40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury REPORT 1 Interim--Redacted Section I. Introduction Section II. The Dioceses 1 13 Roman Catholic Diocese of Allentown 15 Roman Catholic Diocese of Erie 65 Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg 113 Roman Catholic Diocese of Harrisburg 149 Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh 207 Roman Catholic Diocese of Scranton 251 Section III. The Church and Child Abuse, Past and Present 297 Section IV. Recommendations of the Grand Jury 307 Appendix of Offenders 315 Section V. Roman Catholic Diocese of Allentown 317 Roman Catholic Diocese of Erie 389 Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg 475 Roman Catholic Diocese of Harrisburg 517 Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh 587 Roman Catholic Diocese of Scranton 799 Society of St. John 877 I. Introduction We, the members of this grand jury, need you to hear this. We know some of you have heard some of it before. There have been other reports about child sex abuse within the Catholic Church. But never on this scale. For many of us, those earlier stories happened someplace else, someplace away. Now we know the truth: it happened everywhere. We were given the job of investigating child sex abuse in six dioceses - every diocese in the state except Philadelphia and Altoona -Johnstown, which were the subject of previous grand juries. These six dioceses account for 54 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties. We heard the testimony of dozens of witnesses concerning clergy sex abuse. We subpoenaed, and reviewed, half a million pages of internal diocesan documents. They contained credible allegations against over three hundred predator priests. Over one thousand child victims were identifiable, from the church's own records. We believe that the real number - of children whose records were lost, or who were afraid ever to come forward - is in the thousands. Most of the victims were boys; but there were girls too. Some were teens; many were prepubescent. Some were manipulated with alcohol or pornography. Some were made to masturbate their assailants, or were groped by them. Some were raped orally, some vaginally, some anally. But all of them were brushed aside, in every part of the state, by church leaders who preferred to protect the abusers and their institution above all As a consequence of the coverup, almost every instance of abuse we found is too old to be prosecuted. But that is not to say there are no more predators. This grand jury has issued presentments against a priest in the Greensburg diocese and a priest in the Erie Diocese, who has been sexually assaulting children within the last decade. We learned of these abusers directly from 1 their dioceses - which we hope is a sign that the church is finally changing its ways. And there may be more indictments in the future; investigation continues. But we are not satisfied by the few charges we can bring, which represent only a tiny percentage of all the child abusers we saw. We are sick over all the crimes that will go unpunished and uncompensated. This report is our only recourse. We are going to name their names, and describe what they did - both the sex offenders and those who concealed them. We are going to shine a light on their conduct, because that is what the victims deserve. And we are going to make our recommendations for how the laws should change so that maybe no one will have to conduct another inquiry like this one. We hereby exercise our historical and statutory right as grand jurors to inform the public of our findings. This introduction will briefly describe the sections of the report that follow. We know it is very long. But the only way to fix these problems is to appreciate their scope. The dioceses This section of the report addresses each diocese individually, through two or more case studies that provide examples of the abuse that occurred and the manner in which diocesan leaders "managed" it. While each church district had its idiosyncrasies, the pattern was pretty much the same. The main thing was not to help children, but to avoid "scandal." That is not our word, but theirs; it appears over and over again in the documents we recovered. Abuse complaints were kept locked up in a "secret archive." That is not our word, but theirs; the church's Code of Canon Law specifically requires the diocese to maintain such an archive. Only the bishop can have the key. The strategies were so common that they were susceptible to behavioral analysis by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. For our benefit, the FBI agreed to assign members of its National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime to review a significant portion of the evidence received 2 by the grand jury. Special agents testified before us that they had identified a series of practices that regularly appeared, in various configurations, in the diocesan files they had analyzed. It's like a playbook for concealing the truth: First, make sure to use euphemisms rather than real words to describe the sexual assaults in diocese documents. Never say "rape"; say "inappropriate contact" or "boundary issues." Second, don't conduct genuine investigations with properly trained personnel. Instead, assign fellow clergy members to ask inadequate questions and then make credibility determinations about the colleagues with whom they live and work. Third, for an appearance of integrity, send priests for "evaluation" at church -run psychiatric treatment centers. Allow these experts to "diagnose" whether the priest was a pedophile, based largely on the priest's "self -reports," and regardless of whether the priest had actually engaged in sexual contact with a child. Fourth, when a priest does have to be removed, don't say why. Tell his parishioners that he is on "sick leave," or suffering from "nervous exhaustion." Or say nothing at all. Fifth, even if a priest is raping children, keep providing him housing and living expenses, although he may be using these resources to facilitate more sexual assaults. Sixth, if a predator's conduct becomes known to the community, don't remove him from the priesthood to ensure that no more children will be victimized. Instead, transfer him to a new location where no one will know he is a child abuser. Finally and above all, don't tell the police. Child sexual abuse, even short of actual penetration, is and has for all relevant times been a crime. But don't treat it that way; handle it like a personnel matter, "in house." 3 To be sure, we did come across some cases in which members of law enforcement, despite what may have been the dioceses' best efforts, learned of clergy sex abuse allegations. Some of these were many decades ago, and police or prosecutors at the time simply deferred to church officials. Other reports arose more recently, but involved old conduct, and so were quickly rejected on statute of limitations grounds without looking into larger patterns and potential continuing risks. We recognize that victims in these circumstances were understandably disappointed there was no place they could go to be heard. But we have heard them, and will tell their stories, using the church's own records, which we reproduce in the body of the report where appropriate. In the Diocese of Allentown, for example, documents show that a priest was confronted about an abuse complaint. He admitted, "Please help me. I sexually molested a boy." The diocese concluded that "the experience will not necessarily be a horrendous trauma" for the victim, and that the family should just be given "an opportunity to ventilate." The priest was left in unrestricted ministry for several more years, despite his own confession. Similarly in the Diocese of Erie, despite a priest's admission to assaulting at least a dozen young boys, the bishop wrote to thank him for "all that you have done for God's people.... The Lord, who sees in private, will reward." Another priest confessed to anal and oral rape of at least 15 boys, as young as seven years old. The bishop later met with the abuser to commend him as "a person of candor and sincerity," and to compliment him "for the progress he has made" in controlling his "addiction." When the abuser was finally removed from the priesthood years later, the bishop ordered the parish not to say why; "nothing else need be noted." In the Diocese of Greensburg, a priest impregnated a 17 -year-old, forged the head pastor's signature on a marriage certificate, then divorced the girl months later. Despite having sex with a 4 minor, despite fathering a child, despite being married and being divorced, the priest was permitted to stay in ministry thanks to the diocese's efforts to find a "benevolent bishop" in another state willing to take him on. Another priest, grooming his middle school students for oral sex, taught them how Mary had to "bite off the cord" and "lick" Jesus clean after he was born. It took another 15 years, and numerous additional reports of abuse, before the diocese finally removed the priest from ministry. A priest in the Diocese of Harrisburg abused five sisters in a single family, despite prior reports that were never acted on. In addition to sex acts, the priest collected samples of the girls' urine, pubic hair, and menstrual blood. Eventually, his house was searched and his collection was found. Without that kind of incontrovertible evidence, apparently, the diocese remained unwilling to err on the side of children even in the face of multiple reports of abuse. As a high-ranking official said about one suspect priest: "At this point we are at impasse - allegations and no admission." Years later, the abuser did admit what he had done, but by then it was too late. Elsewhere we saw the same sort of disturbing disdain for victims. In the Diocese of Pittsburgh, church officials dismissed an incident of abuse on the ground that the 15 -year -old had "pursued" the priest and "literally seduced" him into a relationship. After the priest was arrested, the church submitted an evaluation on his behalf to the court. The evaluation acknowledged that the priest had admitted to "sado-masochistic" activities with several boys - but the sado- masochism was only "mild," and at least the priest was not "psychotic." The Diocese of Scranton also chose to defend its clergy abusers over its children. A diocese priest was arrested and convicted after decades of abuse reports that had been ignored by the church. The bishop finally took action only as the sentencing date approached. He wrote a letter to the judge, with a copy to a state senator, urging the court to release the defendant to a Catholic 5 treatment center. He emphasized the high cost of incarceration. In another case, a priest raped a girl, got her pregnant, and arranged an abortion. The bishop expressed his feelings in a letter: "This is a very difficult time in your life, and I realize how upset you are. I too share your grief." But the letter was not for the girl. It was addressed to the rapist. The church and child abuse, past and present We know that the bulk of the discussion in this report concerns events that occurred before the early 2000's. That is simply because the bulk of the material we received from the dioceses concerned those events. The information in these documents was previously kept hidden from those whom it most affected. It is exposed now only because of the existence of this grand jury. That historical record is highly important, for present and future purposes. The thousands of victims of clergy child sex abuse in Pennsylvania deserve an accounting, to use as best they can to try to move on with their lives. And the citizens of Pennsylvania deserve an accounting as well, to help determine how best to make appropriate improvements in the law. At the same time, we recognize that much has changed over the last fifteen years. We agreed to hear from each of the six dioceses we investigated, so that they could inform us about recent developments in their jurisdictions. In response, five of the bishops submitted statements to us, and the sixth, the bishop of Erie, appeared before us in person. His testimony impressed us as forthright and heartfelt. It appears that the church is now advising law enforcement of abuse reports more promptly. Internal review processes have been established. Victims are no longer quite so invisible. But the full picture is not yet clear. We know that child abuse in the church has not yet disappeared, because we are charging two priests, in two different dioceses, with crimes that fall within the statute of limitations. One of these priests ejaculated in the mouth of a seven -year -old. 6 The other assaulted two different boys, on a monthly basis, for a period of years that ended only in 2010. And we know there might be many additional recent victims, who have not yet developed the resources to come forward either to police or to the church. As we have learned from the experiences of the victims who we saw, it takes time. We hope this report will encourage others to speak. What we can say, though, is that despite some institutional reform, individual leaders of the church have largely escaped public accountability. Priests were raping little boys and girls, and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing; they hid it all. For decades. Monsignors, auxiliary bishops, bishops, archbishops, cardinals have mostly been protected; many, including some named in this report, have been promoted. Until that changes, we think it is too early to close the book on the Catholic Church sex scandal. Recommendations Grand jurors are just regular people who are randomly selected for service. We don't get paid much, the hours are bad, and the work can be heartbreaking. What makes it worthwhile is knowing we can do some kind of justice. We spent 24 months dredging up the most depraved behavior, only to find that the laws protect most of its perpetrators, and leave its victims with nothing. We say laws that do that need to change. First, we ask the Pennsylvania legislature to stop shielding child sexual predators behind the criminal statute of limitations. Thanks to a recent amendment, the current law permits victims to come forward until age 50. That's better than it was before, but still not good enough; we should just get rid of it. We heard from plenty of victims who are now in their 50's, 60's, 70's, and even one who was 83 years old. We want future victims to know they will always have the force of the 7 criminal law behind them, no matter how long they live. And we want future child predators to know they should always be looking over their shoulder - no matter how long they live. Second, we call for a "civil window" law, which would let older victims sue the diocese for the damage inflicted on their lives when they were kids. We saw these victims; they are marked for life. Many of them wind up addicted, or impaired, or dead before their time. The law in force right now gives child sex abuse victims twelve years to sue, once they turn 18. But victims who are already in their 30's and older fell under a different law; they only got two years. For victims in this age range, the short two-year period would have expired back in the 1990's or even earlier - long before revelations about the institutional nature of clergy sex abuse. We think that's unacceptable. These victims ran out of time to sue before they even knew they had a case; the church was still successfully hiding its complicity. Our proposal would open a limited "window" offering them a chance, finally, to be heard in court. All we're asking is to give those two years back. Third, we want improvement to the law for mandated reporting of abuse. We saw from diocesan records that church officials, going back decades, were insisting they had no duty to report to the government when they learned of child abuse in their parishes. New laws make it harder to take that position; but we want them tighter. The law penalizes a "continuing" failure to report, but only if the abuse of "the child" is "active." We're not sure what that means and we don't want any wiggle room. Make it clear that the duty to report a child abuser continues as long as there's reason to believe he will do it again - whether or not he's "active" on any particular day, and whether or not he may pick a different kid next time. Fourth, we need a law concerning confidentiality agreements. They've become a hot topic in recent months in sexual harassment cases - but it turns 8 out the church has been using them for a long time. The subpoenaed records contained quite a few confidentiality agreements, going back decades: payouts sealed by silence. There are arguments on both sides about whether it's proper to use these agreements in securing lawsuit settlements. But there should be no room for debate on one point: no non -disclosure agreement can or should apply to criminal investigations. If the subject of a civil lawsuit happens also to concern criminal activity, then a confidentiality agreement gives neither party either the right or the obligation to decline cooperation with law enforcement. All future agreements should have to say that in big bold letters. And all this should be enacted into a law. We believe these proposals will assist in the exposure and prosecution of child sexual abuse, and so it is within the scope of our duty to make them. But to be honest it's not enough. We don't just want this abuse punished by criminal and civil penalties. We want it not to happen at all. We think it's reasonable to expect one of the world's great religions, dedicated to the spiritual well-being of over a billion people, to find ways to organize itself so that the shepherds stop preying upon the flock. If it does nothing else, this report removes any remaining doubt that the failure to prevent abuse was a systemic failure, an institutional failure. There are things that the government can do to help. But we hope there will also be self -reflection within the church, and a deep commitment to creating a safer environment for its children. Profiles This final section of the report is possibly the most important. It contains profiles of more than 300 clergy members, from all six dioceses we investigated. By comparison, estimates of the number of abusive priests identified since 2002 in the Boston, Massachusetts archdiocese range from about 150 to 250. The 2005 Philadelphia archdiocese grand jury report identified over 60 9 priests. The 2016 Altoona -Johnstown report named about 50 abusers. We believe ours is the largest grand jury report of its kind to date. Each of the profiles is a summary of the abuse allegations against individual priests and of the church's response over time to those allegations. The profiles are based largely on the wealth of internal documents surrendered by the dioceses. In many cases, we also received testimony from the victims. And, on over a dozen occasions, the priests themselves appeared before us. Most of them admitted what they had done. Even out of these hundreds of odious stories, some stood out. There was the priest, for example, who raped a seven -year -old girl - while he was visiting her in the hospital after she'd had her tonsils out. Or the priest who made a nine -year -old give him oral sex, then rinsed out the boy's mouth with holy water to purify him. Or the boy who drank some juice at his priest's house, and woke up the next morning bleeding from his rectum, unable to remember anything from the night before. Or the priest, a registered psychologist, who "treated" a young parishioner with depression by attempting to hypnotize her and directing her to take off her clothes, piece by piece. One priest was willing to admit to molesting boys, but denied reports from two girls who had been abused; "they don't have a penis," he explained. Another priest, asked about abusing his parishioners, refused to commit "with my history," he said, "anything is possible." Yet another priest finally decided to quit after years of child abuse complaints, but asked for, and received, a letter of reference for his next job - at Walt Disney World. We came across a file in which the diocese candidly conceded that "this is one of our worst ones" - but of course told no one about him. Actually we came across the same statement in the files of several other priests. Then there was the file with a simple celebratory notation: "bad abuse 10 case. [Victim] sued us ... we won." And this happy note, in a case in which a seven -year -old girl was molested by a priest from outside the diocese: In addition to describing the abuse and its handling, each of the profiles also includes a list, as complete as we could make it, of the subject priest's places of assignment over the course of his career. That doesn't mean we received abuse reports associated with each of those assignments. But the assignment list should provide parishioners with a way to determine whether priests who were credibly accused of abuse ever served in their area. We should emphasize that, while the list of priests is long, we don't think we got them all. We feel certain that many victims never came forward, and that the dioceses did not create written records every single time they heard something about abuse. We also couldn't fully account for out-of-state travel. Many priests who served in Pennsylvania also spent some of their careers in other parts of the country. If they abused children elsewhere, reports might have made their way back to diocesan files here. But we suspect that a lot did not. Although this section of our report is as comprehensive as we could make it, we did not automatically name every priest who was mentioned in the documents. We actually received files on over 400 priests from the dioceses. Some of these are not presented here because the information contained in the file was too scanty to make a reasonable determination about what had happened. On other occasions, we present a profile anonymously, because the case reveals a lot about the diocese's behavior, but nothing significant about the priest's. And in numerous other cases, the evidence contained in the file was clear, but the misconduct was outside the purpose of this investigation, which focused on criminal child sex abuse. As a result, we do not include files involving sex between priests and adults, substance abuse, or financial wrongdoing, unless these relate directly to abuse of children. 11 REDACTED -- ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION Many of the priests who we profile here are dead. We decided it was crucial to include them anyway, because we suspect that many of their victims may still be alive - including unreported victims who may have thought they were the only one. Those victims deserve to know they were not alone. It was not their fault. We need to end with this note. During our deliberations, one of the victims who had appeared before us tried to kill herself. From her hospital bed, she asked for one thing: that we finish our work and tell the world what really happened. We feel a debt to this woman, and to the many other victims who so exposed themselves by giving us their stories. We hope this report will make good on what we owe. 12 II. The Dioceses 13 14 Roman Catholic Diocese of Allentown Ecclesiastical Province ofPhiladelphia IArchdiocese Diocese I I Allentown El Altoona -Johnstown Erie I I I I Greensburg Harrisburg 1.1 Philadelphia Pittsburgh Scranton I. General Overview of the Diocese of Allentown, Pennsylvania The Diocese of Allentown originated as part of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. In 1961, portions of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia were broken off to create the Diocese of Allentown. As of 2015, the Diocese had a Catholic population of 258,997, which was 20.04% of the total population within the five counties. The Diocese maintains approximately eighty-nine parishes, thirty-four elementary schools, six high schools, and two colleges, and has approximately two hundred forty priests. The Diocese encompasses the Counties of Schuylkill, Berks, Carbon, Lehigh, and Northampton. II. History of Bishops of the Diocese of Allentown 1) Bishop Joseph Mark McShea (2/11/1961 through 2/3/1983) 2) Bishop Thomas Jerome Welsh (2/3/1983 through 12/15/1997) 3) Bishop Edward Peter Cullen (12/16/1997 through 5/27/2009) 15 4) Bishop John Oliver Barres (5/27/2009 through 12/9/2016) 5) Bishop Alfred Andrew Schlert (8/31/2017 to present) III. Additional Church Leadership within the Diocese of Allentown Relevant to the Grand Jury's Investigation The following Church leaders, while not bishops, played an important role in the Diocese of Allentown' s handling of child sexual abuse complaints. 1) Monsignor Anthony Muntone 2) Monsignor Gerald Gobitas 3) Monsignor Alfred Schlert - (Note: Schlert went on to become Bishop of Allentown.) IV. Findings of the Grand Jury The Grand Jury uncovered evidence of child sexual abuse committed by Roman Catholic priests of the Diocese of Allentown. Evidence showed that priests engaged in sexual contact with minors, including grooming and fondling of genitals and/or intimate body parts as well as penetration of the vagina, mouth, or anus. The evidence also showed that Diocesan administrators, including the Bishops, had knowledge of this conduct and that priests were regularly placed in ministry after the Diocese was on notice that a complaint of child sexual abuse had been made. This conduct was enabling to offenders and endangered the welfare of children. Evidence also showed that the Diocese had discussions with lawyers regarding the sexual conduct of priests with children and made settlements with victims. Further, these settlements contained confidentiality agreements forbidding victims from speaking about the abuse under threat of some penalty, such as legal action to recover previously paid settlement monies. 16 Finally, the Grand Jury received evidence that several Diocesan administrators, including the Bishops, often dissuaded victims from reporting to police or conducted their own deficient, biased investigations without reporting crimes against children to the proper authorities. Offenders Identified by the Grand Jury V. 1) Thomas J. Bender 2) Thomas J. Benestad 3) Robert G. Cofenas 4) Francis J. Fromholzer 5) James Gaffney 6) Joseph Galko 7) Edward George Ganster 8) Francis T. Gillespie 9) Edward R. Graff 10) Richard J. Guiliani 11) Joseph D. Hulko 12) Joseph H. Kean 13) Thomas J. Kerestus 14) Francis Joseph McNelis 15) Gabriel Patil 16) Henry Paul 17) Paul G. Puza 18) Dennis A. Rigney 19) Joseph A. Rock 17 20) Gerald Royer 21) Charles J. Ruffenach 22) J. Pascal Sabas 23) William J. Shields 24) Stephen F. Shigo 25) David A. Soderlund 26) Henry E. Strassner 27) Bruno M. Tucci 28) A. Gregory Uhrig 29) Andrew Aloysius Ulincy 30) Ronald Yarrosh 31) Joseph A. Zmijewski Carmelites 32) David Connell 33) Timothy Johnson 34) Jim Gross Single Victim Group 35) 36) Michael S. Lawrence 37) William E. Jones 18 REDACTED - ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION VI. Examples of Institutional Failure: Fathers Frank Fromholzer, Edward Graff, and Michael Lawrence The Grand Jury notes the following examples of child sexual abuse perpetrated by priests within the Diocese of Allentown. These examples further highlight the wholesale institutional failure that endangered the welfare of children throughout the Pennsylvania Dioceses, including the Diocese of Allentown. These examples are not meant to be exhaustive; rather, they provide a window into the conduct of past Pennsylvania Bishops and the crimes they permitted to occur on their watch. 19 The Case of Father Francis J. Fromholzer Known Assignments 05/1958 06/1959 06/1962 03/1963 06/1965 10/1970 08/1975 04/1980 07/1980 11/1982 06/1992 06/1995 10/2002 09/1959 06/1965 09/1962 06/1965 10/1970 08/1975 04/1980 07/1980 09/1980 06/1992 06/1995 09/2002 Holy Ghost, Bethlehem Allentown Central Catholic High School Holy Ghost (summer assignment) Mary, Queen of Peace, Pottsville St. Paul, Reading St. Mary, Hamburg St. Paul, Reading Sick leave Holy Family Manner, Bethlehem St. Paul, Allentown St. Peter, Coplay St. Paul, Allentown Retired The case of Father Francis "Frank" Fromholzer highlights the immense challenges faced by victims when seeking redress from a Diocese that chose to take a position hostile to the victim. The influence of the institution is evident in many cases. In the case of Frank Fromholzer, it is particularly evident. Fromholzer sexually abused at least two students while serving as a religion teacher at Allentown Central Catholic High School. On June 12, 2016, the victims testified under oath before the Grand Jury that they were sexually abused by Fromholzer in 1965 when they were approximately 13 or 14 years old. One victim was Julianne, now 68 years old. Julianne recalled that, during a trip to the Poconos in approximately 1964, Fromholzer took Julianne and at least one other girl for a ride in his car. The trip was unsupervised and Julianne' s family was comfortable with the trip since Fromholzer was a trusted priest. Fromholzer groped the girls as he encouraged them to take turns sitting next to him. Fromholzer' s conduct escalated and he touched Julianne under her clothes. 20 Once at their destination, Fromholzer retrieved a blanket and radio from the car and took his collar off. Fromholzer told the girls that, while they were on the trip, they were not to call him Father but to call him Frank. Julianne testified, "Then we went - he laid out a blanket and he started kissing, feeling, put his finger in me. That hurt. It was confusing because - you were always told you were going to Hell if you let anybody touch you. But then you've got Father doing it." Julianne described to the Grand Jury the position of power that priests hold within the Catholic faith. She testified, "They - there wasn't anybody that was more important than, not just him, but any priest. They were - and to some degree still are, but they are much above anybody else in your family or they are God in the flesh." Julianne went on to describe other incidents after the trip to the Poconos in which Fromholzer had sexual or inappropriate contact with her. She testified that there was a gym in the basement of the ninth grade building at Central Catholic. Fromholzer would follow her into the basement and make comments that she gained a little weight and needed to get on a scale. Fromholzer would then lift her onto the scale from behind, holding her breast to get her on the scale. Fromholzer would constantly nuzzle and kiss her neck as well as "kiss and touch." After the trip to the Poconos, the touching occurred on top of her clothing and panties. Julianne told the Grand Jury of an incident in which Fromholzer humiliated her in front of her religion class. She was participating in a reading of the Passion of Christ around Easter season. Fromholzer had her read aloud the portion of the story where the words "the cock crows three times" appear. Fromholzer had her repeat the words several times, which evoked laughter from Fromholzer and the boys in the class. As Julianne left class that day, Fromholzer leaned in and nuzzled her neck and asked the victim if she knew what a cock was. 21 The victim testified that the abuse stopped only when she moved on to tenth grade and was no longer in the same building as Fromholzer. Julianne' s friend also testified in front of the Grand Jury about being abused by Fromholzer. The second victim was taken to the Poconos by Fromholzer with Julianne. She was in ninth grade and approximately 14 years old when the abuse occurred. On the way to the Poconos, she observed Fromholzer rubbing his elbow against Julianne' s breasts. Once at the location in the Poconos, the second victim was also sexually abused by Fromholzer. Fromholzer began kissing her on the lips and touching her breasts. Reluctantly, she laid down on a blanket where Fromholzer, using his hands, proceeded to touch her on her vaginal area, inside her clothing. The second victim reported the abuse to her principal at the time, Father Robert M. Forst. She told Forst about the trip to the Poconos and how Fromholzer touched her and her friend inappropriately. Forst responded by indicating to the second victim that the discussion they were having had "ended." Forst told her that she was expelled from school and indicated she needed to bring her father to the school. The second victim came from a single-parent home in which her mother had left after no longer being able to live with her father. Both parents were alcoholics and her father was physically abusive. When her father arrived at the school, there was a meeting between the second victim, her father, and Forst. The second victim recalled Forst telling her, "Now, I want you to tell that story that you said - the made-up story that you said about the priest to your father - with your father here." She again told them about how she was abused by Fromholzer. Her father did not believe her and proceeded to drag her home, yelling at her and slapping her along the way. When they finally got home, she was beaten more by her father, this time with a belt so that the belt buckle would strike her. 22 The second victim told the Grand Jury that the school then failed her in English and Algebra, two courses that she loved. She expressed to the Grand Jury how hard it was to talk of the abuse since she had not told anyone most of her life. The abuse haunted the second victim her entire life, resulting in two marriages that ended in divorce. Talking about the abuse she endured at the hands of Fromholzer, she testified, "You can't get rid of it. You don't talk about it. It is always there." Coming from a broken home, she had counted on the understanding of priests and nuns. The second victim said that, after being expelled for reporting being sexually abused by Fromholzer, she felt "worthless." The second victim broke years of silence when she testified before the Grand Jury. Her friend, Julianne, told the Grand Jury that it took her until she was in her thirties, nearly twenty years later, to find the courage to try to report the abuse to someone in the Diocese. Unfortunately for Julianne, she tried to report the abuse to another priest, Father Weasel. Weasel was considered a family friend. When the victim began to tell Weasel of the abuse, he stopped her and told her, "No, I don't want to hear it. You go to confession and you pray for him." As a result, Julianne said nothing more about the abuse until she was unable to stay silent any longer. Julianne reported Fromholzer's conduct to Monsignor John Murphy of St. Thomas Moore Parish. As she tried to confess the abuse, Murphy told her, "Don't say the name." At the time Julianne tried to report the abuse to Murphy in the 1980's, Fromholzer was continuing to practice as a priest at St. Paul's Church in Allentown. It was not until approximately August 2002, after the Boston Globe broke the story of child sexual abuse within the Archdiocese of Boston, that Julianne was ready to pursue reporting Fromholzer's criminal conduct to law enforcement. She contacted the Allentown Police Department to file a police report and informed the police that Fromholzer was still working at a 23 church that had a grade school. Julianne also personally reported the abuse to the District Attorney and informed him that Fromholzer was still working at a church with a grade school. The District Attorney elected not to pursue the matter and cited the statute of limitations. Julianne told the Grand Jury that, if it were not for the clergy abuse being revealed in the Boston Archdiocese, she would not have come forward to report the abuse she endured. She also indicated how grateful she was, having been able to tell the Grand Jury about the abuse and Fromholzer. Julianne subsequently became involved with a clergy abuse victim's network. She testified that she is aware from fielding phone calls that there are hundreds of victims who have not yet come forward. She described calls in the middle of the night with full-grown men weeping into the phone as they recounted their sexual abuse at the hands of Roman Catholic priests. This is a volunteer effort on Julianne' s part, motivated by her own victimization and a desire to help others. At the close of her testimony, Julianne thanked the Grand Jury for listening to her story and providing her the opportunity to express their pain. Julianne stated, "... so what does it mean to have somebody care? It means a lot. So I thank you." On September 1, 2016, the Grand Jury issued a subpoena to the Diocese for any and all records related to clergy or church officials against whom complaints of child sexual abuse had been made. Records received by the Office of Attorney General from the Diocese numbered into the thousands. The testimony of the victims was cross-referenced with the records of the Diocese. Internal Diocesan records do not contain any information from Julianne' s reports to Weasel or Murphy. However, it is evident that, once Julianne made contact with the Diocese in 2002, the Diocese and its attorney, Thomas Traud, attempted to undermine and discredit Julianne and her family 24 In 2002, the Diocese was made aware of reports of child sexual abuse against Fromholzer by Julianne and her friend, Victim Two. Fromholzer was still in active ministry. Internal Diocesan records show that the Diocese immediately disregarded these complaints as false. However, Fromholzer "volunteered" to retire. On September 3, 2002, a fax was sent to Monsignors Schlert and Gobitas. The fax bore the timestamp of 09:55 A.M. from the Traud Law Offices. After some discussion regarding an attempt to schedule a meeting with Julianne, Traud reported that he had received information from a relative of Monsignor Leo Fink. This informant told the Diocese that she had been the closest of friends with Julianne in high school and that they shared every secret. She reported that Julianne had once danced as a go-go dancer in the 1960's and that she believed her to be sexually active. Traud' s informant stated that she believed it possible that Julianne was one of the girls who had an affair with a coach at Central Catholic. The informant reported that Julianne also had a family member once go to prison. Traud reported all of this to the Diocese, specifically to Schlert and Gobitas. He went on to note that he knew his informant well and that she had been "so candid and honest." Having received a report that one of their priests had violated children, the Diocese and its attorney immediately began to exchange information meant to discredit the victim with unrelated and irrelevant attacks on her and her family Moreover, the fact that information that a Central Catholic coach may have been sexually abusing students was used as evidence against the victim. In reality, it is the report of yet another crime not reported to the police. A memorandum dated September 11, 2002, by Gobitas, recorded a meeting of September 10 between Julianne, her attorney, Gobitas, Schlert, and Traud. In that memorandum, Julianne' s account of abuse is recorded. Julianne stated that there was a witness to at least one assault. The 25 Diocese recorded the meeting as positive and amicable. The next day a memo was generated by Gobitas that recorded his interview of that witness. The witness recalled that she observed Fromholzer rub his arm on Julianne' s breasts on one occasion in a car in front of Allentown Catholic High School. The witness identified another, possibly a third, victim by first name. 26 FILE DIOCESE OFD ALLENTOWN SEelt.ETIOUT FOR. CLERGY MiliVIORA.NIIII,TNI ,44 TO: gititIPTg'Opa:FIKO.M.11,9011-,F FROM: MONSIGNOR GEttA1.0 E. GOBITAS DATE: 13 SEPTEMBER 2002 RE: 11111111111MMIIIIMIN I met with y myself on rriday,13 September 2Q02 at MO a.m. in the. Chaneery: .said that she was never sexually assaulted by Father Frornholzer Mit she -alle ed to have witnessed him inappropriately rubbing his arm over Juliann breasts on one, occasion in a car in front of Allentown Central Catholic was seated in the back High: Sehool. when she anr101111. were both freshmen. seat of the car,, Juliann was in. the Middle in the front seat. stated. the Father Promholzer's hands never went underneath ftrliarkre's clothing. MO MEN said she: knows of another girl narned who may have, been assaulted by Father FrOmholzer. She said that she still, has some contact wiihas. .I gave: her My card and encouraged her to haveilat call me, min stated thiif 0.e, does, not need any counseling she just wanted to confirm the truth3Truliann's The Witness Interview Memo 27 On September 16, 2002, at 2:48 p.m., a fax was sent from Traud Law Offices to Schlert and Gobitas. The message contained impressions of the meeting on September 10th. Among other things, the memo noted that Tom Traud found Julianne to be "overly dramatic in that there were some times she was crying in the meeting" and that "this woman made an awful amount of assumptions that just were unwarranted." This pattern of investigating the victim continued through 2004 in letters from Traud dated January 22, 2004, and April 12, 2002. In the first letter to Gobitas and Schlert, Traud noted that Julianne was recently in the news and was pursuing her lawsuit and that he received information from a local attorney. The attorney told Traud that Julianne's daughter was a witness for the Commonwealth in a murder case. Traud noted that, because Julianne became involved, she could either be "a mother looking out for her child; or, maybe this is a woman who repeatedly wants her fifteen minutes of fame." In the second letter, Traud informed the Diocese that Julianne' s husband was associated with the Christian Motorcyclists Association which Traud labeled the husband's brainchild. In contrast to the efforts to investigate and discredit the victims of child sexual abuse who dared to report their abuse to the Diocese and/or report to civil authorities, the internal documentation regarding the diocesan investigation of Fromholzer is starkly different. The Diocese asked Fromholzer if he did it. Fromholzer said no. Fromholzer then suggested it might be a good time for him to retire. The report of abuse and subsequent investigation of the victim all occurred on the watch of Cullen. In 2009, Banes took command of the Diocese. In an effort to comply with Diocesan policy and state law, the Diocese formally reported the complaints against Fromholzer to the 28 District Attorney. Similarly, Julianne's lawsuit against the Diocese was dismissed due to the civil statute of limitations. She has received no recovery or recompense for her suffering. The Grand Jury finds that the Diocese of Allentown and the Allentown Central Catholic High School knew full well the criminal conduct of Fromholzer. Yet, knowing that Fromholzer was preying on young girls, the Diocese and School took no action. The victims were told to let it go. When these victims came forward again years later, they were met with disbelief and scorn. Ultimately, internal records show that the Diocese itself deemed Julianne' s complaint against Fromholzer to be credible. Victims are reluctant to report to law enforcement or take any action for fear of retaliation from the Dioceses. That retaliation and intimidation takes many forms. Originally Julianne did not seek any legal action against the Diocese. She simply wished to inform Weasel and Murphy of her concerns and for the Diocese to take action. Action only occurred when Julianne began to speak to parties empowered to scrutinize the conduct of the Diocese: her own attorneys, law enforcement, and the press. 29 The Case of Father Edward R. Graff Known Assignments 06/1955 - 04/1957 04/1957 - 05/1958 05/1958 - 09/1958 09/1958 - 09/1959 09/1959 - 06/1962 06/1962 - 09/1963 09/1963 - 03/1964 03/1964 - 07/1964 07/1964 - 02/1965 02/1965 - 11/1966 11/1966 08/1968 10/1969 - 08/1968 - 10/1969 - 04/1971 04/1971- 04/1974 04/1974 - 11/1979 11/1979 - 07/1980 07/1980 - 06/1983 06/1983 - 02/1992 02/1992 1992 - 2002 Annunciation B.V.M., Shenandoah St. Anthony of Padua, Easton St. Elizabeth's, Pen Argyl Pius X High School, Roseto Residence, St. Anthony, Easton University of Notre Dame Our Lady Help of Christians, Allentown St. Elizabeth, Pen Argyl Pius X High School, Roseto Holy Rosary, Reading Central Catholic High School, Reading Holy Name High School, reading St. Margaret, Reading St Peter, Coplay Annunciation B.V.M., Catasauqua, Director, Thanksgiving Clothing Drive Sick Leave St. Margaret, Reading Holy Guardian Angels, Reading Departed Diocese of Allentown Served in various capacities in Dioceses in New Mexico and Texas Father Edward R. Graff served as a priest in the Roman Catholic Church for approximately forty-five years, approximately thirty-five years in the Diocese of Allentown and ten years in the Dioceses of Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Amarillo, Texas. During his years in ministry, Graff raped scores of children. The Grand Jury investigated not only Graff's conduct but the knowledge of the relevant Dioceses. The case of Graff is an example of dioceses that minimized the criminal conduct of one of their priests, while secretly noting the significant danger the priest posed to the public. The Grand Jury notes that the use of euphemisms was constant throughout the Dioceses of Pennsylvania, but particularly apparent in the case of Graff. Terms such as "sick leave" or "health leave" were often used to reference an absence from ministry related to child sexual abuse. In Graff's case, it was 30 coded as sick leave and retirement. Additionally, child sexual abuse was often minimized with terms such as familiarity, boundary issues, or inappropriate contact. In Graff' s case, internal records and correspondence referred to it as difficulties. Finally, it was common to see collateral issues highlighted as the primary underlying problem, while the sexual abuse of children was deemed a collateral and lesser, related form of misconduct. Known child abusers were regularly referred to as having alcohol problems or classified as naive. In the case of Graff, his primary problem was documented as being an alcoholic. A review of the documents obtained by the Grand Jury stands in stark contrast to the acts described by Graff' s victims. The Grand Jury obtained internal Diocesan records after the Diocese was served with a subpoena on September 1, 2016. Those records were maintained in the secret or confidential archives of the Diocese as well as personnel records. In August 1986, Graff entered the Neumann Center in Reading for what was reported as chemical dependency. The Grand Jury concluded that this was not solely a case of chemical dependency but that the Diocese was aware of some type of sexual conduct with a minor. After almost thirty years of service in school and parishes in the Diocese, Graff was sent to New Mexico for treatment of undefined but "serious" conduct on the part of Graff. On November 28, 1989, there was an exchange of letters between Welsh and Archbishop Robert Sanchez of the Catholic Center, Santa Fe, New Mexico. The subject of the letters was whether Sanchez was "aware of the seriousness of these cases." The context of the letter reflected more than a mere problem with alcohol. However, no further details were provided in the letters. By February 1992, Welsh authorized Graff to retire from active ministry in the Diocese. However, Welsh also authorized Graff to begin ministry to the needy in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, New Mexico. On February 25, 1992, three letters were dispatched by Welsh. Welsh wrote to 31 Graff authorizing him to "continue your ministry to the various needy persons you are already serving." Welsh noted that this was done by agreement with Sanchez. Welsh reminded Graff that he was accountable to the Servants of the Paracletel in Albuquerque as his supervision was continued. Welsh also made arrangements to provide Graff with a monthly pension, living allowance, medical and life insurance, and automobile insurance. Welsh's second letter was sent to Sanchez. In this letter, Welsh explained that he had granted Graff faculties from the Diocese of Allentown and understood that Sanchez had permitted Graff limited faculties within the Archdiocese of Santa Fe under the supervision of the Servants of the Paraclete. Welsh's third letter thanked the clinical director of the Albuquerque Villa for the care provided to Graff and informed him of the aforementioned arrangement between the Dioceses of Allentown and Santa Fe. The Servants of the Paraclete was a treatment center regularly used by Pennsylvania Dioceses for the evaluation and treatment of sexual offenders. 1 32 BISHOrSOFMCE POST OFFICE BOX F LENTOWN PENNSYLVANIA 18105 February 25, 1992 202 T1OKTH SEVENTEENTH STREET (215)437-0755 The Reverend Edward R. Graff Albuquerque Villa Post Office Box 72151 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87195 Dear Father Graff, Sanchez, I have After consultation with Archbishop service to active from retire to desire your decided to accede to to the varministry your continue to and the Diocese of Allentown serving. already ious needy persons you are faculties of the Diocese of With this letter I hereby grant you Sanchez, folArchbishop that It is my understanding Allentown. Personnel Board, will lowing the recommendation of the Archdiocesan of Santa Fe. you limited faculties for the Archdiocese Office to provide you shall also arrange with the Finance as stipulated in Dioallowance living and pension monthly the with and life insurance premiums medical your addition, In policy. cesan of your automobile insurance. will also be covered, as will one half I you must continue to feel it is important to remind you that remain accountable. will you whom to Paracletes the be supervised by wishes as you begin this Finally, I extend my prayers and best ministry. phase of your priestly I Sincerely yours in Our Lord, Bishop of Allentown 33 G in ctI BISHOP'S OFFICE POST OFFICE BOX F ALLENTOWN. PENNSYLVANIA 18105 February 25, 1992 202 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET (215)437-0755 His Excellency The Most Reverend Robert F. Sanchez, Archbishop of Santa Fe 4000 Saint Joseph Place, N.W. Albuquerque, New Mexico 87120 D.D. Dear Archbishop Sanchez, You will recall my letter of December 18, 1991 regarding the Reverend Edward R. Graff, a priest of the Allentown currently under the care and supervision of theDiocese of Servants of the Paraclete in Albuquerque. In view of the consistently positive reports I have concerning Father Graff, I intend to allow him to retire received from active service to this Diocese and to continue his ministry to the various needy persons he has been serving under the supervision of the Paracletes. I had my Chancellor contact Father Richard Olona about the recommendations of your Archdiocesan Personnel Board. It is understanding that, provided Father Graff has faculties from my the Diocese of Allentown, you are willing to grant him limited faculties to carry out the ministry referred to above. It is further understood that the Servants of the Paraclete will continue to supervise his activities and pastoral ministry. I shall grant faculties of this Diocese to range with our Finance Office for his pension andFather Graff and arliving allowance. Permit me to take this opportunity to express my sincere thanks for your solicitude towards Father Graff. If you have any questions in regard free to get in touch with me. to this matter, please feel Sincerely yours in Our Lord, /tBishop of Allentown 34 BISHOP'S OFFICE POST OFFICE Box F ALLENTOWN. PENNSYLVANIA 18105 February 25, 1992 202 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET (215) 437-0755 The Reverend P. Roberto L. Martinez, M.Div. Clinical Director The Albuquerque Villa 2348 Pajarito Road, S.W Albuquerque, New Mexico 87105 Dear Father Martinez, I have today written to Father Edward R. Graff inform him that I intend to allow him to retire from active ministry to the Diocese of Allentown in order to pursue the ministry already to the needy in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe in which he has been engaged. to Archbishop Sanchez, as well as the Personnel Board, is in agreement with this arrangement and will grant limited faculties to Father Graff who enjoys the faculties of the Diocese of Allentown. Knowing that you and the staff at Albuquerque Villa support this request made by Father Graff, I have decided to permit retirement provided that supervision of his activity and ministry by the Servants of the Paraclete will continue. I take this opportunity to thank you for the care you have given to Father Graff and the other priests of Allentown. Sincerely yours in Our Lord, Bishop of Allentown The February 25, 1992 Letters 35 In 1993, correspondence between Welsh and Bishop Leroy Matthiesen of Amarillo, Texas, detailed an alarming development. Welsh expressed his concern that Graff had been transferred within Matthiesen' s Diocese without prior consultation of Welsh. Welsh was also concerned about Graff's living arrangements. Welsh wrote, "It had been my understanding that he was residing in a rectory, but it has now come to light that he has purchased a house. Because of his past history in this Diocese, this development raises additional concerns about the potential risk surrounding Father Graff's activity in your Diocese." 36 01JUL.24.2003b: NU. btAl 6:26RMIczuCATHoLIC muluHL GM' b 7t/ 8MHOrsOFFICE PosroPnCEBOXF AIIINTOWFORMIVAMA 10105 STREET 202 NORTH SEVENTEENTH 29 October 1993 (215) 432-0255 Fax (215) 433-71122 His Excellency Leroy T. Matthiesen The Most Rev. Bishop of Amarillo Street 1800 North Spring 79117-S644 Amarillo, Texas Dear Bishop Matthiesen, to the Reverend Edward am writing in regard currently located in this Diocese who is of priest a R. Graff, Diocese. Silverton within your the Servants of his therapy with to me After Father Graff completed Villa, he presented a request Albuquerque Allentown The at the to the Paraclete he retire from active service that he be allowed to Albuquerque to continue with the ministry I granted in Diocese and remain with the homeless and Aids patients. in of Santa Fe had been engaged that the Archbishop determining after Archdiocese to his request faculties of that priestly continue to limited agreed to give however. that he would understood, was It Father Graff. Paracletes. be supervised by the Graff learn that Father done as a surprise to came was it this since Subsequently later Silverton in your Diocese had transferred to consultation with me. This move, I vas not priests of without any prior by the fact that facultieshad been withdrawn by Fe told, was prompted Archdiocese of Santa the in Liam Hoare, s.P.. incardinated suggestion of Father at the On from you to assist the then Archbishop. and obtained permission sought Graff Father parish in Silverton. Our Lady of Loreto Graff's living made aware of Father in Only recently have I been understanding that he was residing It had been my purchased has he that arrangements. develophas now come to light this Diocese, this a rectory, but it surrounding his past history in of risk Because potential a house. concerns about the I can only hope that he ment raises additional in your Diocese. with you activity the Paracletes and Father Graff's close contact with continues to maintain as well. I 37 01JUL.24.2003b; NU.bUU 6:26RMluz0CHIHuL1t: MUIUHL 6KH Bishop Matthiesen / October 29. 1993 2 you can provide me about shall greatly appreciate any update Father Graff. I With every good wish. -- I am Sincerely yours in Our Lord, Ca 1.y-..L. Bishop of Allentown Welsh's "Potential Risk" Letter 38 Matthiesen responded on November 2, 1993, that Graff tended to be a "loner" and thanked Welsh for "alerting me to the risk I may be taking " Matthiesen indicated he planned "to be even more vigilant and to supervise him even more closely." On November 11, 1994, Welsh wrote Reverend Liam Hoare, Servant General, Servants of the Paraclete, and wanted to know whether Graff was being monitored. Welsh sought a description of the precise nature of the monitoring. Welsh wrote, "While this is not a new concern, I am prompted to express it anew at this time because an individual came forward recently and reported that he had had some difficulties with Father Graff in the past." Welsh closed his letter stating: I know that you will appreciate the reasons for my concern, since the matter presents both your Congregation and the Diocese of Allentown with the potential of legal liability for anything untoward which may occur in the course of Father Graff' s ministry in Amarillo. 39 diocese of amarillo November Most Rev. Thomas J. Welsh Bishop of Allentown P.O. Box F Allentown PA 18105 Pitt -8 2, 1993 c)g,' Dear Bishop Welsh: Grace and peace! am I in concerns about Amarillo. receipt of your letter of Oct. 29 sharing your Father Ed Graff's ministry in the Diocese of I accepted Father Graff on the recommendation of Father Liam Hoare, s.P., Servant General of the Servants of the Paraclete, who stated that he would take personal responsibility for him. I was unaware that you had not been consulted. In hindsight, I should have contacted you and apologize to you for that oversight. I had simply taken it for granted. I was told that he is a recovering alcoholic, and my subsequent incIZThy confirmed that. I assigned Father Graff to Our Lady of Loreto Church, a mission of Holy Spirit Parish, Tulia, and placed him under the care of the pastor. For a while he lived in a small, rundown house made available to us at no cost by a member of the mission Church. Subsequently, a better house near the church was offered to us for $12,000 and I approved the purchase as a rectory. after -care program, directed by Father Peter Lechner, in place. Father Graff is a member of a support group comprised of himself and two other priests that meets monthly. Every six weeks he returns to Albuquerque to touch base with his program directors. My Vicar of Clergy is on the road each week visiting our priests, including Father Graff. I require him to attend our clergy gatherings, the next of which will be four Priests' Study Days concentrating on personal development, relationships, boundaries, clergy misconduct, etc. An s.P., is DIOCESAN PASTORAL CENTER AMARILLO, TX 79117-5844 R O. BOX 5544 BOB-383-2243 FAX BOB -3B3-8452 40 -2- November 2, 1993 Father Graff, with his pastoral sensitivity and ability to speak Spanish, is much loved by the people, almost 100 per cent of whom are Mexicans and Mexican -Americans. In addition to the care of Our Lady of Loreto in Silverton I have given him the care of St. Elizabeth's Church in Turkey as well, another poor mission community that is totally Hispanic. My one concern about Father Graff is that he tends to be a I have spoken to him about ttill and shared my concern with Father Liam, who will be with us on one of the Study Days (Thursday, Nov. 11). 1per. Thank you for alerting me to the risk I may be taking. I am in frequent touch with Father Liam and have confidence in his judgment in present circumstances. Nevertheless, I plan to be even more vigilant and to supervise him even more closely. Fraternally yours in Christ, Bisho. y T. Matthiesen' s Letter to Welsh 41 Matthiesen "" d, 11-.11 1 ' L TA - KamVi 911111C1 &me 4i.r.a..31.1 minorew. immwidel marbdo mwreim MEM Pm Oen Dvrembcr 1114 111 Tim 111.1Pi ttes landli=ad serums New PIMINIA1 Pip .119iL Ifathial di 'MI 1igh.-114111 Saar Poillir Live. der IIIA0r tsma 141 toms 9mbilics 411601. Isvir 'Malt,. Mailer, Sr Prildo LI 4tilar't maerligia/ .r at: ONATIII,billt, 1.14 memo Marina- Wr filkimW2 DWAIN Maelpai4 saii104111421 , uipLaig ig .f w tiitild L aits jug Si LIM si 4014ria4 4141 ha ii4 t iiirt slit I _W twirl+ L 401 41, Lhi pi 1m iLipli 411, rom mtli afrirmaLai4 tar Nf millatbit aa4. Le M# top glada gla 0,111.0r Ftedidbala 444111 roar o f alkwAtaary vita lam 114444sial it #agi matilmar1 MIA la %a NAM $1 La litam at 1441eW 011,114. 11 0101.140 rarised alefaiLIF La gem diteltadradd WU' WNW' Orlif aim t oft 1144 ilia wpm.' tall well Ina ti lam id -C r 11 1151.i i4 rileFesit tS! 4a E. iW itaKami ail Lit, tot imitilmt RALLiIn' Rata CLIME *54 . Idol, *him* 14 ipper roporwooklum g4 am, 140.0014.111 Oir cloak*, 44.1140107 +litabop ki 42 pew, Li gym% +w414 tipl, Lira+ IffileALL O1JUL.22.2003b: 3:25PMJAT[UCRTHOLIC MUTUAL GRP 1,11.m NO.657 " H. /4.2.:1 BMHOPSOFFICE pc f01X I't'.NNSYLVANIA wri AU ENT' Wiri, i MI 115 202 Nr 001 November 19. 1993 SI1.VEN'11..Wn I (4151 STI(1ET 437.070 p ili) .1:1:1 7/122 His Excellency D.D. Leroy T. Matthiesen, The Most Reverend Bishop of Amarillo Center Diocesan Pastoral5644 Post office Box Amarillo, Texas 79117-5644 Dear Bishop Matthiesen, for your letter ofin Thank you very kindly Graff's ministry R. Father Edward November 2. 1993 concerning Diocese of Amarillo. have furnished as the information you supermuch very appreciate I vigilant in your to be even more well as your willingness vision of Father Graff. in this matter. Thank you for your interest Our Lord. Sincerely yours in Bishop of Allentown Welsh's Letters of Warning 43 a." Welsh had the power to remove Graff's faculties to minister in light of Graff' s known risk, concern, and legal liability. However, Welsh left Graff in ministry by agreement with Matthiesen. On January 5, 1995, Matthiesen wrote to Welsh, "Bishop, I am happy to report to you that Father Graff is carrying out a wonderful ministry in Silverton, Turkey, and Quitaque. He is well received and loved by the people who are almost totally Hispanic and among the poorest of the poor." In 1997, Cullen took command of the Diocese of Allentown. Diocesan records do not show any indication that Cullen took any action against Graff. In fact, Graff appears to have continued in ministry outside of Pennsylvania with no real attempt to understand where he was or what he was doing. On October 4, 2002, Graff was arrested in Briscoe County, Texas, for sexually abusing a 15 -year -old boy. Several news articles were written about the incident. Graff died on November 25, 2002, due to injuries from an accident while in a Texas prison awaiting trial. A news article written in the Allentown Morning Call, dated November 27, 2002, reported that the boy Graff abused in Texas was hired by Graff to work at the church rectory where Graff was assigned. It was reported that the victim stated that he watched pornographic movies with Graff and Graff performed oral sex on the victim. The news article quoted investigator Jay Foster as saying Graff would hire mostly Hispanic boys in their early teens to clean the rectory and mow the lawn. Foster went on to say Graff "always had things to attract kids, like video games, Cokes, candy." The article cited to Texas criminal records related to his arrest. On October 10, 2002, a victim reported to the Diocese of Allentown that he was sexually abused by Graff between 1983 and 1984 at the Holy Guardian Angels, Reading. The abuse involved a series of incidents such as showering together, masturbation, and fondling. 44 On June 28, 2003, a second known victim wrote a statement detailing the sexual abuse committed by Graff on him. The second known victim indicated the abuse occurred in the rectory of the Holy Guardian Angels Elementary/Middle School when the second victim was in seventh grade. The second victim detailed the grooming techniques of Graff. After the grooming period, Graff had him take his pants down and sit down. Graff then fondled the second victim's penis as Graff masturbated. According to the second victim, when he questioned Graff about the abuse, Graff responded by telling the second victim that it was "OK" because he was "an instrument of God." The second victim indicated the abuse occurred over the next six months as Graff would have the second victim come to his room, where Graff would masturbate both himself and the second victim. The second victim believed his friend and other boys were also abused by Graff during this same period. In July 2003, after these complaints, the Diocese notified Catholic Mutual Insurance Group of potential liability. On January 13, 2005, the Diocese received insurance paperwork regarding coverage for several sexual abuse allegations, including a claim by a third victim who asserted sexual abuse by Graff between 1971 and 1978, when the third victim was between twelve and thirteen years old. The third victim was a parishioner at Annunciation BVM located in Catasauqua when the abuse occurred. In the suit the third victim stated Graff repeatedly took pictures of him while he was naked, masturbated the third victim until he ejaculated, and performed oral sex on the third victim. Graff forced the third victim to masturbate and on one occasion Graff attempted to perform anal intercourse on the third victim, stopping only after objection. For many years the abuse occurred on a daily basis. The abuse occurred in Graff's bedroom or living room of the rectory. Often, 45 before Graff abused the third victim, Graff would force the third victim to drink alcohol until he was intoxicated. On January 25, 2007, a fourth victim reported to the Diocese that he was sexually assaulted by Graff in 1986, within the Holy Guardian Angels Rectory, when he was 17 years old. The fourth victim died in April of 2015. The Diocese paid for his funeral. The Grand Jury heard testimony from some of Graff' s victims. In addition, the Grand Jury learned of Joey from his grandmother, mother, and sister in August 2016. Some years after his abuse, Joey disclosed his secret to his grandmother, Kitty. Kitty and Joey had a special relationship. They would go on walks together. They would discuss their life and the future together. They were best friends. Kitty recalled that, after years of a downward spiral, Joey finally told her what had happened to him as a child attending his home parish within the Diocese. Graff had raped Joey. During the violent assault, Graff had borne down on Joey's back with such force it had damaged his back. Kitty believed Joey had tried to tell her this years earlier when he had asked if priests molest children. Kitty thought then it was just the gossip of children. Joey eventually told his mother, Judy, and his sister. Suddenly, the changes they noticed in this happy, out-going, science -fiction -loving boy made sense. He was dealing with trauma and conflict. Joey wrote the Diocese on July 31, 2007. Joey described how Graff befriended him and then violently violated him. Joey wrote, "Father Graff did more than rape me. He killed my potential and in so doing killed the man I should have become." In August 2016, Joey's mother testified before the Grand Jury. Judy explained that, in spite of his victimization, Joey had kept the faith. She stated: 46 He stayed with the church. And he asked me if anything ever happened to him to have a Catholic mass and I didn't want to do it and he made me promise and I did. I did what he wanted, but it was the hardest thing to go into that church and being counseled with by a priest. I listened to him and tried to help him out a little bit but I was against it. But he -- the religion was very important to him and he was so afraid of going to hell that I think that is why he stuck with it. Judy testified that the Diocese did provide some support to Joey before his death. However, Judy said that financial support was never the thing they most desired. Judy noted, "They never admitted anything happened. It was like he was trying to prove his entire life what had happened and that he was telling the truth. They never admitted - they never said there was abuse." Joey wrote a letter to Cullen before his death. Joey spoke for all victims of child sexual abuse who suffered at the hands of Roman Catholic Priests. Joey noted that the Church's resistance to providing victims their day in court was inconsistent with supporting victims. Joey wrote: Pennsylvania law does not, for one moment, bar the Diocese of Allentown from making financial settlements with persons who were abused as minors, even though they might not report the abuse until they become adults. Pennsylvania's so-called statute of limitations is merely a defense, a legalistic prescription which the Diocese of Allentown may choose to invoke in civil litigation when it wishes to have an allegation of abuse dismissed without a hearing on the merits. Joey did not live to have his day in court. He passed away due to an addiction to painkillers. Joey became addicted to these pain killers after his back was injured during a particularly violent attack by Graff. Joey' s account is but one account of many victims who were harmed by Graff as children. After Graff' s arrest in Texas, public scrutiny turned on the Diocese. On October 14, 2002, the Allentown Morning Call broke the news that four individuals in Pennsylvania had come forward with reports of child sexual abuse perpetrated by Graff. The article stated that a Diocesan spokesman, Matt Kerr, responded that he was "surprised" by the reports and explained that "We communicated to the Amarillo Diocese rumors that had surfaced, but we never had any contact 47 with actual victims," Kerr said, "This is all new to us." These were the same four victims described above, who reported their abuse to the Diocese after reporting it to the Morning Call. However, the Diocesan statement stands in stark contrast to the evidence held within the records of the Diocese. While the Diocese stated they were "surprised," internal records documenting the opinion of the Bishops showed constant references to Graff as being a "risk," a "concern," and a "legal liability." This language was much more consistent with language used in relation to predatory priests than a priest with a drinking problem. Other victims continued to speak out after 2002. One of Graff' s victims testified before the Grand Jury and provided a compelling and detailed account of a violent assault by Graff. In particularly graphic testimony, this victim explained how, as Graff prepared to anally penetrate him, he decided that he could either let the rape happen or run. He explained how he fled into the street, mostly nude, rather than allow the assault by the formidable and imposing Graff. He further explained the lasting effect of the assault and its continuing impact on his daily life. This victim's mother testified before the Grand Jury as well. She stated that her son immediately reported the abuse to her after it occurred in 1984. She reported the abuse to Father John A. Krivak and her son's school principal. In spite of this report, Graff continued in ministry as a priest. The Grand Jury heard from still more victims who reported Graff was particularly violent in his assaults and seemed to take as much pleasure in causing pain as in the criminal sexual acts themselves. All of Graff' s victims have struggled to move forward, and many question why so little has been done to hold the institution accountable for enabling the commission of such heinous crimes by their leaders. 48 The Case of Father Michael S. Lawrence Known Assignments 06/1973 - 06/1974 06/1974 - 11/1974 11/1974 - 12/1974 12/1974 - 06/1975 06/1975 - 12/1975 12/1975 - 06/1977 06/1977 - 06/1978 06/1978 08/1978 03/1980 11/1982 03/1984 08/1978 - 03/1980 - 11/1982 - 03/1984 - 06/1984 - 06/1984 - 08/1984 08/1984 - 01/1987 01/1987 - 06/1987 06/1987 - 03/1994 03/1994 - 06/1998 06/1998 - 01/2000 01/2000 - 03/2002 03/2002 - 04/2015 St. Catharine of Siena, Reading Notre Dame High School, Easton Sacred Heart, Miller Heights Coordinator of Adult Religious Education, North Hampton St. Jane Frances de Chantal, Easton St. Jane Frances de Chantal, Easton St. Anne, Bethlehem Central Catholic High School, Allentown St. Lawrence, Catasauqua Diocesan Tribunal Holy Trinity, Whitehall St. Catharine of Siena, Reading St. Anthony, Easton Notre Dame High School, Easton St. Anthony, Easton St. Joseph, Easton Notre Dame High School, Easton Immaculate Conception, Jim Thorpe Sick Leave St. Paul, Allentown Diocesan Tribunal Ministry to the Aging Diocesan Tribunal Catholic University of America Divine Word College Courage Retired Father Michael Lawrence was ordained on May 19, 1973. Suspicions of Lawrence's pedophilic behavior were brought to the attention of the Church as early as 1970 while Lawrence was attending St. Charles Borromeo Seminary. A student evaluation found within the records of the Diocese and obtained by the Grand Jury indicate that Lawrence was "a mysterious type who craves the attention of younger students" and that Lawrence showed "a little too much interest in younger students." Regardless of these observations, in 1981, Bishop Joseph McShea wished Lawrence well and noted that Lawrence "and a group of young people from Saint Catherine's 49 Parish will be making a retreat on the weekend of November 20d1 -22nd." The Bishop's salutations are contained within his November 5, 1981, letter to Lawrence on the subject. BISHOP'S OFFICE POST OFFICE BO% F ALLENTOWN. PENNSYLVANIA 18105 202 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET (215) 437.0755 November 5, 1981 The Reverend Michael S. Lawrence, Saint Catharine of Siena Parish Cen 2427 Perleomen Avenue Mount Penn Reading. Pennsylvania 19606 Div. Dear Father Lawrence, It was recently brought to my attention that you and a group of young people from Saint Catharine's Parish will be making a retreat on the weekend of November 20th -22nd. I would like you and all those who will be on retreat with you to know that you will be very much in my th is and prayers during the weekend. I pray that the weekend willib time of all pt you closer to our Lord and His hurch. special graces which will draw I ask that you remember my tenticais during the weekend. and that you pray in a special way for an increase of vocations to the priesthood and the religious life. With every blessing and good wish. I remain Cordially yours, Bishop of Allentown The Bishop's Letter 50 Less than a year later, a 12 -year -old boy told his father that Lawrence had sexually abused him. A report written by Monsignor Anthony Muntone, dated August 18, 1982, indicated that Father Fred Loeper called the Chancery to report an "unfortunate incident." Lawrence, then a priest at St. Catharine' s of Siena, Reading, had sexually abused a 12 -year -old boy. The father of the victim called Loeper to report the details of the incident. The victim told his father that he had been in Lawrence's room for a tutoring session. At the end of the session, the talk between Lawrence and the victim turned to sex. Lawrence then began to touch his genitals, had the victim take down his pants, and began to fondle the victim's genitals. The victim's father reported that his son had told him there had been "a lot of fondling, so much that he felt pain." Additionally, Lawrence made the victim urinate. The victim's father also reported the victim was having a hard time sleeping. Muntone called Lawrence into his office and asked what had happened between Lawrence and the reporting victim. Lawrence responded "Please help me. I sexually molested a young boy." Lawrence then admitted he had the victim come to his room for an English lesson. Lawrence had the victim remove his pants and underwear and Lawrence touched the boy's genitals. He then drove the victim home. Records indicate that Lawrence was sent to "Downingtown" (St. John Vianney Center) the same day he confessed to Muntone. Muntone wrote in his report that he spoke to "the doctor" at Downingtown, who informed him that the family of the victim should be given time to "ventilate" and what the victim experienced may not "be a horrendous trauma for the boy." 51 52 mm ,46 Areidtadz, el ,th (mkt A4 far, 6424 -6 pad zLif if( -444.ticeleaa Aucz444.0 e4 /Atli Muntone's Confidential Memo of Child Sexual Abuse 54 - Less than two years later, Lawrence was assigned to a high school to teach religion classes. A handwritten note to Bishop Thomas Welsh, dated April 9, 1984, reported that things were "going well" since Lawrence had taken over Bill Baker's religion classes. The note went on to state that Lawrence would like to be "reassigned to the school with the spring appointments." The note is signed Tony, for Anthony Muntone. 55 G),4 Ord , 1( pLi --lua4/f _A-74 1/1 -tit or tv4 /pee( aiLa ia-da , (_eAA0? At_ix.rv kL4,Kx4 ATI,Q7-1 _i_441 ,te Jxibz t gi -4/ A ,,t4t (a-ciA,-re I Arytta 1 NeALf ,zere-d ,t44(,4 &e,e' -ekt /vel ,c6-ruiee (azt,,/ 7r4 cta-ell a ei/uLd a Cwi4,t. /5e-6- ?..v,47/Ittzzxr. The Note to the Bishop 56 a7 "04.4 7.zenuA- A Lawrence continued in ministry as a Roman Catholic priest in the Diocese of Allentown in different parishes, schools, and other assignments. However, he was removed from parish ministry in 1987 and placed on "sick leave." A letter from Welsh to Lawrence dated October 20, 1987, stated: On the advice of legal counsel, I write to inform you that effective immediately your faculties to celebrate Mass and otherwise function as a priest of the Diocese of Allentown are limited to the confines of the Convent at Bethlehem Catholic High School. I would ask you to make an appointment to see Monsignor Muntone at the chancery at your earliest opportunity. The Grand Jury learned that the father of the boy who reported his abuse in 1982 had continued to complain to the Diocese regarding Lawrence's continued role in active ministry. The Diocese found itself, albeit temporarily, unable to maintain the secret of Lawrence's conduct. On the advice of legal counsel, they removed Lawrence from ministry. Lawrence met with Welsh on November 5, 1987. The following day, Lawrence memorialized his thoughts in a letter. Lawrence admitted that the possibility of legal action and his removal from ministry had caused him anxiety. He wrote, "I find myself in a very dangerous position. The deep sense of frustration and anger have led me to act -out sexually in the past and if my present situation continues it becomes a possibility again." Lawrence referenced another known predatory priest, Joseph Rock, and opined that perhaps they could be a source of support for one another. Lawrence requested a compromise in which he could celebrate the liturgy at the Manor. Ultimately, Lawrence continued to serve as an active priest on the Diocesan Tribunal without a documented parish assignment. But for the perseverance of the victim's father, the Diocese would have returned Lawrence to active parish ministry as they had done time and time again, as documented within Diocesan records reviewed by the Grand Jury. Although hiding Lawrence in ministry within the Diocesan 57 Tribunal was a poor substitute for actual removal from all ministries and titles, the efforts of this concerned parent kept Lawrence out of parish ministry. The frustration this devoted father caused the Diocese of Allentown was documented in a confidential memorandum written by Muntone to Bishop Edward Cullen on May 5, 1998. Father Alfred Schlert was carbon copied. Muntone wrote: Something of a sticky situation has arisen with regard to Mike Lawrence who serves as secretary at the Tribunal. Back in 1987, it has come to light that Mike had been involved in some very indecent behavior with a young boy about ten or twelve years old, some five years earlier when he had been serving at St. Catherine of Siena Parish in Reading. The father of the boy was about as angry as I have ever seen anyone, and I have the feeling that he was just short of resorting to physical violence. He was almost irrational and it was very difficult to deal with him. Muntone noted that once or twice the father of the boy came into the Diocesan offices and vented his anger. Muntone added, "It was pretty terrible." Muntone stated that Welsh renewed Lawrence's faculties on the Tribunal and that a new appointment for Lawrence was announced in the Diocesan newspaper. Muntone described the father of the victim as going "ballistic" and reported that he came to the Chancery once again, where he "complained bitterly that someone as evil as Mike was now being honored by the Church." Muntone noted that the Diocese created a list of priests whose ministry assignments should not be made public without consultation with Diocesan administrators as a result of this incident. Muntone concluded his memo by highlighting "the problem" of the twenty-fifth anniversary of Lawrence's ordination being at hand. Muntone asked for advice as to how to handle the normal process whereby Diocesan publications highlighted priest jubilarians of the Diocese under the circumstances. Muntone noted that, if the regular fanfare was provided for Lawrence's anniversary, it could be problematic and result in the victim's father "banging on the door once again." Regardless, Lawrence continued in his priestly duties on the Diocesan Tribunal until 2002. 58 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 5,1998 TO: Bishop Cullen FROM: Msgr. Muntone RE: Fr. Michael Lawrence CC: Fr. Schlert &. AQ. PU- Something of a `sticky situation has arisen with regard to Mike Lawrence who serves as secretary at the Tribunal. Back in.1957, it had come to light that Mike had been involved in some very indecent behavior with a young boy about ten or twelve years old, some five years earlier, when he had been serving at St Catherine of Siena Parish in Reading. The father of the boy was about as angry as I have ever seen anyone, and I have the feeling that he was just short of resorting to physical violence. He was almost irrational and it was very diffiouit to deaf with him_ Michael was sent to Downingtown, where he remained for about six months. After his discharge he was appointed secretary to the Tribunal, and he has remained there ever since. Once or twice since then, the father of the boy came in to the Office and vented his anger. It was pretty terrible_ A few years ago,' Bishop Welsh applied to Rome for the renewal of the faculties of those who serve at the Tribunal without the necessary canonical degrees. Among them was Michael. When the faculties were renewed, the Bishop reappointed the tribunal staff. There was an arrangement, at the time, whereby the Chancery secretaries informed the AD Times of all appointments made bythe Bishop. The list of appointments, including Michael's, appeared in the next issue of the paper. As you might imagine, the father went ballistic. He came to the Chancery once again. He was accompanied by his. pastor, Joe Smith, and two of his sons, one of whom had been Involved in the Incident He complained bitterly that someone as evil as Mike was now being honored by the Church There was no way to convince him that the renewal of the faculties was hardly an honor. After the meeting gave Deacon John Murphy a list of priests whose names or pictures should not appear in the paper without -his calling the office first to discuss it. Now comes the problem. Michael is Observing the twenty-fifth anniversary of his ordination this year. The AD Times does a special feature each year on the priest jubilarians of the Diocese. If Michael's picture and biography appear, it's a sure thing will be banging on the door once again. On the other hand, if no that Mr. is made in the paper, it creates another problem. mention I !Mt Do you have any advice for handling the matter. Muntone's Memo to Cullen and Schlert 59 On January 6, 2002, the Boston Globe generated national publicity on the issue of child sexual abuse within the Archdiocese of Boston. In February 2002, Lawrence wrote to Cullen. Lawrence stated that, "in light of recent events and at the suggestion of Monsignor Alfred Schlert," he wished to retire. Lawrence was granted a retirement and received a pension and healthcare benefits. D Rev.. Michael. S. Lawrence Holy Family Villa iv. 1325 Prospect Ave. Bethlehem, Pa_ 18018 : -4 2002 OFFICE OF THE BISHOP February 27, 2002 Most Rev Edward P. Cullen, Bishop of Allentown 4029 W Tilghman St D_D. P. O. Box F Allentown, Pa. 1.8105 Dear Bishop, In light of recent events and at the suggestion of Monsignor Alfred Schlert and 1VIonsignor John McCann I am writing to formally request retirement Both the Vicar General and the Chanc.--llor have expressed a real concern for me in this matter and conveyed to me your compassion as welL For this I am trulytograteful. You can be assured of my prayers for you as you strive to be a good shepherd your flock_ I ask that you would remember me in your prayers as well. Yours in Christ Jesus, Rev. Michael S. Lawrence 4Z F, 4 2M FEY. ALFRED A. SC8/311 CHANCERY The "In Light of Recent Events" Letter 60 In spite of a documented confession to child molestation, Bishops Joseph McShea, Thomas Welsh, and Edward Cullen permitted Lawrence to remain in active ministry within the Diocese with all of the authority and trust of a priest serving on the Tribunal. The Diocese took no action to warn parents or parishioners of the Diocese that a predator was in their midst. The 12 -year-old boy who reported his abuse to his father in 1982 was not Lawrence's only victim. In November 2009, the Diocese received another report of abuse at the hands of Lawrence. A victim called to report that he had been sexually assaulted on one occasion by Lawrence. He reported that Lawrence fondled his genitals when he was approximately 13 years of age. Lawrence was confronted with the complaint by the Diocese. He contested the age of the boy at the time and indicated that he believed he was 16 or older. Lawrence also indicated that he often helped the children dress in costumes for parish productions. To the degree contact occurred, Lawrence claimed it was accidental. There is no indication that the Diocese notified the victim of Lawrence's earlier confession to molesting a child in 1982. Moreover, there is no indication that Barres told the Vatican of Lawrence's earlier crime or his related confession when the matter was brought to the attention of the Holy See. In December 2014, Banes notified the Vatican by letter that he would not seek the removal of Lawrence from the priesthood. He recommended that he remain in retired status. Lawrence died in April 2015. 61 OFFICE OF ThE BISHOP Mailing Address POST OFFICE BOX F ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA 18105-1538 r\ 4029 WEST TILGHMAN STREET 18104 AUPfIOWN, PENNSYLVANIA , (610) 437-0755 Fax (610) 433-7822 .111, 16 December 2014 s O.P. Archbishop J. Augustine DiNoia, City Titular Archbishop of Oregon Adjunct Secretary of the Faith Congregation for the Doctrine Uffizio S. Pallazzo del 00120 Vatican City State Re: Prot. No. 486/2004-45204 Prot. No. 486/2004-36902 Your Excellency: letter of 14 Jan I write in response to your to the more re response the priest's written 2014 requesting further documentation, allegations made against him. including David Szatkowski, the Reverend Lawrence dated April 3, 2014, By mandate of Father Michael accepted by me on April 22, and and Advocate Procurator Father Lawrence in SCJ, was appointed his canonical 2014, Father Szatkowski interviewed against him and May of 28th the made 2014. From the 26th to were the additional accusations which order to receive his response to 22 September 2011 (cf. Prot. for the Doctrine of the Faith on 17, Congregation the to communicated (32) page response on June wrote a thirty-two No. 486/2004-36902). Father Szatkowsk I enclose in Appendix A. which 2014 and received on June 23, 2014, under which the accuser not dispute the general circumstances years ago. He does Father Michael Lawrence does abuse occurred more than twenty-eight of others when absence "JM" claimed that an act of sexual or the accuser and the presence of age the as such details, dispute factual he was to assist in the He does confirm the detail that occurred. have to was act in the sa.cristy for the alleged in the parish play, confirms his presence involved children the of costuming have happened." He denies any physical contact with JM could that "realizes and purpose, a 2008, psychological this touch. This admission ties into this report, accusation of fondling or inappropriate Report" One relevant page of as the "Ar was not report entire report, hereafter referred to the in 2011. At that time, submitted was accusation, concerning this request for more information. submitted, prompting your Dicastery's Report." His Szatkowski cites this "Anodos Re he was able which in On page 13 of his "Advocate Brief," that "he had arranged a situation and touch observe citation concerns the doctor's observation surreptitiously room for a play where he could allegation the before to be with boys in a dressing years three this part of the report- made them." Father Lawrence contests remorse. observation that he lacks was made- in disputing the doctor's 62 "second time of therapy" at its attention to Father Lawrence's turns then Brief Advocate's The not relate in any way to sexual he wishes to emphasize "did Saint John Vianney Center which staff." parish at with anger directed misconduct .. but to resolve problems Assessment of Father in Appendix B, is a Psychological by the Director of the Votum, my with enclosed Also on June 10, 2014, and a statement Lawrence, written to his Advocate Michael Lawrence lives a permanent life of prayer and permanent residence where Father penance. of his Advocate and the current and having studied the Brief Having prayed over the matter, best that the Reverend Michael is it I have concluded that psychologist, the of assessment way of life. Lawrence remain under this supervised your Congregation from offered herein will serve to alleviate It is my hope that my opinion further action in this matter. Sincerely yours in Christ, 0 actii-te-e-- D.D. e Most Reverend John 0. Barres, Bishop of Allentown 2 Barres' Notification to the Vatican 64 Roman Catholic Diocese of Erie Ecclesiastical Province ofPhiladelphia IArchdiocese Diocese I I Allentown Altoona -Johnstown Erie I I I I Greensburg Harrisburg 1.1 Philadelphia Pittsburgh Scranton I. General Overview of the Diocese of Erie Pennsylvania The Diocese of Erie was founded on July 29, 1853 and includes thirteen counties in northwestern Pennsylvania. These counties are Erie, Crawford, Mercer, Venango, Warren, Forest, Clarion, Jefferson, Elk, McKean, Clearfield, Cameron and Potter Counties. This is the largest geographical diocese in the state of Pennsylvania. Due to its large size the Diocese of Erie is divided into three sections known as Vicariates: Eastern, Northern and Western. Each of these Vicariates is run by a priest or Monsignor who takes their direction from, and is answerable to, the Bishop of Erie. The Diocese serves the roughly 221,508 Catholics of the region or approximately 25.7% of the regional population. The Bishop is the chief authority within the Diocese of Erie. II. History of Bishops of the Diocese of Erie 1) Bishop John M. Gannon (1920 - 1966) 2) Bishop John F. Whealon (1966 - 1968) 65 III. 3) Bishop Alfred M. Watson (1969 - 1982) 4) Bishop Michael J. Murphy (1982 - 1990) 5) Bishop Donald W. Trautman (1990 - 2012) 6) Bishop Lawrence T. Persico (2012 - Present) Additional Church Leadership within the Diocese of Erie Relevant to the Grand Jury's Investigation The Grand Jury finds that that the following Church leaders, while not Bishops, played an important role in the Diocese of Erie's handling of allegations of priest sexual abuse. 1) Monsignor Mark Bartchak 2) Father Glen Whitman IV. Findings of the Grand Jury The Grand Jury uncovered evidence of child sexual abuse committed by priests in the Diocese of Erie. Evidence showed that Roman Catholic priests engaged in sexual contact with minors, including grooming and fondling of genitals and/or intimate body parts, as well as penetration of the vagina, mouth, or anus. The evidence also showed that Diocesan administrators, including the Bishops, had knowledge of this conduct and yet priests were regularly placed in ministry after the Diocese was on notice that a complaint of child sexual abuse had been made. This conduct enabled offenders and endangered the welfare of children. Evidence also showed that the Diocese made settlements with victims and had discussions with lawyers regarding the sexual conduct of priests with children. Further, these settlements contained confidentiality agreements forbidding victims from speaking about such abuse under threat of some penalty, such as legal action to recover previously paid settlement monies. 66 Finally, the Grand Jury received evidence that several Diocesan administrators, including the Bishops, often dissuaded victims from reporting abuse to police, pressured law enforcement to terminate or avoid an investigation, or conducted their own deficient, biased investigating without reporting crimes against children to the proper authorities. Offenders Identified by the Grand Jury V. 1) Michael J. Amy 2) Michael G. Barletta 3) Donald C. Bolton 4) Robert F. Bower 5) Dennis Chludzinski 6) Donald Cooper 7) Michael R. Freeman 8) Gregory P. Furjanic 9) Chester "Chet" Gawronski 10) Herbert G. Gloeker 11) Robert E. Hannon 12) James P. Hopkins 13) Barry M. Hudock 14) Joseph W. Jerge 15) Stephen E. Jeselnick 16) Thomas C. Kelley 17) Gary L. Ketcham 18) Thaddeus Kondzielski 67 19) Gerard Krebs 20) Jerry (John) Kucan 21) Louis Lorei 22) Salvatore P. Luzzi 23) Richard D. Lynch 24) Daniel Martin 25) 26) Leon T. Muroski 27) Edmundus Murphy 28) John L. Murray 29) Giles L. Nealen 30) Jan Olowin 31) Andrew Pawlaczyk 32) John A. Piatkowski 33) David L. Poulson 34) William Presley 35) John Philip Schanz 36) Samuel B. Slocum 37) Thomas Smith 38) Thomas Snyderwine 39) John Tome 40) Patrick Vallimont 41) 68 REDACTED - ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION VI. Examples of Institutional Failure: Fathers Chester "Chet" Gawronski, William Presley, and Thomas Smith The Grand Jury notes the following examples of child sexual abuse perpetrated by priests within the Diocese of Erie. These examples further highlight the wholesale institutional failure that endangered the welfare of children throughout the Pennsylvania Dioceses, including the Diocese of Erie. These examples are not meant to be exhaustive; rather, they provide a window into the conduct of past Pennsylvania Bishops and the crimes they permitted to occur on their watch. 69 The Case of Father Chester Gawronski Known Assignments 06/1976 09/1978 07/1979 02/1987 01/1988 01/1988 05/1989 12/1989 06/1992 08/1995 09/2001 09/1978 07/1979 02/1987 01/1988 05/1989 05/1989 12/1989 08/2001 11/1992 St. Joseph, Oil City St Bernard, Bradford St. Agatha and St. Bernadette Mission, Saegertown Health Leave Holy Family Monastery, Erie St Patrick, Erie Health Leave Pleasant Ridge Manor, Girard Hamot Hospital, Erie St Ann, Erie St Mary's Asbury Ridge, Erie Father Chester Gawronski became a priest in the Diocese of Erie in 1976. In August 1986, Bishop Michael Murphy was notified that Gawronski had fondled and masturbated a 13 -to -14 year -old boy on multiple occasions from 1976 to 1977 under the pretext of showing the victim how to check for cancer. Complaints continued to be received for decades. In early 1987, the complaints were commonly made by parents who reported similar conduct with their sons. An internal Diocesan memorandum was obtained by the Grand Jury and indicated that the number of victims could be has high as twenty. of the parnts know about the skinny dipping and the cancer check. That as one parent said - How many boys werewe involved?. The same number tkat 'he toRk,t1 camp..;.,iny guess veer 1.431\yea!rs. . would be counting fi teen of,tion yk.e-=#:P=4: ; So many Diocesan Records Attempt to Tally the Abuse Diocesan administrators, concerned about negative publicity and potential legal liability, attempted to assure the families of the victims that action would be taken. Internally the Diocese worked to compile data on the number of families affected and how to keep the matter secret. 70 On January 7, 1987, Father Glenn Whitman, head of the Diocese's Clergy Personnel Office, wrote a letter addressed to a parent of one of Gawronski' s 13 -year-old victims. Whitman wrote, among other things, "My only caution to you ... is to refrain from probing for any more information about past events as it may raise undue concern and attention on the part of people who aren't involved." That same day, Whitman documented the need for "discretion" in another Diocesan communication to an interested party. Among other things, Whitman wrote: can't stress enough the necessity for discretion in this matter. It is obvious at this time that legal action isn't pending, or being considered. Undue attention or publication of this information to other families, or other priests would be harmful and certainly unnecessary." I 71 DICCeet Of Erie altIF elmftille .141m eiilb mir Omar ImIlliddIFY FirrigsfEesi ihrb rewomm 41ma-a+ 4m. ANN 411 1141.proombrr Mori. Ilimpaur small% 14.04101 DIM' T. for rims miliwt*talidia. 140WPO w NAM* Alladussaloa I dAy. I'm sera wrirtruliiiii srl I voit ibit for Chi. %est, emm Bs. Aimehol14. Mormrdollairp Ows Clot sad iii Caviliv I/waived is 11.144.4 +Melt Ot4444 Is* mireormoilty Car dilorrot2mo 1.0 Skim motiol. II ko obslOma ot OLO CLOD %Mt 10144 IBBC10,11 1.01111 fwm41. 1514.11.00110411 OR mlimeidimowd. Ramo ailossitipt car 010 mi %Wm 1.10=44100 60 emAer mr mime"' meseeee weeLd wilhar4M6I emd ifeCttlitif sfaftfOBtfitrrtam X mipp rot, rob omit roar wiwilmo to awirsi r. 4Iae141eatiob at sIde informetiop. = 4141 OP aloft aim Wrelmetliftsrt Wore Et lbw os4 de ChLe 410664 t ho rmolm od lam riwprompildiALL7 omit 6411.4r 4141. It 14 wILMLB l:oral memoirs. Thooka misled for ruoi tilmghteslaisms. ACCerat Whitman's "Discretion" Letter 72 Diocesan records, obtained by the Grand Jury through a subpoena served on September 1, 2016, recorded the ever-growing list of affected and traumatized parishioners. A summary of potential families affected noted that the mother of a group of brothers that were molested continued "to be very angry about this whole thing" and is in conversation with at least one other family on this list. She stated that "going public would be a distinct possibility should (Gawronski) ever be assigned to parish work." On February 9, 1987, Gawronski provided the Diocese with a list of forty-one possible victims. He confirmed at least twelve children as victims on whom he had performed the "cancer check." 73 February 9, 1987 Franks Here is a list of any young man that I had same contact with in (Played racquetball with, the Meadville and Saegeritowm area. took to the cottage, frien s of their family, friends of some of Since the boys, etc.) says that I was with so many kids, I have put a he think done something with all of them. I have asterisk next to the names of the boys I had taught, how to check for cancer. MEADVILLE: (ST. AGATHA PARISHIONERS) FRIENDS OF.80ME OF THE BOYS ADOVEr SAgGEkiTOWN: (ST. BERNADETTE PARISHIONERS) RCDErie 0001970 Gawronski Admits Criminal Conduct A few days before Christmas, 1986, Family A called the Pastor asking why Diocese wasn't doing anything about Fr. Chet. Pastor unaware of her meaning...she explained about camp owned by a Doctor in/near Oil City. Her son was asked to go skinny dipping in pool and felt that CW was going for "those parts of his body forbidden to touch". Son got out, went to shower, CW insisted on showering together and boy was masturbated. Pastor believes boy was 12 then; he told his siblings about it but not his parents until fall of 1986. 1. Family A still angry about this and threatened to come forward - go public - if CW assigned to parish. (also from Saegertown as is Family A) Son also Family B Family went to previous parish administrator CW. by touched Boy about 14 when CW arrived on scene. about the incident. He went with CW to camp three or four times, always with other In summer He resisted stripping for the skinny dipping. boys. of 1980 (boy 15 at time), with two other boys, CW put all in CW helped this circle and CW told them all to "get it up". boy as he was having trouble getting an erection. Once this was accomplished, the "cancer check" proceeded. 2. This boy continued going to confession to CW, who told him it in your pants". "keep to Boy has since married at 19 to emotionally immature girl, possibly to prove his sexuality...since broke up. Mother expressed concern that priests shouldn't be treated any differently than trial?) others in these cases (jail? Two boys, mother feels certain that CW propositioned Family C them both, if not actually did "the check" on them. They often went to the camp, but like the others, mysteriously and suddenly stopped accompanying CW. (Also Saegertown) 3. Strong suspicions from the parents of three other families their in Saegertown the CW molested or at least propositioned Also a family in Cambridge Springs through his ministry boys. at Alliance College. 4. Two sons, mother says that the oldest (Meadville) Family D was molested. Constant presence of CW in house, "rub downs", Mother not sure about racquetball, wrestling in livingroom sure of proposition. pretty molestation possible son's second 5. . Family E Mother feels that of her several boys, the oldest was molested. Continues to be very angry about this whole on thing and is in conversation with at least one other family a distinct be would public" "going that said has She this list. possibility should CW ever be assigned to parish work. 6. RCDErie 0001968 75 7. Suspicions about two other families that, however. - nothing more than Comment at Parish council meeting in Saegertown. Discussion was centered on apparent waning of interest/activity. Reasons were One parent spoke up "Don't forget what happened here 3-4 cited. years ago (reference to CW); there's hardly anyone around this table who hasn't been hurt." RCDErie 0001969 A 1987 List of Families Affected 76 Additional records, obtained from the secret or confidential archives of the Diocese, noted that, in April 1987, Gawronski freely confessed to numerous instances of sexual abuse. He was sent to Chicago for psychological evaluations but denied any problems with boys. He was placed on a temporary leave of absence. In some instances, entire families of young boys were molested by Gawronski. Regardless, Gawronski was still permitted to wear the collar of the priesthood as he engaged the public. In addition to this information, more victims reported Gawronski for criminal sexual acts with children to the Diocese in 1988. In 1990, Bishop Donald Trautman took command of the Diocese. Trautman also received additional complaints in 1995 from a victim who had been molested at the age of 15 in 1986. The victim reported he had fallen prey to Gawronski's "cancer checks." By 1996, there was no possible doubt that Gawronski had spent most of his priesthood preying on the vulnerable. However, even as complaints continued, on November 6, 1996, Gawronski was notified that Trautman had approved his request to hear confessions for persons with disabilities. On May 19, 1997, Trautman sent a letter to Gawronski and thanked him for "all that you have done for God's people during those twenty-one years of ordination. Only the Lord knows the many acts of kindnesses on your part and the deep faith that you have shown. The Lord, who sees in private, will reward." For approximately fifteen years, from 1987 to 2002, Murphy and Trautman allowed Gawronski to remain in active ministry by reassigning him multiple times. As late as 2001, Trautman assigned Gawronski to a new five-year term as a chaplain for St. Mary's Home in Erie. In January 2002, the Boston Globe broke national news by publishing an article detailing child sexual abuse by clergy in the Archdiocese of Boston. Located within records provided by 77 the Diocese was a petition for "withdrawal from priestly ministry" signed by Gawronski with the handwritten notation, "EFFECTIVE FEB. 27, 2002." On June 2, 2002, one of Gawronski's 13 -year-old victims wrote a letter to Trautman. Among other things, the victim requested that the Church: 1) stop aiding and abetting priests; 2) ensure collections were not used to compensate priests; 3) publicize the names of pedophile priests; 4) identify any priest who has molested a child; and 5) establish a policy to ensure offending priests were reported to law enforcement. The victim also advised that Trautman had never contacted him since the Erie Times ran an article identifying potential offenders within the Diocese in April 2002. The victim specifically cited that his dealings with his molestation recently resurfaced when learning of Trautman' s "libelous statement that there were no pedophiles in the Erie Diocese." Trautman responded to this victim by letter dated June 21, 2002. Trautman stated that he was shocked the victim would "go to the press directly rather than to contact me regarding the past" and argued that the victim was 14 years old when the abuse occurred, not 11 as stated in the article. Trautman explained that the Diocese had a "zero level tolerance for any abuse situation"; that he knew of no priest with a pedophile background in any form of ministry; and that he had never transferred an accused priest from parish to parish as had occurred in other dioceses. On November 12, 2004, Trautman wrote a ten -page letter to Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome. The letter was accompanied by a twelve - page directory of Gawronski' s victims and crimes. In total, forty-four identified children were identified in the documents. In providing a basis for Gawronski's removal from the priesthood, Trautman stated, "Gawronski identified, pursued, groomed, and then abused his victims. The classic use of manipulations of the parents, siblings, and friends of the victims in order to get to 78 those victims or cultivate other potential victims is consistently evident throughout." Trautman went on to write: I now see in its totality that his conduct has been deeply harmful to several individual persons, to the faith communities of St. Joseph Parish, Oil City, PA, St. Agatha Parish, Meadville, PA and St. Bernadette Mission, Saegertown, PA, and the common good of the Church. He has gravely offended the dignity of the priesthood, the Sacrament of Penance, and the dignity of marriage, as well as against good morals in general. As long as Gawronski exercises priestly ministry and that is publically known, the effects of scandal among the people of the Diocese of Erie will continue. Justice has yet to be restored, given the number and kind of his offenses. Trautman' s scorching indictment of Gawronski' s decades of child sexual abuse was necessary to convince Rome to remove Gawronski from ministry. It was also the only full and fair accounting of Gawronski' s crimes that either Trautman or the Diocese has provided to date. Unfortunately, it was contained within a private letter to Rome rather than through a public acknowledgment to Gawronski' s victims or the public. Additionally, it occurred fifteen years after the Diocese received the first report of child sexual abuse and only occurred after immense external pressure was placed on the Diocese by press accounts and litigation. 79 The Case of Father William Presley Known Assignments 05/1956 06/1965 05/1971 05/1972 08/1970 06/1965 - 08/1970 - 08/1971 - 08/1971 - 06/1976 - 06/1976 - 06/1977 06/1977 - 06/1978 06/1978 06/1971 08/1981 03/1983 03/1988 04/1990 07/2000 08/1981 08/1981 - 03/1983 - 03/1988 - 04/1990 - 07/2000 - St. Cosmas and Damian, Punxsutawney Elk County Christian High School, St. Marys Immaculate Conception, Brookville Our Lady Queen of the Americas, Conneaut Lake Leave of Absence, Graduate and Student Counselor, Notre Dame, Indiana Leave of Absence, St. Joseph University, Philadelphia Leave of Absence, Campus Minister, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland St. Therese, Shinglehouse Sacred Heart Mission, Genesee Leave of Absence, Parish Ministry in Raleigh, North Carolina St. Agnes, Morrisdale (three separate assignments) Leave of Absence, Outside the Diocese Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Sykesville (three separate assignments) Retired in Lancaster (Diocese of Harrisburg) The Diocese of Erie was first apprised of Father William Presley's sexual abuses as early as November 1987, during his assignment as Pastor of St. Agnes. These sexual abuses, as reported to the Diocese, involved two victims and spanned nearly sixteen years. One of the victims had been abused as recently as 1986; the second victim was abused prior to 1971 when he was a high school student in another parish. Between February and May 1988, various meetings or discussions were held between Presley and Diocesan officials. Fathers John Rosenhamer, A. Joseph Book, Joseph Bobal, Glen Whitman, John Beal, and Bishop Michael Murphy participated in the review of the complaints. The Diocese noted that Presley did not directly deny the allegations. However, Diocesan memoranda obtained by the Grand Jury recorded the Diocese's negative view of the complaining victims. Documents regularly referred to the victims as "troubled" or having psychological 80 "problems." Indeed, it was noted that one victim may have been the victim of a previous sexual assault by a family member. During the course of the counseling, Bill learns that she has read over 400 of these trashy, romantic novels, and that she fantasises about everything. The girl, obviously, to me, Fr. Book, has psychological problems. That's one element of the story. An Excerpt of a Diocesan Memo Regarding a Victim There was a consensus amongst diocesan officials that Presley was extremely violent and predisposed to assaultive behavior. On May 16, 1988, Bobal wrote a letter to Murphy containing his recollection of a meeting with Presley. He confirmed that Presley had given the teenaged female victim a job and had obtained other items for her, including clothing and money. He also noted the possibility that Presley would become violent. The meeting concluded with a request that Presley undergo a psychological evaluation. Presley ultimately refused the evaluation but agreed to see another doctor at the recommendation of the Diocese. 81 Immaculate Cs:Inception Church 408 4rprio Street Oscipra Mille, PA 1666 mey 16i ,3f Diztr. ictshot, Murphy, in response to #091100No 060 * 404 4* '06619Y XWao rechgest maize a; 3 y FaOqr Joeph 1100 7 Am A. 046#4110)1011 4# 10;110444togIne4040 04.00rY 111900* greqgnt at elio*ting were rathOrg aiii41.m0.464 rataiS4**440,kr thel0 141.4,4 9be0aas4 444 :441410 214$ et.0410'44 44 -ma accusations were 1**dioniat .416311 -SOM9thing to 00 11.0.4 1400 tAgetlIgh i/,11w -...moo 9,4-.01 40114dm Of- 1FK% anOt 4W1112. abd yid WI 4000 06 tE44,1001. OE hail. WW1 -her. 040 St 40nOW want to hear' um 440 IAM:dif; 40'1400111115 voilowkwoottotRh htsvAtet. web d 04#00t of EC BoRnatgonarst 411-44tr ag#05/* rob- betF9.40# Vi04/44. As we *PliMii POL4r.00401ionnr hOggi t4't74:1069 Wnlitetrv. 01(P RQ11010144ierr kh4W of fall'n VX01404itY &ward d0044044 Mio4V*-150sat1itY 44 - ih otitAk10 nOio en.0 ?V. tP. WO s-6441 haa$04 xmhn igiOrTee. 04.iP0t. WOO 49 V*** b- 4040010. P:1. 401. 6..iOtell he 401;114 e- Hew he WO-0 Ot wok 40 leer 440004014n W04111011/ f4I5k AtiPAiity: ow now 4.40.0*ys see00. clt 44 tid ' 0izi4 work Os a seorotont,.. / Want vg n040 more money. honrn-Of 9,04. to set hev a eohoUt44.40 at 1$. FFanot0 CogOgo. f- How he went shopping for clothes for her. g- 409ut he; Aoting eon out; of ,0hoo1-. follow now who was the Pess4ble Cause of her ago - ROORFplE61:162207 82 Immaculate Conception Church 408 Stone Street Osceola AliUs, PA 16666 He denied haVing sexual intercourse with her and'also denied several times the with her. There may have been other accusation of any sexual involvement of comments made which I can't remember now. Aftet this, Bill asked John what he wanted him to do and John said he wanted him to go up to Saint Georgeb for the weekend and then he would be taken toSt... Lpuis - I think - for evaluation. Then at this point, I believe, Bill said "Do get to see the Bishop" and I believe that Johns response was not until after the evaluation. There was some discussion on the length of time required fpr the evaluation and Bill kind of balked at the amount of time that he would be away.but then he said that he would go.- that he owed it to tiShop Murphy to go thru the evaluation. / am not sure of the sequence here but it seemed that they began to cover the same ground over again but this time Bill gave 11111111111111life as he knew it father.After this something about I - how she a detailed and graphic'history of was mistreated and abused by her grand- think John restated what he wanted Bill to do and Bill said the possible outcome of the evaluation and then saidl'I've worked too hard for what I have and I won't give it up. I'll get a lawyer." and John said that he thought that he should. Bill also talked about his dogs. He said that he wouldn't give them up since they were a sort ok therapy for him. I believe that somewhere along hereBill said,"/ want to see the Bishop!' and I believe that John said we want you to go for evaluation first. Somewhere in this dialogue Bill said that he respected his vow of celibacy and that the whole conversation was extremely embarrassing Iri to him. the end he did promise to go back to the parish end get things lined up for him to go up to St. George'S and then on to St. Louis for evaluation. Father Rosenhamer said that he would be at St Agnes and St Severin churches for the weekend. RCDERIE0052268 83 Immaculate Conception Church 40S Slone Wee: Cticeota NH:, PA 16666 He said that be would simply tell them that rather Presley was on a health leave. ]1s .he was leaving. I told Bill to either let- me know or write down:what his weekday schedule for Masses was and any other detailed he might want to Leave for us so that rather mastrian and I could maintain things for .kim until he qot hack. Bill left and then called me that afternoon or the next day to check out -Bass schedules for the bulletin. Again. Bishop Have to admit that 1 am not at all positive about the sequence of everything written here and that there were other things said that T could not recall but what is here are my recollections of that afternoon's meeting. Reepe tfylly Yours in Ch istf c. -very Rev. c. - Rev. John A. P. Joseph Bock B.V. Beal , J.C.P. Judicial Vicar RCDERIE0052269 The Bobal Letter 84 Following an evaluation in April 1990, Murphy placed Presley in a temporary assignment. That assignment was made permanent in June 1990. Shortly thereafter, Trautman allowed Presley to remain in his position as Pastor and Administrator at the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary Church in Sykesville, Jefferson County. In April 1996, Trautman appointed Presley to a new six year term as Administrator of this Church, where Father Presley remained until his retirement in 2000. In January 2002, an article detailing the practice of reassigning priests accused of sexual abuse of children was published in the Boston Globe. In April 2002, three separate victims notified Trautman of sexual abuse perpetrated upon them by Presley from 1963 to 1974. One of the victims was as young as 13 years old when it occurred. The abuse of these individuals consisted of "choking, slapping, punching, rape, sodomy, fellatio, anal intercourse," and other acts according to Diocesan records reviewed by the Grand Jury. On April 18, 2002, Trautman contacted Presley by telephone. Trautman recorded that, during that call, Presley admitted the sexual abuse of the victims. Trautman revoked Presley's priestly faculties later that year. In April 2003, and in response to media inquiries about Presley, the Diocese of Erie issued a press release stating, among other things, that Presley's priestly faculties were removed in July 2002 shortly after the allegations prompted the Diocese to conduct an internal investigation. The Diocese stated that Trautman' s understanding of the alleged incidents was that the crimes had occurred 28 years ago during the time of the late Bishop Watson. The Diocese explained that the individual making the allegation was twenty years old at the time and enrolled at a college in another state where the incidents were reported to have occurred. The Diocese told the public that it had "no information to provide on other possible allegations against the priest." 85 This press release was false and misleading. Trautman had personal knowledge of at least three victims, one as young as 13, who reported their abuse to him in 2002. Only one victim was an out-of-state college student. Moreover, the Diocese was aware of sexual abuse complaints against Presley as early as 1987 but permitted him to stay in active ministry for another thirteen years. Additionally, Diocesan records showed that Presley was so violent that priests who interacted with him were concerned for their safety. Later that year, Trautman communicated with the Vatican and outlined additional details with respect to sexual abuse committed by Presley. Trautman cited information provided by a doctor who was counseling one of Presley's victims, the same doctor who counseled Presley in 1988. Trautman reported that the information "...confirms my suspicion that there are even more victims of the sexual abuse and exploitation perpetrated by Presley." By 2005, the Diocese was actively engaged in an attempt to formally remove Presley from the priesthood. In the course of that effort, personnel for the Diocese interviewed other witnesses or associates of Presley and identified numerous additional victims or potential victims. Monsignor Mark Bartchak led the investigation. Several of these individuals stated that they informed the Diocese of their concerns in the 1980's, including a report to a parish council member, who stated that Presley would not allow anyone else inside the rectory when certain children were present and that some of these children spent the night with him on multiple occasions. Bartchak also re -interviewed the male victim who had previously disclosed his abuse to the Diocese in 1982, 1987, and 2002. He explained that Presley invited him to his rectory after befriending him. Presley then tried to hypnotize him before assaulting him. Presley took him on trips to New York and Yosemite. Presley brought other children on some of these trips, including 86 one occasion when he tried to abuse both the victim and another high school student at the same time. Presley taught the victim how to have sexual intercourse by bringing in a female high school student and using index cards to show them where to touch each other. On more than one occasion, Presley gave him some type of a sedative to relax him prior to abusing him. Presley stated that it was okay "because he was a priest" and used his position as a spiritual guide to further the abuse. On August 25, 2005, Bartchak sent a confidential memo to Trautman that detailed the results of his interviews to date. Bartchak stated the following: "I was not surprised to learn from other witnesses from the Elk County area, that there are likely to be other victims" and that "... several more witnesses who could attest to the brutality that they were subjected to by Father Presley." Bartchak asked, "It is likely that there may be others who were also of the age for the offenses to be considered delicts, but to what end is it necessary to follow every lead?" He sought Trautman' s opinion, asking: Is it worth the further harm and scandal that might occur if this is all brought up again? I am asking you how you want me to proceed. With due regard for the potential for more harm to individuals and for more scandal, should I continue to follow up on potential leads? Four days later Bartchak documented a meeting earlier that day with Trautman, in which he stated: Bishop Trautman decided that in order to preclude further scandal, these additional witnesses should not be contacted, especially given the fact that is not likely that they will lead to information concerning delicts involving minors under 16 years of age. In 2006, Trautman made a confidential, formal request to the Vatican in support of Presley's laicization. The Grand Jury reviewed similar requests in Dioceses throughout Pennsylvania. Often called "The Acts" of the subject priest, the summaries were often the most detailed documents within Diocesan records and contained decades of long -held secrets only 87 disclosed in an effort finally to remove an offending priest from the priesthood. The "Acts" of Presley stated, in part: Presley is a violent man....He managed to work his will and way by fear, intimidation, charm and deception, all the classic signs of a hardcore predator. How he managed to escape for so many years defies reason and understanding. His behavior was carefully planned behavior.....Victimization didn't happen spontaneously; it was programmed, masterfully designed, almost perfectly executed. Given the pattern of behavior over his years in ministry, I believe that Presley constitutes a threat to others. Presley's abuse has had a rippling effect on the spiritual, mental and emotional lives of his victims .....Presley' s case has been made public by way of the printed media - causing scandal among the Christian Faithful. He manipulated families to welcome him into their homes and worked to garner the approval of parents. He then used this privileged position to solicit sexual acts with the children. Father Presley's behaviors of manipulating families into giving him their trust and grooming their children for engaging in sexual acts continued and improved as he moved to other assignments. In the course of these proceedings to remove Presley, the Bishop of Harrisburg, Kevin Rhoades, provided a statement. He acknowledged that Presley had moved to Lancaster, Pennsylvania after his retirement in 2000. Rhoades wrote that his predecessor, Bishop Nicholas Dattilo, was personally aware of this matter and that more information regarding the violent behavior of Presley had come to light since Presley moved to the Diocese of Harrisburg. Further, the letter stated that "were this information to become known, especially in the light of his offers of public assistance at Mass in several parishes, great public scandal would arise within this diocese." On July 13, 2006, Trautman wrote to the Lancaster County District Attorney. His letter stated that Presley was now defrocked and that the Diocese had received "credible allegations 88 regarding sexual misconduct with a minor which allegedly occurred many years ago." Trautman falsely wrote, "We were unaware of these allegations until they came to light only a few years ago. As a result, no criminal charges were ever brought forward because the statue of limitations had expired." The truth was that Murphy, Trautman, and the Diocese of Erie intentionally waited out the statute of limitations and curbed their own investigation to prevent finding additional victims. The Grand Jury finds that the failure of the Diocese of Erie and of Murphy and Trautman to aggressively pursue the removal of Presley in a timely fashion had left Presley cloaked in the authority and respect of the priesthood. Moreover, the lack of transparency and candor with respect to the concerns surrounding Presley only aided seamless insertion into another Catholic community. Presley, a priest Trautman would eventually describe as a "hardcore predator," had escaped to a new region of Pennsylvania. 89 DIOCESE OF HARRISBURG 4800 Union Deposit (717) 657-4804 Road-Box 2153 - Office of the Bishop Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105-2153 Votum of the Bishop of Harrisburg Prot. N. 242/2003 Rev. William F. Presley Your Eminence, Cardinal William Levada: Permit me this opportunity to offer an opinion in the matter of Rev. William F. Presley, a priest of the Diocese of Erie, in a case concerning the commission of a gravius delictus, namely the sexual abuse of a minor. I was ordained and installed as Bishop of Harrisburg on December 9, 2004. My predecessor, Bishop Nicholas C. Dattilo, was personally aware of and directly involved in this matter. Following his admission of the sexual abuse of a minor, Father Presley moved to the area of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, within the Diocese of Harrisburg. This occurred in the Summer of the year 2000. My predecessor learned of this from priests of the area, because of Father Presley's assistance to the parishes of the Lancaster area. Upon inquiry, it was learned that Father Presley left his diocese of incardination following an admission of sexual abuse of a minor, and the sexual abuse with force and threats of multiple other persons. At the time, Bishop Donald Trautman of the Diocese of Erie was under the impression that Father Presley had voluntarily assumed a life of prayer and penance, refraining from public ministry or the public celebration of the sacraments. Bishop Trautman wrote the following to Bishop Datillo on May 6, 2002: Dear Bishop Datillo, I wish to inform you that Rev. William F. Presley, a 73 year old retired priest of the Diocese of Erie who is currently residing at 1606 Sunset Avenue, Lancaster. PA 16701, no longer enjoys the faculties of the Diocese of Erie. In view of recent conversations with him, he has voluntarily decided not to assist in the public celebration of the sacraments or in preaching in the Lancaster area. Nevertheless, I want you to be informed that he does not have the faculties of the Diocese of Erie any longer. I am fully confident that he will not attempt to exercise any ministry in your diocese. Sincerely yours in Christ, Most Rev. Donald W. Trautman Bishop ofErie RCDERIE0052124 90 Votum of the Bishop of Harrisburg Prot. N. 242/2003 Page 2 Conversations between curial officials of this diocese with members of the curia of the Diocese of Erie confirmed the history of sexual abuse which Father Presley exhibited, and also that he was not to exercise ministry in any public forum. It is a source of grave concern to me, as it was to my predecessor, that Father Presley misrepresented to his own diocesan bishop that he had voluntarily assumed a life of prayer and penance, and had voluntarily withdrawn from public ministry. More information regarding the violent behavior of Father William F. Presley toward many victims of his disordered sexual appetite has come to light since he moved to the Diocese of Harrisburg. Were this information to become known, especially in light of his offers of public assistance at Mass in several parishes, great public scandal would arise within this diocese. It is also of grave concern to me that Father Presley has not only prevaricated to his diocesan bishop regarding his lifestyle past and present, but in so doing has obviously not withdrawn from contumacy. His lengthy history of sexual misconduct in violation of his promise of clerical celibacy and perpetual continence, his deliberate misrepresentation of the truth to the bishop to whom he promised respect and obedience, and the grisly nature of his many sexual acts even beyond the one known gravies delictus committed with a minor, all combine to suggest to me as the ordinary of the place where he now resides, that Bishop Trautman's request is reasonable and necessary. Dismissal from the clerical state may be the only means of removing a sexual predator from the ranks of the priesthood. His age is not necessarily an obstacle to his sexual misconduct, given his history. As long as Father William F. Presley remains in the clerical state, I harbor fear for the People of God within the Diocese of Harrisburg. I fear that his possession of the clerical state will allow him a means of continuing his pattern of carefully insinuating himself into the lives of others as a prelude to violence and sexual misconduct. Further, I believe that his own contumacy, and his denial of the seriousness of his behavior, may be intransigent until an action as serious as dismissal from the clerical state awakens within him a semblance of repentance. Given in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, this fifth day of April 2006. e. Bishop of Harrisburg In testimony whereof... Chancellor RCDERIEDD52125 The Statement of Bishop Rhoades 91 r Wiese Cirt 2.4. Oar /007 2m/6,0am:a /6514- 0q97 T 'H-F.'2D-C1`3" ,19 July 13, 2006 County of Lancaster District Attorney's Office 50 N. Duke Street P.O. Box 83480 Lancaster, PA 17608-3480 Dear District Attorney Totaro, am writing to you to confirm the information which you received in a letter from the Diocese of Harrisburg dated June 23, 2006 concerning William F. Presley. He is a priest of the Diocese of Erie who recently moved to Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Our records indicate that Mr. Presley currently resides at 1606 Sunset Avenue in Lancaster. I Mr. Presley was suspended by me several years ago for credible regarding sexual misconduct with a minor which allegedly occurred many years ago. We were unaware of these allegations until they came to light only a few years ago. As a result, no criminal charges were ever brought forward because the statute of limitations had expired. would also like to update you to that fact that by means of an administrative decree dated June 10, 2006, Pope Benedict XVI has ordered that the penalty of dismissal from the clerical state be imposed upon William F. Presley. Consequently, we now consider Mr. Presley to be defrocked. I If you have any questions or if can be of any help to you, please do not hesitate to let me know. In the meantime, be assured of my prayers. I Sincerely yours, The Most Rev. Donald W. Trautman, S.T.D., S.S.L. Bishop of Erie cc: The Most Reverend Kevin C. Rhoades Bishop of Harrisburg /eml RCDErie 0022730 Trautman's Letter to the Lancaster County District Attorney 92 The Case of Father Thomas Smith Known Assignments - 06/16/1967 08/15/1967 09/15/1967 06/03/1970 06/03/1970 - 02/12/1971 02/12/1971 07/16/1972 07/16/1972 06/23/1978 06/23/1978 06/01/1981 06/01/1981 10/23/1984 02/01/1984 10/01/1984 03/08/1984 03/08/1989 10/23/1984 02/05/1985 02/05/1985 - 03/12/1985 08/08/1985 09/16/1985 09/16/1985 12/12/1986 12/12/1986 04/22/1987 04/22/1987 11/30/1987 12/01/1987 09/01/1992 09/01/1992 05/01/1994 05/01/1994 05/01/1994 05/01/1994 - Our Lady of Peace, Erie Sacred Heart, Erie St. Patrick, Franklin Notre Dame, Hermitage St John the Baptist, Erie St. Cosmas and St. Damian, Punxsutawney St. Mary of the Assumption, Frenchville Health Leave Presbyterian Council, Erie St. Joseph, DuBois St. Hippolyte, Guys Mills St. Joseph, Mt. Jewett St. Teresa, Union City Health Leave, Girard, Ecclesia Center Health Leave, Suitland, Maryland, St. Luke's Institute St. Joseph, Warren Holy Rosary, Erie Pleasant Ridge Manor, East Mercy Motherhouse Sisters of Mercy Motherhouse, Erie St. Patrick's, Erie, St. Hedwig Cluster Father Thomas Smith was ordained in 1967. In 1981 he was assigned to Saint Mary of the Assumption. Bishop Michael Murphy was first told of child sexual abuse perpetrated by Smith against a 17 -year -old boy in January 1984 while at Saint Mary's. Smith resigned on January 20, 1984. From February 1984 to October 1984, Smith was placed on "health leave." In reality, he was in residential psychological therapy. In October, Smith was released and reassigned by Murphy to Saint Joseph's in DuBois, Pennsylvania until February 1985. In February 1985, Smith was transferred to Saint Hippolyte in Guys Mills, Pennsylvania for approximately one month. From March 1985 to August 1985, Murphy sent Smith to residential psychological therapy once again. Official Diocesan records obtained by the Grand Jury show this was designated as a leave 93 of absence. Upon his release, Smith was sent to Saint Joseph's in Mount Jewett in August 1985. After about one month at Saint Joseph's, Smith was transferred to Saint Teresa in Union City, Pennsylvania where he remained for approximately 10 months. In spite of Smith's history of child abuse, and his need for continued treatment, Murphy continued to permit Smith's contact with children. While at St. Teresa' s, Smith sent a letter to Murphy describing his gifts and accomplishments in "working with young people." In December 1986, Smith was placed on a leave of absence yet again. This leave of absence continued for almost a year while Smith was returned to residential psychological therapy. In January 1987, Diocesan records indicated that the treatment facility informed Murphy that Smith suffered from a "driven, compulsive, and long standing" obsession with sexually assaulting children. The facility warned that since his first treatment in 1984, Smith had not stopped sexually assaulting children and that interdiction was needed. These secret Diocesan records obtained by the Grand Jury pursuant to a subpoena showed that, while in treatment, Smith admitted to sexually molesting at least fifteen children. Smith stated that all of his victims were boys, some as young as seven. Smith had raped them anally and orally. This information was provided to Murphy in November 1987. That same month, Smith was discharged from the facility. In spite of Smith's confession to sexually violating at least fifteen prepubescent boys, Murphy assigned Smith to the parish of Saint Joseph's in Warren on December 7, 1987. Approximately three months later, in March 1988, Father Glenn Whitman wrote a letter to Smith and advised him of recent conduct that placed him in violation of his aftercare agreement with St. Luke's Institute. Regardless, Smith continued in ministry at Saint Joseph's with the approval of Murphy, and, beginning in 1990, Trautman. 94 On July 25, 1990, Whitman wrote a memo to Trautman and noted two known parishes affected by Smith's abuse. He also wrote that "The number of victims is not clearly known." The same day, Trautman wrote his own memo regarding Smith. In this document, Trautman wrote that he had met with Smith about his problems and that Smith was a person of "candor and sincerity." Trautman noted that after another year and a half he would consider a new assignment for Smith because he wanted Smith to complete his aftercare and was fearful of future litigation. 95 Diocese of Erie Office of Clergy Personnel Bishop Trautman I was mistaken about the known occurrences of misbehavior on Tom's part. 2 parishes were affected: (1) ST. MARYS - FRENCHVILLE from which he went to therapy in Pittsburgh at Bethel Park - (2) ST. TERESA UNION CITY from which he went to therapy at St. Luke Institute The number of victims is not clearly known. Rev. Glenn R. Whitman Clergy Personnel Director July 25, 1990 RCDErie 0008565 96 Diocese Oar /497 &Ye, ca Cana- /CS/4 -am Personnel File TO: Most Rev. Donald W. Trautman, STD, SSL FROM: Confidential (Rev. Thomas E. Smith) RE: July 25, 1990 DATE: Today I met with Father Smith and discussed in detail past problems. I found him to be a person of candor and sincerity. I commended him for the progress he has made during the past two and Our meeting was friendly. one-half years in controlling his addiction. In reference to the future, I told him that I would prefer that he would wait another year and one-half which would mark the end He of his Aftercare program before he applied for a new assignment. concurred with My thinking that since he is doing so well in Warren -is happy, fulfilled, satisfied -- that we should continue in that same direction and not take a chance by trying a new assignment at this time. him courage for the future, but at the same I wanted to give clearly indicated that I would prefer him to wait another year and one-half and then have an evaluation at the end of the Aftercare program. time, I He asked for my blessing at the end of the meeting. We both recognized that there are serious difficulties and limitations reThere is also the fear of future ligation. garding future ministry. Nevertheless, this man has made peace with God and has demonstrated for two and one-half years his ability to handle his addiction. I carefully reviewed with him the steps that he takes on a daily and weekly basis to enforce his self-discipline. He will continue to meet with Father Glenn Whitman who will monitor his progress. DWT/eg cc: Fr. Glenn Whitman RCDErie 0008567 The July 25, 1990 Memos of Whitman and Trautman 97 Smith was so relieved to find a refuge in Trautman that he wrote to him on July 17, 1990 with respect to the aforementioned meeting. He thanked Trautman for truly caring about him. In reference to his desire to stay in active ministry, Smith wrote, "And so why did I worry?" On July 20, 1992, Smith was transferred to the Holy Rosary Parish in Erie, Pennsylvania by Trautman. Smith was very active in the "Isaiah 43" ministry program, a program for Catholic children. 98 ofd aoceesez 262. Oar &VW 2.61.161(1(Zal.a. &COW -0197 r 1111ZIP gircegcrkgWo July 20, 1992 Reverend Thomas E. Smith Saint Joseph Church 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, W. Warren, Pennsylvania 16365 Dear Father Smith: Acting on the recommendation of the Personnel Board, and In am pleased to appoint you Parochial Vicar response to your own request, September 1, 1992. The effective Erie, in Parish at Holy Rosary be limitations placed on your ministry, as mutually understood, areastolong as observed with absolute fidelity. This assignment will continue it is mutually agreeable and productive, as evaluated by yourself, myself and the Pastor, Very Reverend Richard D. Lynch, V.F. I have been most pleased by the progress you have made in your Saint continuing care program, in the contributions you have made at the Isaiah Joseph Parish in Warren and in the interest you have shown in join you in profound gratitude to Very Reverend I know 43 program. and Sal Luzzi, V.F., Pastor of Saint Joseph for his generous characteristic hospitality and fraternity extended to you after your discharge from Saint Luke Institute. It is just such a warm andParish. supportive environment am sure you will find at Holy Rosary I I I Continue to adhere to your aftercare plan, your support groups, the Jesus Caritas Fraternity and the enthusiasm you bring to the in am confident you will continue to make progress...progress ministry. the Lord. I With every best wish, I remain Fraternally yours in Christ, Most Rev. Donald W. Trautman, STD, SSL Bishop of Erie /nh RCDErie 0008635 Trautman' s Letter of Appointment to Holy Rosary 99 A little over a year after Smith was transferred to Holy Rosary, Trautman received a letter. Dated September 20, 1993, the letter was from the parents of one of Smith's victims. They described the abuse suffered by their son when he was only nine years old. Trautman wrote to St. Luke's Institute, one of Smith's treatment providers, and requested information as to the future ministry of Smith. Among other things, Trautman noted that he was "worried about appearances" and that "Father Smith does participate in the Isaiah 43 Program which takes him outside of the Diocese. I have no supervision of his activity away from the Diocese; it is an act of trust in him." Trautman explained his sudden interest in Smith's activities, stating, "The mother of this individual has raised concerns about Father Smith's involvement in Isaiah 43 since there are youth present for this type of retreat." St. Luke's Institute responded on December 28, 1993. Trautman was informed that Smith had failed to report his involvement with the Isaiah 43 program as part of his continued aftercare. Trautman sent a letter to Smith and informed him that his duties at Holy Rosary would be altered. However, Trautman permitted Smith to remain in the Isaiah 43 program until he completed his duties there in March 1994. The church bulletin for the Holy Rosary Parish, January 1994, announced the assignment of Father Thomas Smith, Parochial Vicar, to several chaplaincy positions in the Erie area beginning at the end of March 1994 and noted that Smith would remain in residence at Holy Rosary with the title of Resident and Weekend Assistant. This assignment permitted Smith to roam freely about the Diocese, serving as a chaplain with all the authority and power of the priesthood. Moreover, he continued to be a friendly face in residence at the parish and a weekend assistant. Nowhere in the bulletin was it indicated that Trautman notified the parishioners that Smith had been in treatment since 1984 due to sexually abusing children, nor was it noted that Smith admitted 100 to such conduct with as many as fifteen boys in 1987. Nowhere did it warn that the Diocese was aware that he had re -offended and that the offenses included anal and oral sex with prepubescent boys. These warnings were conspicuously absent because Trautman failed to warn his own parishioners of the danger Smith posed to their children. 101 January 9,1994 Holy GRosary Church 2701 East Avenue, Erie, Pennsylvania 16504 PARISH STAFF: Rev. Richard D. Lynch, V.F. Pastor Rev. Thomas Smith, Parochial Vicar Rev. Jeffery J. Noble, Parochial Vicar Msgr. James J. Gannon, Weekend Celebrant Pat Marshall, Director of Elementary Rel. Ed. Jan Nicolla, Director of High School Rel. Ed. - RCIA RECTORY OFFICE: Telephone - 456-4254 SUNDAY LITURGY: 5:00 p.m. Saturday Vigil 7:30, 9:30, 11:30 a.m. Sunday SACRAMENT OF RECONCILIATION: 3:30-4:30 and by appointment Saturday BAPTISMS: Parent sessions monthly MARRIAGES: Contact priest six months prior to wedding PRAYERLINE: Call Veronica 456-0989 or Mary 456-9788 HOLY ROSARY SCHOOL Pre -School through Eighth Grade 1012 East 28th Street Telephone: 456-7212 Mrs. Mary Lee Cook, Principal RCDErie 0008648 102 Page Two School News Wed., Jan. 12 - Hot Lunch Mon., Jan. 17 - NO SCHOOL - Holy Rosary Church, Erie, Pennsylvania ANNOUNCEMENT: Martin Luther King Campbells Labels, Quality & Giant Eagle Tapes Please save for benefit of Holy Rosary School students. Leave in boxes at church. January Confirmation Schedule Sun., Jan. 9 - NO CLASSES Sun., Jan. 16 - 11th Gr. - 6-8p.m.; Saints Summary Due; Sacramental Sheets due for those who did not bring them in as yet. Sun., Jan. 23 - Large Group Meeting - 9th, 10th and 11th - 6-8p.m. - in the Gym. Sun., Jan. 30 - NO CLASSES - Superbowl Sunday. Rel. Ed. Resumes TODAY K-8 Religious Education resumes today, January 9 at regular times. Laura Drapeho, our new coordinator, invites any parent in to say hello. She is looking forward to meeting and knowing as many of you as possible. Let's welcome her warmly. Ham & Cheese Pretzels Sandwich Sale benefits the Boy Scouts, Pack 40. $1.25 ea. - Delivery on Thursday, Jan. 27. Please call Liz at 456-7476 or Patty at 825-6314. Thank you for your support. H. R. Knights of Columbus FREE THROW CHAMPIONSHIP ALL boys and girls ages 10 -14 are invited to par- ticipate in this local level of competition, which will be held on Saturday, January 22,1994 in the Holy Rosary Gym. Sign-ups for the event will be held on Sundays: Jan. 2, 9, and 16 in the new school section of the school from 10:30am to 1:00pm. For additional information contact: Matt Killion at 459-7107 or Bruce Eicher at 825-0061. Altar Rosary Society There will not be any meetings during January or February. See you in March. BAPTISMS: As a general rule, the season of Lent is a time to prepare for the Feast of Easter, when the Sacraments of Initiation are celebrated. Therefore, we are asking parents to schedule their Baptism before or after Lent...January 23, February 13 or at Eastertime. of Bishop Donald Trautman is announcing the assignment Fr. Thomas Smith, our Parochial Vicar, to several chaplaincy positions in the Erie area beginning at the end of March. Fr. Smith will remain in residence here at Holy Rosary with the title of Resident and Weekend Sacramental Assistant. Food Pantry REMINDER The Pantry will be distributing every other Tuesday morning to any parishioner in need. Please call Irene with (456-9467) or Charlotte (456-9556) ifyou have this need or questions. Family Perspective Parents can sometimes focus on the wrong things children do that they begin to think that they are bad kids. Take a tip from heaven in today's Gospel-be sure to tell your children that you love them and that you are well pleased with themand do it OFTEN!!! Pro-Life Media Campaign This weekend our church will participate in the Annual ProLife Media Campaign conducted by People for Life. By your donation you will be contributing to positive pro-life messages on television, radio and newspaper, as well as other areas of the media. Thank you for helping to spread the pro -life message throughout the community. PLEASE JOIN US: The 16th Annual Greater Erie Area Ecumenical Prayer Breakfast & March/Motorcade for Life on Saturday, January 15 at 9:00am at Cauley Auditorium, 4th & Holland. Janet Folger, from the Ohio Right to Life Society, will be our featured speaker. Reservation requested by TODAY, Jan. 9. The March/Motorcade will begin at 12:00 noon and proceed to Perry Square. Bring your children, your banners and signs. The 21st Annual National March for Life in Washington, D.C. will be on Friday, Jan. 21st. Friday allows us to visit our elected representatives. Buses leave St. George's parking lot at 11:45pm Thursday night, Jan 20. Cost: $30. Reservations requested by Jan. 15 by calling Fran (833-7012), Mary (456-7364) or Carol (833-7105). Parish Appreciation Dinner An Appreciation Dinner Invitation went out to all the workers and volunteers of the parish. Sometimes someone is missed. If you or someone you know has been overlooked, PLEASE, call Fr. Smith right away. Thanks Some people received invitation addressed to Mr. & Mrs. because both parties volunteer. Others were addressed to only one. If your spouse is not a volunteer and wishes to join you, they may do so. We ask that you cover the cost of $10 for them. Please note it on the R.S.V.P. and pay that night. RING LOST At Christmas Midnight Mass: A man's gold ring with 5 diamonds inset. If you know the whereabouts of this item, please call the Rectory or drop off the item there. Thanks. RCDErie 0008649 103 January 9, Holy Rosary Church, Erie, Pennsylvania Page Three Snowflakes January 9, 1994 Snowflakes are one of nature's most fragile things, one not like the other, but look what they can do when they stick together! The Baptism of the Lord ( 1994 \\Iii6.;-",..,- -.--:-.:-.,..4.0;<-- , ..t..c.r., Christmas Cleanup "Then a voice came from the heavens: 'You are my beloved Son. On you my favor rests.'" HELP NEEDED!! We will be removing the Christmas Tree and other decorations from the church TODAY, Sun., Jan. 9th at 2:00pm. PLEASE COME AND HELP! The more hands we have the sooner we will get done. Anyone still need service hours? Mark 1:11 MINISTRY WORKSHOP Monday, January 10 7:00am Luigi Sansone (Laura & Michael DeSanctis) 8:00am Henry Konapka (Family) Holy Rosary Parish has planned an afternoon for all its ministers on Sunday, February 5th. Bishop Murphy will be the Keynote Speaker, plus others. More information will follow next week. The following groups should reserve the date of Feb. 5th from 2 til 6pm: Lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, Ushers, Choir & Music Ministry, Coaches and anyone working with the youth, Religious Education Teachers, School Teachers, Long Range Planning Committee, Parish Council and Liturgical Committees. If anyone else in the parish is interested in coming, you are welcome. Perhaps you would like to join one of the above groups. This would be a good opportunity to do this. Tuesday, January 11 7:00am Marion Anthony (Family) 8:00am Kathleen Lynch (Helen Kloecker) Wednesday, January 12 7:00am Peter Krizmanick (Helen Krizmanick) 8:00am Stephen Nemergut (Judith Kirk) Thursday, January 13 7:00am Charles Clark (Estate) 8:00am Shirley Ann Hanlin (Ellen Rainey) Workshop for Rite of Christian Initiation Friday, January 14 7:00am Edward Nowak, Death Anniv. (Andrew Savindi) 8:00am Marie Tenace (M/M Joseph Mikowski) The Diocese is offering a three -session workshop on January 13,20, and 27 for those wishing to learn the basic skills of BreakingOpen the Word, which follows the Rite of Dismissal, and for those interested in becoming parish sponsors for catechumens and candidates. The sessions will be held in the rectory basement at Blessed Sacrament Church from 7 to 8:30pm. Register by Jan. 10 by calling 454-0171 or 824-1272. No charge except for a workbook. Anyone from Holy Rosary who has any questions or is interested, please call Fr. Jeff at the rectory (456-4254). Saturday, January 15 8:00am Mary Torelli, Birth Anniv. (Harrick Grandchildren) 5:00pm VIGIL Paul Lipinski, Anniv. (Wife & Family) SUNDAY, January 16 7:30am Parishioners of Holy Rosary 9:30am Patricia Bargielski (Fred & Kathy Weaver) 11:30am Ann Bernardini (Children) Thought for the New Year Take time to work... It is the price of success. Take time to think_..ft is the source of power. Take time to play...It is the secret of perpetual youth. Take time to read...It is the fountain of wisdom. Take time to be friendly...It is the road to happiness. Take time to be to laugh...It is the music of the soul. Take time to dream...It is the road to greater Sanctuary Candle The candle in the Mother's Chapel will be lit the week of January 9 in memory of the birth of Avellino Duchini. If anyone wishes intentions for the Sanctuary candle in the Mothers Chapel please call the Rectory at (456-4254). Feb. 6 & 27 open. vision. Readings for Sunday, January 16 Take time to give...The day is too short to be selfish. Take time to love and be loved...It is the privilege of all God's children. Take time to pray...It is the road to God. -1 Sm 3:3-10, 19 2nd Reading - 1 Cor 6:13-15, 17-20 Gospel - John 1:35-42 1st Reading RCDErie 0008650 The Bulletin for Holy Rosary Parish, January 9, 1994 104 That same month, all Pennsylvania Bishops received a confidential letter from the Most Reverend Joseph V. Adamec, Bishop of the Diocese of Altoona -Johnstown. Adamec and the Diocese of Altoona -Johnstown were involved in the high profile litigation of child sexual abuse offenses perpetrated by Father Francis Luddy. As discovered by the Thirty -Seventh Statewide Investigating Grand Jury in their investigation of the Diocese of Altoona -Johnstown, Adamec and the Diocese were aware of sexual offenses committed by Luddy. Documentation within their secret archives contained incriminating information regarding numerous priests who had molested children. In Adamec' s letter to the other Bishops, he explained the steps he had taken to protect the secret archives from litigation. Notations on the document appear to indicate that Trautman took note of Diocesan records which Adamec was forced to disclose, and that the Diocese's motions in the case, such as seeking bifurcation, jury sequestration, and to dismiss based on a "time bar," were being denied. 105 Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown Office of The Bishop Box 126 Logan Boulevard Hollidaysburg, January 31, PA 16648 1994 CONFIDENTIAL His Excellency The Most Reverend Donald W. Trautman Bishop of Erie 9th Street Erie, PA 18501 205 W. Dear Don: I write to inform you that jury selection begins today in the civil case of Michael Hutchison versus Francis Luddy, Bishop James Hogan, et al (which includes the Diocese of Altoona -Johnstown). The case is being heard by Judge Hiram Carpenter in Blair County. The allegation is that the Reverend Francis Luddy sexually molested the plaintiff (which he denies) and that the Diocese was negligent in protecting potential victims in this and other cases of alleged pedophilic behavior on the part of its priests (which we deny). The court has ordered (and, we have compiled) that the Diocese produce documents and information of any and all allegations of pedophilia relating to our priests between 1967 and 1984. This includes documentation which was in the Secret Archives. I refused to comply in the latter matter until it became evident that the Diocese could suffer sanctions and would lose its insurance coverage for non-compliance. We have placed a number of motions before the Judge. These include the following: a - bifurcation (requiring plaintiff to first prove its case against Luddy and receive jury's verdict before expanding its litigation to other priests), b - sequestering of the jury (due to expected publicity), c - motion in Blaine (to exclude from trial allegations of child molestation against any other priest), and d - motion to time bar (given the statues of limitations). However, all of these motions have been denied. Defense for the Diocese continues to be provided by our underwriter insurance companies through the Pittsburgh firm of Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebeneck and Eck; - being represented by Attorney Carl Eck and Attorney Julie Sweeney. Attorneys of both the United States Catholic Conference and the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference have been kept informed. A "gag order" continues to be in place, preventing plaintiffs or defendants from speaking with the mass media. However, this was recently CONFIDENTIAL RCDErie 0002044 106 CONFIDENTIAL [Pennsylvania Bishops RE Luddy Case; 1/31/94] breached; even though, not by us. This may or may not change when the trial begins. The Presbyteml Council la unanimously supportive of the Diocesan position that no offer of settlement should even be considered. It is our position that the Diocese and its Bishop acted appropriately and thoroughly in each case of alleged pedophilia. Last Thursday, I met with the Presbyterate and Diaconate of this Diocesan Church in order to bring them up-to-date. I sensed the same support there, as well. It would appear to me, given the facts of this case and the procedures allowed the attorney for the plaintiff, that this is another effort to discredit the Church. We have been viewing our situation within the context of our faith journey and are putting forth every effort to approach the matter in a positive way. Please remember us in your conversations with the Lord. May the gift of the Holy Spirit be a source of strength for you during 1994, bringing with it peace and joy for your journey to the Kingdom. Fraterna (Most Bis yours in the Lord, v.) Joseph V. Adamec of Altoona-Johnstown Pro -Nuncio Pennsylvania Bishops SAME: Apostolic CONFIDENTIAL RCDErie 0002045 CONFIDENTIAL Adamec's Letter Regarding Child Sexual Abuse Litigation 107 Meanwhile, Smith was unhappy with his new assignment and sought a reprieve from Murphy, his first enabler. Murphy, now retired, reached out to Trautman on behalf of Smith and another priest seeking greater leniency. Trautman responded by letter on May 6, 1994. Trautman explained that he had not been overly restrictive but that the Diocese could not adopt a "posture" less than what Pittsburgh had done. The Grand Jury noted that Trautman did not cite to the evils of child sexual abuse as the external pressure which warranted the restriction of offending priests. Rather, Trautman provided Murphy a copy of an article from Time Magazine on "this problem" and stated that "[t]he article is vicious and demonstrates, once again, the need for vigilance on the part of the church." 108 S. Oioce.8e 2.61. Cacyr sa5y7 -017.114yaielfil& the.174 -0,E97 eke, eriie-Oiclie)o. May 6, 1994 Most Rev. Michael J. Murphy, DO, STL Retired Bishop of Erie St. Patrick Rectory 130 East 4 Street Erie, Pennsylvania 16507 Dear Mike, As a follow-up to our conversation regarding two of our brother priests with a past problem of sexual misconduct, may share with you guidelines that are operative in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. i cite these only to demonstrate that the Diocese of Erie is not overly restrictive. could cite other dioceses, Chicago, for example, which has a much more believe it important for us to restrictive policy than even Pittsburgh. priests in this predicasupervise to done have see what other Bishops believe, also, these guidelines can be a model for us in forming ment. would When that written policy has been composed, a written policy. do not like, then, to present it to our two priests in question. believe it will come as any surprise to them since we have already emphasize, again, the Diocese of Erie is simply verbally discussed it. other dioceses. Permit me to cite some of the in practice the following guidelines from the Diocese of Pittsburgh: I I I I I I I a cleric against whom a serious accusation of sexual misconduct has been substantiated, will not be permitted to return to public ministry. If an exception were to be made, at least the following criteria must be met: 1. He has undergone extensive treatment; 2. He receives ongoing professional counseling and participates in a therapy group or life management support group on an ongoing basis, both such activities being subject to termination only with the written permission of the diocesan bishop; 3. It is possible to supervise adequately and monitor his contact with the public; 4. He is subject to special placement in a situation in which he will be monitored by an on -site supervisor, and appropriate diocesan official; 5. The cleric must be willing to disclose the nature of his problem with his coworkers; 6. He must demonstrate a spirit of repentance and goodwill. "Ordinarily, RCDErie 0002033 fys,ye, raw eao - 2 - May 6, 1994 Most Rev. Michael J. Murphy, DD, STL Pittsburgh further states "the diocesan bishop reserves the right to modify or supplement these procedures to meet the needs of a particular case and commits himself to review them periodically for adequacy." In Pittsburgh, there is a full-time person called the 'process manager' who oversees these cases. The responsibilities of the 'process manager' are the following: review the actions taken in each case to insure that all diocesan policies and procedures are being followed; maintain regular contact with clerics with whom the diocese must exercise some degree of supervision; update the priest's personnel files of these same clerics noting particularly what steps the diocese has taken relative to allegations of sexual misconduct; administer the supervisory program; prepare reports for the clergy task force and serve as a liaison to the Assessment Board. do not believe the Diocese of Erie cart adopt a posture less than what Pittsburgh has done or other dioceses. Therefore, am suggesting that for our two priests to be in residence at St. Patrick's Rectory, that there be clearly defined in writing, guidelines, procedures, expectations. We've already discussed some of these with them, namely, reporting to the Diocesan Review Board, limitation of public ministry to the Nursing Home Apostolate, restriction of diocesan faculties to exclusively the Nursing Home Apostolate, and on -site supervision. I I am also enclosing a copy of this week's article in Time Magazine on this problem. The article is vicious and demonstrates, once again, the need for vigilance on the part of the Church. After Monsignor Smith and Monsignor Brugger have had a chance to come up with specific guidelines, perhaps we can all get together and discuss them. certainly want to balance these guidelines with a reach -out in love and fraternal support. However, there is an obligation at this point to protect the flock as well as to go in search of those who have strayed. I I Best wishes. Fraternally yours in Christ, Most Rev. Donald W. Trautman, STD, SSL Bishop of Erie DWT/nh Enclosure cc: Monsignor Robert J. Smith Monsignor Robert L. Brugger RCDErie 0002034 Trautman Responds to Murphy 110 Ultimately, Smith served as a chaplain as described in the Holy Rosary church bulletin until his retirement in March 2002. In April 1996, Smith wrote to Trautman and asked to be appointed to the board of the local YMCA, as well as to be returned to the Isaiah 43 program. Trautman was aware that Smith continued to seek contact with children and elected not to warn anyone. Due to the national coverage following the article about the Archdiocese of Boston, Trautman was forced to field letters from concerned parishioners and answer inquiries from the local press. On January 31, 2002, Trautman wrote to parents of one of Smith's victims and stated, "I believe appropriate action has been taken in the fact that there is no parish assignment and there is a definite curtailing of his ministry." On March 15, 2002, Trautman gave an interview to a news reporter and stated, "we have no priest or deacon or layperson that I know of that has, in any way, a pedophile background." Smith retired that same month and was still a Roman Catholic priest. By April 2002, some victims had begun litigation in connection with their past abuse. In a letter dated April 24, 2002, from counsel for the Diocese to the attorney for one of Smith's victims, the following statement was made: ... it must be understood that we cannot simply write checks because an event occurred 20, 30, or 40 years ago, but we must limit our assistance to rehabilitation and encourage people such as your client to attempt to put the past behind them and move on with their lives. By February 2003, it appeared that Smith had moved on with his own life. A February 26, 2003, memo by Trautman documented that Smith had obtained employment as a counselor at "Turning Point" and that Trautman had relied on Smith's word that he disclosed his past abuses to them. Trautman wrote a memo on July 22, 2003, documenting that Turning Point had made a complaint. Smith had never disclosed his history of child sexual abuse offenses to them. Trautman documented that "I felt he had made a complete recovery from alcoholism and sexual abuse. He 111 had been faithful to his treatment program and gives every indication of having taken full responsibility for his actions." Under public pressure, Trautman submitted a formal request to the Vatican on November 10, 2004, and requested the laicization of Smith. Now that Trautman needed a basis to remove Smith from the priesthood he acted with candor. Contrary to nearly every one of Trautman's previous statements regarding Smith, Trautman now disclosed his knowledge to the Vatican in a confidential letter. Trautman admitted that the Diocese of Erie had been aware of Smith's abuses since at least 1987. Trautman disclosed that Smith abused boys between 7 and 12 years of age. He described Smith's acts as chilling and noted that Smith used physical force to bring about the offenses and threats to secure the secrecy of his crimes. Trautman wrote that Smith invoked the name of God to justify his actions against his victims while using their faith and the priesthood to manipulate them and secure their silence. Trautman noted that, even after Smith was told to avoid any and all occasions that would place him in the company of minors, he continued to do so in a public manner For example, he was photographed assisting high school students in the collection of food for the poor and the photograph was published in the local newspaper. Trautman summarized Smith's worldview and stated that he saw his victims as objects rather than people. The Vatican finally acted in 2006 and removed Smith from the priesthood. Smith's former flock was never told the reason for his removal. On August 3, 2006, Trautman directed the pastor of St. Hippolyte to make the following notation in the record of the parish with respect to Smith: "Dismissed from the clerical state on June 10, 2006 by Pope Benedict XVI. Nothing else need be noted." 112 Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg Ecclesiastical Province ofPhiladelphia IArchdiocese Diocese I I Allentown Altoona -Johnstown Erie I I I I Greensburg Harrisburg 1.1 Philadelphia Pittsburgh Scranton I. General Overview of the Diocese of Greensburg, Pennsylvania The Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg was canonically erected on March 10, 1951, by Pope Pius XII. The Diocese oversees Armstrong, Fayette, Indiana, and Westmoreland counties, Pennsylvania. As of 2017, the population of Catholics living within the Diocese of Greensburg was 137,641, which constituted approximately 21% of the total population in the Diocese's geographic region. The Greensburg Diocese consists of 78 parishes, 14 elementary schools, two junior/senior high schools, and a school for children of all ages with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities, and has approximately 100 clergy members (including active, retired, and international priests, as well as permanent deacons). 113 II. History of Bishops of the Diocese of Greensburg a) Bishop Hugh L. Lamb (1/16/1952 through 12/06/1959) b) Bishop William G. Connare (5/04/1960 through 1/20/1987) c) Auxiliary Bishop Norbert F. Gaughan (6/26/1977 through 7/09/1984) d) Bishop Anthony G. Bosco (630/1987 through 3/04/2004) e) f) III. Bishop Edward C. Malesic (7/13/2015 to Present) Additional Church Leadership within the Diocese of Greensburg Relevant to the Grand Jury's Investigation The Grand Jury finds that the following Church leaders, while not Bishops, played an important role in the Diocese of Greensburg's handling of allegations of priest sexual abuse. 1) Father Roger Statnick 2) Father Lawrence Persico (later Bishop of the Diocese of Erie) 3) Monsignor Thomas Klinzing IV. Findings of the Grand Jury The Grand Jury uncovered evidence of child sexual abuse committed by a number of priests of the Diocese of Greensburg. The forms of abuse discovered included grooming and the fondling of genitals and/or intimate body parts, as well as penetration of the vagina, mouth, and/or anus. The evidence also showed that Diocesan administrators, including bishops, had knowledge of this conduct and regularly permitted priests to continue in ministry after becoming aware that a complaint of child sexual abuse had been made against them. This conduct enabled the offenders and endangered the welfare of children. 114 REDACTED - ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION Evidence also showed that the Diocese made settlements with victims and had discussions with lawyers regarding the sexual abuse of children by its priests. These settlements often contained confidentiality agreements forbidding victims from speaking about such abuse under threat of some penalty, such as legal action to recover previously paid settlement funds. Finally, the Grand Jury received evidence that Diocesan administrators, including Bishops, dissuaded victims from reporting abuse to law enforcement. Meanwhile, the Diocese regularly failed to independently investigate allegations of child sexual abuse in order to avoid scandal and possible civil and criminal liability on behalf of the Diocese, accused priests, and Diocesan leadership. To the extent an investigation was conducted by the Diocese, it was too often deficient or biased and did not result in reporting credible allegations of crimes against children to the proper authorities or otherwise faithfully respond to the abuse which was uncovered. V. Offenders Identified by the Grand Jury 1) Father Dennis Dellamalva 2) Father Greg Flohr 3) Father Charles B. Guth 4) Father Francis Lesniak 5) Father Raymond Lukac 6) Father Henry J. Marcinek 7) "Greensburg Priest #1" 8) Father Robert Moslener 9) Father Fabian G. Oris 10) Edmond A. Parrakow 11) Father George R. Pierce 115 12) Father Gregory F. Premoshis 13) Father Thomas W. Rogers 14) Father Leonard Sanesi 15) Father Roger A. Sinclair 16) Reverend Joseph L. Sredzinski 17) Father John T. Sweeney 18) Reverend Joseph Anthony Tamikowski 19) Father Roger J. Trott 20) Father Charles Weber, OSB VI. Examples of Institutional Failure: Fathers Edmond A. Parrakow, Raymond Lukac and Robert Moslener The Grand Jury notes the following examples of child sexual abuse perpetrated by priests within the Diocese of Greensburg. These examples further highlight the wholesale institutional failure that endangered the welfare of children throughout the Pennsylvania Dioceses, including the Diocese of Greensburg. These examples are not meant to be exhaustive; rather, they provide a window into the conduct of past Pennsylvania bishops and the crimes they permitted to occur on their watch. 116 The Case of Father Edmond A. Parrakow Known Assignments 1968 (summer) 1968-1969 1969-1973 1973-1984 1985 December 1985 1985-1986 1986-1989 Leave 2004 Catholic University Ponce, Puerto Rico Assumption Catholic Church, Tuckahoe, New York St. Peter, Yonkers, New York St. Martin of Tours, Bronx, New York (St. Thomas Aquinas H.S., Faculty) Servants of the Paraclete, Jemez Springs, New Mexico Accepted into Greensburg Diocese Holy Family Catholic Church, Latrobe St. Pius X Catholic Church, Mount Pleasant (Return to Archdiocese of New York) Request for Laicization Father Edmond Parrakow was born and raised in New York City and ordained on June 1, 1968, at St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City at the age of 28. Parrakow thereafter spent seventeen years serving in various parishes within the Archdiocese of New York. At some point during his assignment to the parish of St. Martin of Tours, Bronx, New York, and St. Thomas Aquinas High School, complaints related to the sexual abuse of children were made against Parrakow. While records within the Diocese of Greensburg regarding Parrakow's alleged misconduct in the Archdiocese of New York were somewhat limited, Parrakow's Greensburg Diocesan file indicated a complaint was made against him around the beginning of 1985 by a man alleging he was sexually abused by Parrakow fifteen years prior when he was a teenage boy (Victim One). This abuse allegation appears to have prompted the Archdiocese of New York to arrange for Parrakow to receive counseling with a Father Benedict during the first months of 1985. Parrakow underwent an intensive "evaluation" at the St. Bernardine Clinic in Suitland, Maryland, in May 1985, which resulted in his referral for in -patient treatment at the Foundation House operated by the Servants of the Paraclete in Jemez Springs, New Mexico ("Foundation House") in July 1985. 117 Foundation House was a facility that provided evaluations and treatment for priests accused of sexual abuse of children or other improper acts. According to a memorandum dated February 20, 1985, from Monsignor Thomas Klinzing of the Diocese of Greenburg to Bishop William Connare, an inquiry was received from the Archdiocese of New York asking if Parrakow could be accepted into the Diocese of Greensburg "for the next three or four months." This initial request from the New York Archdiocese included information that Parrakow was undergoing counseling at the time, but assured the Greensburg diocese "that there were no unusual psychological problems but that Father Parrakow needs time to sort out his problems." Parrakow underwent a series of interviews and tests upon his arrival at Foundation House. During one such interview on July 22, 1985, Parrakow admitted to having molested approximately thirty-five male children over the previous seventeen years he had served as a priest (he was years old at the time). Parrakow indicated he preferred his victims around the age of 15 45 or 16 and admitted to having engaged in sexual touching, mutual masturbation, mutual fellatio, and mutual anal intercourse. Parrakow further stated that he "thought that sex with a girl was sinful and that sex with a child was not violating them-it was doing something to them externally." The doctor who conducted the July 22, 1985, interview with Parrakow reached the following conclusion: My impression is that he [Parrakow] certainly has pedophilia. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind. The real issue with treating him is going to be giving him insight and helping to motivate him to change his behavior. I am not sure the level of motivation that is within him right now [sic]. Basically if he had not got caught he would be continuing the behavior without really thinking that it was really not that harmful [sic]. While Parrakow was undergoing "treatment" at Foundation House, letters were exchanged between the Archdiocese of New York and Connare, confirming that Parrakow would be granted 118 a ministry within the Diocese of Greensburg. On October 7, 1985, Connare wrote to Reverend Henry Mansell, Vice Chancellor for Priest Personnel for the Archdiocese of New York, and indicated he would "be happy to help Father [Parrakow] with an assignment" after his release from Foundation House. On October 11, 1985, Mansell responded with a letter of gratitude and agreed to facilitate an exchange of information regarding Parrakow' s time in New Mexico. Specifically, in his October 7 letter, Connare requested "a complete report on that treatment and his needs so that we can consider his needs when the time for an appointment draws near." Mansell later assured Connare that the Greensburg Diocese would "be provided with a complete report on his treatment and needs." While Parrakow's complete records from Foundation House, including those pertaining to his interview when he confessed to having sexually abused thirty-five boys, were sent from Foundation House to the Archdiocese of New York on August 6, 1985, the records of the Diocese of Greensburg do not reflect whether this information was provided by New York to Greensburg at that time. For instance, according to a letter sent by Parrakow to Connare on December 9, 1985, Parrakow was including with the letter several "progress reports" pertaining to his treatment at Foundation House. These progress reports only addressed his general participation in various programs at Foundation House and did not include any details of his prior sexual abuse. In a confidential memorandum dated December 11, 1985, prepared by Connare that was held within the secret archives of the Diocese of Greensburg, Connare acknowledged receipt of the progress reports sent with Parrakow's December 9, 1985, letter. In this confidential memorandum, Connare documented that although the official reason offered for Parrakow's stay at Foundation House was 'burn out' due to his teaching experience," he was informed during a telephone conversation with a Father Isaias that the reason Parrakow was dispatched to New 119 Mexico was a complaint of sexual abuse committed by Parrakow on a teenage boy fifteen years prior. Connare noted that the victim was "older and unbalanced" and had been contacting the Archdiocese of New York about Parrakow. Connare further remarked in his confidential memorandum that he spoke with Parrakow about the matter and that Parrakow confirmed he was sent to Foundation House because of the accusation of abuse made against him. There is no indication, however, that Parrakow revealed to Connare his complete history of sexual abuse. In response to learning about the complaint against Parrakow, Connare wrote the following: From my interview with Father Ed, it would seem that his problem is in the past. It would also seem that from the program at Foundation House, he has come a long way in discovering his own nature and personality, including implications of sexuality. He realizes he must limit contacts with young people and work on developing patterns of mature conduct. In a letter dated November 4, 1985, sent by the Director of Foundation House, Connare was directly warned not to assign Parrakow to a parish that had a school and recommended he be assigned with at least one other priest. would like to offer some suggestions concerning possible assignments for Father Parrakow: 1) we recommend that Father Parrakow be assigned with at least one other priest in a parish setting that does not have a school. 2) In addition, we recommend that Father Parrakow continue in therapy with a competent therapist, psychologist or psychiatrist. 3) He should also be seeing a qualified Spiritual Director on a regular basis and belong to a priests's support group of some I type. A Selection from the Letter of Warning received by Connare from the Director of Foundation House On November 20, 1985, Klinzing responded to the Director's letter of warning and advised that the Diocese of Greenburg would not be able to abide by his recommendations: 120 As Bishop Connare has previously stated, he is more than willing to have Father Parrakow serve in the Diocese of Greensburg in the pastoral ministry while on leave from the Archdiocese of New York. However, the Bishop does not feel he can comply with your suggestion that Father Parrakow be assigned in a parish setting that does not have a school. The Diocese of Greensburg is made up of many parishes with between 600 and 900 families and these parishes usually have a small parochial school attached. The Parish school usually has under 200 students. The Bishop feels that in asking Father Parrakow to accept an assignment, he would have to place him in such a parish. Klinzing further stated, "If you have a problem with any of the above, please feel free to call me or Bishop Connare." 121 November 20, 1985 Reverend William D. Perri, s.P. Director, Foundation House Servants of the Paraclete Jemez Springs, New Mexico 87025 Dear Father Perri: Bishop Conn are asked me to respond to your 1985, concerning the possible assignEdmond Parrakow of the Archdiocese of letter of November 4, ment of New York. Father As Bishop Connare has previously stated, is more than willing to have Father Parrakow serve in the Diocese of Greensburg in the pastoral ministry while on leave from the Archdiocese of New York. However, the Bishop does not feel that he can comply with your suggestion that Father Parrakow be assigned in a parish setting that does not have a school. The Diocese of Greensburg is made up of many parishes with between 600 and 900 families and these parishes usually have a smallparochial school attached. The parish school usually has under 200 students. The Bishop feels that in asking Father Parrakow to accept an assignment, he would have to place him in such a parish. he Concerning the other suggestions, the Bishop Is more than willing to cooperate In any way he can to make the six months prior to his return to the Foundation House an experience in June, that will be beneficial to Father Parrakow and the people he will serve. If please feel the matter. problem with any of the above, or Bishop Connare to discuss Our phone number Is ¶4121 837-0901. have you free to call a me With every hest wish, I am Sincerely yours in Christ, Reverend Thomas J. KlInzing, J.C.L. Vicar General/Chancellor DG000441 2 Monsignor Klinzing's Letter of Response 122 Shortly after Connare's interview with Parrakow in December 1985, Parrakow completed his tenure at Foundation House and with the consent of the Archdiocese of New York and approval of Connare, entered into ministry in the Diocese of Greensburg. Between December 11, 1985, and July 1, 1986, Parrakow was not assigned to a single parish, but rather aided various parishes in the Diocese. On May 14, 1986, Parrakow wrote a letter from St. Procopius Parish in New Salem, Fayette County, thanking Connare for his acceptance and expressing his satisfaction with his involvement in parish ministry. Parrakow also spent a short time at Holy Family Catholic Church in Latrobe, Westmoreland County, in the early months of 1986. On July 1, 1986, Parrakow received his first formal appointment in the Diocese when he was appointed Parochial Vicar of St. Pius X Catholic Church in Mount Pleasant, Westmoreland County. Throughout his assignments, Parrakow regularly had contact with Catholic schools. 123 Tilietpap's Office (15reenoharg, Fauna_ July 441gs-et-Lb 1, 1986 Edmond Parrakow atteUtrenb anb bear Aatiyer: 1le herellg appoint mon Parochial Vicar afttureli in Saint Pius at the X Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania. nu mill please take gout place Tuesday, July 15, 1986. Aaitlyfoalg 'yours in gisslinp a# Mremehirrg Chancellor DG0004404 Parralcow' s First Assignment in Pennsylvania 124 Parrakow served in the Diocese until early 1989, when a complaint was made against him regarding inappropriate contact he had with a seventh grader at Holy Trinity Catholic School located in Mount Pleasant (Victim Two). Parrakow had been tasked with instructing Victim Two in the faith and his upcoming sacraments. According to internal Diocesan records, on February 13, 1989, Klinzing met with the child's parents and was informed that, from the outset of their son's involvement with Parrakow, Parrakow was verbally abusive towards them and accused them of abusing and harming their son. They stated that Parrakow was "overprotective of [their] child and interfering with [their] child's life" and that, since his involvement with Parrakow, Victim Two's performance in school had suffered. They described that Victim Two's experience with Parrakow had "been extremely bad for him." The situation escalated during an incident in which Victim Two was taken to the emergency room because of an illness. While Victim Two's parents were with him at the hospital, Parrakow entered the treatment room, insulted the parents, and "began to touch [Victim Two] on his face and hands and chest while he lay on the emergency room bed." A violent argument ensued with the boy's father. Parrakow called Victim Two's home that evening inquiring about the boy and appeared at the hospital the next day, which "terrified and petrified" Victim Two. Meanwhile, in January of 1989, Parrakow requested incardination with the Diocese of Greensburg, meaning that he would be formally transferred from the Archdiocese of New York to the Diocese of Greensburg. The request prompted the disclosure of Parrakow' s full records from the Archdiocese of New York. This included his complete records from Foundation House, which included his admission to having molested approximately thirty-five male children while he served as a priest. At the same time these records were being disclosed in the first weeks of February, 1989, the complaint involving Victim Two was received by the Diocese. 125 On February 16, 1989, Bishop Anthony Bosco of the Diocese of Greensburg notified Lawrence M. Connaughton, Vice -Chancellor for Priest Personnel of the Archdiocese of New York, of his concern over the incident with Victim Two and his parents. Bosco stated that he had relieved Parrakow of his assignment in the Diocese of Greensburg on February 10, 1989, and would not provide him any further assignments. On February 22, 1989, Klinzing wrote a memorandum to Bosco stating, "Father Connaughton asked if there were any incidents because he's worried about legal ramifications. I told him that we have suspicions but no hard evidence." Significantly, an undated note in Parrakow' s Diocesan file appeared to confirm that the Diocese of Greensburg had engaged in no meaningful supervision of Parrakow since his arrival in 1986. The note stated, "We have not & cannot supervising." Par. i s.W4-64, '4"*"" AA-1.12- A(Y) -ea-A.,\40 DG 0004341 The File Note According to correspondence between the Archdiocese of New York and the Diocese of Greensburg in 2003, Parrakow resided in the Greensburg Diocese but did not engage in any priestly 126 activities between 1989 and 2003. In 2004, Parrakow consented to laicization and was formally removed from the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church. Pursuant to the Grand Jury's investigation, Victim Two was contacted and later interviewed by Special Agents of the Office of Attorney General (OAG) on April 12, 2017. Victim Two confirmed the details of the incident as documented within Diocesan records and stated that Parrakow was "a pervert" and that "he always made me feel uncomfortable and intimidated." Victim Two further expressed his firm belief that, had his father not intervened that day at the hospital, Parrakow would have gone much further than rubbing his body and face. Victim Two identified a boyhood neighbor of his as another possible victim of Parrakow. This young man had served as an altar boy before abruptly withdrawing from that role in his local parish. On May 4, 2017, this additional victim (Victim Three) was interviewed by OAG Special Agents. Victim Three explained that, for approximately one year when he was 10 or 11 years old and in fourth or fifth grade, he served as an altar boy at St. Pius X Catholic Church in Mount Pleasant. He stopped being an altar boy due to Parrakow. Victim Three reported that, while he was an altar boy, Father Ed, as the boys called Parrakow, told the altar boys not to wear any clothing under their cassocks because God did not want any man-made clothes to be worn next to their skin while they were serving Mass. Parrakow also told the boys their cassocks had been blessed and were meant to be worn next to the skin. Victim Three stated he never felt comfortable about this and that it did not seem right not to wear any clothing under his cassock. Victim Three also reported that Parrakow took the altar boys into a private room and told them he had to do a physical examination on them because there had been a report of abuse at the school. Parrakow told the boys he was checking them for any signs of abuse and further stated that the school did not want this to be common knowledge because they might never find out which 127 student was being abused. Parrakow told the altar boys not to say anything to their parents, teachers, or other students. Victim Three further added that Parrakow would touch the children "all over" during these "examinations," including their genitals and buttocks. Victim Three specifically recalled Parrakow breathing on his neck when he was behind him checking his buttocks. On December 11, 2017, Parrakow appeared before the Grand Jury pursuant to a subpoena. During his testimony, Parrakow admitted that he had molested children as a priest, many of whom were altar boys. When asked if he had abused numerous children, Parrakow stated, "... I don't well, I didn't keep contact - contact with them, and I didn't count them. - So whatever the Diocese is saying is probably correct." Although Parrakow could not recall the names of all the children he had molested, he did recall that he had sexual contact with the child of a youth minister in Bethlehem, Lehigh and Northampton Counties, during drives between New York and Greensburg. Parrakow explained that he had developed a friendship with the youth minister and was invited to stay at their home as a point of respite on the long drive. Parrakow further testified that the Diocese never placed any restrictions on his ministry and never limited his contact with schools, despite the warning and recommendations of the Director of Foundation House. Parrakow stated he was unaware of any such recommendation and did, in fact, have frequent contact with school children. Parrakow testified that he confessed his crimes to his fellow priests, but admitted he would offend again after he received absolution. During a particular exchange with the attorney for the Commonwealth, Parrakow conceded that he could not be cured of his desires and indicated that he was unware of the "serious effects" of his criminal actions. The prosecutor challenged his assertion regarding the seriousness of his offenses in the following exchange: 128 Okay. You didn't know that Scripture itself says it is better to put a millstone around your neck and be cast into the sea than harm a child? Q: A: That, I knew. Neither Edmund Parrakow nor William Connare can be prosecuted for their crimes. The statute of limitations has expired for the multiple indecent assaults Parrakow committed in Pennsylvania. Parrakow is currently employed in a shopping mall in Westmoreland County. Connare died in 1995. The Bishop Connare Center, the Diocese of Greensburg's ecumenical retreat, social, and educational conference facility, was named in his honor. 129 The Case of Father Raymond Lukac Known Assignments 06/21/1954 06/29/1955 1957 08/01/1961 07/03/1963 01/16/1964 Various Saints Cyril & Methodius, Fairchance Holy Trinity, Ford City Servants of the Paraclete, New Mexico Diocese of Gary, Indiana St. Stanislaus, Posen, Illinois Immaculate Conception, Clarksburg, West Virginia Veterans Administration Service Father Raymond Lukac was ordained within the Diocese of Greensburg in 1954. According to records in Lukac's Diocesan file, his ordination in 1954 was preceded by considerable resistance by Church officials to Lukac joining the priesthood. This resistance was in response to his refusal to conform his conduct to that expected of a priest and resulted in Lukac being briefly dropped as a seminary student, before being readmitted under strict conditions. Lukac's refusal or inability to follow the rules of the priesthood, despite the consistent consternation and discipline of Church officials, was a trend that continued throughout his tenure as a priest. In April 1955, soon after Lukac's ordination, the Chancellor of the Diocese of Greensburg, Cyril Vogel, met with Lukac regarding a "serious matter." According to numerous handwritten letters from parishioners of Saints Cyril & Methodius appearing in Lukac's Diocesan file, members of Lukac's parish were complaining that he appeared to have been romantically involved with the 18 -year -old organist for the parish (Victim One). Several parishioners expressed concern over having seen Lukac with the teen late at night, including one writing that Lukac was observed in Victim One's company while "driving away with the lights off." Father Anthony Hardy, head pastor at Saints Cyril and Methodius' s, complained to the Diocese that "he is the talk of the parish and the community everywhere." 130 Diocesan records showed that, in order to distance Lukac from the brewing scandal, he was transferred to Holy Trinity in June 1955. In July 1955, Lukac signed a pledge that he would no longer see Victim One or have any communication with her whatsoever. Approximately one year later, Father Matthew Yanosek, the head pastor of the Holy Trinity parish, discovered that Lukac was involved with a 17 -year-old girl (Victim Two). Yanosek made a verbal report to the Diocese in the summer of 1956 about the matter and, by December 1956, Yanosek had learned that the relationship between Lukac and Victim Two had continued. Concerned of possible scandal, Yanosek wrote a three -page letter, dated December 13, 1956, that the Grand Jury obtained from Diocesan files. The letter, addressed to Bishop Hugh Lamb, stated, in part: This past summer I made a verbal report on a scandal in our community which involved Father Lukac... Your Excellency's advice at that time was for me to give him a canonical warning and then if he failed to put it in writing and make it a matter for the Chancery Office. Father Lukac was advised of this and the rules set down for him were 1. No social visiting 2. No driving girls in his car. He has violated these rules. Many times and I have warned him many times. Yanosek further explained that, upon his return from a trip to Detroit, the housekeeper for the rectory reported witnessing Lukac enter the rectory with Victim Two and observed the teen in Lukac' s bed. Yanosek wrote that he "called the father of this child and reported the situation." Yanosek also told Bishop Lamb that he had found a wedding ring and a marriage certificate in Lukac' s room. The marriage certificate indicated Lukac had married Victim Two on November 20, 1956, at Holy Trinity Church and included the seal of the Church and Yanosek' s forged signature. It did not appear that this forged marriage certificate was associated with a formal, legal marriage. The Grand Jury determined that the date of the marriage certificate was not coincidental; November 20 was the date Victim Two turned 18 years old. Yanosek concluded his letter by 131 stating, "(Lukac) has lied to me so many times and I suspect him of thievery. For the best of all concerned, I beg your Excellency, please replace him." In response to Yanosek's letter, Lamb wrote a letter to the Archbishop of Philadelphia, John O'Hara, on January 12, 1957, requesting his assistance in the matter. Lamb explained that there "is a danger of scandal" and that the Diocese felt Lukac should be removed "for the good of his own soul and for the welfare of the church." Despite having the marriage certificate as proof of a relationship between Lukac and a minor, Lamb told O'Hara, "there is no conclusive proof that he has gone the limit in the three cases brought to our attention of the two parishes to which he has been assigned." Additionally, the Grand Jury's review of Yanosek's Diocesan file found various letters from parishioners complaining of Lukac's contact with teens. Specific details regarding the third case Bishop Lamb referenced were not contained within Diocesan records. Lamb asked O'Hara to send Lukac to Padua Retreat House in Pocopson, Chester County. Lamb wrote that "the other two young priests of this diocese who were given hospitality there profited much by the experience." It is unclear who these other two priests were or why they were sent to Padua House. However, Diocesan records revealed that, before Lamb made final arrangements to send Lukac on the planned retreat, Lukac eloped with Victim Two to Virginia. By January 18, 1957, the date of the marriage, Victim Two was over 18 and a legal marriage was recorded on that date. Despite his elopement, Lukac returned to the Church and, in July 1957, was sent for treatment and repentance at Foundation House operated by the Servants of the Paraclete in Jemez Springs, New Mexico. Foundation House was a facility that provided evaluations and treatment for priests accused of sexual abuse of children or other improper acts. Father Lukac thereafter 132 divorced Victim Two in December 1957. According to several documents in Lukac's file, Victim Two bore Lukac a child. Lukac remained in New Mexico until August 1, 1961. Upon his departure from Foundation House, he did not return to the Diocese. Rather, while still under the authority of the Diocese, Lukac was granted the necessary permission to serve within the Diocese of Gary, Indiana. In a letter dated June 30, 1961, the Bishop of Gary, Andrew Grutka, accepted Lukac into his Diocese on "a trial basis." Lukac was given all faculties of the priesthood in the Diocese of Gary, with the exception of the ability to hear confessions. While the Grand Jury did not locate any documentation formally assigning Lukac to serve at schools within the Gary Diocese, it is clear from references in various letters and documents appearing in Lukac's Diocesan file that he served as a high school teacher at Bishop Noll Institute in Hammond, Indiana. In a letter from Grutka to Connare dated June 13, 1963, Grutka directed that Lukac was "to leave the Diocese of Gary" on June 30, 1963. While Grutka explained that the Diocese no longer had a need for Lukac, he ended his letter with the following: "He is also troubled with impetuosity with a tendency toward indiscreetness. In my humble opinion an assignment in a Boys' school would be in the best interest of Father Lukac." On June 15, 1963, a letter was dispatched from Brother I. Conrad, the Superintendent of Bishop Noll Institute, to Connare. Conrad' s letter offered the following assessment of Lukac: Father Lukac' s besetting fault seems to be a lack of prudence. This has been noticed in his dealings with some of the students, particularly the girls... However, I am not aware of any scandals in this regard, although his conduct at times gave me a few moments of uneasiness and apprehension. On June 19, 1963, Connare responded by letter thanking Conrad for the "confidential" information he had provided. 133 Lukac' s removal from the Diocese of Gary resulted in Connare endeavoring to find him a new ministry. On June 17, 1963, Connare wrote a memorandum to Monsignor Norbert Gaughan of the Diocese of Greensburg in which he sought to move Lukac while instructing Gaughan to "[IA/latch and carefully guard secrecy of this." PA 4c) -ipt F-Fk4=;1...4. ink A1,71rE t titta MEI I IS i-vcnr. - Ao. rat tCJ M G!]it*IV / -7 - e41'--.25 - /ir 6r-r IDG0022823 Memorandum of Bishop Connare In numerous letters contained within the secret archives of the Diocese of Greensburg, Connare attempted to find Lukac a "benevolent bishop" to accept him into another diocese. On June 21, 1963, the Bishop of Fort Wayne -South Bend, Indiana, Leo Pursley, wrote a letter to Connare stating, "the truth is that I have taken in quite a number of problem priests without 134 much success, but I will certainly give Father Lukac every possible consideration." Ultimately, Lukac was not accepted into the Diocese of Fort Wayne -South Bend. Lukac moved to St. Stanislaus in Posen, Illinois, in July 1963, although he did not live there under an official capacity. Rather, according to a July 23, 1963, memorandum written by Chancellor F. W. Byrne of the Archdiocese of Chicago, Lukac arrived at St. Stanislaus through his friendship with Father Stanley Dopek, the pastor of St. Stanislaus, who had invited Lukac to live with him in the parish. Byrne noted that the Archdiocese of Chicago would not accept Lukac as a priest and instructed him to find a different "benevolent bishop," while permitting Lukac to live with Dopek until he found other arrangements. On August 12, 1963, Dopek wrote to inform Connare that Lukac was serving within his parish. That same day, Lukac dispatched a letter to Connare asking that Connare petition Rome for the return of his capacity to hear confessions. In October 1963, Connare granted Lukac's request and petitioned the Vatican for a full restoration of priestly faculties on behalf of Lukac. Connare noted his success in returning Lukac' s ability to hear confession in a January 9, 1964, letter to the Bishop of Toledo, George Rehring. At that time, Connare was still working to place Lukac in ministry in another diocese. Connare stated the following to Bishop Rehring: "This past fall, however, while in Rome, I reviewed the details of his case with the Holy Office, and obtained these faculties for Father Lukac. Their use is contingent upon his getting a benevolent bishop, and limited, for the present, to one year." Diocesan records showed that Connare and Lukac continued to write to various bishops asking that he be accepted into ministry within their respective dioceses. On January 10, 1964, Joseph Hodges, the Bishop of Wheeling, West Virginia, wrote a letter to Connare stating that Lukac "is most welcome here, that I know something of his background, 135 and we will be happy to cooperate in helping him serve as a real priest." Connare responded by thanking Bishop Hodges, noting that "obviously he [Lukac] is a risk... but who can pre -judge the workings of divine grace." Connare then reminded Hodges about his reservations regarding "assignment in the northern end of the Diocese," since such a placement may be too close to the Diocese of Greensburg. 136 Melt Rev; je#40-11. Hodges, hop" of Whetling 14d.!, Risher sRelidantee 14 'thirteenth' Street Ilheoling4- Vail Tirtinaa irliSkep Od Hodges; r Utter; I an deSply grateful to Ire tor yeas trillingneas t. give Father, daymend Lukas a °hence. obviously ha is a riski ah I indioated is or previous but, she eas-prelpjudge the uerkings ef divine :Irmo? I have seen thither.Lubito en his way to iillidOs4MY tkavkvelaintuar loWiLower thtli0dCW.th 1410110-'.1 hawC0i. asiCespeeially his .diff1oultioa (io/F; I he 'IWO *s. learned frost esperifinal4 and that in thety IOU have so graelously given hih-he vi,11 prove -Maws f SC,be. Min:priest I think he truly wants to be: I note that yep renenbered wry resorvatioha about an assignment in the northern cad iet the Dieeeleflie sPOotetMetter while ho 44.44411111140441see deelOn rerft,* Comity, relatively neer the tifegatatovn aren't enclosing g oopY of the latest Lukse's ease: You will; nets tisk drohileft oonfeeeion.privelogie en en 'ad For your file I silt reSioript severing Father for is I year'.Iteedlees to say will :be delighted Holy °film, for a review of the -netts! ;peg, yew! aid advtaild timumettatim data approttati:: aheid: potittist one ::$101 : .It ass good to see you, and to speak with yen in Philadelyhiallet week. May your fondest dreams for 19114* fully **alined: Vith all Os beet for yes; Dear Diehl* Hedges, I he pevIhrtly yeurit411, Motet RUM* of Sreettsburg DG0022872 Bishop Connare's Letter to Bishop Hodges 137 On August 1, 1964, soon after Lukac joined the Wheeling Diocese, Hodges wrote to Connare informing him "He [Lukac] was rather strong in his language in a talk to some of the high school students earlier this year." Hodges wrote that he did not want to lose Lukac, but felt it might be better for him to be moved and that such a change would be preferable before "classes" resumed. Subsequently, Lukac was assigned a position as a part-time chaplain for the Veterans Administration Service, a position in which he served for two years. In 1967, Lukac requested permission to take a full time chaplaincy in the Veterans Administration Service. In 1993, the Diocese of Greensburg was contacted by an individual claiming to be the daughter of Lukac. This individual wanted to make contact with him and stated in her letter to the Diocese that she thought he had remarried. The Diocese contacted the Archdiocese for Military Services for assistance, but they claimed to have no record of Lukac. In August 2006, the Archdiocese of Chicago requested information regarding Lukac from the Diocese of Greensburg because they had received a complaint that Lukac had sexually abused a minor while residing in the Chicago Archdiocese (Victim Three). Victim Three stated that, in approximately 1962 to 1964, Lukac abused her when she was around 11 years old in the St. Stanislaus rectory. Lukac was at St. Stanislaus between 1963 and 1964. Victim Three reported that she felt good when Lukac paid attention to her because she was always picked on and that her contact with Lukac ended when he left for the Navy. On April 11, 2012, Kelly Venegas, the Bishop's Delegate for the Diocese of Gary, Indiana, called to speak with Father Lawrence Persico of the Diocese of Greenberg regarding an allegation of sexual misconduct involving Lukac alleged to have occurred while Lukac was serving in the 138 Diocese of Gary. The only note appearing in Lukac's Diocesan file regarding this matter stated the following: "Woman approx. 1961 - 1964 teenage sex relation" (Victim Four). The Grand Jury finds that the Diocese of Greensburg was aware from the outset of Father Lukac's ordination that he posed a serious risk of sexual misconduct to minor females. Despite this known risk, the Diocese failed to properly address the serious complaints against him and thereafter enabled his sexual misconduct. After being confronted by parishioners of the Diocese with Lukac's abusive acts, Connare doggedly sought to keep him active in his ministry and persisted in his efforts to have Lukac assigned to another diocese and have his priestly faculties fully restored. These assignments included Catholic high schools, where Lukac would be in regular contact with teenage girls, to whom he posed a known, immediate threat. The Grand Jury finds that the bishops who collaborated to keep Lukac active in the priesthood did so knowing he posed a risk to the public and were, therefore, complicit in the abuse he committed. 139 The Case of Father Robert Moslener Known Assignments 1976 - 1978 1978 - 1979 1979 - 1985 1985 - 1986 1986 - 1986 1986 - 1987 10/1987 1987 - 1988 1988 - 1992 1992 - 1996 1996 - 2002 06/2002 John the Baptist, Scottsdale Agnes, North Huntingdon Joseph, New Kensington Pius X, Mt. Pleasant Cajetan, Monesson Saints Simon and Jude, Blairsville St. Luke Institute, Suitland, Maryland Holy Cross, Iselin Assumption Hall, Sisters of Charity Retirement Home, Greensburg St. Patrick, Brady's Bend St. Mary Church and Sacred Heart Church, Yatesboro The Anodos Center St. St. St. St. St. Father Robert Moslener was ordained into the Diocese of Greensburg in May of 1976. He thereafter served in a variety of capacities within the Diocese through 2002, including as a school teacher in the 1980's. His tenure in the Diocese was marred by the sexual abuse of children nearly from its outset when, in 1979 and 1980, he acknowledged engaging in "inappropriate behavior" with a 15 -year -old victim (Victim One) and was sent for an evaluation. While information regarding this incident in Moslener's Diocesan file was limited, it is clear that William Connare was notified of Moslener's contact with the 15 -year-old boy but nevertheless permitted him to return to his ministry. According to internal Diocesan documents associated with this incident, the Diocese viewed Moslener's abuse of Victim One in the following manner: "incident with the 15 -year -old boy may well have represented an unacceptable yet understandable waystation on his path to more adult sexual integration." Numerous allegations of child sexual abuse were levied against Moslener six years later. Diocesan records indicated that, in 1986, several elementary to middle school aged children provided statements to the Diocese regarding what Moslener had been teaching in his religion class. The children advised that, among other things, Moslener asked them if they masturbated 140 and described how Mary had to "bite off the cord" and "lick" Jesus after he was born to clean him off. One letter made clear that Moslener was discussing the physical effects of masturbation with a child. On May 26, 1986, Klinzing sent a confidential memorandum to Connare. In this memorandum, Klinzing recommended that Moslener be put "on ice" due to the complaints made by these children. In May 1986, Connare dispatched Moslener to a psychologist for the purpose of an evaluation. 141 /1;9 771e r eok lie , ___GIa -'7c .-,C:l.r2Ctiei:V2.1..i $ ft _5(i ...-_;LY ....L, s 3 . e__ _i Ah d k i ila Olar LI r 41.1- :,. .:".- 5 s y is e qc Cte r la y i,J 1 o i h ey k./ r7=A , l'-e1 ; /7 st1 ; 12.vv.q. veLifr ki .Ot cLad 0.4v ri 17 s, :.--il V y c r:,'2,1-. g-, _SVighiza fl.z. s6 ye.fr _yea Oi.vi- c- P1C 71" %., (-1 .6 < .101 d -117 1 -el ,-; {4 er.t gtht r 1-4 I ,:ra.4. aryl 4- 5 ye, r 6.? 5 rd. /1, re 4 c_b_f_)_nd je.e is Alt rg_the.r ser',/-1 ;4- -geeil ti:"1" An Example of a Child's Statement In April 1986, the North Huntingdon Township Police Department advised the Diocese that Moslener had been investigated for committing sexual acts against male juveniles and that they had "records on file to substantiate the charges." Diocesan records make reference to sexual contact with a 16 -year -old boy (Victim Two) around this time. There are no records indicating Moslener was prosecuted for his conduct. 142 r AO of North Huniret:I 108C/0/2 Police Dept. 11279 Center Highway North Huntingdon, Pa. 15642 William ). Brkovich Director of Public Safety 14121 863-8800 April 10, 1986 Attorney Vincent J. Morocco 101 N. Main Street Greensburg, Pa. 15601 Dear Sir, As per our conversation on April 9, 1986 this letter is to inform you that the Rev. Robert Moslener has been investigated by this department con- cerning homo-sexual acts involving Rev. Moslener and male juveniles. We do have records on file to substantiate the charges. Sincerely yours, William Brkovich Director of Public Safety . DG0001918 The Police Department's Letter In 1987, Moslener was sent, over his objection, to St. Luke's Institute for an evaluation. Klinzing notified Connare via a confidential internal memorandum dated March 24, 1987, that Moslener "was involved in an inordinate way with a 16 -year -old boy in the North Huntingdon area and there is a police record verifying this." Klinzing also noted that "Father Moslener was involved 143 with another individual at the St. Joseph Parish in New Kensington." In this memorandum, Klinzing explicitly asked Connare whether Moslener was a risk to children. Moslener was subsequently assigned as Chaplain of a retirement home from 1988 to 1992. From 1992 to 2002, however, he served as an active pastor in parishes in the Diocese. He was assigned as pastor of St. Patrick's Church in Brady's Bend, Clarion County, from 1992 to 1996 and at St. Mary Church and Sacred Heart Church in Yatesboro, Armstrong County, from 1996 to 2002. An internal Diocesan document detailing the timeline of Moslener's career indicated that, in 1999, another victim (Victim Four) contacted the Diocese and disclosed sexual abuse perpetrated by Moslener. The next entry or event appearing in Moslener's file was his removal from the priesthood in 2002. Thus, despite Victim Four's complaint and the numerous complaints of child sexual abuse levied against Moslener over the years, he was permitted to remain in active ministry. In March 2002, two months after the January 2002 publication of a Boston Globe article detailing accounts of clergy sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Boston, Bosco placed Moslener on administrative leave. On August 1, 2002, Bosco resigned as Bishop of the Diocese of Greensburg. In 2003, yet another victim came forward with an allegation of sexual abuse by Moslener (Victim Five). Finally, in 2004, newly -installed requested that the Vatican dismiss Moslener from the clerical state. In 2013, the Diocese received an email from an individual (Victim Six) reporting that he and his siblings had been sexually abused by Moslener when they were children. Victim Six became concerned when he saw Moslener featured in various photos on the St. Joseph's parish 144 REDACTED -- ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION website, despite his dismissal from the Church approximately a decade earlier. Victim Six referenced the "irreversible damage" Moslener caused and noted, "His name doesn't appear on any sex offender registry. His victims continue to struggle to this day." 145 See Case VI The Bishop's Delegate received the following e-mail which was forwarded from Father John Chesney pastor of St. Joseph In New Kensington on April 3,2013: Eby am contacting you concerning some offensive photos discovered on your parish website. My siblings and grew up in the 7D's attending St. Joseph's School. We all received the sacraments of reconciliation, communion, confirmation and marriage at St. Joseph's Parish. My brothers were regular altar servers for many years. Our parents were extremely active within the community and made very generous financial as well as social contributions to the I I school/parish. During our years at St. Josephs, a former "priest", Robert Moslener, befriended our family. He embedded himself deeply into our lives often attending family gatherings and events. He portrayed himself as not only a religious man but a teacher, mentor, and friend to especially the youth of the parish. As a young child, had a strong uneasiness about Mr. Moslener made stronger by the fact that he most often only liked to associate with male youth and seemed disinterested in female youth. Unfortunately, my age prevented me from fully understanding the harm he was inflicting upon our family. Due to the access of social media, technological advances, and decades of strong suspicion, can now after 35 years piece together and attest to the irreversible damage Mr. Moslener has caused. I 1 My siblings and I suffered horrible abuses at the hands of not only Mr. Moslener but Sister Victor and Sister Marie Corday both now deceased. My siblings and all suffered physical and mental assaults at the hands of these three monsters. For some reason, was stronger or perhaps more intuitive for my age and therefore somewhat spared from the more horrible assaults. made it my childhood "mission" to explore why just simply did not like Mr. Moslener, watched his every move and am positive to this day he knew was keeping a close eye on him at school, church, and In our family home. I I I I I I At that time, Father Higgins was also a priest in the parish. It is unclear If he knew. plan to ask him what he knew. hope nothing but am realistic in that the truth probably won't be told to anyone. We know that Mr. Moslener was "moved" from parish to parish prior to his "unemployment" as a priest. It leaves me to question just how many children the Catholic faith Is willing to use as human sacrifice. Mr. Moslener now resides in Pittsburgh enjoying his golden years unscathed. His name doesn't appear on any sex offender registry. His victims continue to struggle to this day. plan to check on his employment status to make sure he isn't having any private "lunches" with young boys. Needless to say, my beliefs about Catholicism are in question, my wedding day somewhat less special, and my childhood and that of my siblings a huge lie. I I I will be checking back on the church website hoping not to see Mr. Moslener In any photos. Please pay particular attention to the photo Including a young child. It disgusts me the most. wonder who that little boy is and if he Is okay. would pray for him but sadly don't really know if a God exists. I I I The parish web site was immediately accessed by the Diocese and the offending pictures were Immediately taken down. The site was made active again and there was no further contact with 11.1.1100.011 DG0001855 Victims Five's Letter 146 Connare and Bosco permitted Moslener to continue in ministry for 22 years after the initial complaint of child sexual abuse against him and the numerous reports of child sexual assault which followed. During that time, Moslener continued to prey on innocent children within the Diocese of Greensburg. 147 148 Roman Catholic Diocese of Harrisburg Ecclesiastical Province ofPhiladelphia IArchdiocese Diocese I I Allentown Altoona -Johnstown Erie I I I I Greensburg Harrisburg Philadelphia Pittsburgh Scranton I. General Overview of the Diocese of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania The Roman Catholic Diocese of Harrisburg covers fifteen counties of Central Pennsylvania: Adams, Columbia, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Juniata, Lancaster, Lebanon, Mifflin, Montour, Northumberland, Perry, Snyder, Union and York. Pope Blessed Pius IX established the Diocese on March 3, 1868. There are 89 parishes in the Diocese of Harrisburg, including one Cathedral and two Basilicas. The bishop's seat is in St. Patrick's Cathedral. The Diocese of Harrisburg reported on its website as of January, 2018, that it has 92 Diocesan priests; 38 retired Diocesan priests; 34 religious order priests; 67 permanent deacons; one religious brother; 274 women religious; and 33 seminarians serving the Catholic population. II. History of Bishops of the Diocese of Harrisburg 1) Bishop George L. Leech (1935 through 1971) 149 2) Bishop Joseph T. Daley (1963 through 1967) 3) Bishop Joseph T. Daley (1971 through 1983) 4) Bishop William H. Keeler (1983 through 1989) 5) Bishop Nicholas C. Dattilo (1990 through 2004) 6) Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades (2004 through 2010) 7) Bishop. Joseph P. McFadden (2010 through 2013) 8) Bishop Ronald William Gainer (2014 through Present) III. Additional Church Leadership within the Diocese of Harrisburg Relevant to the Grand Jury's Investigation The Grand Jury finds that that the following Church leaders, while not bishops, played an important role in the Diocese of Harrisburg's handling of allegations of priest sexual abuse. 1) Monsignor Hugh Overbaugh 2) Father Paul Helwig 3) Chancellor Carol Houghton 4) IV. Findings of the Grand Jury The Grand Jury uncovered evidence of child sexual abuse committed by priests of the Diocese of Harrisburg. Evidence established that priests engaged in sexual contact with minors, including grooming and fondling of genitals and/or intimate body parts, as well as penetration of the vagina, mouth, or anus. The evidence also revealed that Diocesan administrators, including bishops, had knowledge of this conduct and that priests were regularly placed in ministry after the 150 REDACTED - ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION Diocese was on notice that a complaint of child sexual abuse had been made. The Diocese's actions enabled the offenders and endangered the welfare of children. Evidence also showed that the Diocese entered into settlements with victims and discussed with lawyers the sexual conduct of priests with children. Further, these settlements contained confidentiality agreements forbidding victims from speaking about the abuse they suffered under threat of some penalty, such as legal action to recover previously paid settlement monies. Finally, the Grand Jury received evidence that several Diocesan administrators, including bishops, often dissuaded victims from reporting to police, or conducted their own deficient, biased investigating without reporting crimes against children to the proper authorities. V. Offenders Identified by the Grand Jury 1) Francis J. Allen 2) John G. Allen 3) Francis A. Bach 4) Jesus Barajas 5) Richard J. Barry 6) James Beeman 7) John Bostwick 8) Donald Cramer 9) Walter Emala 10) Paul R. Fisher 11) Harrisburg Priest #1 12) Augustine Giella 13) Harrisburg Priest #2 151 14) Donald "Tim" Hackman 15) T. Ronald Haney 16) John Herber 17) Philip Hower 18) Kevin Kayda 19) Edward Konat 20) George Koychick 21) Thomas Kujovsky 22) Thomas Lawler 23) Robert Logue 24) Arthur Long 25) David H. Luck 26) Robert Maher 27) Daniel Mahoney 28) Guy Marsico 29) John M. McDevitt 30) Anthony McGinley 31) James McLucas 32) Ibarra Mercado 33) 34) Joseph Pease 35) Charles Procopio 36) Guido Miguel Quiroz Reyes 152 REDACTED - ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION 37) James Rush 38) 39) Bryan Schlager 40) Herbert Shank 41) Patrick Shannon 42) Timothy Sperber 43) Carl J. Steffen 44) Frederick Vaughn 45) Salvatore V. Zangari VI. Examples of Institutional Failure: Fathers Augustine Giella, Arthur Long and Joseph Pease The Grand Jury notes the following examples of child sexual abuse perpetrated by priests within the Diocese of Harrisburg. These examples further highlight the wholesale institutional failure that endangered the welfare of children throughout the Pennsylvania Dioceses, including the Diocese of Harrisburg. These examples are not meant to be exhaustive; rather, they provide a window into the conduct of past Pennsylvania bishops and the crimes they permitted to occur on their watch. 153 REDACTED- ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION The Case of Father Augustine Giella 06/1950 06/1969 06/1970 03/1976 03/1980 10/1982 ---- Known Assignments 06/1969 06/1970 03/1976 02/1980 10/1982 04/1988 Holy Trinity Church, Hackensack, New Jersey Our Lady of Sorrows, Jersey City, New Jersey Church of the Epiphany, Cliffside Park, New Jersey St. Catherine's, Glen Rock, New Jersey St. Joseph's Church, Hanover St. John the Evangelist, Enhaut Father Augustine Giella was ordained in the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey on June 3, 1950. After twenty-nine years of ministry in New Jersey, Giella suddenly decided to seek ministry elsewhere. In November 1979, Giella wrote Bishop Joseph Daley of the Diocese of Harrisburg to request an assignment. On December 7, 1979, Archbishop Peter Gerety of the Archdiocese of Newark wrote a letter to confirm that Giella was a priest in good standing and stated that Giella "has always shown himself to be [an] excellent priest giving himself only for the greater honor and glory of God and the people of the Catholic Church." Gerety gave Giella full permission to seek service outside of the Archdiocese. Though Giella was still an incardinated priest of the Diocese of Newark, an agreement to serve in another diocese was permissible with the concession of his home Bishop and the approval of the Bishop of the receiving diocese. During the interview process with the Diocese of Harrisburg, Giella told Father William H. Keeler that he sought to have his own parish, which was unlikely to occur in the Archdiocese of Newark due to an abundance of priests. Keeler conducted the interview because he was acting in his capacity as Auxiliary Bishop. This interview was recorded in a memorandum prepared by Keeler and sent to Bishop Daley and Monsignor Hugh Overbaugh. The Diocese of Harrisburg accepted Giella and assigned him to St. Joseph's in Hanover, York County, in 1980. 154 Thereafter, Giella was assigned to St. John the Evangelist Church in Enhaut, Swatara Township, Dauphin County, in 1982. In 1983, Bishop Daley died and Keeler was appointed Bishop of the Diocese of Harrisburg. At St. John the Evangelist Church, Giella met a family who warmly embraced him as their parish priest. The family included eight girls and one boy. Giella began sexually abusing the girls almost immediately upon his appointment to the parish. Giella sexually abused five of the eight girls. Giella also abused other relatives of the family His conduct included a wide array of crimes cognizable as misdemeanors or felonies under Pennsylvania law. In August 2016, the sisters that Giella abused testified before the Grand Jury to the criminal sexual acts Giella perpetrated upon them. The Grand Jury learned that Giella regularly collected samples of the girls' urine, pubic hair, and menstrual blood. Giella utilized a device he would apply to the toilet to collect some of these samples. Giella would ingest some of the samples he collected. The abuse occurred in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, where Giella invited the family for visits. Giella' s abuse had a lasting effect on the sisters. The sisters testified to the challenges they have faced in overcoming Giella' s sexual abuse. The emotional, psychological, and interpersonal damage to the sisters is incalculable. Most of the sisters refrained from sharing any details of their own abuse with their siblings for fear of what they might learn. The Grand Jury learned that Giella' s tragic abuse of these girls could have been stopped much earlier if the Diocese of Harrisburg had acted on a complaint in the 1980's. In approximately April 1987, a teacher at Bishop McDevitt High School received a complaint that Giella was insisting on watching a girl as she used the bathroom. The girl stated that Giella insisted on watching her go to the bathroom and that he did "wrong things" with 155 children. The teacher reported the complaint to Father Joseph Coyne, who in turn made an immediate report to the Diocese. This former teacher testified before the Grand Jury on January 24, 2017. The former teacher's testimony is corroborated by an internal memorandum from the secret archives of the Diocese of Harrisburg. In that memorandum, dated April 14, 1987, Overbaugh recorded the complaint, as well as an allegation that Giella engaged in similar conduct with one of the above mentioned sisters. The witness, the reporting victim, and the family of the sisters are all recorded and identified by name. Overbaugh wrote: (REDACTED), a teacher for the Intermediate Unit, was informed by one of her students, (REDACTED), that while she was a student last year at Bishop Neumann School in Steelton, she was in Saint John's rectory, Enhaut, and expressed to Father Giella, the pastor, her need to go to the restroom. Father Giella is reported to have said that he would like to go with her and watch, that he does this whenever the (REDACTED) girl goes to the restroom.2 Overbaugh noted at least one other complaint by a girl who reported to her teacher that Giella had "acted improperly towards her." Overbaugh concluded his memo, "Father Coyne was instructed to do nothing in the case until the matter had been discussed with diocesan legal counsel. was present for this entire discussion between Father Coyne and Msgr. Overbaugh." The Grand Jury has withheld names otherwise identified within the document for the privacy of the witnesses and victims. 2 156 REDACTED -- ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION ,. ..r - : j. . , "5- ;: - ':(k`t VI .r. -1.!%10 DIOCESE CMF HARRISBURG fiwirolostie ineviiss X441.1 611:00 lome-lom i112 (TM 10.14/1C4/ 41011.1W10 TPla . mammy . -0 Ao.".....Z...6.1:;:. ' ir . ciy 31 April 1-- ;43ilf, ._. .1 -\ rev. Anguatina N. Gish. -. : wormukoziwi - , . Rot 14, . , 1.987 fti f rather Joseph Myna* Principal of eithop ricOawiti High School, Harrirdmirg, Ealephormd Wally and a,..pripptpd 44 urge, t mead to speak with it. Re oame to the Chshaary imedletaly.and related the Cellowing infOrmatlon, : ..... tkor. Millelpigelli a teacher EC( Um. 7c tsrmediate ;:5 Unit, wog info y e DC her atudantai ttst While mks wail a student Let pear at p *mann School to steelten, eh, was /a Saint John's ractory, Shhaut,--1 and express' to raLbar c110114, the pastor, her need to go to the rmmtroom. rather Giella is reported to have said that he mould likm to with hat and watch, that ha does this whenever the 4E10 ?Don to Lhm rmatrboa. Citakeihq been patter at St.411c a myself los about three yeas. and _ ,tam my krimiladge of this parlshicneco, rtes t that the turn ase of this lattar girl is rather thaw: l an Keel", of the aids"' Cr p *tweet' rather -.."k!,:: Cie Is and tha maators of the family. 'Mars are e t 'skint Almon girlp In mit y nd know that they are An the rectory tathwr frogumntly.) elri .f..-... 1 1 _ . I. mlao confided that another former School and nom, Iiko a pre n it 51.1.0hOp 14.Oeuttt Sieh Scho01., h.d to complaints that rather Gialls had mated Luproparly,. or, This girl's nem it She ..: Indicated that rather OJella had es e w -5 r e . Mmaa mtedlert it e :,. this ., ' formar1011.1111and foraar meebeC O f 0 0 m parish, trataut, had also axpariencod in her Childhood BOMA bed encounters litioth i pYlOmt. O. Pithar e0yoe was Inatrilacted to do nothing; 01 dui ceee the Netter had bisi diecueeed with our dlocasan legal comasal..* wax present for Lt. *eking asougaien batmman Pathmr Coyne aa4 mgr. owsrhsegb 'ail R1011000064$ L Te-1.1 ' S - r The Overbaugh Memorandum 157 *REDACTED -ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION This complaint was consistent with the type of deviant interests Giella pursued with the sisters he victimized. The Grand Jury uncovered another document related to this report in the secret or confidential archives of the Diocese of Harrisburg. An undated document addressed to Keeler regarding "Report on Gus Giella" noted: "I spoke with Father Coyne on the pastoral concerns: A.) Approaching Fr. Giella B.) welfare of the student C.) satisfying the ire of the teacher. I said we would consult you on these matters. =" In spite of the detailed memorandum and this note, Giella remained in ministry and neither Keeler nor the Diocese attempted to remove Giella from ministry. Giella voluntarily retired in 1988. However, in the approximately five years that followed the Overbaugh memorandum, Giella continued to sexually abuse the girls identified in the Overbaugh memorandum, which included a reference to the family of girls. Keeler left the Diocese in 1989 to become Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Baltimore. Nicholas C. Dattilo became Bishop of the Diocese in 1990. Giella continued to steal the innocence of children. In 1992, one of the victims came forward and disclosed what Giella had been doing. The family initially reported the conduct to the Diocese. Father Paul Helwig wrote a memorandum to Dattilo dated July 18, 1992, regarding the complaint against Giella. Helwig documented the information he received from the reporting victim's family at various meetings in attached supplemental memoranda. The documents detailed the events leading up to the 12 -year -old girl's disclosure, and described the event believed to have finally triggered the girl to disclose her abuse, the discovery of nude or partially nude photos of the girl in Giella' s residence. Helwig wrote that he interviewed Giella on July 30, 1992. Among other admissions, Giella stated that he began having contact with the girl in the bath and that "as time went on they became more comfortable with each other the embraces became more intense and involved some fondling 158 REDACTED -- ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION on his part." Giella also confessed that he took pictures of the girl. memoranda are set forth below. 159 The July 1992 Helwig *%..o 111111111111111 DIOCESE OF HARRISBURG 4800 Union Deposit Road - Box 2161 * SECRETARIAT FOR CLERGY AND RELIGIOUS LIFE Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 171054161 (717);657-4804 Most Reverend Nicholas C. Dattil0 Very Reverend Paul,C,, Uelwi 1992 July 18, Father Augustine 'M. Giella This afternoon upon my return to St. Lawrence earRectory Monsignor Hugh Overhauh informed me that Mrs. with met he lier in the afternoon sa ion v and her dau4h-ter. 1 mrs. Father involving misconduct sexual. of report a on centere of Newark Archdiocese the of priest a Augustine Gielia, oflar-, who was granted permission to work in the Diocese daughter, youngest Mrs. and risburg*, Clurch in while he was pastor-ofSt. John the EvangeliSt Both 0111111 Mrs. by The meeting was requested Enhaut. as pastor time his from Gverbaugh monsignor knew mothers presently is 12 years old. of St. John's, Enhaut. ' , Imo MEMO giallneis xeported that by nature to quiet and somewhat withdrawn, but recently she seemed wrong, anything was In asking her,ifithere be more o. he was station revealed that Father Giella while Not to her. advances inappropriate made e at St. John's did Mrs...111 wanting to upset her daughter anymore, not ask more questions about details of the situations. MrS She feels that her daughter is telling the She retruth and is in need of some kind of counselin seems that call phone a later in ported to me at she knows to be doing a little better already now t someone else knows. . reported In the.course'of the Meeting it was also by Father that another daUghter repeled, an advance Made Giella. - _ 1st, With .a family wedding, approaching on August is .not Mrs. -ate, partidi to is' in which now, but is life interested in future -near interested in helping, her dang:ter in the ( disturbingrig - Presbyteral Life Religious Life 160 . Permanent Diaconate Vocations DOH 000667 July, 18, 1992 (memo 42) In order to .make a personal contact with Mrs. notify her that I was aware of her conversato 11011111 gravity tion with MSgr. Oyerbaugh and to assure her of the her,in the with which he consider. such happenings I phoned evening and spoke with her at her home. be willing to I told her that the diocese would No assist her in obtaining counseling for her daughter. situadetails were discUssedexcept to temporize on the tion until after the family wedding on August 1st. f was informed that incases such as Mrs. After this -the priest is presented with the report shortly prieStOf a is Father since Therefore, it is received. the Archdiocese ofNewark:I would contact those diocesan officials and thatmoat probably withinthe week Father would be approached abOutthe Allegations. C6, )1. about In order to speak knowledgeably with Father wouldMeet:with ri,e if the inCidents I asked Mrs. eceived from 1111.11.111.. me to review the information, meet with me on, Tuesday will mrs.41111111 and her husband evening, July 21 At the 'Diocesan Center: 111111asked that these proceedings be kept ! ' Mrs. I. sake. in the strictestOfbonfidence for her datighter's so,. do to practice our assured her that On our part it is ONO pornographicliterature, also mentioned that Father Giella and photographs in hiepossess!T. 'has She'in conion that should 4e confiscated and destroyed. hemay cerned that if' he is alerted to these developments from it keep to place and some it put take the material being found, Mrs. ; I When Father Giella arrived in Enhaut to the family befriended him. The daughterS would go mai: tained!Con7,' have They him. rectory to doehores',for ietact to this day. Most recently (prior to Father with family visited the veiation). dence in Whitipg, VII ! ''SVrt4k+'? 4r.1 4. a nrM 4 N :':i, DOH0000668 rt; ft;16 , we44.:kt,Ive.. ^AtiOd, 161 -3 - July 21', 1992. scheduled With Mr. and This evening 1 hada-meeting .arrived with his son, Mr. Ot,Ok his wife had a spat.be or said that he Mr: Iie She want to come along: refaSed trey left:the Ouse:and she appoin first the made who woman (the ed to.bring Mrs. Mr. and ith Msgr. Overbaugh)'along the matter s ment for Mrs. Be said them. accompany to er want lirldid not others from outside the amily affair and be 44 not want immediate family.to knOW all?theJdetails. said that. In the course, of the. conversation ofill!MY, exOe+t details he really did not know any of the referthings -teminalli. He that Father Giellaidid ,improper details. ed me to his wife for anymore And; i that the family. consists of he ge,Sa oldest.t ages of order (in -4ild nine children wife yontgest)4 ' ) : 0010 dir OEM 1111111 and some of her said that Sunday collection, p-count.the he to would go to the rectory give them each would Father and help out around the rectory, Sdhool aig6John's St. attended $5-00 f0r. counting, interested in the JOnand - MrAIININVwere_very that be and the Hiaholoe them assured I thecase, * ftdenttality of other'pripsts:( MagrverhaUght: myself,thetwodiocesan lawyer would know about the and and Father Hahe in porgusaid that, they were not interested Mr. matter in creating Mr. sisters. IMO 4 -,.IM. )! were they interested ing thematterwith the Law nor there is nothin to hegai ed Mr111,said any kind of scandal. to th Mrs. reported,by spn has., by that,' The matter that it was good t at told Vas Children's Services.pffice..':She received the repOrt f Om. she did it herself. Had the officials the. home and removed: into :someone else they. could. have come protect the child frp to be done probably would ':(This i rea in. the. not is perpetrator further abusel'howeVer;, since the .thisJilay.not have'. happened.) contact with Bishop Earlier in the day I made an initial. Archdiocese of ew, the in d Michael paltarelli, Vicar for Priests when they are available a iella. I will give him more details ark., Father with to talk peke arrangements toge to whititqf NJ, , OW . DOHO 00669 *REDACTED 162 LITIGATION -- ONGOING APPELLATE July 25, 1.992. MIN, Mrs. 11111111, and Mrs. met with Mr, LOSXenoeliectorY. IIIIIIIAt.at, she ar d described for me the relationship MrS, after he a that said she her family had with, Father aella. as pastor he asked one of rived at St, John Church in. Enhaut. Then a secon the girls to help count theSandaycollection, the youngest and eventually11111111,, 'help daughter began along with her. sisters. daughter in the family, was goling her sisters were working She- would play in the rectory'while pia at the time. At this time 11.1111111wa two years 'Today x IMO Continued to grow closer tiaAs time went on grandfather figure in the me Father Qiella. 5e beca home and join in family t he1111111roys family. He would visit and gifts and would celebrations. He bought nnting4. 111111111P txkpn and On sisters take, her and her `Peened to be his favorite. family continued After he returned to New JerOey thehim at his beachvisit would him and with in touch keep to and the girls would go to the hOuSe hopse, of it himself. care take not did He him., Clean it up for Enhaut to, the beach They were the ones Who moved him from time from the beacha Second house in New Jersey and then house to Whiting. lefore he moved from: At the time ofthe seoond. MOve of the children (which some and the beg0h.hUeeMrs ,11.1118, granddatighter Mrs. and included to7PitRW went that ypunger who is only ey arrived, 1-L-waa. get in when 0,40e and were unable .to several attempts with 1-0_11 but morning, the.. in very early to the deer.. They Oahehlia.to get to they Were not, able went to!A neighbor! slept in the car. The next MOrning they 0111110 found a SO Mrehouse and called, but no,AnSWer. and had her window the windaW open and lifted 111111hrOugh found father in very they enbred they When door. open:the probably. from the bad phyaidal condition Ole Was,!dehydrated They called tight): closed everything heat because he kept hospital,* inithe week a abOirt the ambulance and he Spent said he would Had they not found him, the medical persOnnel died. have 111111. -ears = . as a fortuil- MrnAINIIIIVOAW Father's hoapitalization pack for the move to Whit:tegs happening. She waa.helping him process because he_ want d packing the ingand be was tindering DOH 000670 163 -5- should MI. a lot of stuff ta.take everythihq along, She thought Mrs. hospital, the in he tbrOWn away, With Father headway. great make could felt she 1.1111111 said she bathe X4 the process,, of Packing Mrs. were unusual for, a priest ,across SOfiethings that she thought Father's integrity question to Want to have, but she did nat perhap he confis thought There were Playboy Magazines. She dispose of eventually andwould else cated them froM Someone. them later. dirty cloth Once on A,ViSit When picking up Father's then thtOW and once T-shirts (he. would wear tO launder the* girls' found them in a pile and by new ones) Mrs..11111.10 the girls mus that thought She his, with in underwear mixed or that time around have. left them there op-a, previous visit thihgs. his with: in mixed got and they: in, Whiting On her last trip to: Father's hO4P0 Father wanted to -tax shower a taking was she: said that while: She said that.t e pictures -of her. She. refused to.copperate. able to keep hi not was bathroom dour Would not lock and. she have jammed it because said, that he must (Mrs. out. ke to ask to be allowed to t it did wOrkrir)--lie persisted and an got Father refuse. continued to pictures, but' thing one is said that this. yeue4.at her. Mrs. what peOple ask for fear of heM Cannot handle, She almayo oes ets "outstanding" on getting upset:with her. She consistently believes not bee Use her report cards for conduct. Mrs. being yelled'ap par of out but she wants to be so good4 AS fat as I ')shWi.he ObOtoS were takeh. the even. thinks that -this may have been Mrs for th state withdrawn more into an even that drove past seVera "Mon- S, told he began t tell he story after a picture at, saw sister that she MotheK naked, (Actually it was:41. ace of FAthet up without in younger year ttom the -waist photo of said that Mrs. on. suit swimming a the top of was: little.) a habit of dein this when she !!!!!had riven another sister, Who, while tr in turn told Was very Withdr Wn that not noticedagain day one to do wi her what was wrong and if 1t`had anything had been what her and told' the photo. 1111111.111began to -cry Siena, Father happening with would need led to the realization that -and the contacted) has been the services gf: a counselor (who: - r Ms DOI-10000671 164 to the Child and Youth subsccident reporting of the incidents is scheduled to SerVices Office. A person from that office home on Wednesday evening to interview outone is certain of the purpOee or possible come of that visit: that the I once again -assured Mr, and Mrs. as we can to .diocese wants to be as supportive r al:111 e. May they said, Other members of the family since of the other daughters) -and some to adyancee made other .been that we would offer our aesistance, come t.o the ( Father t. also told them that I would be contacting he is that him instruct to and pretientJttheir report to hiM to conhe is nor wedding family 1st not to attend:the August is to cease. ta0t the family again. All communication I :Tnly 30 1992 at his home in Yesterday I visited with Father .piella received regardrg of the report I him apprise Whitingg:N.3.!to report,.at least Father-was concerned when he heard the for what it on the face of it, not so much for himselfg but affectionate were they that said He hag done as well as physiand grew.emot-17771-177clOSe to one another he had become lilt -that mentioned (Mre. cally close. that his ac a .grandfather to the fermi-;)lie was bewildered: Ile said t at now. trouble ;Inch so tivity should cause of. members when ago weeks 3 or he had just seen her about a birthday party f the -family came. to his place to Celebrate seemed fine their.. formed.. Land. relationsh.p 1asked, that he. recount the history of -his girls u ed the of two that. Pe mentioned with Sundays an on collection the count to come to the rectory to One' day betwee eventually began to tag along. that into the ba went a break had the Massee:when the girls to use the. in Went and room to put on some. make,-up called him into the bathroom and said with he toilet, the toilet 11111wanto a'hug. Shell.... was on: he This was a hug. him give to sllewed-ber he and arms.raised ha ening and even frequent a became on later It beginning: to hug one -an tually was not unusual for Father and e e sters. t all of fayorite, his !SbebbecaMe other:. and they became more Fathertsaid that as time went on became more intense embraces the Comfortable with each other also said:the and involved'. some fohdling on his paxt.IFather 00(51H 165 0120672 ' -7- but has since destroyed 7-f -410'00kt.UPAx#Eti4them, I ' apAl the family again and that I 4,Sked wedding this weekend. he was not:t417-0,A 64itgen4104- the family anyway due to to able been ile h01044.440Vta*e to him that go saWaigi has begun, hishealth, I 4.100:00.44ed that the and -TueS.evening counse114.(4±..fivstisgssitmtvas A easean4toutits%,4010 has been ilotirl:e4. Offisen-# 'to talk- with evening1,4At visit w4A,to office fiat, w.ohlc04-#0131her #E--vd-or-t*,-liscer--4,41;---e4Actily',*-tart-toopenpa-etw'een SaIF told .iratheg-'-that i inforted. bishop that he would probably tareil.i.inNekark of the situation andfrets his retreat. be hearing Troia him after' lie returns i for F40.ez is very- remorseful' that his affection, Vey.-:and6,$414 that. he woulPl had dfogtod,...hei: in the 4):P in any way that he can. Se expects that wii-ing refrain to agreed: readily and family ,.will he;.-747Ore;71V*411.-hillI from qpixt*t.ti4,4106.. . . . DOHO' The July 1992 Helwig Memorandums 166 00673 The family also reported Giella' s abuse to police in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Police in Pennsylvania contacted the Office of the Prosecutor in New Jersey and law enforcement began an investigation. Upon serving a search warrant at Giella' s residence in New Jersey, New Jersey police confiscated the following: young girl's panties; plastic containers containing pubic hairs identified by initials; twelve vials of urine; soiled panties; sex books; feminine sanitary products (used); numerous photographs of girls in sexually explicit positions; and some photos depicting children in the act of urination. Giella was arrested in August 1992. Diocesan records do not indicate if Overbaugh, Helwig, Dattilo, or any Diocesan personnel ever reported the prior complaints against Giella or his confession to the police. The victims told the Grand Jury that this information was never relayed to them. Giella admitted his actions to the police. According to the police report, after Giella was charged and arrested for child pornography and sexual abuse, numerous calls were received from women reporting that Giella fondled and abused them in Hackensack, New Jersey. These women stated they had been afraid to come forward given Giella' s position in the church. Additionally, the reporting victim's sisters began to disclose Giella' s sexual abuse of them. Having learned that her child had been sexually abused by a priest, the mother of the family of child victims confronted Overbaugh. The family considered Overbaugh a friend and highly respected his role in the church. At the time of the confrontation, the family did not know that Giella' s conduct had ever been reported to Overbaugh or the Diocese. However, further evidence of Diocesan officials' knowledge of the danger Giella posed to children was demonstrated to the Grand Jury when the victim's mother described the confrontation. Overbaugh stated, "I wondered why you were letting them go to the rectory." The victims' mother stated that she later received a phone call from Helwig. Helwig stated, "You can relax. Father said that (REDACTED) just took 167 his intentions towards her wrong," and "that he loved her, and he would never hurt her." This account bears some semblance to Helwig' s July 1993 memorandum, where he wrote, "Father is very remorseful that his affection for (REDACTED) has affected her in this way and that he would be willing to help in any way that he can. He expects that the family will be 'sore' with him and readily agreed to refrain from contacting the family " Lost in this characterization is the reality that child sexual abuse is not affection or care, but the criminal violation of innocent children. On October 12, 1992, an attorney for the family engaged the Diocese of Harrisburg in civil litigation via a letter of notice sent to the Diocese. Prior to reaching settlement terms, aggressive litigation resulted in the release of the victims' psychological and academic records to Diocesan lawyers, the exchange of offers and counter-offers, the execution of confidentiality agreements, and prevention of a Harrisburg newspaper from obtaining information about the case. Letters between attorneys for the family and the Diocese haggled over whether the victim actually had a diagnosed condition as a result of the abuse. Diocesan lawyers argued that the Diocese was not responsible for the conduct of its agents. On October 27, 1992, Dattilo wrote the family, and stated in part, "I share your shock, anger and hurt, and pledge full cooperation by the diocese in this unfortunate situation." However, while Dattilo promised full cooperation, the diocesan lawyers continued to litigate and attempted to negotiate the family down from their approximately $900,000.00 demand to $225,000.00.3 The Grand Jury notes this is a familiar pattern. In October 2017, Chancellor Carol Houghton testified before the Grand Jury. Houghton was the long-time Chancellor for the Diocese; Dattilo appointed her to that position. As Chancellor The final settlement figure was nearly one million dollars. However, it does not appear that the 1987 Overbaugh memorandum uncovered by the Grand Jury was ever disclosed during that 3 litigation. 168 and a canon lawyer, Houghton maintained many Diocesan records. Houghton is not a member of the clergy. Houghton had been tasked with a file review and was extremely knowledgeable as she maintained notes of her work. Houghton was shown the 1987 Overbaugh memorandum and questioned regarding the Diocese of Harrisburg's failure to inform the family or law enforcement of its contents. Houghton testified she had never seen the 1987 Overbaugh memorandum concerning Giella. She had no prior knowledge that the Diocese of Harrisburg had warnings about Giella' s behavior in 1987. Houghton did not have access to the secret archives; only the Bishop had access pursuant to the Canon Law of the Church. The Grand Jury observed this in numerous flawed Diocesan investigations across Pennsylvania. The Dioceses' focus on secrecy often left even the Dioceses' own investigators in the dark. Ultimately, Giella never faced a jury concerning his alleged criminal conduct. He died while awaiting trial. His criminal actions, and the criminal inaction of Keeler, resulted in continued victimization and trauma for the family of girls described earlier. The trauma was so fresh that the youngest sister, the one who finally reported Giella' s criminal conduct, suffered a panic attack while in the Grand Jury suite after seeing an older gentlemen who bore some resemblance to Giella. In explaining why she came forward, she testified: Because it doesn't have to happen to anybody. They don't have to live a life like I have to. I continually have to battle. The man out there is a very nice man He is old like Giella and I can't -- it makes me -- it makes me think about what happened and he is nice and he doesn't deserve me to think that. But I can't -I can't walk through there and see him because it makes me feel uncomfortable. I don't -- I don't know. I believe in God. I don't go to church. My son is the only reason I'm alive. Thank God I had him because, if I didn't have him -- I probably would have killed myself a long time ago. This survivor of sexual assault attempted to take her own life in the months after her testimony before the Grand Jury. In recovery, she requested to speak with the attorney for the Commonwealth and special agent involved in this investigation. Even though she had almost lost 169 her own life, the victim's primary concern was a fear that in the intervening months since her testimony, the Grand Jury's investigation may have stopped and that the truth would never be told to the public. She was assured it was still an active investigation. 170 The Case of Father Arthur Long Known Pennsylvania Assignments 11/1974 09/1975 Appointed Chaplain Harrisburg Polyclinic Hospital Chaplain for Sacred Heart Villa and Geisinger Medical Center Father Arthur Long was a Jesuit Priest assigned to ministry within the Diocese of Harrisburg. Long was ordained in 1955 as a member of a Catholic religious order, the Maryland Province Society of Jesus. The Grand Jury highlights Long's case as an example of another common observation in the course of its investigation-misconduct by religious order priests. There are over one hundred Catholic religious orders and related sub -groups throughout the world. Many operate within the United States. In the Roman Catholic Church, these entities are often referred to as "religious institutes." A religious institute is "a society or group which commit to and pronounce public vows which they share in common with the members of their order or group." These organizations are often founded upon the teachings of a particular individual. By way of example, the Franciscan Friars are followers of Saint Francis of Assisi whereas the Ordo Sancti Benedicti, or the Benedictines, follow the teachings of Saint Benedict. There is a lengthy list of similar organizations. The vows of a religious order priest often include things such as a commitment to living a life of poverty, a promise of chastity, or service within the mission of the order. The headquarters of an order may be within the United States or in another location. The head of the religious order is often called the Superior. With the permission of the Superior and the acquiescence of a Diocesan bishop, an order friar or priest is assigned ministry within a particular diocese. In any case, an individual can be removed from ministry by his superior for any reason or a bishop may rescind authorization to minister within his respective diocese. 171 The Grand Jury finds that record -keeping regarding order members was sporadic, often lacked detail, and was inconsistently maintained. Records related to an order's priests are usually maintained by the religious order. However, in some cases a diocese may create their own additional records relative to the order priest's service within their diocese. This was the case of the Diocese of Harrisburg and Arthur Long, where the Diocese maintained some records primarily related to a specific complaint against Long. Long obtained the permission of his superior, as well as the approval of Harrisburg Bishop Joseph T. Daley, to serve within the Diocese at some point prior to November 27, 1974. Diocesan records indicated that Long's service within the Diocese included a November 1974 assignment as chaplain at the Harrisburg Polyclinic Hospital. The Diocese recorded complaints against Long in a letter from Overbaugh to Long's superior, Frank A. Nugent, on August 11, 1987. Overbaugh noted that "while this documentation contains numerous complaints, we seldom if ever receive word of all the good which Father Long accomplished during his years at the Geisinger Medical Center and for which we in the Diocese of Harrisburg are grateful." Overbaugh was vague in detailing the complaints but noted that, since Long's time in Danville, he had been doing little more than saying Mass at the Motherhouse of the Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius. Overbaugh' s letter indicated that "Sister Raymund," the General Superior of the Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius, was displeased with Long's presence there. Overbaugh wrote, "Sister Raymund wishes Father Long to be out of the home, certainly before the high school girls return to the Academy in the near future." 172 DIOCESE OF HARRISBURG 4800 Union Deposit Road (717) 657.4804/652-3920 - Box 2153 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 171052153 THE CHANCERY August 11, 1987 Rev. Frank A. Nugent, S.J. 5704 Roland Avenue Baltimore, MD 21210 Dear Father Nugent: In keeping with your recent request, am sending herewith certain information which was received at this office concerning Father Arthur Long and his ministry to the Catholic patients at Geisinger Medical Center in Danville, Pennsylvania. I Let me state that, while this documentation contains numerous complaints, we seldom if ever receive word of all the good which Father Long accomplished during his years at the Geisinger Medical Center and for which we in the Diocese of Harrisburg are grateful. When I spoke with Father Long in Danville several weeks ago, he admitted that he was probably "burned -out," which I can readily believe, because he rarely took time off or went away for vacations. It seemed expedient that Father Long be replaced and this happened when Father James Muthuplakal, a priest from India, who has had considerable experience in hospital work, offered his services to the Diocese of Harrisburg. Meanwhile, Father Long remains in Danville, doing little more than saying Mass at the Motherhouse of the Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius. Sister Raymund, the Superior General, telephoned me on Friday to express her concern for Father Long and inquiring when the Society would be reassigning him. The Sisters would like to use the home which Father Long is now occupying and which will need a thorough cleaning, because of the presence in the house these many years of Father Long's two dogs. Sister Raymund wishes Father Long to be out of the home, certainly before the high school girls return to the Academy in the near future. DOH0009622 173 Should you wish any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Begging your kind understanding in this matter and reaffirmimg the gratitude we in the Diocese of Harrisburg bear for all the help afforded us by the Maryland Province of the Jesuits, I remain Sincerely yours in Christ, Rev. Msgr. Hugh Vicar General A. Overbaugh Enclosures cc: Sister Raymund, SS.C.M. Rev. Msgr. Walter H. Shaull DOH0009623 Overbaugh's "Complaints" Letter 174 The Motherhouse of the Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius was associated with an academy for school -aged girls. Father David McAndrew of St. Joseph Church in Danville wrote a statement in November 1987 to Diocesan officials. McAndrew reported that a 21 -year-old female and an 18 -year -old female had approached him with concerns regarding Long. McAndrew wrote, "(REDACTED) said Father Long sought to have sex with her four years ago when she was 17 years old. (REDACTED) refused his advances." McAndrew continued, "In conversation Father Long admitted to (REDACTED) that he has had sexual relationships with 'four or five' girls since he was stationed in Baltimore. Father Long told (REDACTED) 'God wants us to express our love for each other in this [sexual] way.' When, in response, (REDACTED) told him the Bible warns that such conduct will be punished by God, Father Long said, 'there is no hell.'" McAndrew' s letter noted that the victim had been warned when she was six or seven years old to "never play in Father Long's yard." The conclusion of McAndrew' s letter identified another victim who is believed to have come into contact with Long when she was 13 years old. His statement recorded, "they were involved sexually." Attached to McAndrew' s two -page letter is an "assessment" of the women who reported Long's conduct. McAndrew concluded that he had "no doubt" that the victim was telling the truth and believed her companion was "telling the truth" in regards to the additional 13 -year-old victim. He noted that neither victim was in need of professional counseling since he had surmised that the "process of healing" had begun. 175 sT..,d 43,;: 0 DO* AO b 'i' ) *T: :i7.611 . November2r 14r07) LIIImiih'' On 'Saturday evening, Both` and and 21, 14L e day and hadbeen_pereuade& oItil!!!!!td Conftse n:ear by theit :Cionfeasor to meet withme.ottside of the Sacrament and to. inform me about certain _serious moral lailingi: on the: Part:. ,.6A Father Arthur Long,, S.J. ' ti."'-'t! at the es .With het 4randfather. residence is n Danville (Fathet .LOngke 1111111111111" She told me she had' been of Railroad Street). . 0 block "never,to play in Father Warned, even at the age Of 6 or 7, Lung's yatdn in a tone which implied that'something' bad would She later learned'that the reason fOt the happen to her there: warning was Fat enoy to seek sexual contact. with Long's t andare friends and have shated.theix young girls'. knowledge concern ng Fathe - MO said FathetLongtoUght to have sex with her. four,. Yeats ago when she was 17 years old. 1111.1111-refuaed .hie Advanoes. In conversation.. Father L40.001t$tdA6111111111111that he has::-. ix le since he was sexual relationshiPs With1.160'dk: "Opd..-wants. us to stationed in Baltimore. Father Long told When, in way". a express our love for each other in this Is response, lipmptld him :the Bible, arns that such conduct will be punishe d, Father Long Said, "there is no bell". had ' Father Long Admitted to that he had an affair with a She is a divotcee with two woman from Baltimore named She spent a. week n A10 children. Cha with.Father Long at his home in the summer of 19S5 during the Annual festival the Sisters hold !During the weekend Father .:Introduce0 V at Sacred 'Heart. to the Sisters and staff of the Villa and shelled dinner t'' a Villa. : 141111 OEMboth spoke 1.4 detail of one instance with which very familiar because the situation continues to who liVes in .Michigan. This concerns St. Cyrilit AcadaMY, is 25 years old... They::years of age, When she became friends with Father Lon has ete involved sexually. After'leaving St, .Cyrills, continued to come' to live with Father Long at his res denOe and. th sexual rela491144iPAlas,been. maintained up to the present. is wealthy in4j*dependent so she is free to come tin4 V Ile to spend -long periods of time with Father Long.. sod they are this day: ' SAILITRINPat iiAW' b0H0009626 176 state er."jiW13..dead . FebriiarY'an4 alVe here. 40 tliOrt not tple040,0000p.10340101V:e andilliteut4i0,001 04* 474ir the'. ,hard'Oitft") 'until "every Abuse:10A: -tong,iiiiqMka daily They sai daYiVery They said thfi. he cannot in tiOt.!Of hapPens night". , . asked how this taal...miebOnductand alCohol abuse Could con**over so long a Period without my hearing, about it. "The they stated: and mithoUt the Sistera learning about it, ,Sistere.dO not know what's going on at Father LongiS _house". When told l andel!". I would compote this summary of our that they could review it and ofter any necessary conversatiOn changes at A meeting onSunday,' November 29, at the rectory. This ztateSent was read by them and met with their approval. 41"1":0( /41. nk asaiMAr. Very Rev. David T. McAndrew 1541? DOH0009627 177 I khOtOtilaliallalla have fOr ehbUt: four years. I advised her wle101: ef./was tryinglEP.decide Whether t6-etter. the': U.S. Armed Forces; l'advised her to dO 156 because I consider -her.: The parens, for.their part, overly dependent upon her parente. dOminate theiradult children 'im a way Whioh is not healthy.lier parents ,persuaded ,her tOt.to take my advice I do not I have no doUbt thatilltis telling the truth. think she could bear to 1 ve with the :thought that she falsely naive, and has She is 'a bit accused a priest or religious, suffered sPiritual injury because of the -experience she described However; I do not feel she needs professional counseling.. to me. She has ample opportunity to The process of healing has begun. receive spiritual direCtion within the parish setting; I had trouble min locatingin thittAgu hter of with w om is not known to me. 1 She is our parish,recordS. the divorced daughter of as lived for a number of years,: OEM demeanor during, our cOnVi'r'01On leads tells me that she never been solicited for sex by Father Long. Her knowledge' .0003.,: with Father LO4' from liVingl'inthe neighborhood and visit Much of her knowledge comes from her friendship with" However. she has firsthand..knOWledgp of the I do not think SheJ:. ire'related concerning needs professional counseliM IIIRRMIliving the **merits as .and seems to be able:to accept the !failings of Father tong something she must learn to live with. she , . inslieve is telling the truth. in COnfassitn, I assured her As part of mYcOunsel tb I revealed to Father Long. that her that her name, would n also warned her that there is, every possibility he would figure And so, I feel certain out who it was whp:reported these fadts. she knows that her decision to reveal what she revealed can lead explained these I also to additional inconvenience for her. realities to ,I0146( )714420,44601//- Vpity'RW,i David T. McAndrew Man 3 McAndrew's Statement and Assessment 178 00H0009628 Overbaugh notified Harrisburg Diocesan Bishop William Keeler of the complaints and forwarded McAndrew' s report to the superior-in -charge of Long's religious order in Maryland on December 1, 1987. Overbaugh reported that he and had met with Long. Long admitted he had a "relationship" with the girl, whom he identified by name. He stated the relationship was over. He had gone to confession and was receiving spiritual counseling. Long claimed that, while she may have been a girl, there was no sexual involvement while she was a student at the school. Overbaugh noted, "Thus eliminating the possibility later of a pedophilia suit." Near the conclusion of his letter, Overbaugh wrote that Keeler preferred that Long be "reassigned by his Religious Community," and then memorialized the following: "I told Father Long that the report of his misconduct and the prudent decision concerning his transfer from Danville would have to be given to his Superiors in Baltimore. He understood this." On January 6, 1988, McAndrew wrote a note to Overbaugh that the Grand Jury obtained from Diocesan records through a subpoena. The note stated: Hughie, This is a private communication separate from the foregoing official letter. My real fear is that (victim) may reach the point where she will seek to embarrass all her 'enemies' by one rash step. By exposing Father Long's misdoings she would succeed in hurting him, the Sisters, and (especially) her parents whom she considers hypocrites. This is not so far-fetched. Remember her brother publically lifted the Offertory collection at St. Joseph's to (I think) embarrass his parents. I do not like to play amateur psychiatrist, but these are my fears. Dave 179 REDACTED -- ONGOING APPELLATE LITIGATION Podeid Mad 513 FERRY STREET, DANVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17821 14A,V.tL /Z4. )n