AB1510 is currently stalled in the california senate appropriations committee. This bill would allow USC survivors of George Tyndall to sue in state court. He’s the gynecologist who took pictures of his patients, misdiagnosed them as punishment and assaulted and battered them. USC hired a lobbying firm to fight the bill. We need to be able to hold powerful institutions. I hope California will follow suit.
16
Regarding people who don't believe that children can "remember" from 50 years ago.....I was about 4 or 5 or years old and one incident (no genital penetration involved) happened with a neighbor, a "nice old man" named Bill.....I remember it vividly.
That would have been 63 or so years ago.
My family learned later that other similar "incidents" had happened before with Bill and he and his wife moved away shortly afterward. (Back then there was, of course, no thought of notifying the police or bringing charges against him. I think my Dad, who learned of it first, went over and yelled at the man, and possibly threatened him).
11
The comments are mostly about the Catholic Church but the Church is not the only organization that is guilty of sexual abuse. The public school has had their problems with sexual abuse but we seldom hear of these. The orthodox Jewish faith had accusations and also the Protestant religions but little is said of their abuses.
Every organization has had their problems but it seems like it is only the Catholic Church that they write about. This also brings out the anti-Catholics who love to rant on against the Church. The Catholic Church is not perfect but it is perfect enough for me. I could not find a better Church to worship in. And remember we have over 1.3 billion members worldwide. It does have staying power.
9
@KMW
You're right, it's not just the Catholics that covered up abuse.
The Catholic Church in New York could do something great now by talking about this opportunity for victims to come forward. Priests in every parish in every diocese in the state could talk about it and encourage Catholics to discuss it, too. Perhaps an expert could explain the aftermath and typical effects of abuse so clueless parents might recognize what may have happened to their children.
I'd guess that most of those who were molested don't attend church, so a separate public statement would help. How about a full-page announcement in the New York Times?
10
Boy Scouts can be a great experience for youth BUT it all depends on the quality of the volunteer leaders. Too few parents are willing to put in the time and effort required for a good unit. Too many are willing to let someone volunteer as Scoutmaster without checking them out and being around to keep an eye on him.
The low paid BSA staff are rarely seen by local units while some of the high paid heads of local councils rule as absolute dictators, caring only abut their own compensation. National officials have run BSA into the ground pandering to a few conservative groups like the LDS (a huge problem when it came to abuse when you look at numbers). National officials were focused more on faking membership numbers and sucking money out of local councils by selling off property. Our Council went from a dozen properties worth millions to two - rocks surrounding stagnant lakes. We ousted a Council Head after an epic battle. He'd destroyed two Councils but STILL was kept on by BSA National.
Sadly I expect BSA is doomed. Our Troop is changing dramatically as new parents are unwilling to put in the time and effort needed. My sons were lucky to be there when they were. They had monthly overnights, multiple high adventure trips (ice-climbing, winter hikes, dogsledding, canoeing Lake Champlain and more). They went to Philmont, did SCUBA and Desert Island trips to sea base and more. Too often BSA paid officials made things harder than they should have been.
4
@cynicalskeptic:
My son also enjoyed his years with the Boy Scouts. They went to a camp in Georgia and saved up and did car washes etc to pay to fly out to Philmont and back.....
The scout troop leader was a local lawyer with sons in the troop. He once jokingly referred to himself as a "part time lawyer and full time Scout leader".
I know these things must be brought to light but hate to think that men like him will be vilified by the ignorant.
11
For all the people defending the statutes of limitations, this is not just a matter of a child's memory. For most of the accused, this was not a one-time event. There are many victims of each of the perpetrators. These people had a reputation among their peers for being pedophiles. The RC Church actually has records of priests who were moved to different parishes, states or even countries because they were pedophiles. Students on college teams "joked" that a visit to the doctor for a sprained ankle would mean a genital exam too. Schools were well aware of their predatory teachers. Dr. Nasser even made a film explaining his methods. He faced the camera and said he had to go into the dark places and do the shaky hand thing. How in the world could adults have failed to protect the children when they knew the truth? To them, reputation is the only thing that counts. Even today, with all the publicity, it is still going on.
17
In the early 1960's, at age 15, I was driven into a love-friendship relationship with an adult boy scout leader I very much admired. Our encounters would take place at a Baptist church, where we used to hug and kiss each other, though there was no genital contact neither were we ever naked from the waist down. I did not realize that that relatioship, which ended when I was 16, was indeed sexual, and later idealized it as a spiritual one, viewing it like the one held by David and Jonathan and narrated in the Bible. When I grew up and read about homosexuality, I was finally aware of the true nature of said relationship; however, I deemed it to be a step in the development of my bisexual orientation. Until such a time that I married and my former wife, whom I told that story, demythologize it for me, I kept a positive image of that boy scout leader. Years later I confronted him, but he did not acknowledge his fault. It may seem strange to others but, In spite of such a behavior, I would not sue him for that, even if I could, and we have kept in touch. Nevertheless, I cannot help feeling resentment, because I was just a boyr when those things happened and think that, as a leader, he should have been consistent with the assumed principles of scouting.
8
This is nuts. I have deep sympathy for the victims of sexual abuse, but statutes of limitation exist for a reason. There reaches a point where people accused of crimes and/or civil offenses that allegedly occurred in the land of long ago will not be able to call witnesses or produce evidence in their defense due to the passage of time. In short they are effectively denied due process and the right to a fair trial. This legislation basically ignores that fact.
14
@John C.:
see my post above it is there. No, I certainly have no "witnesses" (the old man and his wife and my family from those days are all dead). That doesn't mean I can't recall the episode.
(A portion of my earlier post):
I was about 4 or 5 or years old and one incident (no genital penetration involved) happened with a neighbor, a "nice old man" named Bill.....I remember it vividly.
That would have been 63 or so years ago.
7
Odd how many commenters claim humans cannot remember events from 50 years ago.
With all the talk about the 50th anniversary of Woodstock, how can a rational person say that? Those happy days cannot be forgotten.
And traumatic events, like being sexually assaulted by a priest, are seared into the memory. To add to the misery by accusing the victims of lying is horrible. Why do that?
20
I grew up in the Catholic Church in a small town. I don’t recall any sexual abuse on the part of priests. However we also lived close to the largest Boy Scout camp in the world and I knew in passing many of the counselors. They hung out in our local restaurants and bars on their free time. Many of them made us deeply suspicious of what motivated them to spend so much time in close company with young boys. I have predicted for years that the Boy Scouts would be the next institution to have its dirty laundry strewn in the town square. Let’s hope the victims get justice and compensation. The whole organization may not be a locus of organized sex crime but there is certainly sufficient smoke to indicate a terrible fire.
7
The title and picture with the article mention the Catholic Church when there are many other organizations who are involved in sexual abuse. It does talk about them but I think the title could have also included this fact. No organizations are immune unfortunately.
The Catholic Church was the first to encounter sexual abuse and have been instrumental in dealing with this serious problem. Sexual abuse has plagued many venues and to its credit, the Catholic Church has been a useful guide to follow. They now have a no nonsense policy and once it has been discovered that a member of a religious order has been found guilty, they are permanently dismissed. There are no second chances.
Most priests and religious are good living people who take their vows very seriously. They would never think of sexual abusing anyone. The ones who are abusing are a small minority and do not represent the Catholic faith. The priests and nuns that I know are wonderful people and have devoted their entire lives to helping others. This must not be forgotten in the midst of this evil. The good ones which represent most are as angry and disgusted as are the rest of us. They should be saluted and praised. They must not be forgotten.
10
@KMW Your so-called "good ones" are not the victims here...keep your eyes on the prize
7
So can I knowingly commit a crime and then sue the insurance company to cover any damages. Cool Beans!
1
@Paulie Dumont:
not really a subject for humor for most of us.
6
Pedophilia is a mental disease in which the person suffering from it is sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. This is not the case in the current scandals. The perpetrators are pederasts. Pederasty is a moral choice, not a disease. It defines sexual activity between a homosexual man and a boy, and is a more precise term for these cases.
5
Abuse of children, women, and orher weaker sections of the society is routinely observed in many religious organizations across the world. Political parties also get involved in it.
It not be unfair to say that religion almost always prey on weaker section of the society. Poverty, gender, age, and other such discriminatory issues, besides religious minorities, are shrewdly exploited to strengthen the interest of privilaged few. Child mercenaries in the name of jihad or crusade is still very much in use in many places in this world.
11
I think this is a good idea in theory, but how on Earth does one prove anything from 50 years ago ( absent polaroid photographic evidence, I suppose)? There's nothing, other than a decades old recollection, and then a denial.....
9
@GBR And how do you defend?
2
@GBR Clearly, you have never been sexually abused. The memories are clear as day, even decades later.
18
@GBR:
see my post above it is there. No, I certainly have no "witnesses" (the old man and his wife and my family from those days are all dead). That doesn't mean I can't recall the episode.
(A portion of my earlier post):
I was about 4 or 5 or years old and one incident (no genital penetration involved) happened with a neighbor, a "nice old man" named Bill.....I remember it vividly.
That would have been 63 or so years ago.
1
I like this article but at the same time i don't because they are taking everything the one way. This article is a topic that is very heated right now because it brings out Catholicism in it. I understand that these victims now are coming out to sue the Catholic diocese but what is that point...yes, you were a child but it is ridiculous that victims are coming out suing the diocese for a priest that one is dead or he is already out of the diocese. It bring out the question to a lot of Catholics of why was there a minor alone with a priest and it brings out the way of how parents raised their children.Yes being sexually abuse will cause trauma, trauma that can't be forgotten, and yes its right for the abusers to be locked up but there shouldn't be a victim suing a diocese for one of their priest who is dead. I don't believe that you have to pass a law that says that you can sue up till your 55. There isn't an age to sue for other laws in other states.
2
@Xitlaly Orzechowski you need to read...I was abused and told my mother and she explained that the priest was just being "manly"...I was 10 years old in 1964...and the abuse took place in the sacristy behind the alter. Should I sue my dead mother or will you send me a significant check? I hope (and pray) the catholic church will go bankrupt over this "open window" law!
13
@Xitlaly Orzechowski I attended Catholic Schools for 12 years and was raised Catholic. It was common place for the priests to come into the schools to pull boys out for "altar boy practice." Little did we know then what was going on. No one questioned it -- why would you? These were trusted priests. And you are going to blame the parents for trusting their priests? Seriously? And the reason why the CHURCH is being sued is because they often were AWARE of the allegations and simply responded by moving the priest onto another unsuspecting parish. It's because of the Church's failure to act (and acts of giving cover to pedophiles) that allowed the abuse to go on and on and on.
22
Absurd to have to defend yourself against a witch hunt (and there were a lot of witches in this reality story) claim from 50 years ago. The evidence will be someone's memory (and memory is very inaccurate, especially over that much time) with no ability to defend.
9
@David:
see my post above if it is there. No, I certainly have no "witnesses" (the old man and his wife and my family from those days are all dead). That doesn't mean I can't recall the episode.
(A portion of my earlier post):
I was about 4 or 5 or years old and one incident (no genital penetration involved) happened with a neighbor, a "nice old man" named Bill.....I remember it vividly.
That would have been 63 or so years ago.
2
@David Sounds like the language of a Trump supporter! We need less of that nonsense and far more empathy.
7
Reading some of the comments on here, you can see why the church was able to get away with these abuses for so long, it is all the same excuses I hear, that all this is about is greedy lawyers and plaintiffs looking for a quick payout against 'the holy church and its fathers", they must be lying, people will be falsely accused. I hear a lot 'why didn't they report it back then? Why didn't they sue when they became adults', as an argument against allowing this. It doesn't dawn on them that back then, the courts, the cops, and sadly, parents, refused to believe that the 'holy church' could do anything like this, and someone reporting these kind of things were dragged through the mud, their parents told them to shut up, called them evil, cops and lawyers, many of them Catholic themselves, covered for the church instead of doing their jobs...so for many, many decades the church basically got away with foul, immoral behavior and paid no penalties for it, and politicians made sure they didn't with an idiotic statute of limitations.
And most victims are not suing to gain money, most of them are suing to seek what justice they can. Unfortunately, likely because of the power the church still has, they haven't changed the statute of limitations on this heinous crime (unlike murder and rape, which have none, raping a child has statute of limitations on it), so this is the only form of justice they can seek.
16
Also, let’s not forget who the largest owner of land is in the US after the federal government ! The Catholic Church!
11
Oh yes I have to believe these people who have been sexually abused and have not told a a soul about their being sexually abused by a priest 50 years ago are jumping for joy and just can't wait to tell everyone all about it! Especially tell everyone through the court system and associated mass media circus coverage (note the sarcasm).
Maybe the reason the abused did not speak up 50 years ago was because the abused were young, immature, scared, confused, worried, blindly looked up to authority, felt no one would believe them, possibly threatened to keep quiet, and the memory so horrible they blocked it out for years.
Whether or not someone who was sexually abused remembers every single detail from 50 years ago they still should be heard. With the preponderance of sexual abuse by catholic priest across the globe (thousands of cases), by the evangelical church in the US (hundreds of cases), the Boy Scouts of America (hundreds of cases), the US Women's Olympic Gymnastic doctor, and people like Epstein, maybe a small amount of guilty until proven innocent is completely understandable.
Stop blaming the victim.
38
You can almost pick the Catholic faithful by the comments here. Ponder this about your church- being a priest does not make one a pedophile. The church attracts pedophiles because it provides opportunity, victims, protection and silence, as well as giving the pedophile a mantle of authority and endless "forgiveness" by higher ups. This corrupt behavior needs to be smashed to oblivion. If that takes the whole organization down so be it. This has gone on way too long.
43
So Catholic parishioners will keep donating and that money will be used to pay victims of sexual abuse. How do they rationalize continuing to visit the Catholic Church at this point?
15
Regardless of any details, and without trying to be unfair to potential victims, a law that allows raising questions or suing for something that potentially happened, what, 40 - 50y ago, is idiotic. Which geniuses came up with it? Was it a lawyers-only legislation, since they will certainly benefit greatly from this legal abomination?
9
This is just wrong.
There are good reasons for statutes of limitations. Witnesses die, memories fade (or, in some instances, are confabulated - look up False Memory Syndrome), evidence becomes unavailable.
While extending the SOL into adulthood for child sex abuse cases makes sense, it should be a reasonable period of time, not to age 55!
12
@JoanP:
I doubt most are suing for money. Most would be suing (I would be!) for justice.
WHAT is a "reasonable" period of time to recall childhood sex abuse?
8
Trust no one, just trust yourself .
Sadly in these day that is the naked truth.
1
I thank these brave people for coming forth with their stories. Child sexual abuse is, to me, a form of murder. You destroy a child's psyche/soul and negatively impact their entire lives.
I wish I understood better why do many adults prey upon children.
15
Good. Now let’s see an article about a public school teacher who abused a child, who can now sue him, fifty years later. In other words, stop the anti-Catholic porn, please. I know it titillates you and your readers, but a news outlet should serve higher purposes, such as an accurate representation of a social problem.
10
Re: "...It took Charlie d’Estries decades to recognize that his relationship with a priest as a child was, in fact, sex abuse. Now he is entitled to sue..."
'Statue, 'O limitation' laws aren't an issue if you kill your neighbor; sexual assault is like murder, w/o end; why should such arbitrary limits exist if they serve to protect offenders?
Meanwhile...
Timmie Cardinal Princess Dolan has moved / attempted to move, heaven, 'N, earth, in unceasing effort to protect 'statue, 'O limitation' laws...Vs. 'at, risk', (...of exploitation / assault), children!
...Amidst this cardinal's strange silence re the president's increasingly, obvious bigotry as policy!
4
50 years later is ridiculous
8
@NYC Dweller
Yes the abuser could be dead by then
5
For more information about how abuse can affect children into adulthood, read In the Shadow of the Cross by Charles Bailey, and watch Call Me Lucky, about Barry Crimmins.
5
It's about time. I cannot simply fathom that society tolerates thousands of children being raped by the so called priests.
8
@Srini:
seriously, the Catholic Church IS being demonized here, though they are clearly not the only predators and only a small (relatively) group of them ever were.
BTW I was sexually abused by a neighbor many, many years ago and recall it all clearly.
3
@RLiss It is impossible to demonize any individual or institution that remains silent - from the top down - when thousands of children were and are being sexually assaulted all over the world. Surely, you would hold a religious organization to a higher standard than your creepy neighbor, I hope.
2
"Each time, the law’s supporters were thwarted in the Legislature by opposition from the Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, Orthodox Jewish groups and the insurance industry."
The Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, Orthodox Jewish groups and the insurance industry - The Axis of Pedophile Evil
10
I've always wondered who it was who benifitted from the laws that upheld the "Statutes Of Limitations".
A raped child learned that the SOL had run out 3 years before.... before the child had even reached maturity.
It always struck me that that entire body of laws only protected the rapist/abuser/beater/thief.
A one-year window?
The limitation kicking in at 55?
Again, who does that serve?
No, no "time limit".
No limitation on whether it is civil or criminal.
You know, America, you've just got to stop stacking the deck against those who have already been harmed by your laws.
I hope that all individuals and all institutions are sued to the eye-teeth, that their coffers, both private and non-profit, are emptied and that justice is found.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
8
Are they claiming the child abuse were acts of God and should therefore be covered by insurance? Were they accidental? Was it accidental that the higher-ups ignored the abuse? What's the rationale for other people to pick up the damages that people have intentionally inflicted on others?
Insurance ?? Suing the Insurance Companies ???
3
@Zeke If that's the insurance coverage you bought, yes.
1
@David Oh wait! You're implying that the Church has bought specific insurance to cover crimes committed by those they put into positions of trust? So, that's a separate insurance pool?
I think you don't get the fact that insurance companies pool the money for all sorts of coverage.
2
I could care less if the Church loses every last penny they have in trying to defend themselves.
Survivors of sexual abuse are effectively given a life sentence. Many don't even understand the effects the abuse has on their lives until years down the road of life.
For some, no amount of money will ever replace what was taken from them.
39
@DJ
Soooo true! I was in my 60s before I just woke up one morning crying my eyes out like a baby over all the sexual abuse that happened to me as a child. Why? I just don't know. It was always in the back of my mind, but I guess my mind suppressed it. I am thankful I am a Veteran and getting counseling over these issues now, but yes, the damage is PERMANENT! Even in this NY case, I don't meet the statute of limitations since most of this happened to me in the 50s and early 1960s.
10
My wish is that more and more people will realize that any person or group claiming to speak for, or represent, "God" is actually deception and fraud.
24
It’s long past time to end tax exemption for religion.
29
@Luke It does imply they are better than others, which seems like an establishment if ever there was one. I mean, they can take the non-profit route, but that requires all the reporting of finances that goes with it. They get tax exemption without oversight, peddling promises and stories that are clearly faith-based rather than reality-based.
4
Some commenters here believe that prosecuting old crimes will invite a flood of opportunists. That is not the case. Many other countries have no statute of limitations at all on sex crimes. Canada is one. They are hard to prosecute, of course - just like recent sexual assaults. Still, it is important that the fear of getting caught should hang heavily over the heads of perpetrators, even at 80 years old.
40
I was never physically abused by anyone in the Church, but I was psychologically abused as were many of us who grew up in the fifties and sixties. It's not anywhere as devastating as those who were physically abused, but it is something that has damaged many of us in ways we can never fully know or never completely get over.
21
I think that this is a good start, but where does the cutoff age leave all the victims who are 55 and older ?
Is the trauma of those who are 55 and older less valid that is the trauma of those who are 55 and younger?
Under the new law, I am too old to pursue legal action ate 57, while a friend who is about to turn 55 in a few weeks would have less than a few weeks
Those of us who are 55 and older are no less traumatized than those who are 55 and younger.
I don't think there should be an age cutoff, given that there is no cutoff for the trauma of the victims.
The financial stress on the state's eight Catholic dioceses,
against Rockefeller University, or against any institution that aided and abetted sexual predation is of no concern to me.
I believe that those who are responsible should have to pay out of pocket. Those who knew and did nothing, and worse, transferred sexual predators from one location to another were complicit
in the sexual abuse of children. They doomed future victims to sexual abuse, knowingly and willingly.
If the driver of a getaway car whose passenger commits a felony can be charged with felony, including felony murder, even if the driver had no knowledge his or her passenger was about to commit a crime, why aren't those who knew that individuals were preying on children, yet chose to relocate the predators ,being held accountable ? Those chose to send predators out to molest new victims, should be held to account.
12
@DJS contact an attorney. According to the article, "advocates and lawyers stressed that the new law does not apply retroactively, meaning that virtually every abuse survivor older than 23 must bring any claims through the look-back window." This look-back window is open until August 2020. Good luck
8
@DJS
Court Clerk is correct. You can absolutely sue starting tomorrow.
5
@Court Clerk
Thank you for explaining that to me ,and thank you for your good wishes.
5
The NYC Catholic diocese shouldn't be so sure they will survive the coming storm. If they are not totally destroyed by the coming compensation awards,they are not paying out enough. They should be forced to sell most of their valuable real estate to pay the victims of abuse of which they were fully aware.
The investigation in PA which showed that 300 priests abused only 1000 children is obviously a gross under count. Pedophiles do not stop their preying on children just because someone ages out. They just find new victims. The NY diocese has had cardinals who have intimidated politicians for decades. These cardinals have had an exalted position with great power to silence any threat and export their pedophiles to other places.
Any institution that has fought against the look back window obviously knows the facts. There were and still are predators among their staff and deserve to be closed down with money going to the victims. They allowed pedophiles to roam freely in their institutions without regard to the destruction of the lives of the victims. There is not a single institution that did not know what was going on. They failed to act because they thought the predators were more important than the children. This will be a real game changer because every religious group, school, camp, children's social organizations and yes, even medical practices have had known predators working there and chose to ignore the sexual abuse. Doomsday is coming.
14
Good. Too many of the powerful have gotten away with too much for too long. Too many have looked the other way. Its time for Justice to be served.
21
Let us pray that these institutions which, throughout their history, have been little more than fronts for adult males to gain private access to vulnerable children and repeatedly perpetrate their heinous crimes without fear of punishment, are finally shut down once and for all as a long overdue comeuppance for their "let us prey" guiding moral principle.
7
For those who rightly deserve compensation that's excellent. I have no doubt a rape survivor forgets nothing of the experience. But the temptation to recall events decades old, bated by a hungry lawyer and the possibility of huge settlements is ruining lives of innocent people too. I haven't read anything yet that mitigates against the abuse of this law by attorneys, many of whom work for a percentage of the settlement.
I personally know three people who have been wrongly accused in these abuse scandals.
One was accused of raping a woman, but he is gay and her accusations proved to be completely false. He was quickly exonerated but he nearly got fired over it, it cost him thousands, practically had a nervous breakdown, and the stain on his reputation will always be there.
Another was accused of child molestation by a parishioner on Facebook. And it almost ended his career, except other parishioners stepped in to defend him and clarified the lack of substance. He had been fired earlier that month and he was simply looking for revenge.
And another was a priest in NY who was accused of complicity in a legit abuse case. He lost his parish but was later reinstated in a lesser place after his innocence was established. Bit it's too late, his career is over.
So while a group of lawyers changes the law and offers very very large sums of money, lets how they also bother to weight the actual evidence before they get greedy. it's not like we don't all know what lawyers do.
15
@Erich Richter -----so my take is ---if we end up with a year of erring on the side of the victim, so be it----organizations that have been complicit in these abuses and stonewalled every attempt of victims to get justice will learn that not only will their justly accused get justice, but the unjustly accused will suffer as well. That is the price of doing business in a "sweep it under the rug" culture. Anyone that continues to work or be involved with them has to understand the risks they are taking. You cite 3 innocent parties, but they are an extreme minority of the massive abuse culture.
11
@Jonathan Elder Yes, those innocent priests and others who were falsely accused are victims not just of their false accusers but also of the Church or others institutional authorities who made it policy to cover up the actions of the guilty.
12
@Jonathan Elder I get tgat but It seems like a bad legal precedent to set. My issue is really more with the things this new law doesn’t or can’t do. If we’re mostly talking about the Catholic church the obvious root of the problem isn’t being addressed by the Church or these lawyers. I’m referring to the arcane celibacy rules that have created these unhappy disordered clergy in the first place. Maybe enough of these settlements will pressure Rome into taking that on but it seems doubtful. I’m afraid the net result will be little more than a huge transfer of money with lawyers being the big winners.
Children, repeat children, (think your own son, daughter, niece or nephew), were ABUSED and the church knowingly and systematically enabled that abuse. Is there any reason they shouldn't sell their properties, art collections and the rest of their extensive assets to try, just try, to make this right? If you disagree, you've never been abused or have no moral compass. Oh, and this from an Irish Catholic who has lost the church but not his faith...
75
The idea that the Catholic Church, as an institution, “knowingly and systematically” enabled the abuse of children is false. Some bishops tried to cover up sexual abuse in their parishes by some priests in their parishes. Is there any documentary evidence from official church files that confirms the idea that pederasty was systematically enabled by the Church? or is this just coming from someone’s imagination a la Christine Blaisly Ford? Is the Boy Scouts of America guilty, as an organization, for it’s abuses? What kind of lawsuits have they paid out? With hundreds of millions of dollars floating around in settlement cases, it is fantasy to to think there has not been some skullduggery by at least some lawyers and alleged victims. In this story, what is the evidence? A man’s memory of something that happened 50 years ago? How does that get investigated? Are we to just “believe the victim because they say they are a victim? Has it ever occurred to anyone that the church, defined as the people of God, might also a victim?
2
Wrong. Just plain wrong.
Let's hope the financial stress puts them out of business.
17
The contention of the New York Catholic conference that the institutions had "no knowledge and no role" in the abuse is ludicrous. In most cases, they did know, and did very little, if anything, to stop it.
22
Me: 50 years ago you abused me
You: I did not
Me: I remember
Judge to me: can you remember where, when, etc...
Me: um, no. It was 50 years ago. (See christine ford)
Judge to you: do you recall doing this?
You: um, no. It was 50 years ago.
Defense attorney to judge: Judge do you remember what you had for dinner last Thursday?
Judge: um, no.
*judge pondering*
Judge: Defendant--guilty as charged.
That's about how this will go for many of the legitimate cases and all of the many false, made up cases and cases where the memory is just inaccurate. As well, as the revenge cases and the many make a quick buck cases.
8
Good! I had a classmate that was abused in 6th grade at a Catholic School in upstate NY. He’s 55 now. Hope if he hasn’t sued, he will now. As one of his classmates, I had no idea why he cried each day in class after a camping trip with our parish priest. He later left our school and went to a public elementary school. No one was aware of the abuse until years later. The priest was never prosecuted. Heard he left, moved to Pennsylvania and sold used cars. The Catholic Church in Pennsylvania has spent 5.3 million since 2011 to lobby legislators so they won’t extend the statute of limitations. I do wonder where these millions come from to lobby our legislators. Is that the third collection at Sunday mass?
41
Pope Francis has asked only that accused child rapists be turned over to Church authorities, instead of to law enforcement.
The Church has long been less interested in protecting children of its flock than in protecting its own wealth and influence.
Those who protect the molesters in their midst are simply accessories to that molestation. And that includes Francis.
25
"The New York archdiocese said it would likely be able to weather the litigation."
And there it is: it is more expedient to pay lawsuits than do the right thing. We see this over and over where corporations are concerned. The catholic church adopted the same mentality.
The recidivism rate among pedophilia is near 100%. They are certain to repeat their crimes. There is no cure. It is not a life-style choice.
I was sexualy abused by an uncle when I was a small child. I was 40 before I realized the extent it had affected every phase of my life.
So no, I have no forgiveness in me for people who exploit children (n any way) or the people who enable them.
21
@DaveInNewYork
Completely agree.
My aunt molested me for years in very early childhood. I too am still impacted. I finally began to speak up when the US female gymnasts shared their horrors. They are my heroines. I have been tremendously unburdened.
The only sad part personally is that, often when I have shared with women, they have been angry with me for “stealing a women’s issue.”
Also , for many boys who have been abused by females, they are often told they have “gotten lucky.”
4
Fellow Catholics, do you realize how much of your church donations pay attorney and investigator expenses to fight against victims of priest and nun sexual abuse getting their day in court? For years the Roman Catholic church in New Jersey spent much money and effort fighting attempts to expand the civil suit statute of limitations for sex abuse. Think of that when the collection plates comes around.
Thanks to Senator Phil Vitale, Governor Murphy and enough politicians with the guts to buck the power and money of the church, a law expanding the civil statute was passed and takes effect on December 1, 2019. If you or someone you love has been abused -- whether by clergy, a teacher, a counselor, a scout leader or skating coach, or anyone else, see a lawyer, do some online research, and get the therapy you need. There are many resources for your recovery. You are not responsible for the abuse you took, but you are responsible to get help.
20
Will evidence be required, or will this be a cash pot available to anyone making unverifiable claims against a long-dead accused?
9
@Jonathan Katz
It would be totally irresponsible for a judge or jury to award money to a plaintiff without significant proof of liability. And how can a defendant who was psychotic or nearly so at the time possibly prove that fact 50+ years later??
1
Easy to see, based many of the comments, why the victims were victimized. They're not believed, and even if they are, their critics think they should shut up.
Protecting abusers is more important than listening to their victims. Adding insult to injury.
29
@Pecan
One more thing: in parochial school in the early '50s, I noticed how often the boys got out of class to serve funeral Masses and weddings. They'd be out the entire morning, accompanying Father to the cemetery or to the wedding breakfast.
Sister never asked them to account for the hours they were away. Now I know that the priest would sometimes take the long way back, giving him time to park with the boy and molest him.
Those accusing the boys, now middle-aged and old men, of lying about the abuse they suffered, are aiding and abetting the crimes against those little boys.
28
@Pecan
Sister never asked perhaps because she also had wandering hands. That was the case with my Catholic pals from childhood, anyway. I doubt this was a single isolated school where it was going on.
3
@Pecan
According to my Catholic boyhood pals, plenty if the nuns had wandering hands too.
2
How does this not violate ex post facto principles?
4
@Jon F
That applies only to something being deemed a crime after the fact and then charging someone for it after it happened. What we are talking here is basically expanding the statute of limitations on filing a lawsuit, has nothing to do with calling something a crime. In Criminal law, the statute of limitations is not considered ex post facto either, if something was a crime at the time someone committed it, the statute of limitations can be changed and you can then be charged, since it wasn't creating a new law. On the other hand, the law at the time many of these crimes were committed did not explicitly require those in positions of authority who knew about it to report them (the laws in many cases now require that), so people like Dolan and the rest of the hierarchy that covered for the priests cannot be charged with failure to report.
1
@Jon F That only applies to criminal cases; these are civil cases, seeking money.
Religious institutions that are anti-gay are often the worst offenders.
10
The concern for faulty memories, lack of witnesses, etc., will all be part of the priest's/church's defense at trial so there is no injustice there. Most states have no limitations periods for crimes like murder. Child sexual abuse is equally offense. Evidence that you were "Billy's buddy" will be damning in this case. If the priest abused other children, a piece of evidence that is generally admissible in child-sex-abuse cases, should also alleviate concerns over accusing an "innocent man." The length to which the Catholic Church has gone to cover this up also justifies the law. It's evidence of consciousness of guilt and grounds to extend the limitations period. If the evidence is thin, juries will acquit.
7
I was raped when I was 13 by a teacher and coach who had groomed me from the time I was barely 12. He made a careful policy of dispensing alcohol to vulnerable students while cultivating the socially powerful parents in the my school's community. He was a hero to the outside world, someone who could do no wrong.
I was raped for the better part of a year. I saw him rape another child once in front of me. These are not things you forget even if some of the details are blurry many decades later. And the soul wrenching psychological disfigurement never goes away. Never.
My rapist had adult friends who knew what he was about -- friends who are still alive. The fear instilled at the age of 12 or 13 doesn't fall away easily.
He had come from another school and later went onto another school after leaving mine. It was only recently that the rapes he committed at that first school came out, and only in a very limited way.
The schools and churches who "investigate" these crimes never put the interest of the victims above their own institutional survival. My own attempt to come forward, something that occurred very recently in response to the #metoo movement, has affirmed for me that the fancy schools with their expensive lawyers still, to this day, want nothing more than to pretend that those of us whose lives were horribly ruined simply don't exist.
I want justice for myself and what are probably dozens of other victims. NOT money. Money could never undo the harm I suffered.
101
@Just Another Survivor
The sad fact is unless they are hurt, and hurt hard, financially, they will never change. Hit them in the wallet
18
@Just Another Survivor
Please don't give up fighting for justice for yourself. Your abuser should be held accountable along with the institution. You said you attempted to come forward.
Does your state have a look back policy? Can you and did you sue? I hope you find the strength to fight them in court.
15
@sjs @Michael
Thank you both for your generous responses.
I don't disagree with the fact that the need to pay money damages will cause schools and churches to think more seriously about their complicity in having enabled the rape of children in their care.
In my state, the statue of limitations for civil damages lapsed a decade or so ago. But since my rapist left the state two years after the time I was raped, the statute of limitations on his state criminal liability was tolled -- which means, since he still alive, living an unmolested life in retirement -- he could still face justice.
But the last thing in the world that my school will lift a finger to do is to help to bring criminal charges against their former star teacher. (They appear to have been very strategic about not identifying victims who were likely to have been hurt the most seriously, including the family of one of who appears to have died a long time ago.)
I am not giving up the fight but it is very difficult. Most of the lawyers who represent victims seem to be looking for big contingency settlements or a lot of flashy press. In my case there is likely to be no basis for such a settlement. And if there were, I'd give the money away (other than what I need for legal fees and therapy).
The challenge I face is finding a legal partner to work with me to identify what I expect are likely to be dozens of victims at (possibly) at up to half a dozen schools across the country over a long teaching career...
17
In practical terms, these laws and lawsuits will probably do far more harm than good.
It's impossible to know today what really happened 50 years ago. The reality is: most of the priests accused of acts alleged to have occurred decades in the past are no longer alive, and finding true justice is simply not possible.
This being America, there will likely be large verdicts. Some of the money will flow to victims, but they will pay a heavy price: they will have to relive trauma and revive memories perhaps best forgotten.
Most of the money will probably go to the lawyers, who will be filing large numbers of cases. It will be paid by the Catholic Church. The Church spends much of its money on charity, including inner city schools and charitable services for immigrants, including many on our southern border. Many such charitable efforts will inevitably end, when the funding is lost.
Is society really better off when we end much needed charitable services to enrich lawyers?
16
@Alex It's up to the victims that choose to report what kind of "price they want to pay" in making a report, whether it's 1 day or 50 years after an assault. How can we willingly choose to fund charitable efforts that obscure that fact that children are likely still being abused by priests? Society is indeed MUCH better off when you provide all avenues for victims to report sexual abuse. What kind of society do we want to live in, if we're enabling charitable services while also enabling child sexual abuse? I agree that many wonderful charitable services are offered by all churches- but it's not worth allowing sexual abuse offenders to not be held accountable for their actions.
9
@Alex----absolutely YES -----you should realize that the abuse is not limited to the local parish---it is even greater when they are not supervised in impoverished countries---google Douglas Perlitz in a Fairfield University supported village in Haiti----170 children abused abuse in 2009 not settled until June of this year
3
@Alex
Sorry, arguing that this is about a money grab from 'greedy lawyers" leaves out that many of the victims are only seeking justice, to finally have someone understand they were wronged and make those responsible for it pay the price for it. Worse, arguing that these cases shouldn't be heard because 'look at all the good the church does, look at all the charity work they do, look at the harm this will do' is like saying "don't hit X company with huge fines for dumping toxic wastes, it will kill their stock price and cause them to file for bankruptcy, think about all the charities who own the stock and the money the company gives to charity, not to mention the workers who will be hurt". That attitude is part of the reason the law wasn't changed, and is also a large part of why so many shielded the church from the consequences of their action, I am sure the cops and da's who ignored this, I am sure the lawyers who refused to help the victims, I am sure the parents of the victims, were 'afraid to hurt the church and its good works", and as a result kids were victimized for decades and the church got away scott free, and knew they would..on the other hand, how about when a guy kills someone drinking and driving, do we shield him/her from the consequences of their actions because of the potential harm to their family? Do we shield someone who has done a lot of good works from the consequences of bad things they have done?
4
I am hoping for a new law that will create a "Look Back Window", on charges that have passed the statute of limitations for a criminal president, who republicans claim can't be indicted while in office.
Either that, or "stop" the clock from running out the statute of limitations while the criminal is in office.
The criminal in office is capable of doing anything to remain in office until the statute of limitations passes.
A Look Back Window, on criminal Charges, or Stopping the clock, may very well keep us out of a war or other manufactured crisis. It would take away a president's "Get out of jail Free" card.
5
I do not intend to minimize the experiences of the men in the story. It is good that the statute of limitations will be extended to allow men to sue priests who have abused them. And this extension is created, of course, because we expect to believe them.
Why are women not afforded the same credibility when they come forward to point out their abusers many years later?
42
Thank you Colleen M, for stating what should appear obvious—
6
@Colleen M Laws extending a sexual abuse statute of limitations are not created because someone expects to believe someone. They are passed because of the well-proven fact that victims suppress their memories of abuse-- in many cases horrific abuse-- in order to stay sane. It is a phenomenon known by and relied upon by the predator, who uses his position of authority to intimidate the victim into keeping silent. It is especially potent as to priests and bishops, whom Catholics have been taught are the personification of Christ on earth. Wouldn't a child internalize that the abuse isn't something deviant, or is somehow deserved by the child, when priest-as-Christ is doing it?
Also your comment conveys the false impression that women are not afforded the protection of these new laws; they also protect women who have been abused.
6
@Colleen M
Try sharing your last point with a boy who was molested by his female teacher or aunt or older sister, and has been told he “got lucky.”
2
I've been walking around in circles trying to decide how to respond to this. I was abused by an older man in Central Park when I was a sophomore in high school. I was abused by a priest a year later. They were one-time events and I have been able to put them aside and go on with my life. And, honestly, I think if I had spoken up I would have been bombarded with loving and caring people telling me that I was somehow damaged because of these incidences. I am not damaged. I have gone on with my life and it is good. I do truly empathize with anyone in a similar circumstance: man, boy, woman, girl, trans, whoever, who has not gotten over the trauma, but I believe to the depth of my being that outside forces trying to convince you that you are damaged by these events are not helpful. You are strong. You have survived and moved past this.
30
@mcarrca
Surviving us not the same as thriving. Perhaps your life is just as good, just the same, as it would have been had you not been attacked. I hope that’s true, and if so, well done!
For many, or perhaps even most, victims of childhood abusers, alas, this is simply not the case. Their abuse leaves deep scars, not because they have been told they are damaged—since so many stay silent—but because the trauma is real , and because they have hidden their experiences.
20
@mcarrca
Central Park (parts of it) were notorious. We were warned to stay out. Sensible young people did. There is a reason your parents told you not to talk to strangers.
Today one sees mothers pushing strollers through the places we were warned against. Sometimes things get better, and we can enjoy Olmstead's landscape. Presumably the molesters have moved somewhere else.
4
@mcarrca
Obviously I cannot say whether or not you were affected by your experience since I don't know you, but more than a few survivors of abuse claim they are 'fine', they got over it, until you look deeper into their lives. More importantly, though, not everyone is that resilient, some people survive horrors you can't imagine, and come out of it strong people, others spend their lives living with the consequences, everyone is different.
As the partner of someone who experienced horrific sexual abuse as a child from a parent, I can tell you that the consequences of abuse in many people don't just go away, that the consequences are there and linger in many, and there is damage. No, it is not helpful for people of good will to tell them they are damaged, but it is helpful for them to understand that there are things left by abuse, and that the key is for the victims of abuse to become survivors of it; some people do it themselves, others do so with help, and the point of the help is to have them become survivors.
8
My sympathy goes to the many who were abused and denied justice decades ago. They deserve justice. But there's a very serious problem here: in almost all cases, it's utterly impossible to determine what happened 50 years ago. That's the reality.
Most of these cases do not seem to be motivated by concern for the victims. The article notes "Lawyers have cast a wide net in their search for cases, blanketing television programs, newspapers and Google with advertisements. " The lawyers seem to be more concerned with earning large fees than bringing about justice. Indeed, by reopening 50 year wounds and memories in most cases long forgotten, the lawyers may themselves be doing more harm than good.
These victims do deserve justice, but it just doesn't seem possible to achieve it decades after the fact. I can understand the visceral rage over unpunished sexual abuse that has inspired these laws. But, in the large majority of cases, it is simply too late to find justice in a courtroom. The facts from 50 years ago cannot be determined today. We need to move on, and change the laws, and the societal attitudes of today, so this can never happen again.
In most circumstances trying 50 year old cases in courtrooms will not bring us justice; the cases will do little good, and may do substantial harm.
12
@Alex Please explain what harm you think may be done by prosecuting these cases.
6
@Alex
What harm? When I hear that, it usually translates into "look at all the money that could have been used for good, going into lawyers hands" or worse "if we keep this up, faith in the holy church will continue to erode, no one will listen to the teachings of the church, they will walk away".
First of all,not all these cases will be 50 years old, the law we are talking about changed the statute of limitations on filing from someone being 23, so you could see cases that happened within the last 10, 20 or 30 years. More importantly, these cases will still require evidence, if someone sues because they were abused, there will need to be evidence. The victim will be talking openly about something they have buried for years, not to mention they are under oath. In many of these cases, they also are suing because the church covered the case up, and the courts will subpoena church records. Likely, they also will have other people testify, under oath, that the perp did what they did, and if they are suing the church leaders for covering it up, there will be other evidence. I am sure lawyers in these cases are often driven by greed, but most plaintiffs simply want some form of justice.
As far as the harm of allowing this, that is an evasion, something we don't do elsewhere. We don't not penalize companies for bad actions because of the consequences to stakeholders, we don't not put people away because of harm to the family of the perp..evil acts are not mitigated by good.
4
If one is accused of sexual abuse and the accuser can not provide any evidence of the abuse, does the accused have any legal remedy?
Is there any legal disincentive for making an accusation against someone? Isn’t it especially important in these kinds of cases where the simple accusation will lead to serious consequences for the accused?
1
Let me see.... About 45 years ago somebody made me feel uncomfortable, oh wait, touched me, no, wanted to me to do unspeakable things. Yes. Let's sue. I could use some extra cash. Let my teacher prove it did not happen.
17
@Grisha while it's true that some people lie about their cases, there's also a large amount of legitimate child abuse cases which were never brought to light until now (50 years later). Don't disenfranchise those who have experienced trauma and are just now coming to terms with it publicly.
39
@Grisha
Your comment is disgraceful. There are individuals who who sexually abused.
Consider yourself fortunate that you were not one of them.
Your sarcastic, obnoxious comment evidences that you were not a victim. Had you been a victim, you would not have written a comment mocking sexual abuse victims.
21
@Grisha
Why don't you ask the people in your extended family if they were sexually abused? If they tell you the truth, I don't think you will think this is so funny, and you won't be so dismissive. Of course, given your attitude, I don't think any will tell you the truth.
15
In 9th grade a classmate who was an altar boy died from shooting himself at home with a hunting rifle. At a memorial service in church a priest told us that it was a tragic accident but our classmate was nowhappy in heaven. I refused to go to church after that. I read a few weeks ago that the church in my former town may close b/c the pastor is retiring, and there appears to be no one to replace him. I was glad to hear it.
32
@Rinwood
Makes you wonder why the poor kid shot himself in the first place, given what we know now, what are the odds an alter boy committing suicide was because the priest abused him?
5
Wow. Surprised and disappointed to see the commenters here who simultaneously disapprove of the Act while maligning the victims. The stories of the men featured in the article certainly don't sound like fiction to me, and they do not seem to be motivated by money. They are seeking justice and emotional healing after life-changing abuse and years of painful silence. My guess is that many of the people against this Act are the devout Catholics, who defend their organization and its "leaders" no matter what criminal behavior is discovered and proven.
39
@luckygal For those who seek redress I understand but then sue for recognition or getting bills paid not large sums of money.
4
@luckygal
Not only religious people defending their institutions are opposed to this law, but also men who want to be free from any accountability for their past behavior, i.e., our newest supreme court justice.
25
A wiser age created statutes of limitation because of the difficulty of trying to defend yourself about accused actions that occurred long ago. Not to mention the injustice of it—especially when the allegation was of an act that had no witnesses.
One of the deep, destructive flaws of the left is to engage in false compassion. This is going to result in the same injustice that the witches in Salem and the 1980s era day care workers suffered. It’s scary—just imagine if any one of you had to defend yourself from an unhinged or money seeking high school acquaintance from 30 or 40 years ago. This law will hurt far more than it helps.
16
@ehillesum
Children may have acquiesced because they were children and expected the "adults" to know what was right.
Now the children, grown up, who probably did not want to be in either of these two situations have the will, and the courage to bring to light a dark truth from years ago.
15
Witnesses? You have to be kidding. Predators don’t abuse or attack their victims when there are witnesses near by. Whether rapists or burglars and other criminals tend to pick the weak and someone alone.
I hope you never have cause to have your story investigated based solely on your word. Someone like you may not believe it because you don’t have a witness.
15
@ehillesum
Ah, another ardent Catholic defending their church by smearing those coming forward. The statute of limitations were originally designed with the idea that the person responsible for the original crime/bad action, in living in fear of consequences, would in effect pay the price for their crime. Thus someone stealing something, would live for X years with the knowledge they could be prosecuted. Likewise, in a civil case, it was living under the shadow of a lawsuit, that waiting was considered penalty enough.
However, the statute of limitations is also supposed to fit the crime. The law has no statute on murder, you can be charged 50, 60 years after the fact, you can be charged with rape as well these days, because it was felt the nature of the crime was so large that it could never be 'washed away', In civil law that is true as well, some actionable items have no statute, and with abuse, given the horrible actions of the church and law enforcement both, this is the only way they can get a measure of justice.
5
This removal may--MAY--benefit a few true victims, but it is also a visit to labyrinthine evils of its own: a legal burlesque of false or sensationally unproved accusations; a terrific rip-off of institutions with supposedly infinitely deep pockets; a recruiting device for politicians in an election year; a victory for a vengeful totalitarian sexual ideology in search of absolute cultural supremacy--and, oh, yes, as others have said already, a ticket to riches for lawyers cruising the world for evils to exploit. To replicate this kind of thing across the legal system would wreck anything like a rule of law.
16
@David A. Lee
Another way to look at it that this will finally bring to justice the rapists of children who are still alive to be prosecuted. It will also punish the corrupt institutions that protect their own colleagues while throwing under the bus those children who have been raped.
The Catholic Church has spent millions to protect its wealth and influence even as it threw aside little kids who have been raped. Read those last six words again, please. Anyone who helped the victimizers of those kids is an accomplice to those rapes and molestations. And that includes Francis, who continues to require only that accused rapists be turned over to Church authorities, not to law enforcement.
4
@Franco51 I believe that some such children have been thus victimized, and I don't doubt it. But what does a 55-year S.O.L. remediate after that many years of a life thus injured is endured before the victim comes forward? And whom does it protect from a false accusation, in which the word "evidence" must try to be something more than a mere assertion by somebody with money to gain from the success of the accusation and in which every year that lapses in the making of it only potentiates the suspicion of perjurious intent? Sexual wrong is an area of the law in which the privacy of the behavior always--always--stands in tension with the need to guarantee serious evidence, proof and the credibility of the law itself. There is NO simple solution to such problems.
2
@David A. Lee
"a victory for a vengeful totalitarian sexual ideology in search of absolute cultural supremacy"
That sounds to me more like the Catholic hierarchy, it is the church that promotes a medieval attitude towards sex and women and also claims to have the only true teachings and that the church should be the ultimate arbiter of society and its mores.
As far as unproven accusations, that is a bogus argument, in court the plaintiff has to prove their case, and the church isn't exactly going into these with a legal aid lawyer either. As far as benefitting a few victims, that boat has sailed, the evidence out there is of a lot of victims of what the church and its priests did, this isn't a few isolated cases, it is massive.
2
A truly rotten idea.
Statutes of limitation do not exist to protect the guilty; they exist to protect the innocent. And charitable immunity statutes exist to ensure that the donors to fictional entities -- churches, scouts -- do not see their precious funds diverted to purposes other than those to which they donated to advance.
Money will not help these victims. But it will create many more victims, who do not have access to valuable programs when trial lawyers bankrupt them.
THIS is what happens when we allow criminals to destroy charities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Boychoir_School
When you're the victim of a crime, you should be limited to suing the PEOPLE the committed it or abetted it.
But since priests don't have any money, and trial lawyers don't work for free...
8
@Michael
Your last line is a perfect argument about why the Church SHOULD be subject to law suits.
5
@Michael
The statute of limitations was designed to prevent someone from facing the consequences of their actions based on the nature of the crime, call it the "Jean Valjean" law (where he is persecuted by a cop for decades for stealing a loaf of bread"). They are designed to protect the guilty, in that the fear of the consequences over a period of years is punishment enough. In civil cases, they were designed to protect someone from having to defend themselves for something they allegedly did years ago, the timeframe is relative to the seriousness of the action.
And the key is relative seriousness. In criminal law, murder and rape and other serious crimes have no statute of limitations, in civil law serious violations, serious actions, can have very long limits, companies that dumped toxic waste 60 years ago can face lawsuits over it, even though it was cleaned up years ago.
In this case the church is no innocent victim, the fact speak for themselves, and because of their power and arrogance they dug their own bed, their leaders covered up for pedophile priests, and the law did nothing for the same reason parents did nothing, they felt their first duty was 'to protect the church'..sadly, that is what the leaders thought they were doing, never dawned on them their first duty was to protect their children.
5
I was abused by a Deacon in 1974 to 1977 and never told a soul. I was sexually abused in the church I was baptized in and could never tell my parents as they were immigrants who loved the Catholic Church. The Deacon is now dead. He was defrocked in 1983 after being caught having sex with other boys but wasn’t arrested. I didn’t tell a soul. Now I am filing a lawsuit not for the money but so I can tell someone and try to live with myself. My wife doesn’t know, my kids don’t know and now I must tell them so I can have peace. I sent my kids to catholic schools watching them and teaching them about abuse because I believe in God and a good education. I am scared to death. I can’t sleep. I can’t eat. I’m nervous and anxious. I don’t know if I can go forward and pray the archdiocese doesn’t publish my name or worse, deny I ever got raped. My rapist is dead and has been for sometime but to me, he is still alive and taunting me. I feel like it’s my fault but I was only 15 and trusted the good Deacon. I will not see him in court. There will be no justice for me and many others who’s abusers are dead. Just shame and guilt. I ask all of you out there reading this, to please pray for those of us that were abuse and pray for our sinners. Please.
88
@Alone
I don't pray. I am atheist.
But I wish you well and may I suggest that you would find a certain peace if you looked at all of this as a "crime" rather than a "sin"?
29
@Alone my heart goes out to you. Please believe you are not alone. There are both victims with similar stories and others like me who believe you and feel for your pain. I hope with therapy and your legal proceedings you find peace and realize it was not your fault and you are not “damaged goods” but a person who was unsupported by a society afraid to look at itself. We are now beginning to look. I hope if helps you and your family.
17
@Alone
I went to Catholic school in the bronx for twelve years and was exposed to no less than 6 clergy men who were defrocked for pedophilia.
One was a deacon who thought 8th grade that several of us 8th graders thought was a pedo back in 1978.
You're not alone. I hope you find the peace you deserve. You already have the courage.
18
This is good news for property developers. A non-profit organization is sued, decides to settle rather than pay litigation and court fees, is nonetheless unable to pay the settlement, and so has no choice but to sell its valuable asset, such as a summer camp for children. Developers swoop and decimate anyone who questions their development plans. This happened in Saugatuck, Michigan. No more summer camp for children.
5
@Nancy Cohen
The good done doesn’t trump the evil
The benefits of a summer camp don’t outweigh or excuse the harm done by individuals and by the organization.
12
Agree the properties should be seized as restitution and kept as nature preserves. The Jesuits have been egregious in NY and elsewhere selling retreat houses for quick profit and despoiling beautiful landscapes.
2
@Nancy Cohen You sound like Donald Trump using a nom de plume. Or have you kept your head in the sand for the past decade? To close your eyes to horrific abuse perpetrated by deviants because the deviants work for a tax-exempt religion is not only callous, it's deviance itself.
7
Vatican should sell its artwork and palaces to compensate for all the harm done. They care nothing for the victims, beyond the impact of having gotten caught enabling child rape for decades.
Yes, there are statutes of limitations for very good reason. But the voices of the abused have been systematically stifled for decades. Who cares if certain institutions become financially bankrupt? They and their leadership have been morally bankrupt and not fulfilling their mission (and IRS tax exempt purpose) for decades or longer.
56
Who’s getting sued? Us. Even non-Catholics will pay to the extent any money comes from funds that maintain the many church properties in our neighborhoods.
@Kirk Cornwell
Maybe “us” should take responsibility for the evil that “us” facilitated.
5
That was a real reach.
4
@Kirk Cornwell
Seriously? Church properties are maintained by the church because they own them (and might add, pay no property taxes on), and if they cannot maintain them then like any organization faced with this, they either sell them or find a way to pay for them...how is this any different than a corporation that owns property that gets hit with heavy fines and can't maintain it, or a property owner who has to pay a massive fine for not filing tax returns and as a result, can't maintain their house?
4
The New York Catholic. Conference states it is against the law because it will “force institutions to defend alleged conduct decades ago about which they have no knowledge and in which they had no role.” There are many paper trails portraying how the church knew about abusers and covered up for them so implying no knowledge is disingenuous to say the least. The church has lobbied for many years to prevent any laws that would enable anyone a victim of the church to seek compensation.
40
Lots of lawyers are going to make lots of money now.
10
@Steve
That's okay, for decades the church was rolling in money from the faithful, the NY Archiocese makes a lot of money from rent on the properties it owns, all the while committing aggregious actions against its own children with little to no fear of paying any kind of consequences, maybe it is time for the church and their arrogant leaders and the people writing comments like yours face getting a little of their own medicine, maybe then they will learn a bit of empathy for the many victims they ignored, denigrated and otherwise allowed to be harmed and left them with nothing.
4
It's about time this law is passed in New York. Victims of sexual abuse carry the trauma with them for their whole lives, and so should the opportunity to hold people accountable and punish them for their crimes. For most victims, the money they receive from these cases does not resolve the sorrow. But, unfortunately, large payouts seem to be the only consequence that results in institutions and individuals taking sexual abuse seriously.
67
This is a law that was designed to make lawyers wealthy. Amazing that there have been no sexual abuse assertions against the public school system - yet.
15
There have been plenty of accusations against public school teachers, but teachers rarely spend one on one time with students and I can hardly imagine a public school being willing to shield teachers from their misconduct. Now private schools, that's another story. I'm a public school teacher and we have very strict codes of conduct so that there can be no misinterpretations. No hugs for my second graders, even at their request. High fives or hand shakes are the extent of contact, which I believe is appropriate.
15
There have been plenty of accusations against public school teachers, but teachers rarely spend one on one time with students and I can hardly imagine a public school being willing to shield teachers from their misconduct. Now private schools, that's another story. I'm a public school teacher and we have very strict codes of conduct so that there can be no misinterpretations. No hugs for my second graders, even at their request. High fives or hand shakes are the extent of contact, which I believe is appropriate.
2
@Maureen
Ah, I was waiting for this one "Well, how about the public schools?". First of all, this law applies to the public schools, it applies to anyone who has been abused.
More importantly, what does the public schools have to do with the church? More importantly, if kids are abused in the public schools, they can be sued, no different than the church..and there have been relatively few documented cases of where teachers have abused students, and have been left in the classroom, moved to other schools, etc. One of the reasons for this is that unlike the church, the schools have no special standing, the same parent who would yell at their child and say they were lying, that father Obrien would never do that to him, would be screaming bloody murder if a teacher did it and immediate sue the school for a million dollars.
The reality is that the church, thanks to the nature of the way parents and law enforcement viewed them, the fact that so many cops and DAs and the like were Catholic, meant that they were treated with kid gloves for far too long, and the church knew it. In many cases, when abuse charges were taken to law enforcement, they helped cover it up,helped make it go away, dissuaded those who filed charges, and as a result the number of cases piled up.
4
Are men more threatened than women by this change ? Seems like it based on the commenters names.
25
I know several victims of this kind of abuse. The consequences are lifelong and have significantly affected their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to function in relationships and in the workplace. Seeing the perpetrators of such crimes be brought to justice can be immensely healing. The victims deserve that reckoning.
Understandably, the evidence trail may have gone cold after this many years. But in some cases, as we know, there were multiple victims and witnesses. In some cases, both the crimes and the institutional enabling were widespread and systematic. Thank you, State of New York.
34
As CSA survivor in Pennsylvania...here's my problem with all of this. The lawyers get RICH...BIG TIME. We have to live through the nightmares again AND the guilt of knowing we got to sue, while victims of say a public school teacher do not. There is no look back window if the perp was a state employee. That's nonsense. Either everyone can sue...or no one can sue. Just my opinion.
12
@Tom
Where do you get your information? Do you think they just changed the law for the Catholic Church? They amended the law to allow ANY victim of abuse to sue, as long as they file before their 55th birthday, it applies to a child with an adult, it applies to a public school teacher, a rabbi, the counselor at a camp, a music teacher at Juilliard, it allows the victims of any kind of abuse this right.
This idea that this just targets the church is nothing more than a lie Fox News likes to proclaim. It happens that the church as an organization has been covering this up for years, allowed priests to do these things, and also because the church, unlike other organizations, was for far too many years given carte blanche to do these things by its memebrs and law enforcement.
But again, this law isn't just about the church, it applies across the board.
3
so who pays? the perpetrators? not on your life. it's todays donors who intend their donations for the poor and the downtrodden.
4
Your church has vast treasures and real estate holdings. Vast.
7
@Kent Kraus
that is what happens when an organization does something wrong and eventually has to pay the price. When a company gets hit with a billion dollar cleanup like GE was with the Hudson River, it hurts current stockholders, not those who owned the stock 50 years ago. When a car company like Audi is found to have falsified emissions tests, employees who had nothing to do with it and stockholders pay the price.
And maybe, just maybe, you should be voicing your rage against the church leaders, ask them how they could allow this kind of thing to go on for so long, and demand accountability. It is the church that committed these actions, it is the church that allowed little kids to be abused, it is the church that to this day still has not cleaned house of the Bishops and Cardinals who looked the other way, and your questions really should be aimed at the church. By the way, if you don't want your funds going to pay the lawsuits, there is an easy answer to that. If the diocese is being sued, insist that any money you pay to your own church stays within the church, is not sent to the diocese. If you are worried about the poor and downtrodden, instead of giving to your church, take that money and donate it to something like Catholic Charities directly, or another charity, this way you know it won't be used to pay off lawsuits.
4
Yes. As the originator of Western Civilization the Church has amassed quite a collection over the last 2500 years. Most of its wealth came in the form of donations and gifts. The Catholic Church is the largest charity in the world and has been for centuries.
The problem with this law is that every gold digger with an agenda will try to sue for ‘free’ money. While the basis of the law is good, it opens up a ‘free for all’ for suing institutions of all kinds. NY is notorious for passing laws that are not real well thought out and often cause more problems than they solve. This is just another one of those laws. There has been a real exodus of people from NY and this is just going to add to it. Pretty soon, NY will not have the tax base necessary to fund all its various social programs and that spells doom. The writing is on the wall.
10
@Mike L
yeah, right, people are going to leave NY because of a law allowing victims of abuse to sue, I am sure. ...I can just see it in NYC, where there are now 8 million people, I am sure they will leave because the church is being sued.
As far as 'every gold digger with an agenda suing", that is a trope of Fox News, not reality. That assumes, first of all, that a lawyer will even take any case that comes along, the problem with that is the lawyer is only going to take cases that have some evidence to support them. More importantly, I have sat on juries, and they aren't rubber stamps, juries are not going to find for the plaintiff, and a judge will not okay damages, unless there is evidence there of real wrongdoing. Sorry, the Catholic church and other institutions for far too many years have been shielded from consequences, it is about time they pay the piper.
2
At the risk of incurring the wrath of NY Times readers, there is a reason there are statutes of limitations. No one has a perfect memory and our memories of events actually evolve over the years. This new law is insane and puts at risk every individual who has ever taught children. How would or could anyone defend a charge based on a recalled event that may or may not have occurred 40 or 50 years in the past?
Further, given that accusers are automatically labelled "victims", this law is very scary.
74
@John Palmieri I can understand your point. It's well known that even eyewitness testimony soon after the event is often unreliable. Imagine the memory of the offended party decades after the fact. However, this new law isn't changing standards of legal standing , evidence or reasonable doubt as in any other trial. I think the nature of these sorts of cases require some special handling like this law gives, but the standards of trial law are not being changed.
30
Reasonable doubt applies to criminal trials. As these abuse claims are civil in nature, the standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence.
30
I agree with the concern about such a long statute of limitations period. And this new law does apparently apply only to civil lawsuits, not to criminal actions filed by the State.
There are reasons for having reasonable limitations periods, as referenced by your comment. And what I see with this new law are lawyers getting rich off the filing of these lawsuits, forcing settlements from big pocket organizations like the Catholic Church. It’s all about the money, mostly.
20
It's sickening that this legislation was held up as long as it was, and the groups responsible for that should be ashamed of themselves.
88
@Kayla Hackman
Sickening unless this 50 year old standard is applied to someone you love and whom you know never committed the alleged crime. Yes, victims should receive justice but so should the accused. How can the wrongly accused defend themselves when they are dead, suffer from dementia or provide witnesses in their behalf if such witnesses are long dead?
4
How do you “know” what someone did or did not do? You mean you can’t believe that they would do that, but you can’t possibly know that.
8
@Summer Smith
If your best friend whom you love and trust was accused, might you think different? In today's media driven justice, how many men just have to be accused to be automatically guilty? Even if acquitted, how many would still say -- "guilty!"
1
The under analyzed issue is the male.
The male is the initiator of sexual and physical violence.
We keep focusing on symptoms, like institutions.
Historically, the male has terrorized humanity, whatever he is a part of.
Females do not significantly register as perpetrators.
Yet, there is no national conversion on the problem of the male.
Things will not change until the male changes.
Laws are simply a weak safeguard.
Need to understand what is in the male psyche and biology that has made him the universal, eternal perpetrator of violence, sexual and physical.
76
@Emmett Coyne
This is the new ideology that convicts without need for credible evidence. Is the alleged perpetrator guilty? Is he male? Guilty as charged!
11
@Emmett Coyne
Actually in domestic environments male are the initiators of sexual abuse close to 95% of the time. Females are the initiators of physical abuse of children about 80% of the time. I know this latter point will be unbelievable for many readers until they realize that females spend much of the time spent with small children and so have the opportunity and frustration that often triggers the outbreak of violence.
15
@Emmett Coyne
interesting. Perhaps males were abusers because they could be. Our culture gave them power over women and children for a long long time.
22
Does the look-back law include public schools, which are not mentioned in the article? And if not, why not? Also, the article stipulates that accusers may file until they are 55 years old, yet two of those interviewed are 60 or over. Very confusing piece.
15
@jlunine
My understanding of the article is that there is a one year window for a victim of sexual abuse who is over 55 years old to come forward. After that one year period, the age limit for victims to come forward becomes age 55.
7
@jlunine
It does apply to public schools. It also applies to municipal parks, camps pools etc.
Now if NYC public schools get inundated with thousands of claims the statute may be revisited but as of now it applies across the board.
The one year window is for everyone. The age 55 is the new statute of limitations going forward so if you are 40 and were abused 25 years ago you have ONE year to bring your lawsuit you do NOT have until you are 55 to bring it.
2