduct and Dismissal from the Clerical State, 1995; cf. Letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine 310 of the Faith, May 18, 2001). These provisions may include a request by the clerk for dispensation from the obligation of holy orders and the loss of the clerical state, or a request by the bishop for dismissal from the clerical state even without the consent of the cleric. 4. For the sake of due process, the accused is to be encouraged to retain the assistance of civil and canonical counsel. When necessary, the diocese will supply canonical counsel.to a cleric. 5. The cleric will be offered assistance for career retraining. 6. If the penalty of dismissal from the clerical state has not been applied (e.g., for reasons of advanced age or infirmity), the offender is to lead a life of prayer and penance. He will not be permitted to celebrate Mass publicly, to wear, clerical garb, or to present himself publicly as a priest, III. The Independent Review Board Norms/ Procedures Article I 1. - Statement of Jurisdiction - These procedures are established solely for the purpose of presenting to the Diocesan Bishop a recommendation as to a particular course of action to be taken when a doubt remains regarding credibility of an allegation involving sexual misconduct or when the suitability to hold ecclesiastical office or any other ministerial assignment has been questioned due to circumstances beyond those defined In the universal law of the Church. In addition this Board will assist the Diocesan Bishop in a regular review of diocesan policies and procedures for dealing with sexual abuse of minors. Coverage - An assessment under these procedures shall be convened only by the Diocesan Bishop or by one specifically delegated by him to act on his behalf. 2. Limitation of Action 3. Exclusion - These procedures are not applicable to doctrinal matters of faith and morals, the validity of sacred orders or canonical imposition of penalties by judicial or administrative procedures. Article II - Powers and Duties 1. The Vicar for Canonical Services shall be responsible for the implementation and application of these procedures. 2. It shall be the duty of the Vicar for Canonical Services to: 6 311 a. Effect the proper operation of these procedures; b. Process c. Maintain accurate records; d. 3. the procedures; through the established .Transmit said records together with the recommendation of the Independent Review Board to the Vicar for Clergy following conclusion of the action. A roster of people qualified to serve on the Independent Review Board shall consist of laity not employed by the Diocese, as well as pastors and religious, appointed by the Diocesan Bishop, The list shall include persons who are learned in civil law or the human sciences and who meet any other qualifications which the Diocesan Bishop may establish. They shall be appointed for a five (5) year term that 4. request is renewable. Five (5) members of the Independent Review Board, including at least one pastor, and at least one person who has expertise in the treatment of sexual abuse of minors shall be selected for each case by the Vicar for Canonical Services of these procedures. Article III - Process of Assessment 1. The designated Independent Review Board shall hold hearings upon any case referred to it by the Vicar for Canonical Services, with the Initial hearing being scheduled not more than fifteen (15) calendar days after such referral unless extended by the Vicar for Canonical Services. The Board is convened by the Vicar for Canonical Services with the approval of the Diocesan Bishop. 2. The Vicar for Canonical Services shall set a time, date and place for each hearing and notify the parties, in writing, not less than ten (10) calendar days prior to such hearings. 3. Prior to establishing a time, date and place for the initial hearing by the Vicar for Canonical Services, the Vicar for Clergy or his delegate shall submit to the Vicar for Canonical Services all documentation and information which has been previously gathered concerning the allegation and shall determine the willingness of the person making it to participate in these procedures. 4. All testimony shall be taken under oath or affirmation. The Board may take testimony of the parties and witnesses by deposition, affidavits or otherwise when it is deemed necessary. 5. The Independent Review 7 312 Board shall make its recommendation on the evidence presented. All testimony shall be taken in the presence of the entire Board. The parties may offer any evidence as they desire, subject to a decision by the Board as to its relevancy and materiality. 6. Upon completion of the process, the Independent Review Board shall submit, in writing, its findings and recommendations to the Vicar for Clergy through the Vicar for Canonical Services of these procedures. The recommendations are then shared in full with the Diocesan Bishop. 7. The recommendation of the Independent Review Board shall be handed down no later than ten calendar days from the date of the closing of the process. IV. Canonical Penal Procedures Introduction The canonical penal process establishes the fundamental procedures by which truth and justice is served within the eccieslal community. The penal process Is divided into two phases: 1. The Prior Investigation; (c. 1717-1719) 2. The Development of the Process. (c.1720-1728) These two phases form the administrative and judicial process by which the Code of Canon Law safeguards the rights of the complainant and the cleric, repairs scandal and restores justice. In addition, the penal process is governed by the Normae de Gravioribus Delictis Congregation' Pro Doctrina Fidel Reservatls, and Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela. Prior Investigation The prior Investigation phase has two distinct components. The first component is the investigation by the Diocesan Bishop or his delegate to determine: The specific offense alleged to have been committed; The precise canonical violation; The evidence available; and The canonical statute of limitation (prescription). during the investigation, the accused enjoys the presumption of innocence, and all appropriate steps shall be taken to protect his reputation. As in civil law, 8 313 Development of the Process When this first component is completed the Diocesan Bishop proceeds to the second component and determines: Whether the specific offense is a delict of the type reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in conformity with the Motu Proprio, Normae de Gravioribus Delictis Congregation' Pro Doctrina Fidei Reservatis, and Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela. 1. / 3. If the Diocesan Bishop has reasonable belief that a reserved delict probably has been committed after the appropriate canonical investigation, he transmits this to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which, unless the Congregation claims jurisdiction of the case itself, will order the Ordinary to proceed to a conclusion, with due regard, nevertheless, for the right of appealing against a sentence of the first grade to the Supreme Tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. If the process is directed to be handled by the Diocesan Bishop, on a local level, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will forward appropriate norms governing the handling of the case. 4. If a case is not reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a determination must be made by the Diocesan Bishop if the process is to be administrative or judicial. 5. If the Diocesan Bishop decides to proceed by an administrative process, he must inform the cleric of the evidence and offer the cleric the opportunity of self defense before a decision is rendered. 6. If the Diocesan Bishop decides to proceed by a judicial process in a case that is not reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he must do so by transmitting the evidence collected to the Promoter of Justice who is to present a formal petition to the Diocesan Tribunal. The Diocesan Tribunal must act on the petition in accord with the procedural norms established by the. Code of Canon Law and the Motu Proprio, Normae de Gravioribus Deficit Congregation! Doctrina Fidei Reservatis and Pro Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. . 9 314 .. CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH 111 Boulevard ofthe Allies Pittsburgh, PA 15222 @201 7 315 Subject: Secretariat: ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINORS BY CHURCH PERSONNEL OTHER THAN CLERICS Ministerial Leadership Purpose: Number: 1\41,-I Page: 1 of 3 To establish a protocol for dealing with allegations of the sexual abuse of minors by Church personnel other than clerics. Applicability: All non -clergy Church personnel. Definitions: Church Personnel: All persons directly employed by the Diocese of Pittsburgh or any parish within the Diocese; and, All persons who provide any volunteer services to/for the Diocese of Pittsburgh and to/for any parish within the Diocese. Minor: Any person under eighteen (18) years of age. Sexual abuse of a minor: Sexual molestation or sexual exploitation of a minor and other behavior by which an adult uses a minor as an object of sexual gratification. Sexual abuse has been defined by different civil authorities in various ways, and these norms do not adopt any particular defmition provided in civil law. Rather, the transgressions in question relate to obligations arising from divine commands regarding human sexual interaction as conveyed to us by the sixth commandment of the Decalogue. Thus, the norm to be considered in assessing an allegation of sexual abuse of a minor is whether conduct or interaction with a minor qualifies as an external, objectively grave violation of the sixth commandment (USCCB, Canonical Delicts Involving Sexual Misconduct and Dismissal rom the Clerical State, 1995, p.6). A canonical offense against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue (CIC, c. 1395 §2; CCEO, c. 1453 §1) need not be a complete act of intercourse. Nor, to be objectively grave, does an act need to involve force, physical contact, or a discernable harmful outcome. Moreover, "imputability [moral responsibility] for a canonical offense is presumed upon external violation ... unless it is otherwise apparent" (CIC, c, 1321 §3; CCEO, c. 1414 §2). Cf. CIC, canons 1322-27, and CCEO, canons 1413, 1415, and 1416. This definition is contained in the Essential Norms that were adopted by the bishops of the United States. The norms received the recognitio of the Apostolic See on December 8, 2002, and became effective as particular law binding all dioceses and eparchies of the United States on March 1, 2003. Effective Date: Revision Date: Number of Revisions: June 1, 2003 Approved May 21, 2003 316 Subject: Secretariat: ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINORS BY CHURCH PERSONNEL OTHER THAN CLERICS Ministerial Leadership Number: ML4 Page: 2 of 3 . . Policy and Procedure: I.A. When an allegation of sexual abuse of a minor is made, the Church will respond both pastorally and administratively. The Church shall provide assistance to the minor and his/her family with the offer of spiritual support andpsychological counseling as needed. I.A.2. The civil and canonical rights of all involved will be respected while the Church seeks to offer assistance. LA.3. A pastoral support team will be put in place to provide assistance to parishes or C0771171UlliiieS affected by the allegations. 1.4.4. Any allegation ofsexual abuse involving a minor may be brought by the minor, his or her parent(s) or guardian(s), or anyone else with knowledge or a reasonable suspicion that sexual abuse has occurred. LA.5. The Office of the Secretary for Ministerial Leadership will work With the Office of Civil Legal Services to reportpromptly all allegations of the sexual abuse ofminors to the appropriate civil authorities as well as to comply with all civil law obligations. Any mandatory reporter. who receives an allegation fr0711 a minor will comply with the requirements of the Child Protective Services Law. Even though the diocese will have informed civil authorities, all persons communicating an allegation of the sexual abuse of a minor will also be encouraged to turn the allegation over to the civil authorities. LA.6. The alleged victim ofsexual abuse or another individual bringing the allegation will be interviewed by the Office of the Secretary for Ministerial Leadership. Ifthe Church employee or volunteer does not W07* in Central Administration, then the pastor or other supervisor ofthe employee or volunteer will participate in the. interview. When possible, the allegation should be in writing and signed by theparty making the allegation. LA. 7. The Church employee or volunteer will also be interviewed by the same persons set orili in the preceding paragraph. At the beginning of the interview it should be determined that the employee or volunteer is aware of their civil and canonical rights. if the allegation is deemed to be credible, the employee or volunteer will be suspended immediately. In the case of an employee, the temporary suspension will be with pay. Effective Date: Revision Date: Number of Revisions: June 1, 2003 Approved May 21, 2003 317 Subject: Secretariat: ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINORS BY CHURCH PERSONNEL OTHER THAN Ministerial Leadership Number: ML-I Page: 3 of 3 CLERICS After the preliminary review has been conducted, a decision will be made by those conducting the interviews whether the employee or volunteer is to continue on suspension, be reinstated, oi dealt with in another manner including termination ofemployment. 14.9. Further action may be taken later. The circumstances in which further action might be taken include, but are not limited to: (a) a retraction of the allegation; (b) an admission by the employee or volunteer; (c) the institution of or the resolution of either criminal charges or a civil action, (d) or the receipt of any other relevant information at any time 1.4.10. Ifat any time it is determined that the allegation is unfounded, then appropriate steps will be taken to affirm the employee or volunteer in their work and to mvpair any damage to their reputation. Effective Date: Revision Date: Number of Revisions: June 1, 2003 Approved May 21, 2003 318 3/4/2018 Dioceses more responsive to Catholic Church sex abuse scandals 1TribLIVE W,(/home/), g J Back (/news/allegheny/10078326-74/abuse-church-diocese) f Text Size: http://triblive.com/news/allegheny/10078326-74/abuse-church-diocese - Dioceses more responsive to Catholic Church sex abuse scandals JASON CATO V' (littps://twitter.comEac412Cato) I Saturday, March 5, 2016, 9:00 p.m. Decades of silence by the Roman Catholic Church regarding child sexual abuse by priests has given way to an era of atonement, as public apologies and condemnation come from local dioceses up to the Vatican. But that isn't enough for some. The church needs to name priests suspected of abuse, like those outed last week in a 147-page grand jury report about the Altoona Johnstown diocese, so more go to prison, said David Clohessy, national director of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. - "More words, clearer words, sadder words it's all words, and words protect no one. Decisive actions protect kids," said Clohessy, expressing a desire for local dioceses to post online the names of priests accused of sexually abusing children. "They often are fixated on PR, policies, panels and protocols that look terrific on paper but essentially are worthless. "Sincerity must be judged by actions, not words." Leaders of the Catholic Church in Pittsburgh and Greensburg said they are committed to stopping sexual abuse and righting decades of wrongs. would hope in every diocese we realize we can never do enough to keep this horror from occurring," said Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik, who will host a special "Service of Apology" March 21 in St. Paul Cathedral in Oakland. re EXHIBIT "I In htlp://triblive.com/news/altegheny/10078326-74/abuse-church-dlocese?prinrlertly=true 4 1/3 Dioceses more responsive to Catholic Church sex abuse scandals I TribLIVE. 3/4/2018 He said the Mass is not related to the allegations of abuse in Altoona -Johnstown, which Attorney General Kathleen Kane made public in the same week that "Spotlight," a movie about The Boston Globe's investigative reporting into decades of abuse there, won the Academy Award for best film. A Somerset County priest was sentenced last week to nearly 17 years in prison for molesting orphans during mission trips to Central America. All U.S. dioceses in 2002 adopted zero -tolerance policies for dealing with suspected sexual abuse, though'the Greensburg Diocese's policy dates to 1985 and Pittsburgh's to 1988. Edward Malesic, who last year became bishop in Greensburg, said the church has to remain watchful for cases of abuse and clerical perpetrators. terrible issue for the church for many years," Malesic said. "It's extremely important that the church be vigilant and make sure children are safe." 'This has been a That includes conducting background checks on everyone who works for or volunteers with the diocese and reporting every case of suspected child abuse to authorities, he said. can't change the past, and I can't change what happened in Altoona -Johnstown," Malesic said. "But I can be strong here in Greensburg?' "I Messages left with the Altoona -Johnstown Catholic Diocese were not returned. In a statement, Bishop Mark Bartchak noted the diocese cooperated with authorities and is reviewing the grand Jury's report, which ended an investigation that lasted nearly two years. deeply regret any harm that has come to children, and I urge the faithful to join me in praying for all victims of abuse," said Bartchak, who committed to posting on the diocese's website the names and current status of every priest in the diocese accused of "I abuse. Philadelphia is the only other diocese in Pennsylvania to have posted such a list, according to bishop-accountability.orghttp://bishop-accountability.org). The website lists 42 cases of abuse involving priests from the Pittsburgh diocese and six from Greensburg. The National Catholic Reporter revealed last year that U.S. Catholic churches had paid nearly $4 billion to settle decades of lawsuits. In 2014, the Vatican reported that during the previous decade it defrocked about 850 priests who raped or molested children and sanctioned 2,500 worldwide. Officials with the Vatican and U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops In Washington, D.C., could not be reached. Kane announced Tuesday that the grand jury found that at least 50 priests in Altoona Johnstown abused hundreds of children at orphanages, foster homes, campsites, confessionals and the cathedral in Altoona from the 1940s to 1980s. No criminal charges will be filed because the statute of limitations on such crimes has expired, suspected priests have died, and some victims are reluctant to testify, Kane said. 320 http://triblive,com/newsialleghenyil 0078326-74/abuse-church-dlocese?printerfriendly--true 2/3 Dioceses more responsive to Catholic Church sex abuse scandals I TribLIVE 3/4/2018 On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Kim R. Gibson of Johnstown sentenced the Rev. Joseph D. Maurizio Jr., 70, of Central City to prison for engaging or attempting to engage in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places; possession of child pornography; and money laundering. Prosecutors, who sought 27 years' Imprisonment, said the priest traveled to an orphanage in Honduras between 1999 and 2009 and promised cash and candy to boys who allowed him to watch them shower or have sexual contact with them. Maurizio plans to appeal, his attorney said. Zubik said he scheduled his apology Mass before the grand jury report and sentencing of Maurizio. It will be the second such Mass he has hosted in Pittsburgh, the other being in 2009. He first hosted a "Service of Apology" in 2006 while bishop in Green Bay, Wis, The services address several ways people could have been victimized by the church, including sexual abuse. An apology from the church is healing for some but pulls off a scab for others, Zubik said. "But forgiveness is that way. Saying you're sorry does that,' he said. "It highlights that even though the church is divine, we are all certainly human." - Pope Francis apologized to five victims of sexual abuse both those abused by clergy and by others, such as family members during his visit to Philadelphia in September. - predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, publicly apologized for clergy sex abuse in 2008 and 2010. Pope John Paul II in 2000 said a special Mass in Rome to ask God's forgiveness for the sins of Catholics -though he did not specifically mention sexual abuse by priests. His Zubik said John Paul's public atonement inspired him to conduct similar services later. The one this month is in response to the church's Jubilee Year of Mercy, he said. "It's a moment of grace," Zubik said. Clohessy called apologies discouraging rather than hopeful signs of real change. "This is just more shrewd PR," he said. "You apologize after a threatening harm is over. Church officials know full well this crisis is a continuing crisis." Jason Cato is a Tribune -Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-320-7936 or jcato@tribweb.com (mailto;jcato@tribweb.com). Copyright 2018 -Trib Total Media, LLC (ttp://tribtotaimedia.comn(TribLIVE.com) 321 http:Mriblive.com/news/allegheny/10078326-74/abuse-church-dlocese?printerfriendly=true 3/3 Newspaper§ - Pittsburgh Post -Gazette (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) Sat, Jun 15, 2002 httpS://WWW, neWe papers .00Mfirnage/90372938 . Page 1 Printed on Mar 1, 2018 .... . . . VOL i SATUADAY, JUNE I5, 2002 t14.13il1 this day fikiward no one known to haw; satially abused a child will work in die Catholic Church in the United States.' 1 , -Bishop nifion Unr9; rtaliFyvvire pnwrilivil 'Elias bishops get tough on sex a users tie. , .. Policy removes priests for molesting minors By Mn Rodgefs.Molnick Om Gann 5111 e, Y.'. - DALLAS Reeling from tho worst scandal to rock the Catholic Church in inenjory, the nation's bishops iviedosorwd toltubtgly In remove from ministry any pital who has ova sexually abaci' n Minos "From this day forward MI one known to ham sexually abused a child will work In Ilw Catholic church In the [lolled Slates," said Bishop Wilton Gregory, lite confercnce president. Ho alto apologized Ior"aur Inagnally ilow response In iacoialzIng tho horror" of sexual . abuse. Archbishop harry Flynn, chair. man of Iho bishops comniflice On sexual abuse, coiled It en effort "ho root outs cancer In ourchurch." The pnilates stood and applaud ad oiler they hPlirnicd lire Policy one. 11943 vote by 'Niel halloL It a as Um climatal': moment Egan exlivoctlinary meeting that boo been filled with wrenching accounts of abuse from victims and solemn expressions of remorse froin church leaders. Bishop Donald ITherl of Pitts. burgh playedu kky in the de. bale, coiling fora brooder dantllono(sesual 0611938nd Insisting that 411 allegations of sexual . - D.- ji* nith:Slr.i.dri.., , Bishop Wilton Gregory of Ballwin°, Ill., presideni of the Untold States Conforanca of Colhona Bishops. addresses i he pioup atter passage of Its clonal sex abuse policy al nut US. Conleronce of Catholic Bishops' meetingyoslorday in Deltas. abuse against Muse who are now minors bolmmedlotc4gic en falba dvg aulhoziOes. document allows us to assure our pont° that wo am not, to ibis Ito boil of our ability, placing any of our children at risk. li basically restores (Mt basis of trust and begins the IteenIng,"%ert said. Thu policy sap that no ',deli who luta abused aminor In the pail, present or future will remain In ministry, Some %learns groups wen: crilltal of o clouso IntlionIng tlual sachilicalo who ens aged, inIlrm, or el forsomo other mason cannot ba effeclhely removed from Ilia piresIlmodby i h o Wilcan,inusi Use a life of supervised penance and be forbidden la wear clerical parts, celebrate Moss publicly or cull hintsolf n pricaL lite bishops alsopassetla policy allowing !hair own Committee on Ills Life end Ministry:or Bishops to lake action against bishop:who fall to Implement the polkin,altheith those dLselplInary. measures wens not spelled mil. Bishops' compllonce would be determined by a newly ealablisiled Unice for Child and Tull Protctilon and u blue ribbon national lay review board to Copyright 0 2018 Newspapers.com. All Rights Reserved. bo chaired by Oklahoma Gov Frank Keeling,. The Charter for the Protection of Children and 'Thong People takes effect Immediately, but wilt bo monitored for twoyears tarps, Able revislons:Docausoofthat, the bishops Asked Ilie Valkan lo up. prove for only on Initial Iwo.year period a net (dolmas that give the standards the !owe of canon law with the Idea that they may be re sired later. SEE IBISHOPS, PAGE A-3 AVEKta: NewspapersTm 322 Newspaper:s- Pittsburgh Post -Gazette (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) https://www.newspapers.com/image/90372940 . Sat, Jun 15, 2002 Page 3 Printed on Mar 1, 2018 II PITTSBURGH POST4A2EfTE SATURDAY, ;UNE 15. N'02 U.S. bishops vote to remove priests who molest minors imam flt0i.415ZEM poniblate laicise -niacin:1y re monk= Um priedhoni mono denying pekda. ' A apeaul/sal lie bishops had preposed lo Mode le Mb liRIC. ee Sept. I I was dunged - A &Mkt alichondude wail 1.= gout emu Dal Ugh for whether they Just devastating.' old, Chopin earths SIAM bodied Ine &Mors Menai d saturants/by . b in tome of 111.1 kikne bishops woks!. bee been the nut um- him me/bob:la crient" also a/ Webby cou .loco II. von olio a ley player In fight he tronshend non wore bn-I la Make hWOnla lo Ire ;matey mon ilkentlone MYoking victims stove Ail minors lo Muni embodies Sarnia. ape ady noted le_lefal Ohl.Ms VW they had nut bulkiest lkwitrodutu Um, onobiosyneuy drsielog rostkig I him mu bun knohed In add. maaten1 tem WWI bemuse many bishops lusw tong uld that theirs Ohm meeting era in 107 end deall Oh Mies cosi Inanuld epselelmeel as an etedl ed and found luy Whop sills velment Woo Thoreau Doran of to ford, IS, otkded that unksa the the therserchlAshm of Ionise co certain haus of con- blatant eithallsbcd the maths can lo the is isst that was the m morel urban. lle UNA- le ut lssie hut an Wed uld. pour Ant 'Ws huhu Moine elbow Wage dr knob end bees that an- pay - skims before %Where boon Abused and petals wh i sill norerune Nolan, egain IL Lo bald to hem to mate dod. nor oleos that au dsirnalkally and cad. lateral)," change suite's issa," he N he ludergusd fa the name la o1 diS ebbe. cpurboulpered the loose ei 'zero aphid kW, la artic.. v... ci chase -UN, muse that on/Perko erbedinnl Ike e prkst su be re- act le and .e parted le do thal, !ben en are kots he dd. %rant what ire oh thlas we rat 'out ourprksts. And In cod In fame Wool cowed many of the Lhal the bishop's go led succeuda to de. the sexual abuse us Continuo inkradlons between, child and an ad' slam the chid h ladeg um/ es an &Jai el smut gelded-Ion /or the Adult A chill Ls abused auk row td grill orgioahl it utdoabether jaunt. nel %Mier or not aluerniblo hurtful cot by the chid anti them come La Some lishma WU far leo ingue.'es Lida g (eke ecel Is lids icing to a emir Anoliblahql Jastin Illgal of Si. Lode mked a on- )sus/ _tantalums rrhht nonMoil "Remember Ito Are the micas ma of 'amino for - lishop Jateph Gabel, ur Dah IA; bounce wiped OW ergot the wet arum seenseled Ls for of. kooks prints le show Nap, Stud b MccUarY le dal Oh conducts he WA liberfs lenguage Neon tun a statement by he wean bi.M oso puled mensholmindre Thu choUnout NA Wet gendaM Mae dsil len h c soh hue 'Hobe the smual abuse Ls phial mmies to odnem hu robe InNekd In our detkidon almond abuse, whether we II la unwed by chi low. Whet we hist teen felting Moot all along 4 something that le Immoral All - ond debate for Int to plal mblatrat Onlythe ,,glzw. WI er the only to &Nadu to ndlahle to ccetinthe Wainer moVereletrie Via or,fol Copyright © 2018 Newspapers.corn, a male Onus am* be ukt 5m1o.lhettlirestV4004atouy: ane casa far whkh petal who atee keg bad ornated ago, undergou therm:land had fah br stronger rumen Nu 'Tb4 Niel known molestem in the Inked sore44hd & fought le o law' doff Inoue' mord Wears mkt Ins le momenta Nal sad &rem leaN negollein WM u. foal Fieslhood is devastating, itue,,,,,"-,.,,,,,tiar..i.P01.-:: at ttrzz,fel". on date., Ma eat ni le the =Vim= 'Tocome today and hear lhaltheyaregoing totems lleleu and WI Iloarotee name li mos, bo coke. Lhe eithailles ma delcmine LI the Amnion dm crodidnbudd. 'I beim ohne um /we tool lo the put 4 woprietIng le oun mbes the d abater or col turned Lbe &Sepias bemuse se docklod nol /Neap Anthony Doom Greensburg add Math the Are moodoleryy. of modern /di*. paten re oeder dell lox. WWI; Already do Oh leuh mo accused of Ansi, and thue nee Ma separate student Alould fesidestas be Onn my foilag 4 WI Ile might to dupe coot of ping Jul II we da bay Cured Prageony ciao by handled on Besiecquo ol Stnadelptigmads games yestanny ea IUDS. Conkunce rU'lltansil"lIonrird I !Nord of AI. bueARX,mmphred II le the oneMae hug laws. whIdihe raid had fatted to mhablitali minor drug of Ceshode Bbhcoe' means In Wu. iniemass trebled Mot Me bishops hid lupus Ise On* 1.1,hrwitstheribig...0E.V..3 Malta ortTac; se on reaninal hutke Cardhael Avery Oulu Jesuit theekettaa oho Is 'heady ementag of ibe coedesence neer Oman Earbsra A hada el do Sun shore ridansk althea°Abused by Pod roma. Bolllhodeer n arsine she deuinl*"tlecPdithjmisexuV tabuseo the br"Ithat %al hod Inserted 'lligta eery itheruzial of fences; Merida); eddamml the hibduldwTheinwhilewrishind Nu IMSOlilie.1 to his bishop attend runfous""alaboullirsenes"hling Nokia no ewer hew sae- Ilse So la my my Poll ako igluEr amen 'II mu that slut they heard easeful what he um to theblaMp malenby manias lud in tonauto because ihe Whetcan threw him eh sat ,esi 011=1131=6"1.1grei -c4114:1114"PfdledelfwIt.lhadisl2e rill:tee/We mustias the Nubs. Ia"talsbope "MT", &eine basun f"lb41'"1"adrall'a The:e4C1. "6"wlud. church Erst, he .ppod &moment re peon to restore me mealier ad the church nod Its mond minder hould.lit wed eirongsumort el this document be wtbeir"creadithow.end'o I sai Ilagiinfru pleudlo9 the document had reed cures Dash .Pillaburgh WU the lesiknoey cd four anual atstata oUninn on Thursday Mal ge/mniu oursLICA the Whey! le too dimity Wit id& Alcoa bY In MS and nude re keel coon., mil he helloed whit IAN Whew 'hunt .&-e auistila ennpulloo to ilack premaPd'irlorlelthseseMI'Ltia.1 flan "UK Sgeed korn gjevith ma A the peaskrule In- tautly of the sumbore And Ms re adleoulY oedlcooll o4 the WU' ms' be 14 reabeibi 0,1 Raise MY ON CVOCCrni Poisons MN MIX Other Veil. ran iskos on UN am Inhumane ""Thollofle ,ithetc i.ealreme..061.6.1Theblevarbwd. em dealer concerns eon ethe Ilene soukl gins the Whops menu the UMW Whops .whether Mn. of moan tune mut lent dal eccormd hang aometnixpe Dal Nies' Whom' of tood ckeedtker meting More Emma Maim mime 0101 tray Its Angeles may ham tenons the day Ned. sdMlol 392, most weight when lao mote el Put some Wean arida has Wicom hoard Orem bik pop hire Wog Ws* asanued and lulu monde& pm caukbil do reaultniudestalantols Mat then doared dnamicien of motel amitaing elm he eald lithe del ' stoles `I oak elm lo permanently serneniall cf. the beaus' they be Ilea II mot deli sith IL NA 1 I is VIllybelpsUi tab ese On Miro deal with them things, tumidly lbo uslounded oom and gel II over ullb:hessa Mere Ls a ciffours behaeu cuing (or p print cad Untesuencea for seal Wu of bard et y. r Of onus we ray Merl ell haei to the el Mums; hosN. lio 1 heed offenders le raga %.1.4are Notary but remain en the aoman midi, MIAMI Mc Dykema to call thenteehes a Fiat, ale Whom who but toe mine today end hem Out - come the Fi,rlb rod: sad re= muds-dm my. it yawl Ptkillest Cim Denedelikl, IV, ham pulite Slue cr dress to idol. Poullie mums far this Mu 1314 Whose gam seas lithe of fender was too old or Ill i. atoll trng ariacendud, rale finden iminmeepodally eGussi Mai al- PlAil to km realmn the priesthood scows- mum! lean mepoltesrundold ise en the peaty but said odSdals there It lengthy ugh mho -!toga arom Asdint he 'mimeo( b.utel skim the lliNan mash mak* approve the packs. litah ball op Ilregury mid =raelTh!d1 d cdma cest' 107 *AupuaidParamIntdd a NRASapers'1.1 Rights Reserved. 323 Newspaper,s- Pittsburgh Post -Gazette (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) Tue, Aug 25, 1987 Final Edition Page 6 Downloaded on Feb 23, 2018 https://vvww.newspapers.com/image/89698014 kiln 6 burgh Post Guano: PRIESTS AND PEDOPHELIA A greater By Eleanof Borgholz PeoulamrittmlAm Ibirelnury congellon el DA Troll t. Latla i li"atgMt Errit ale ,took sharply th way the dlorm and leal Len enlertemen1 Mackie lundied a limner cue pars NOM. Tug. former puke el SL doh. parish nl Delman, admitted molatkg Il MEL Wine punk fouled Troll's (WIN or Drie Andrea le the Wcalmorelind County Children's Donau, 11 larestlgaled cad re /erred the eau to the Andel Alloy the Baptist de le Us (t for prosecution. Chord on officials reacted Troll *Ibis mile roll defies Under a pin budge disarmed trIth lie pa rerds, Troll nu charged MA one cant el compaon of metro !Nokias a 11.yeaeold tar be) and mimed to Ilveyeari mobatlin. deal alto reeptred Tull, to be tamed tor p.4401112, a usual &herder In ankh the lore abject Is a Mid, at Si Luke's 10411,1, In SWIM& hid. It nr Tunis mm111,10'411111 Pali' reers."Deills"brietemsleal:least culler did oat roultle Mos. cake Dulcet there swat a POI years rail lbal ha, Iht rarS, raMillMJ iteret for in Stay IN& the Oreemborli doom paid lee tamales PISMO KIN a Ova lawsuit loorghl In belull al Mu Impact a ' bop molested al Idaho loaner auecialer peallam of Serrates pirb.1 k itiorrystige. ODOM Ationey Jay Driscoll Tho nor. Rage, Troll with Ma lamer. Ross Muth alter a manna in Felon, ral1 hi meld da II Cr/meetly II Dellmatra's cut ratio le him to 1011 on Roe Ile sald polls. Inrestigaters, the Clildren'a Borne and lb. Om Me all learned a `real dial hem the Mika that characterized the DMIMAMYla tiro that ease 'brothel If Roger rug ei CrtiC mu hen Tho Mil tlint nf the Rai: Dennis Dellarnalva 11.1 Mem bas instant /1 civil 0730 IN: Inlay, II mold bane beta reported mock team aodlt valid bare Witmer In the NMI al 1012, ultheet of San Frandsen le triplex:dam obit slats 11x1 Dig.. llei of mats IdifireZtiggcr nit inerlt:tel;jektt mplamIka to antibioses". Della pllaLlot thefoulfleideelded maim yeas Iratufezzed to Italy Family M Olrthe A seer la te roxelete of percale I hal Irons lanes ecurred le There woo ie inueligatIoa preMzed a ertrelnal rade they nithed NI to pursue IL rodayi re would kme been abk a market therktlme that feritultul promo noel walla net late hart their Sloth! el Seurat .tild the dislike alma Out 4Ilamalra Dud mehsted Ihehr aeon sold ho reamed atom Anoka. /Ultra Interetli. way Ile Dellmalsa ai thestalethol ea Ma (drown neuleg Munster, Purse handled Ile Mu 'frogman"The diocese bas made a ors.tire prepared a erlohnal coin. complete I emsbut hills war lloy plainl but we did nil entail Uy Me Oen Ms Imola rue. Oae could that Ms not ath for it belief resekste. They charges." he sold, addles mar tokled by the s" el rereverypremplmoydultIre.no Hike the females and Dula Micros" oho moktratIon. They acted In a Mae arlate.11. prated the hays' prmla o-kt-- 4 c.1 lam" (Arb--4 6.1ja s,:A-Q tt-ewA 1A)to 6144,01, a ttL, 4-4* Glyfi_pt,tj A,0,LLy41.4._c4. a C/ `1C,6\4Amilac). a.1. 356cta-e-u2,a_itt-41- 4"J-el srFe 4,,L.set.6v c,Levr to_(/tR tvoiedee., tiLA *iA tLz.LJsz.sk-tizt 4 0J1n,LJ-,c3 %\-wuc,ILft44_,01 je_tyvg.- 40a^ 4t-eL-tyLf4.7 tta-4t- IA,11J-1 ax-psA. Rkar,J1,, 357 358 RESPONSE OF REV. JOHN P. FITZGERALD TO THE REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY PURSUANT TO 42 PA. C.S. § 4552(e) Counsel of Record for Rev. John P. Fitzgerald: Thomas E. Fitzgerald, ESQ 1040 Fifth Ave. Pittsburgh PA 15219 412 338 9988 PA ID 43580 359 RESPONSE OF REV. JOHN P. FITZGERALD TO THE REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY PURSUANT TO 42 PA. C.S. § 4552(e) This is the Response of Rev. John P. Fitzgerald pursuant to Order and Notice of Court in accordance with 42 Pa. C.S.A.4552(e) which ordered a response to the Report of the 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury. Initially, it is the position of Father Fitzgerald that the Order of Court and the Grand Jury Statute is unconstitutional. Title 42 Pa C.S. Section 4552 of the grand jury statute which permits a grand jury to issue a report critical of the conduct of an individual, accusing him or her of incompetence or wrongdoing without recommending criminal charges, is a violation of Article ), Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, as it permits the issuance of a final judicial order damaging a person's reputation without the due process of law required by Article Article l, I, Section 11, of the Pennsylvania Constitution. Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitutions provides, "All men are created equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefensible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness." Article 1, Section 11 of the Pennsylvania Constitution provides, "All courts shall be open and every man for an injury done him in his land, good, person or reputation shall have 360 remedy by due course of law, and right and justice administered without sale, denial or delay. ..." This procedure is totally lacking in the due process of law required for the protection of a person's reputation as required by the Pennsylvania Constitution. There is no opportunity to present evidence, no opportunity to cross examine a witness, no required notice. The proceedings of the grand jury are secret, and are not available to the party so named, even ,if the person is given the chance to reply. This report becomes a formal court document for full public examination. The allegations of misconduct against Rev. John P. Fitzgerald contained in the 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Report No. are false. The allegations contained in 'I the Summary referring To. Rev. Fitzgerald are the product of a fabrication made by a convicted thief, a convicteciviolator of the Controlled Substances Act, a person who "punched his father in the head and bodY, kicked his mother in the midsection and choked his sister" when they tried to stop him from driving after snorting heroin" according to a police report filed based on the statements of his father, mother and sister. It is clear from reading the Summary that the alleged accuser did not appear beforethe Grand Jury. If he had appeared making these allegations contained in the Grand Jury Summary he would have perjured himself. 361 For example, the Grand Jury Summary states that the events occurred in 1996 including allegations of misconduct at the Pittsburgh International Airport Chapel. The airport chapel did not open until 1998. The walls of the chapel are transparent glass completely visible to office spaces which are adjacent and the food court from above. The allegations made against Rev. Fitzgerald contained in the Grand Jury Summary were solely compiled from subpoenaed notes of William VValtershied, a bishop of the Pittsburgh Diocese. Waltershied met the alleged accuser on July'30, 2014. At the time VValtershied met the accuser there was an outstanding Allegheny County Bench warrant for the accuser. VValtershied had met the alleged accuser at the request and instigation of Rev. Patrick Geinzer: Geinzer represents himself as an expert on child abuse by Catholic priests. Prior to the request the accuser had "borrowed", "stolen" or extorted thousands of dollars from the brother of Patrick Geinzer, John Geinzer, who is also named as an offender in the Grand Jury Report. Waltershied heard the allegations which included that the accused was sexually assaulted in an airplane, in a car, and at the Pittsburgh International Airport chapel. He claimed that he performed oral sex on Rev. Fitzgerald "maybe a half dozen times". Waltershied then interviewed Father Fitzgerald on July 31, 2014. Father Fitzgerald 362 categorically denied all of the allegations telling Waltershied that it was physically impossible to do what the accuser claimed. Waltershied and Zubik then removed Father Fitzgerald from his position as Pastor at Our Lady of Peace in Conway, PA. He was forbidden to return to Our Lady of Peace and his possessions, computers and personal belongings were seized by the Diocese. They conducted no further investigation to either confirm or deny the allegations. They asked for no physical evidence, sought any corroborating witnesses nor visited the scenes where the allegations of abuse were said to have occurred. They did not interview the pastor of the Church were the some of the allegations were said to occur. Father Fitzgerald was given an admonition to not speak of the matter to anyone or defend himself in any civil proceeding or to respond in any way to the allegations made again him. It further prevented him from pursuing legal actions against the accuser and others. In August, 2014, Waltershied and Zubik then referred the matter to the Allegheny County District Attorney and the Lawrence County District Attorney. After four years neither office has filed any charges. On August 3, 2014, Waltershied appeared at Our Lady Queen of Peace parish and at Sunday Mass defamed Rev. Fitzgerald from the pulpit leaving all parishioners with the 363 inescapable conclusion that he was a child abuser. Then Bishop Zubik ,Waltershied and Rev.Lawrence DiNardo, through the Diocese of Pittsburgh, authorized payments to the accuser and his family in amount of at least $40,000.00. Rev. Fitzgerald did not kn6w, consent, or in anyway approve such a payment. He had absolutely no knowledge of the payments until he read it in the Grand Jury Summary that such a payment was made. Any such payment, in his view, was tantamount to legal extortion. Since the $40,000 payment was made to the accuser he has been arrested at least four times for drug related offenses. On December 12, 2014, the Diocese of Pittsburgh held a Diocesan Review Board under the direction of Lawrence DiWard°, the vicar general of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, and was prosecuted by Thomas Kunz, a lawyer priest. The review board consisted of lawyers from the law firm of Zimmer Kunz (the father of Thomas Kunz is the former managing partner) and a lawyers who sit on managing Boards of property owned by the Diocese of Pittsburgh. At no time prior to the hearing did DiNardo or Kunz provide a written statement of the exact'allegations against Father Fitzgerald including the dates and places where the allegations of abuse were said to have occurred. The Diocesan Review Board heard testimony from the mother and sister of the accuser. The accuser, who was then well over thirty years old at this time, did not 364 attend or testify. The Review Board never saw or heard from the accuser directly. Thomas Kunz, advised the Board of the allegations made by the accuser based on his understanding of the allegations made to William VValtershied. (It should be noted that Kunz testified in an another proceeding that he never personally spoke with the accuser at any time. It also should be noted that Watershed never testified before the Review board.) The Diocesan Review Board was not advised by Kunz that the accuser had been asked when he was in a drug rehabilitation center whether he had ever been sexually abused as a minor. The accuser had denied he had ever been. At the time he was asked that question he was thirty years old. At the Diocesan Review Board hearing Rev. Fitzgerald denied all of the allegations in emphatic terms. It is admitted that the findings of review board as summarized by the Grand Jury Report were the findings made. It is denied that the Diocese Pittsburgh does not know the status of the proceedings against Fitzgerald. At all times material to the Grand Jury proceedings the Diocese of Pittsburgh, Kunz, DiNardo, Waltershied, and Zubik have been aware that further proceedings were held. and that the allegations were found to be not proven. Rev. Fitzgerald immediately appealed the findings of the Diocese of Pittsburgh to the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith who conducted further proceedings. The 365 Congregation heard sworn testimony from the mother and father of the accused, Patrick Geinzer, Thomas Kunz and others recommended by Kunz on behalf of the accuser. The accuser, himself, refused to be sworn but was interviewed. In his interview he dramatically changed his allegations made in his July 30, 2014, interview with William Watershed but did maintain he was assaulted in Rev. Fitzgerald's airplane and at the Pittsburgh International Airport chapel. Father Fitzgerald again testified unequivocally.that on no occasion did he have any inappropriate conduct with the accuser. He presented expert testimony from aviation experts familiar with the aircraft that the accuser said that it occurred. They testified that it would have been physically impossible to do what the accuser alleged without crashing the aircraft. On March 2, 2017, the Judges of the Tribunal for the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith informed both the Diocese of Pittsburgh and Rev. Fitzgerald that the accusations made by the accuser and the Diocese of Pittsburgh had not been proven. The Diocese of Pittsburgh has known since March of 2017 that the allegations against Rev. Fitzgerald had not been proven yet did not include those findings to the Statewide Grand Jury although they were under subpoena to do so. In summary it the position of Rev. Fitzgerald that this procedure is totally lacking in the 366 due process of law required for the protection of a person's reputation as required by the Pennsylvania Constitution. There is no opportunity to present evidence, no opportunity to cross examine a witness, no required notice. The proceedings of the grand jury are secret, and are not avpilable to the party so named, even if the person is given the chance to reply. This report becomes a formal court document for full public examination. 367 368 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 THE FORTIETH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY ALLEGHENY COUNTY COMMON PLEAS CP-02-MD-571-2016 NOTICE NO. I RESPONSE TO THE 40TH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 1 AND NOW COMES Rita Flaherty, by and through her counsel, Michael A. Comber and the law firm of Farrell & Reisinger LLC, and respectfully submits the following Response to the 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Report No. 1: The allegations set forth within the 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Report No. 1 (the "Report") sadden Ms. Flaherty on several levels, as it must anyone who has worked with victims and their families. While Ms. Flaherty has sat across from dozens and dozens of victims to hear their tragic stories of abuse and the long-lasting implications these incidents had in their lives, seeing these stories collected in this Report brings much sadness for the pain and injury people have experienced. However, this Report also saddens Ms. Flaherty because it does not tell thefull story and, at times, it tells a distorted one. The full story includes compassionate responses by many individuals, including diocesan staff, who listened with care and sought to assist victims of abuse with all of the resources at their disposal. Such aid to healing was not a "one size fits all" response, but one tailored to the needs and preferences of each individual victim. 369 The MI story also, sadly, includes false allegations. While Ms. Flaherty has always approached each person who came forward with a full recognition of the enormity of pain and courage required to do so, nevertheless, there have been allegations which were not supported by facts and, in some instances, were provably false. Ms. Flaherty remains saddened that the Report, given the very nature of the Grand Jury's process, includes accusations that cannot be substantiated at any modest level of proof or scrutiny. Inclusion of these patently false accusations risks causing great harm to honorable people and their families. In 1993 when Cardinal Donald Wuerl asked Ms. Flaherty to serve the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh as a Licensed Social Worker, no title yet existed such as Victim Assistance Coordinator. That would come later. In the moment, Cardinal Wuerl recognized the need, before many of his brother bishops, to have a lay, professionally trained and licensed person serve the needs of the victims and seek evaluation of and treatment for those priests whose behavior was morally abhorrent and criminally reprehensible. That Ms. Flaherty was a mother of small children was also important to the decision to offer her this new position, as a mother's instinct for the protection of the most vulnerable among us was key to Milling this role effectively. Since then, this has been her life's work, her mission. Ms. Flaherty has served in the administrations of Cardinal Wuerl, Bishop Bradley and Bishop Zubik. Each empowered her to receive and respond to victims and their families with every possible resource at the disposal of the Diocese for their healing, spiritually and psycho - socially. Many of the implications throughout the Report about termination of resources mischaracterize the information before the Grand July and the reality of the situation. Ms. Flaherty does not wish to respond to nit at each of the instances of literary license that the drafters of the Report take with the selective, incomplete snippets of her notes that misconstrue 370 reality. The focus must remain on the victims. The priorities must never stray from healing, protection and prevention. This begins with awareness of the nature and extent of sexual abuse in our society, from which, sadly, the Roman Catholic Church has not been exempt. To the extent that the Grand Jury Report creates this awareness, it permits all of us-church, civic and community leaders-to focus on what each of us can do better as human beings and a collective society to ensure that victims are never silenced, that their wounds are healed and that others are protected by appropriate preventative measures. The healing of victims, the protection of minors and vulnerable adults, and the prevention of future abuse must be the focus as we move forward. However, there is another group of individuals for whom we must also recognize the enormity of their suffering the factually innocent priests and their families. This Grand Jury report process has failed them. Ms. Flaherty mourns the lives marred by any child predator, lay or ordained. She grieves with and for all of the victims with whom she has worked for over 25 years. She prays for peace for all whose lives have been forever tinged by the tragedies of abuse. But she also prays for those unfairly portrayed in a legal process that, at times, appears to take accusations at face value because it favors a story that some want to tell regardless of the facts or the consequences. In conclusion, we recall the distinction sometimes made between "doing the right thing" and "doing things right." Ms. Flaherty has always strived to do both in service to the people with whom she has interacted, be it the primary victim of abuse or a secondary victim, such as a family member, or be it the priest rightly accused or the one wrongly identified. It is a standard Ms. Flaherty has brought to her work for 25 years and that she continues to bring each and every day. Ms. Flaherty's sincerest hope is that all of us, in whatever capacity of public service in 3 371 which we find ourselves, will seek no less. We owe it to each other as we strive to foster a world where the dignity and worth of every human being is protected and promoted. Respectfully submitted, elaxia /egg/4(4 Mich 1 A. Comber, Esquire PA I No. 81951 FARRELL & REISINGER, LLC 300 Koppers Building 436 Seventh Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 412-894-1380 412-894-1381 (fax) mcomber@farrellreisinger.com Dated: June 21, 2018 4 372 ***FILED UNDER SEAL*** IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 THE FORTIETH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY ALLEGHENY COUNTY COMMON PLEAS CP-02-MD-571-2016 NOTICE NO, : 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Michael A. Comber, Esquire, hereby certify that a copy 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Report No. 1 of the foregoing Response to the was served on June 21, 2018 via electronic mail and overnight mail upon the following individuals: The Honorable Norman A. Krumenacker, III Supervising Judge, 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Cambria County Court of Common Pleas Cambria County Courthouse 200 South Center Street Ebensburg, PA 15931 nakadmin@co.cambria.pa.us nakbench@co.cambria.pa.us Daniel J. Dye Senior Deputy Attorney General Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General 16th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 ddye@attorneygeneral.gov Julie Horst Executive Secretary for the Grand Jury Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General 16th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 jhorst@attorney neral.gov (c4 By: Mic el A. Comber, qu Attorney for Rita Flaherty 5 373 374 Reverend John A. Geinzer' s Response to Grand Jury Report No. 1 In regard to the Grand Jury charge of child abuse---which I abhor---I cannot recall any action that could be considered or construed as such. This charge can only refer to conduct which has been misinterpreted and thus misunderstood. Secondly, in regard to my heartfelt greeting of children viewed as 'inappropriate, I have been counselled by a diocesan official in a "teachable moment," which became for me a good lesson about social boundaries. Since then, there have been no complaints. 375 376 Response of Father Robert F. Guav First and foremost, I feel that reading the details in Report No. 1 of the 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury ("the Grand Jury Report") regarding sexual abuse by a priest, or by any adult for that matter, toward a child affirms how horrific and devastating these events were and how they have greatly impacted the overall well-being of the victims and their families. For that reason, counseling at the Diocese's expense was offered to victims of such abuse who came forward, and this offer of counseling was often accepted by the victims. While the Grand Jury Report was difficult for me to read, I hope that it can help the Church in general and the Diocese of Pittsburgh in particular in improving their responses in the future to matters of sexual abuse by clergy, should they arise. I served as Clergy Personnel Director of the Diocese of Pittsburgh from June 16, 1986 through the end of January 1991: I was then Secretary for Clergy and Pastoral Life in the Diocese from the end of January 1991 through May 31, 1996, when I returned to serving as the pastor of a parish. As Clergy Personnel Director, I knew of some of these types of issues, but most such issues of abuse by clergy were handled by my/predecessors without my involvement. Once I took over in 1991 as Secretary for Clergy and Pastoral Life, Father (now Bishop) Zubik, who succeeded me as Clergy Personnel Director for the Diocese, and I met with victims of sexual abuse and priests who were accused of such acts, and, later, Rita Flaherty, a trained and licensed social worker, was hired by the Diocese and joined us in these meetings in an effort to better respond to the needs of the victims in a more timely fashion. In this day and age, we now know much more about child sexual abuse and how to best respond to it than we did in the 1980s and 1990s. Continuing education about child sexual abuse and the need for clearances for those working with children, including priests and deacons, has been helpful today in terms of raising a greater awareness about this issue and preventing such conduct. The Church itself has learned and grown from this process since the 2002 Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People ("the Dallas Charter") was issued by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. With the Bishop's acceptance of the Dallas Charter in 2002, there were more clear guiding principles put in place for handling these situations than had been in place in the past. The Grand. Jury Report is presented in such a way that it seems that nothing was ever done right by the Diocese of Pittsburgh in response to allegations of sexual abuse by members of the clergy, and that is just not true. The Report only focuses on the negative, not on any situations that were handled well or on, any improvements that have been made. I feel that the Report'portrays me in an unfair and disingenuous light. The Report lists me as a "Church leader" who "played an important role in the Diocese of Pittsburgh's handling of child sexual abuse complaints." Such a characterization implies that I had decision making power within the Diocese's handling of these complaints that I just did not have. Although I was part of the decision -making process, with the consultation of others, I was an administrator, following Diocesan policies. At the time, the Church believed that the treatment facilities the Church was using would andcould be successful in treating and rehabilitating those accused of sexual abuse. These treatment facilities would make recommendations, which the Diocese usually followed. However, for the most part, now it 377 seems clear, in retrospect, that such treatment and rehabilitation was not successful and that such recommendations should not have been followed. Once again, I feel that it is important to note that the Diocese of Pittsburgh tried to respond to the victims and their families in a compassionate way by offering counseling;assistance. At all times, I, along with others at the Diocese, sought to help both victims of abuse and those struggling with addiction. I never discouraged anyone from making a report to law enforcement authorities, and I never engaged in any misconduct myself Furthermore, at all times, I did my best to abide by the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as well as church law. Then and now, I seek to fulfill my duties as a priest in accordance with the teachings of Jesus Christ. The Church is not perfect and those who run the Church are not perfect, but I believe that the leaders of the Church should try their best every day to help victims of past sexualabuse and to prevent sexual abuse from occurring, in the future. Since the time that much of the conduct in the Grand Jury Report occurred, I feelthat the Church in general, and the Diocese of Pittsburgh in particular, have made great strides and significant improvements in the way that they handle these situations, and I hope that the Grand Jury Report will be an impetus for the Church and the Diocese to continue to improve until there are no more sexual abuse victims and until it can be ensured that this will never happen again. Reading the Grand Jury Report caused me to think long and hard about what the Church could have done better. As a result, I have some recommendations for additional improvements that I believe the Church should make to prevent and address sexual abuse in the future. I intend to share these recommendations with the Diocese of Pittsburgh and hope that the Diocese will consider and implement my recommendations in the future. I pray for all those locally and throughout the world who are victims of abuse as well as their families, and I pray that our Lord will grant them healing and comfort. Respectfully submitted this 20th day of June 2018. s/ Fr. Robert F. Guay 378 379 .4 "ILA men ,e11.1.:s% JUN 2 9.2018 Office of Attorney Genera .frosecu o ns SeCIAP1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: : : SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT.2016 THE FORTIETH STATEWIDE : INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY : : ALLLEGHENY COUNTY COMMON PLEAS CP-02-MD-571-2016 SEALED RESPONSE SEALED RESPONSE OF REVEREND BERNARD J. KACZMARCZYK AND NOW comes Reverend Bernard J. Kaczmarczyk, with the assistance of undersigned counsel, and files the following sealed response with the Court regarding a report critical of him containing findings that he may be characterized to have engaged in child sexual abuses, or being an enabler thereof, or otherwise violated a duty to safeguard the welfare of children, and by way of said response, avers as follows: 380 I, Bernard J. Kaczmarezyk, have no recollection of committing any of the conduct outlined in the summary provided with the Order and Notice dated Mays22, 2018. 2. 1, Bernard J. Kaczmarczyk, specifically deny committing any of the conduct outlined in the summary provided with the Order and Notice dated May 22, 2018. 3. 1, Bernard J. Kaczmarczyk. aver that I would never commit any of the conduct outlined in the summary provided with the Order and Notice dated May 22, 2018, and that such conduct is outside my character and reputation in the Community. Respectfully Submitted, 414/ 6-v Bernard J. ICaczmarczyk/ / Date: Witness: Brent McCune, Esq. PA ID #47794 381 382 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 : : THE FORTIETH STATEWIDE : ALLEGHENY COUNTY COMMON CP-02-MD-571-2016 : NOTICE NO. : INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY 1 RESPONSE I, Edward L. Kryston, deny any wrongdoing regarding the circumstances set out in the summary of the Grand Jury notes provided to me at pages 362, 363, 364 and 365. By: 06Gc.Acutd._L and L. 383 Kryston 384 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: : : SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 2 W.D. MISC. DKT. 2016 THE FORTIETH STATEWIDE : ALLEGHENY COUNTY COMMON PLEAS CP-02-MD-571-2016 : NOTICE NO. : INVESTIGATING GRAND JURY 1 RESPONSE OF NANCY DELGENIO, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF FATHER DONALD MCILVANE PURSUANT TO 42 PA.C.S. § 4552(E) TO THE GRAND JURY REPORT TO THE HONORABLE NORMAN A. KRUMENACKER: Ms. Nancy Delgenio, Executrix of the Estate of Father Donald Mcfivane by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby submits this Response to portions of the Grand Jury Report (the "Report") which she has learned of from the undersigned counsel, to be attached to and made part of the report before the report becomes public record, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 4552(e). We appreciate the opportunity to provide this Response to address factual allegations and conclusions that are incorrect. The undersigned counsel in reviewing materials received by clients whose names were contained in the Grand Jury Report noted that Father Donald McIlvane was listed as No. 47 on the list of "Offenders" from the Diocese of Pittsburgh and learned in confidence that the listing was based on a report of allegations made in 2008 against Father McIlvane. The undersigned represented Father Mcllvane in the Diocesan proceedings against him. The charges were so bizarre that the Independent Review Board unanimously dismissed them and he was immediately restored to ministry. Counsel did reach out to Ms. Delgenio who was the Executrix of. Father IVIcIlvane's Estate who has asked that if no hearings are held as to the validity of allegations against certain people named in the Report, this statement should appear as an attachment to the 2 385 PHDATA 6520376_1 Report in an effort to avoid having his name tarnished. Father Mcllvane was a leader in the Civil Rights Movement who marched with Dr. King in Selma, Alabama. He was a community leader in the City of Pittsburgh who worked with interfaith organizations in numerous activities designed to combat racism and to alleviate poverty. He did not engage in any improper sexual activity and his legacy should not be harmed by false allegations that he was an "Offender". Respectfully submitted, Dated: June 20, 2018 SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS, LLP By: etA) 14%/11.-zi Paul 'H. Titus Attorney I.D. No, 01399 Fifth Avenue Place, Suite 2700 120 Fifth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3001 Telephone: (412) 577-5200 E-mail: ptitus@schnader.com 3 386 PHDATA 6520376_1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this ac+i, day of June, 2018, I served the within Response of Nancy Delgenio, Executrix of the Estate of Father Donald McIlvane, Pursuant To 42 PA.C.S. manner. § 4552(E) to the Grand Jury Report on the following persons and in the following Such service satisfies the requirements of Rule 114 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure: Via Electronic and U.S. First-Class Mail addressed as follows: The Honorable Norman A. Krumenacker, III Supervising Judge, 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Cambria County Court of Common Pleas Cambria County Courthouse 200 South Center Street Ebensburg, PA 15931 E-mail: nakadmin@co.cambria.pa.us Daniel Dye Senior Deputy Attorney General Criminal Prosecutions Section 1600 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 E-mail: ddye@attorneygeneral.gov Julie L. Horst Grand Jury Executive Secretary Criminal Law Division 1600 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 E-mail: jhorst@attomeygeneral:gov SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS, LLP C.014 Pf:/14-4- Paul Titus Attorney I.D. No. 01399 Fifth Avenue Place, Suite 2700 120 Fifth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3001 Telephone: (412) 577-5200 E-mail: ptitus@schnader.com 387 PHDATA 6520376_1 388 ''. \-----T.SiS:'''' e\1 \ WC-, lakOtil s.,, W''''. 0 -sr%V ,, ,n ' e/epuzele72F E idwal&A4t-, 4-1-1751 r. ; FA- iszln .-Li( 2 - 46 3- 2g4S- ,,, \ 7\ e litivoteh i-6 mtp4r. ae ti Q.Orh4tosel 9t1,4414.4640 0 ezi-60- --) AIN or 11, yd.-6446u ...,1 aff.4.4., eint.44.2/40444) 4;1 cit.;.6( eet44.. ), teto eavvii /,:rEilo:LeA).e..0ixwctak fut,40/{444/44 c4,4 to-tui Ailzplatag , Ead Ljr .143 4- 2-011 44frout. 01.ti),c Q ,a6t-f,), --171 ' 1 00-14 / 7..o //, /iot,,,,t4Thi a4 4 .46:it4;/4441w 6-44 AA, ( 10,P.A-e. 'Ke- 2) a.2 -(..1-41)i- Zi--t., .041.1.1. Ce24/teT-e/t tvca-X cliffrr We 14444 etcaliti :441/ 014ie.4-4 tuvem (licteRA).-t ,Ch /4-044d4 1,4,4CetAt, i (114,41 to7NAM q, eihis i.a.A.i4 .mot" tve,44 ;,..tt ,,i,:* iafm.ile.6 44° ttn rim:1444 404444) tt,tiAt A:,*.t)..tiv) i etdtel :-..1 Itelte.deplerp Xe.194/11,4t '94,4 - CRATXA,4 d%$44/ .), `t e'474t;,,,t6-4 CAkee,.. 0.04_44,t;d14.6.44:dr. 1,, ) e attfi:tiktrizi ' D imi4,14446,4 It, P C,041-4.1, Ilvi,7,6 D ;low 44- k444w4, p 389 d ee,444, dielle-e4t 6-A ..0.6.4644siii,i1 /6;- al , 1 - IQ '44444 ,z;WA d.6464.a altJt141 /,..0., . tj ;/, 1doi,,ttiM4 rim' p:-,e,-114 ' h (- ,'. p - (i -A-.4: k :::t , ,,,,.. A, - : 11 114- AttAzkot ;t0 jtf..C.44 ,... I 1 A rb, 1 . ..... 4 1 d!.,c-c) ,.6,,td .6::,0,c.U.,_:::1C.:41 $ ,.. '34 .., Ca) 1 Itidi 4 i 1,-:,21.4 4 ( elA 0 114-/V)11,1 ftz4 c4-0tAi d4 Ctit , 7.400 6k- tita: N,,, it: 04114 q ,t-it4:11. -..:11-i-V441jt 26 ii,__Cite .i-olitcaValitz 444 rite0A__ C:e4.4%,1 ratite,' Sa-4, CA-Ca- A - Aereirweatd ?Lc 4"14A-1-4 /C11,141)-ir:44 __hatitJ (6766///i 0,14.1,14e) 1,,tek,1-an2V) WIWI- .,41.LI-Wieltiaci- x3u.,(31 a/0401de 1A1LC- 0444.- idt6) 5-12.4Aft4. 'Litetioe 54- xitomtlitlz4)mogei npuaLL A --t4141 Wail a... CiLidedo.L.14,ta Ar17:-.0 t:;-thkig,,Rdwa-eg e-44tap-ol te-.1) 4-friee4:k, d4,4 0..o-utit. tee.$3_ if -ad (x-64 Iter,44 ix -e Cil^e14- t Ltizadif,:dteql.i,e- couZI-14 '14LL'- /4444-4 0 .411-e` ) epic& -ea-toe 411)Z -4) .4114044 14-,e 44A4,) ut d gt/nre41..-5 Le cuotAxi .44 0-1011 Oak, etd-t CbLe'12-' 3 390 to-4.0-t A; 1.4idairth' k _st) a,i24 Add 11-473 eed-go. c14,i ,Zbfrzat /16 Oattx,. 44114)L-ad A04-40101 V-A41:Ce GI -J a6i OILe4U1 dal, 4:141h1420.04(Mg-i (7,40,Ydezie A leLSJ _tam. At-roddzi 4L0 iAt xte,A0 ura4 mmi-vt) 1111111111 .-47tatt414-0..44- 42.eeiosick .44-4-aer Ater+f 4-er-pw-- 4>ica, 71tealya. rriztzlet, A-eittd-tim) 2T8 a,c,cep/Mif intASeime,coub4-, Aatiaz-lida-4 Cejara itettb4-_,t7L, P3 4 391 --Pota-c141(pi a/-12;42,41, iz amcl 1ut.4bag- A44-71:44-24).A4 - 1 btu ___a_p_emetAjde --41---74-1.61? Cte aLtartruiivue .14 f-p,adrzeal weells e.041i1D4 11.0-yke, pLae. 404_/,4. As-rm 014.140.A. top_Asl_ Awa au-ci excze...014.04.A pa4-0,14A, I Aie_ -44.0-i,o4yat5,thimtwuqp 63744t Ab4_, 71w dod- Cernireezzi aa ezieizt- Ai& 4..Vizvi, 7ka SA-Le4 Lvo.4 ca-4, t, Odd jagGe xL, 124,04,0 fl-zw ik)- 4-e-ia: 1 m ./zdal 4-1E4 LiCkA --Ad ;6662°1"/2111i/V ),;/ d(e. , ,, ct , , d L.).0x4i_o (3.L.,L.6,-.1 r.4-6-;.,' 4,./....4-di. 2- 6 // ,Wt.;10_1* ii,aAtt ;iv bk--;#td4iza,&& 04)(44it Ociqq-/- 26 a li.x. ,Igcu?A- )Lzo 6-tzha," . Tkrz, i -1,..6 . di 1 %;-ttigo ,IVAcorkrw-c/Ta4 , ) bil'W)-- 41-e4A4,u 3 ,iiiv,...,21., ,, 14i an ,,;,,2. ,, LTLE, a-..-4_ _,,It- ,,,.. c..7,..T.,, pi,,.. , th )4,;,,/,,,,,,o i.i...4 .0- _. 6 1 395 iii.e.A...,_ 396 quitkoc:1).+421,; polo To: Public Defender July 19, 2011 After reading Detective Campbell's report, I find that she has merged several incidents into one and omitted several things I told her. I just want you to know what happened. I, of course, will provide you with any needed details. I met Matt at a gathering of teens with Asperger's Syndrome which their parents had arraigned. This was early in 2008. I had worked with two of the boys and their parents had invited me. I have never had any professional relationship with Matt. He apparently heard from the other teens about activities I had arraigned for them and asked me if I could become his 'big brother'. I was a little taken by surprise, since that seemed to be a rather unusual request for a teen from an intact family to be making, so I talked to his parents and they;said it would be a good thing. The parents are both very nice people, but dad has some very serious health problems. After visiting their home several times and getting to know each other, I agreed to give the relationship with Matt a try. I asked Matt what he would like to do and he said "Lets go camping". Since their home is only a short drive away from Raccoon Creek State Park, we gave it a try for a weekend. Things went well at first, pitching the tent, cooking a meal over the fire and taking a short hike around the park. Then we got ready to bed and things got complicated. We both had an air mattress and sleeping bag and were laying there in almost total darkness. I then heard ( and dimly saw) Matt get out of his sleeping bag and move over till he was kneeling over me. He then reached down, pulled back the top of my sleeping bag and laid down (face down) on top of me. Now, Matt is over six feet tall and weighs nearly 300 pounds and this was uncomfortable to say the least, but given some of his psychiatric diagnoses I thought be wasjust acting a little immature and wanted to 'wrestle'. Then I felt something pushing into my'abdomen and realized it was his erection. I reached up and rolled him over onto the ground and grabbed my flashlight. He was laying there, clutching his'penis and masturbating by 'punching' it. He asked me to join him. I refused, but couldn't help watching because of the pain he must have been inflicting on himself. It was over in a few minutes and I just told him to go to sleep and he did The next morning I decided to pack up and go home after just one night. He got very angry about not staying the second night . On the drive home, he punched me as I was driving and then opened the car door and made as though he was going to jump out of the moving car. I pulled over, got him calmed down then returned him home with no further problem For the next couple weeks, I saw Matt at his home;and talked to him about the incident at the park thought we had it worked out. He did ask to visit my home and I agreed. A week or so later ( I believe it was on a Saturday) I took him to my place - 606 South Main - and showed him around. As soon as we got to the bedroom he pulled down his pants and began masturbating . I just told him he was on his own and that I was going downstairs and that he should call me when he was done. I walked down to the kitchen and had a cup of coffee. Eventually, I heard something from upstairs and walked up. Matt was standing at the top of the stairs - masturbating - but this time his hand and penis were covered with blood I was more concerned about his injuring himself than about the sexual matter. I showed him (using my pointed finger -not his penis as the police report has it -to illustrate how most other boys do it). I did also tell him about using a lubricant because I could imagine that he was doing this frequently and could really hurt himself I was also beginning to worry that I should get him to a doctor to take care of the torn skin. However, after a few minutes I began to understand that this had been all for show, He had been using stage blood!!! Matt is smart, and his 'encompassing preoccupation' (a la Asperger's) is anything to do with movies and TV. He is constantly writing and 'shooting' movies with his cameras and recording equipment I had already taken him to a store in Robinson that specializes in costumes and stage equipment ... and yes, he had been looking at stage blood. The date that my attorney and the District Attorney had agreed to focus on - April .IS` 2008 -was apparently chosen because Matt had told them that that was the first time he stayed over at my place. (I was told that I could get a detailed account of what he told them but although both I and my attorney have written and asked for it, I have never received it) Matt had been acting fairly well and he constantly asked to stay with me over a weekend, I had set up my bedroom for two of us. He was to use my bed and I had set up an air mattress and sleeping bag on the other side of the room for myself. As I remember, we had picked up a movie to watch and gone out for something to eat. It was getting late 397 and we were getting ready for bed. I was sitting on the side of the bed taking my shoes off when Matt sat down right next to me. I don't remember if I realized he was naked but I would in a few seconds. He reached over, took my right hand and pulled it over to him. By the time I looked over, he had placed my hand over his erection and was holding it there with both of his hands. I just remember asking him "What are you doing?", and telling him to "let go!". Of course, at this time we get into the problem of defining what I was doing. In Matt's' mind, I was masturbating him-- in my mind, I was trying to jerk my hand free from his organ. Of course, it was all over in just a minute or two and I can assure you that the only 'seminal fluid' that was produced here belonged to Matt, not me. By my response to Detective Campbell's question that I felt like "a somewhat willing participant", I meant that I realized after this incident started that I could have ended it by getting very physical (by hitting or otherwise harming him) but I decided not to because I still really wanted to try a more positive approach to helping Matt. During the first couple of months I knew Matt, he wanted to spend all ofhis weekends at my place. In fact, he said several times that he wanted to move in with me. He was constantly arguing with his parents and in trouble at school. He did come back to my place overnight several times and, yes, he tried the masturbation thing again. I told him strongly that ;I was getting sick and tired of it but if being 'close' to me -as he put it- was so important, I asked him to thing of another way to do it. He asked if I could give him a back-rub. That seemed to'be offer an improvement in the situation, so I agreed to try it. Unfortunately, the first time we tried it, he reached behind himself, grabbed my hand and pulled it down over his buttocks. When I told him I didn't want to do this either, he became angry again. He really seemed to think that rejecting these sexual advances were rejecting him! I believe that on the drive home, he tried another 'acting out' for the first time - while we were driving down a road near his home, at about 45 mph, he lunged over from the passenger side, grabbed the top of the steering wheel, and tried to make a hard right turn - which would have had us crash into a bridge abutment Fortunately, I saw it coming and was able to slow down and keep control of the steering wheel. After several instances like this, I was getting very concerned about where this was going and felt that I should let his parents in on what was going on. I finally called his dad (dad apparently didn't remember the call when the detective asked him about it). That's probably because I wasn't too explicit when I talked to him, I just told him about the incident at the park as "Matt had laid down on top of me ", and that "Matt was masturbating and wanted me to help him". Finally, after several talks and frequent admonitions didn't change things, I began to see that this couldn't continue. After Matt had acted out sexually three or four more times, trying to involve me, I had to address this - or get out of it! On one of the Saturdays I saw Matt at his home, we went out to lunch in McDonald and, on the way back to his place, we drove past the Ft. Cherry High School. Matt wouldn't talk about any of these things at home because he felt he would be overheard, so I pulled into the school parking lot. It was a sunny and warm day, so I guess it was the end of May or beginning of June. I told him that we really had to do more than just talk. I had to say something that he would have to agree to or our relationship, which he said meant so much to him, was headed nowhere. As well as I can remember, what I said was " Matt, I really like you and care about you. I want to be your big brother and I appreciate bow smart and talented you are... but this sex thing has to end! It can get me into a lot of trouble.. and it's going to finish off the first real friendship you've had in your life. If you don't end this stuff right here and now, I'm just going home and staying there. I'm going and never coming back. You will never see me again! Do you understand?" He seemed to be tearing up, but he nodded a 'yes'. The amazing thing was that it worked! From that day, he never tried to involve me in any sexual act or situation. For the next two and a half years, I saw Matt on most weekends and he did stay at my place a few more times, mostly on a few weekends when we had arraigned for him to have an 'extra' part in a motion picture being filmed here in Pittsburgh. But from the time of our 'talk' in the high school lot, he never again tried or even suggested that we have any improper contact. The last time. I saw Matt was at Christmastime last year (2010) when I dropped of his present, a book about how to become a movie producer. When I didn't hear from him after Christmas, I called him a couple times but he didn't return the calls. My guess is that the conversation with the social worker had taken place and he was afraid to follow up on it. During those two and a half years, Matt asked me to teach him how to drive (we tried that out for a few times on a neighbors private road, but he gave up on it ). For most of the time, he was constantly getting me to have a 'part' in one of the movies he was constantly producing. The scripts were usually rather strange - featuring strange relationships between seriously disturbed people, but he would come up with a new project at least once a month, and ask me 398 to appear in it. I think he's worn out several camcorders. Things changed a little during 2010. As I have already pointed out, for all of his emotional problems and diagnoses, he is bright and talented. One of the local cable companies actually gave Matt his own television news showl ( You can see several of his 'newscasts' at mcdonaldareanews.corn ). For the last months I was with Matt, I was constantly helping him to finish his studio. You can still watch several of his shows on-line. There are none done in the last few months, so he may, have lost his connection with the cable channel. On the negative side, he is still having sexual problems. I didn't know it at the time. But he was apparently downloading liddy-porn' from the intemet. A speaker from the FBI had apparently appeared at his school and told the students about the government crackdown on the problem. He stopped the downloads, but has become obsessed with the idea that the government might be spying on him. The last time I really spent time with. Matt, he was totally absorbed in his television show and wanted me to help him get enough money to upgrade his studio. I don't know whether my inability to do so had anything to do with his recent statements. Finally, even as I sit here typing this out, I ask myself why I didn't try to get out of this situation a lot sooner. I guess it's as follows: When this kid came up to me over four years ago, I could feel the loneliness and frustration in his story. He had no friends and had already been diagnosed with several psychiatric problems (Asperger's, Bi-Polar and several others). He's been under treatment and taking a rather heavy load of medications for most of his life, this includes several hospitalizations. When he came and just about begged me to be his 'big brother', I knew that I had some unused free time on my weekends and just couldn't refuse him. I guess that my reaction to his bizarre behaviors at the beginning was that I thought of them as symptoms of his mental health problems that I could help him overcome. Several schools and programs have thrown him out because of his behaviors (not necessarily his sexual ones), I didn't want to be another rejection, and after a few months I succeeded in what I was trying to do.. But now I have to ask if those schools and programs were right ..like them, maybe I should have just walked away. My contact information: Arthur Merrell, 60"6"Seu t%\el Phone: 22=38.44..... ' 399 t, Pitts m ell@ PA 1`20 com 400* rPigr-71155: Nn) \ Itt-t -*Rai 0.11 13251 Apaloosa Lane Apt. 317 MAY 0 9 2018 Ft. Myers, Florida, 33912 Office of Attorney General Prosecutions Section May 8, 2018 Mr. Daniel J. Dye Senior Deputy Attorney General 16th Floor Strawberry Square Harrisburg, Pa. 17120 Dear Mr. Dye, I am writing in response to the document which you sent me which was dated May 4, 2018. I do not know the full legal implications of this document, but I will try to answer some of the questions which it contains. At the present time, I am eighty-four years old. cannot walk very well and must use a mobility scooter to get around. have not been involved in any basketball programs for thirty years since 1988 when the Diocese of Pittsburgh asked me to withdraw from the basketball program. did comply with this order. The main complaint in this document is that I was present in the locker room when the boys were taking showers. This is accurate. However, at no time was I ever in the locker room by myself; the coaching staff was always there. As far as the boys being required to take showers, this was not my request but that of the head coach. The coach thought that this was a way to prepare the boys for the practice of showering when they would be playing basketball in high school. At no time did ever touch a boy or any child. There has been no child who has made an accusation against me that I touched him. In the summary of the document it states: "The Diocese could attest to the following statements: `No accusation of misconduct have ever been made against him, nor has he ever been involved in any incident, to my knowledge, which has led to potential or public scandal and to the best of my knowledge he has never engaged in sexual behavior inconsistent with priestly celibacy, nor has he ever acted in an inappropriate manner with minors." Father Mark Eckman, the Vicar for Clergy, signed this statement and attested to its veracity. I have also included a copy of the Certificate of completion for Recognizing and Reporting Child Abuse. I I I I Sincerely, (Rev.) Thomas M. O'Donnell 401 Certificate of Completion Page Certificate of Completion Recognizing and Reporting Child Abuse: Mandated and Permissive Reporting in Pennsylvania Meets ACT 31 of 2014 training requirements Meets the Recognizing Child Abuse and Mandated Reporting components of ACT 126 of 2013 training requirements 3 continuing education hours Presenter: University of Pittsburgh School of Social Work, PA Child Welfare Resource Center 403 East Winding Hill Road, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Presented to: ti O'Donnell, Thomas on the date: October 30, 2016 s; 4 Provider Number: CACE000004 CE Course Number: PCW000001 V Tracy Soska, Director of Continuing Education Qrshnnl of Qnnisol rE 1A/nr4 \11 Michael Byers, Director PA Child WelfareResource Center -141 402 -:?.XZ!;),462<.'n 1 of 1 403 Paul G. Spisak 2600 Morange Road Pittsburgh, PA 15205 May 24, 2018 Daniel J. Dye Senior Deputy Attorney General 16th Floor Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Dear Sir: received your 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Report dated May 4, 2018. I have read it thoroughly -and found some discrepancies and false assumptions in the report. All I can say at this time is that have followed all of the recommendations of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. I I Respectfully, atah Paul G Spisak Cc: The Honorable Normal A. Krumenacker, Ill 404