Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ex-priest accused of sexual abuse (Here we go again)
Anchorage Daily News ^ | October 12, 2005 | LISA DEMER

Posted on 10/12/2005 8:05:55 AM PDT by AlaskaErik

Former Anchorage Catholic priest Frank Murphy is accused in a new lawsuit of sexually abusing a boy numerous times years ago.

As Monsignor Francis Murphy, he tried at least twice to rape the boy and took nude photographs of him, said Anchorage attorney Ken Roosa. He filed the lawsuit Tuesday in Anchorage Superior Court on behalf of the plaintiff, now in his 30s, who is called Joseph Doe in the suit.

Murphy was a popular and charismatic priest in the Archdiocese of Anchorage from the 1960s to 1985. That's when his superiors suddenly ordered him to an alcoholic rehabilitation center for priests in the Lower 48 as police were investigating him for sexual misconduct, the Daily News reported in 2003.

The newspaper revealed Murphy as an alcoholic who collected pornography and was sexually attracted to boys. He permanently moved to Boston later in 1985 when police said they'd arrest him at the airport if he returned, the newspaper reported.

(Excerpt) Read more at adn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abuse; catholic; homosexual; molest; obstruct; priest; rape
Get ready for the church's plumbing unit to obstruct all they can.
1 posted on 10/12/2005 8:06:02 AM PDT by AlaskaErik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik

US News

245 priests accused of sexual misconduct
LOS ANGELES, CA, United States (UPI) -- At least 245 clergy members from the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles have been accused of sexual misconduct, just-released church documents reveal.

That is 26 more than previously admitted by the nation`s largest archdiocese and came Tuesday in documents called proffers intended to settle pending lawsuits, The Los Angeles Times reported.

The diocese last year settled 90 cases for $100 million. Still-pending suits involving more than 200 priests could cost the diocese $1 billion, parties to the suits said.

Despite a 2002 zero-tolerance policy, seven accused Los Angeles diocese priests remain active today. Church officials said the accusations have not been substantiated.

Victims` lawyers called the proffers inadequate and want complete personnel files, which the church has fought.

Raymond Boucher, lead attorney in suits against the archdiocese, told the newspaper the 'sanitized' proffers 'reveal decades of participation by the archdiocese in molesting children.'

Church attorney J. Michael Hennigan said, 'There was never a time when a priest was transferred without counseling after a credible complaint' since the 1980s.

05, 14:20 GMT

FOLLOW THE MONEY It could cost them $1Billion. THAT is what scares them, not satan. Losing money scares them. The Catholic church owns many very valuable properties around the world and they don't plan to lose them.... The priests enjoy them.


2 posted on 10/12/2005 8:13:54 AM PDT by buffyt (America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our people. Pres. George Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik

Complaints of priest abuse were ignored for decades
By LAURA WIDES
Associated Press

LOS ANGELES -- For decades, the Los Angeles Archdiocese ignored parishioners' sex abuse complaints and shipped accused priests between therapy and new assignments, according to newly released personnel records involving 126 clergymen.

In many cases, there was little mention of child molestation. Instead, euphemisms such as "boundary violations" were used to describe the conduct.

The summaries of the personnel records were released Tuesday as part of settlement talks with lawyers for more than 500 accusers who sued the nation's largest Roman Catholic archdiocese.


The records, released after nearly three years of legal wrangling, cover priests who were ordained as far back as the 1920s. The documents offer details in numerous cases, though much of the information has already been published.

Raymond P. Boucher, the plaintiffs' lead attorney, said the newly released information was a first step but that complete personnel files, including letters of transfer and other confidential documents, should be made public.

"The significance of these files is that they provide a little more information for the public about the church's knowledge and frankly their participation in the molestation of children, but until the (entire) files are made public, we're not going to be satisfied," he said.

Archdiocese and plaintiff attorneys had agreed to release the information, but lawyers for the accused clergy succeeded in blocking publication, arguing it would violate their clients' privacy rights.

An appellate court ordered the documents released last month.

Archdiocese attorney J. Michael Hennigan called Boucher's concerns that the summaries might be whitewashed "nonsense."

"Ray has not seen the files themselves and has no basis to say that beyond speculation," he said. "These are accurate descriptions of the content of the files, without disclosing confidential communication."

One priest, who served as a teacher and administrator at numerous Southern California schools, was convicted of molesting two boys and given probation. The conviction was later expunged from his record.

A subsequent report was made in 1994 of "boundary violations," in which he allegedly patted the buttocks of a teenager. He entered alcohol treatment days later and was eventually placed on leave.

Another priest's file shows the archdiocese received repeated complaints that he engaged in "inappropriate sexual conduct with children" beginning in 1959, but that it did not appear to take significant action against him until 1994 when he was relieved of his duties, documents said.

David Clohessy, who heads a victims' rights group, called the information release a "shrewd public relations effort," as civil cases against the clergy inch toward trial.

But Hennigan said in the early days of the accusations, church officials did not go to civil authorities because "parents of children who had been victims did not want their children famous for this. They did not want people talking about this."

Hennigan said that in many cases counseling was offered to clergymen accused of abuse. Those accused were generally removed from the ministry altogether as church officials' understanding of sexual abuse increased, he said.

The files show that in many cases the church provided years of therapy to some of the clergy.

The archdiocese has posted nearly 150 pages of summaries from the clergy files on its Web site.


3 posted on 10/12/2005 8:14:34 AM PDT by buffyt (America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our people. Pres. George Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik

Excerpt....




http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lapriest12oct12,0,2454957,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Archdiocese Says It Didn't Shield Kids From Priests
By Jean Guccione and Nita Lelyveld
Times Staff Writers

October 12, 2005

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles allowed at least eight priests to remain in contact with children even after receiving complaints that the clerics had a sexual interest in minors, according to church documents produced in the lawsuits by hundreds of alleged sexual-abuse victims.

That is twice as many as the church had previously conceded.

The documents, which became public Tuesday, indicate that numerous children might have avoided harm if church leaders in the 1960s, '70s and '80s had reacted more vigorously to warnings about abusive priests. Tod Tamberg, spokesman for the archdiocese, said the documents would be posted at midnight Tuesday on the archdiocese website, http://www.la-archdiocese.org .

The documents offer the most unfiltered look yet at the way the archdiocese responded to child-molestation allegations involving its priests over the last half-century.

In one of the newly revealed cases, a parishioner in 1980 passed a rumor to archdiocese officials that a young boy was spending every weekend at Father Richard Henry's home. In the decade that followed, the church received additional reports about Henry, including two in 1988, one from a nun at Our Lady of the Rosary in Paramount who said that the priest was partial to boys, and the other from a layperson who said he "grabs little boys and hugs them."

Despite the reports, Henry was allowed to remain in his parish while undergoing therapy. Church leaders say they did not know that he continued to sexually abuse young boys. He wasn't removed from ministry until the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department launched an investigation in 1991 that ended with Henry pleading no contest to four counts of lewd conduct with a child.

Henry went to prison in 1993 and served three years, according to court documents. He was removed from the priesthood in 2003.

more there if you click the link....


4 posted on 10/12/2005 8:17:12 AM PDT by buffyt (America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our people. Pres. George Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
This is getting wearisome.
The problem is not the Church, it's homosexuals.

What is really frustrating and maddening is that the Catholic church is bankrupting itself "paying the price" for perversion, but it constitutes perhaps 5% of the total problem.

The perverts have metasticized themselves into every corner of our society with impunity, including our schools, and, for that 95% of the problem, laws are passed at all level of goverment protecting the very same perverts and predators!

It feels wonderful living in a world gone mad!

Gheeeez!

5 posted on 10/12/2005 8:57:50 AM PDT by Publius6961 (Liberal level playing field: If the Islamics win we are their slaves..if we win they are our equals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; Coleus; NYer

Ping!


6 posted on 10/12/2005 9:02:33 AM PDT by Clemenza (Gentlemen, Behold!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
In most of the native villages in Alaska, you'll find quite a few, (over 50%) of the kids are raped before age of 8-10. Mostly by family members and relatives. Massive child abuse combined with alcoholism is killing the future; so sad.

Elders that I knew and trusted always claimed the child abuse began when the govt took all their kids and sent them off to boarding schools 50 years back.

All priests are not child abusers but I also don't dismiss what the natives claim about where their child abuse problems began. Learned behavior that is passed down. The cycle got to stop somewhere.

7 posted on 10/12/2005 9:06:00 AM PDT by Eska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
Someday,we might start seeing an occasional headline that reads:"Unitarian/Universalist Minister (or Reform Rabbi) Charged In Child Molestations".

But then,probably not.Some "faiths" are so PC as to render their "clergy" as off limits to criticism.

8 posted on 10/12/2005 9:08:54 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eska

I was amazed at the number of Natives listed on the State sex offender database.

And how many lived in my neighborhood.

Booze is not a problem in Alaska, booze IS the problem in Alaska.


9 posted on 10/12/2005 10:47:56 AM PDT by ASOC (Insert clever tagline here: _______)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ASOC
Child sexual abuse isn't something genetic in Ak natives. Its just there has been so much dysfunction, alcoholism, and social problems in villages that seems to continue. When you have over half the adults having been abused as children themselves, you are going to have quite a few possible child abusers in the adult population. How do you lock up half of your relatives? Thats why it continues.

Children are destroyed emotionally by child abuse, for the rest of their lives. Boy, I saw some crazy sick situations in villages. The village leaders do what they can, but they are overwhelmed. Actually, when you get in a growing village (alot of kids), you'll find abuse in most of the families. Maybe a couple families (christian & leadership) protect their kids but thats about all.

Even as a regis repub, after living in a village; I came away with a complete different outlook and understanding on natives and the problems they face. I feel awful sorry for them and realize they have lost just about everything as a result of our government policy over the last 100 years.

Nowadays as a parent, you have to watch your kids close; no matter who you live around.

10 posted on 10/12/2005 11:45:49 AM PDT by Eska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Eska

Yup - it seems villages are a whole lot more disfucntional than others. I like to visit Dillingham, folks are froiendly and open. Forget Kotz...

I am fortunate enough to live in the largest Native village in the state, so that helps.


11 posted on 10/12/2005 3:34:55 PM PDT by ASOC (Insert clever tagline here: _______)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson