I would like to highlight a point the Archbishop makes:
” Two cases are set for trials beginning today. One plaintiff seeks more than $130 million in compensatory and punitive damages, the other $25 million. We have made every effort to settle these claims fairly but the demand of each of these plaintiffs remains in the millions. I am committed to just compensation. These demands go beyond compensation. With 60 other claims pending, I cannot in justice and prudence pay the demands of these two plaintiffs. ”
How much money is enough compensation? In the minds of these two victims, only the destruction of the Archdiocese will do. The Archbishop says that two cases start today. All that is needed is a anti-catholic jury and you will see a award that exceeds the asking amount.
It’s likely that Portland is going to have to do what Boston or Santa Fe did in order to settle its claims. Chapter 11 only buys time to figure out how to come up with the funds. Portland, like most archdioceses, no doubt has tens of millions of dollars in real estate. The Louisville Archdiocese paid a $20+ million settlement out of investments alone!
It’s unlikely that the “corporation sole” method of titling parish properties, which the Portland Archdiocese uses, will protect the real estate either. The idea is that each parish is a “corporation” with three diocesan officers and two parish officers. The Bishop is thus not directly the titleholder. Lawyers can correct me if wrong, but I’d imagine the RICO law could pretty easily sweep that fiction out of the way if the diocese winds up with an eight-figure settlement to pay.
So far, judges and juries have not been sympathetic to diocesan claims of poverty or ministerial need. If the courts rule against Portland–and this Grammond “kids dive into my lap for sexual excitement” character sounds pretty colorful–they’ll have to pay. Chapter 11 just buys time to figure out the least painful way.
Sadly, nothing less than costly court judgments seems to work in getting the bishops’ attention. Interviews with victims and families suggest that it all could have been averted had they removed any reported abuser from ministry promptly, apologized to the family, and made amends by paying all therapy costs, etc. “We just wanted an apology” is a common statement from victims’ families.
I don’t believe in “pain and suffering” damages. If someone can prove that he suffered material loss due to another’s action, that other person (or entity) should be required to pay compensation. But pain and suffering are non-material, and therefore no money should change hands.
Yes, I think child molesters should pay for their crimes, but not this way. No one should be able to get rich because he was wronged, no matter how horrible the wrong.
Canon law could also have helped with Portland and other such situations. If the diocese both a) reported any credible accusation of abuse to the authorities; and b) held a canonical trial to reach a church determination of guilt or innocence if the victim doesn’t press charges and thus doesn’t engage the civil justice system for such a determination.
Had this been done, many–maybe all–lawsuits could have been avoided. A canonical trial offers due process for both accuser and accused. It shows a good faith effort by the diocese to get to the truth of the matter. Thus, the victim sees that the Church doesn’t think he’s the enemy to be bullied with high-priced lawyers. He’s a member of Christ’s family who has been violated, and deserves justice. And on the basis of a canonical finding, the diocese could remove a priest from minsitry permanently if guilty, or have a finding of innocence that allows him to continue in ministry.
For a tiny fraction of the cost of today’s settlements, the dioceses could likely have done right by abuse victims, and removed abusers promptly and spared many, many other boys the violation of abuse.
I for one don’t think people should “get rich” off of tort awards; awards should be tantamount to the actual harm suffered as Eric suggests–therapy costs, lost livelihood, etc. But the problem in this situation is, the bishops spent decades repeatedly bullying victims with high-priced lawyers and treated them like enemies.
It was a corporatist strategy guaranteed to bring the tort system down on our dioceses with both feet. And as Boston’s need to sell parishes shows, everyone suffers when the hierarchy acts like the mafia.
I would like to highlight a point the Archbishop makes:
” Two cases are set for trials beginning today. One plaintiff seeks more than $130 million in compensatory and punitive damages, the other $25 million. We have made every effort to settle these claims fairly but the demand of each of these plaintiffs remains in the millions. I am committed to just compensation. These demands go beyond compensation. With 60 other claims pending, I cannot in justice and prudence pay the demands of these two plaintiffs. ”
How much money is enough compensation? In the minds of these two victims, only the destruction of the Archdiocese will do. The Archbishop says that two cases start today. All that is needed is a anti-catholic jury and you will see a award that exceeds the asking amount.
It’s likely that Portland is going to have to do what Boston or Santa Fe did in order to settle its claims. Chapter 11 only buys time to figure out how to come up with the funds. Portland, like most archdioceses, no doubt has tens of millions of dollars in real estate. The Louisville Archdiocese paid a $20+ million settlement out of investments alone!
It’s unlikely that the “corporation sole” method of titling parish properties, which the Portland Archdiocese uses, will protect the real estate either. The idea is that each parish is a “corporation” with three diocesan officers and two parish officers. The Bishop is thus not directly the titleholder. Lawyers can correct me if wrong, but I’d imagine the RICO law could pretty easily sweep that fiction out of the way if the diocese winds up with an eight-figure settlement to pay.
So far, judges and juries have not been sympathetic to diocesan claims of poverty or ministerial need. If the courts rule against Portland–and this Grammond “kids dive into my lap for sexual excitement” character sounds pretty colorful–they’ll have to pay. Chapter 11 just buys time to figure out the least painful way.
Sadly, nothing less than costly court judgments seems to work in getting the bishops’ attention. Interviews with victims and families suggest that it all could have been averted had they removed any reported abuser from ministry promptly, apologized to the family, and made amends by paying all therapy costs, etc. “We just wanted an apology” is a common statement from victims’ families.
I don’t believe in “pain and suffering” damages. If someone can prove that he suffered material loss due to another’s action, that other person (or entity) should be required to pay compensation. But pain and suffering are non-material, and therefore no money should change hands.
Yes, I think child molesters should pay for their crimes, but not this way. No one should be able to get rich because he was wronged, no matter how horrible the wrong.
Canon law could also have helped with Portland and other such situations. If the diocese both a) reported any credible accusation of abuse to the authorities; and b) held a canonical trial to reach a church determination of guilt or innocence if the victim doesn’t press charges and thus doesn’t engage the civil justice system for such a determination.
Had this been done, many–maybe all–lawsuits could have been avoided. A canonical trial offers due process for both accuser and accused. It shows a good faith effort by the diocese to get to the truth of the matter. Thus, the victim sees that the Church doesn’t think he’s the enemy to be bullied with high-priced lawyers. He’s a member of Christ’s family who has been violated, and deserves justice. And on the basis of a canonical finding, the diocese could remove a priest from minsitry permanently if guilty, or have a finding of innocence that allows him to continue in ministry.
For a tiny fraction of the cost of today’s settlements, the dioceses could likely have done right by abuse victims, and removed abusers promptly and spared many, many other boys the violation of abuse.
I for one don’t think people should “get rich” off of tort awards; awards should be tantamount to the actual harm suffered as Eric suggests–therapy costs, lost livelihood, etc. But the problem in this situation is, the bishops spent decades repeatedly bullying victims with high-priced lawyers and treated them like enemies.
It was a corporatist strategy guaranteed to bring the tort system down on our dioceses with both feet. And as Boston’s need to sell parishes shows, everyone suffers when the hierarchy acts like the mafia.