Catholic Sex Abuse Hearing Descends Into `Shut Up' Order and Charge of 'Abomination'

Courthouse News Service ^ | March 25, 2011 | Reuben Kramer

[Dr. Eckleburg]

At an intensely combative and vitriolic hearing Friday afternoon in a sex-abuse case that has shaken the Philadelphia Archdiocese to its core, a state court judge shocked one priest's defense attorney by disclosing that the government thinks he might be a witness as a former seminarian and could be disqualified from the case. The lawyer, who represents one of three current and former Roman Catholic priests charged with raping boys in their parish, fired back that prosecutors were being "anti-Catholic" and had uttered an "abomination."

Judge Renee Cardwell Hughes told defense attorney Richard DeSipio that she's received information that "might make you, in fact, a witness because of events that occurred while you were a seminarian."

The information "stems from the fact that you attended the seminary with a student who asserts he was abused," Hughes said, adding that DeSipio "may possess factual knowledge about abuse that occurred with that student."

She added that the substance of the claim that DiSipio witnessed something is still unclear. "I just don't know if it's true," Hughes said. "I really don't know if it's true."

Yelling and visibly upset, DeSipio demanded that the government, then and there, identify the source of the allegation. "Let them spill it out right now!" DeSipio demanded.

"How dare they send you a letter about that," DeSipio said, referring to the district attorney's office. "That's an abomination."

Prosecutors said only that part of DeSipio's seminary training overlapped with the tenure of a senior clergyman accused of endangering children by failing to protect them from priests with a known history of abuse.

Monsignor William Lynn, now pastor of St. Joseph Church in Downingtown, Pa., is reportedly the highest-ranking member of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States ever to be charged with child endangerment. Between 1984 and 1992, he served as dean of men at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Wynnewood, Pa., according to his biography on St. Joseph's website. As the secretary for clergy for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia from 1992 to 2004, Lynn acted as personnel director for priests. He is accused of ignoring reports of abuse, covering up for them and putting children in danger.

"They are anti-Catholic. I'll say it," DiSipio fumed. "[The district attorney is] attacking me as a Catholic!"

The judge rejected DiSipio's claim. "Attack you? You attacked me! You don't even know me!" Hughes said, referring to a prior argument over the necessity of a preliminary hearing, another hotly contested issue Friday afternoon.

"Mr. DeSipio, I suggest you shut up," Hughes said. "People are coming from out of the woodwork [to provide information to the commonwealth.]"

If the government can prove the allegation is credible in 30 days, DeSipio will be disqualified as the archdiocese's attorney.

"You can change lawyers now, you can change lawyers in 30," the judge warned DeSipio's client, the Rev. James Brennan. "[But] there are some conflicts that are not waivable."

DeSipio argued that the 30-day investigation was "really unfair to Father Brennan," given his mounting legal costs.

Judge Hughes was livid that DeSipio spoke up again. "If you open your mouth one more time I am going to have the sheriff take you out of here," she told DeSipio.

As DeSipio continued to argue, Hughes said she might have him "locked up and held in contempt." Instead she issued a gag order, responding to what she observed as attorneys having "gone to the airways to advocate."

"No more interviews with anyone," the judge ruled.

"Does that include the DA going on Chris Matthews' 'Hardball' and going to the New York Times," defense attorney Michael McGovern asked.

The judge responded affirmatively: "I don't want tweets. I don't want Facebook. I don't want IMs [instant messages]."

Hughes said the court will revisit the gag order on April 15, when defendants are to be arraigned. That date also marks the deadline for the DA to provide the defense with the first batch of discovery, she said.

All but one of the defense attorneys challenged the government's amendment to its case, which added a conspiracy charge that had not explicitly been requested of the grand jury.

"The issue here is that if the DA seeks to amend, it has to be subject to some sort of prima facie determination," the defense argued.

The judge found otherwise, ruling that the commonwealth established "good cause" in its pleadings and that "there is no constitutional right - federal or state - for a preliminary hearing."

It was "a technical error on the commonwealth not to charge conspiracy" originally, Hughes said. "Conspiracy is made," and the defendants will not be afforded a preliminary hearing, she ruled.

Hughes said there was abundant evidence to support the amendment.

"I'm the only person, besides the prosecutors, who has seen every stitch of evidence," she said.

Defense attorney McGovern argued that her admission was precisely the problem.

"Your Honor, this is patently unfair!" McGovern said. "You know the evidence. They know the evidence. I don't know what the evidence is! I haven't seen any!"

The attorney said proceeding to trial without a preliminary hearing was like saying, "Let's have a dart game in a dark room."

"What kind of country is this where we have this?" he shouted.

The judge yelled back, baring her teeth: "You sit down! Sit, sit, sit!"

DeSipio agreed with McGovern that their clients deserve a preliminary hearing, which could allow them to confront their accusers.

"There's no witness. I know that they [the prosecutors] don't like that he's in jail," DeSipio said. "This accuser says there was an erect penis in his buttocks."

"Was it in your buttocks, or was it in your anus," he asked rhetorically. "If that question wasn't asked [of the grand jury], and he didn't specify anus or butt cheeks, I have a right to ask that."

"What you can't do, and what I submit they're trying to do, is say just because we have a grand jury, we have good cause [to by-pass a preliminary hearing]," DeSipio said.

The judge also addressed a potential conflict of interest concerning Monsignor Lynn, who unlike the three current and former priests, faces child endangerment charges - not rape or sexual assault. Plans for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia to pay Lynn's legal costs present "a whole array of conflicts that I can't even imagine at this point in time," Hughes said.

"It's real simple," the judge said to Lynn, who was donning his clerical collar, "your master is the person that's putting bread on the table."

"It may be in your best interest to put forth a defense that attacks other people [or the church]," Hughes said.

She told Lynn he was putting himself in the position of receiving "advice from people who are being paid by people whose interests don't necessarily align with yours."

The stakes of this gamble could amount to "14 years of incarceration versus probation," she said.

Lynn, in a calm voice, declined. "Well, I trust these two men." he said, adding that the church hadn't placed any conditions on the payment of his legal costs.

Hughes was incredulous. "You are making a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision to place yourself in conflict with your attorneys?" she asked.

"I am," Lynn responded, waiving his right to any future appeal based on the argument that his attorneys had a conflict of interest.

"Then we're moving forward," the judge said.

After arraignments and release of the first batch of discovery, which will include grand jury notes and testimony, on April 15, the government will begin putting together a second batch. The government said that batch would take longer to produce, as it will include roughly 10,000 pages of documentation, much of which will need to be redacted.

Hughes said the government must give the defense a specific timeline for the production of the second batch. "There has to be some finality," she said.

In January, a grand jury returned an indictment for rape and sexual assault against one current priest, one defrocked priest and one man who taught at a Catholic school. Monsignor Lynn, the third cleric who worked for the archdiocese as secretary of clergy, is accused of giving known abusers easy access to minors.

[WPaCon]

“Do you think that a Catholic President would appoint a Protestant SCOTUS?”

John F. Kennedy appointed Byron White.

[smvoice]

Having trouble getting to it? That’s because you can’t get there from Rome. And the Magisterium telling you it’s ok to go there.

[count-your-change]

Yes. I rather thought his childish behavior was a contrived act but even so as a judge I might’ve tossed him in jail until he gave an abject and acceptable apology.

The circus should be fun to watch.

[metmom]

The Vatican does not own the definition of the word *heresy*.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heresy

her·e·sy

1 a : adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma
1 b : denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church

1 c : an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma

2 a : dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice

2 b : an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards

If the RCC wants to declare people who deny their teachings as heretics against the Catholic church, then that’s their prerogative. However, they are in no position to declare them to be heretics against Christianity as a whole.

[smvoice]

Yes, he did. And White was considered the most conservative member of the Court at that time.

This is very interesting. I would like to read more about him, and Kennedy's choice of him for SCOTUS.

[WPaCon]

“That’s because you can’t get there from Rome.”

That’s odd that you can’t access a website from a particular city. It’s also odd that you assumed I’m in Rome when my “about” page has a Pennsylvania flag. If you’re admitting that the Catholic Church doesn’t change, then I understand.

“And the Magisterium telling you it’s ok to go there.”

To be honest, you’re post is incoherent.

However, if we are to talk about religions changing, how many Protestant churches opposed contraception before 1930 and how many do now? I think you’ll see lots of changing to be like the world.

[MarkBsnr]

The Stations of the White Hanky:

Ah, the good old Pentecostal Prayer Pimps and their hankies. I was wondering when in Lent you'd bring up our favourite Pentecostal Prayer Scam Artists and blame them on the Catholic Church. Let's stroll down Pentecostal Memory Lane, shall we?

I would have posted pictures of Diana's Divine Lap Hankies from the Prophetess Lougenia J. Rucker, Divine Diamonds Ministries - Visonary/Founder; but I was laughing too hard.

I think that you missed your calling, Quix, old son. Instead of being on the business end of the couch, you should have been shilling white Pentecostal hankies to the rubes in tents. You keep bringing up hankies on thread after thread after thread; I think that you and your bank account would agree with me.

[WPaCon]

Thank you for proving my point that heresy can mean anything contrary to the Catholic Church.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

You can't excuse the city government and the local prosecutors for what they tried to do to the Boy Scouts by pointing to what they see to be doing to the RCCC now.

Please show me where I excused Philadelphia for its handling of the Boy Scouts.

These two acts must be reconciled.

Sorry. That is ridiculous.

[metmom]

The lawyer clearly criticized the judge for attempting to blackmail him into leaving the case (does she fear him winning the case?)

Wow. You know that she was attempting to blackmail him into leaving the case?

How do you know that? Did she tell you? Can you read minds? Are you just guessing?

Are you sure she wasn't warning him of what could be coming so he would be prepared and could make contingency plans? Seems to me that she did him a favor by letting him know so he wasn't blind-sided later by it. That way it would give him time to think it through and decide what would be best for the defense to do about the situation. If he's subpoenaed as a witness, he can't refuse.

His reaction was totally uncalled for

Whether or not he admitted to being a child molester or other kind of tutti-fruitti is a different issue, and should be referred to a trial, not a judge to counsel discussion in a hearing on an entirely different matter.

Who said anything about the defense lawyer being accused of being a child molester?

Did you actually READ the article? REALLY read it?

You begin to see why these guys get off so easy ~ too many judges not interested in running a regular trial from beginning to end. Going after their lawyer is mickey mouse stuff. If he needs gotten he can be gotten at another time.

When? During the trial so a mistrial can be declared? You do know that the trial hasn't started yet, don't you? How can she be *running a trial* that doesn't exist yet?

[Ransomed]

Only because the albino monk assassins were intercepted by Episcopalian commandos and couldn’t deliver the orders from the Vatican supercomputer to nominate bishop Fulton Sheen in time...(kidding of course)

Freegards

[WPaCon]

LOL

[MarkBsnr]

It is, to me, interesting that a Protestant President would put aside his religion for the politics of his country.

And not just the President - the Senate must approve. How many Catholics were put on the bench with a hostile Senate?

Do you think that a Catholic President would appoint a Protestant SCOTUS? Just an interesting point of conversation, IMO :)

It certainly is possible. John Kennedy named Byron White who was Episcopalian and Arthur Goldberg, Jewish. But now? The last number of appointments have all been Catholic or Jewish. I'm sure that the conspiracy theorists here could make some hay on the antiChrist and One World Order cabalists and UFO slavemasters sluicing people into trenches so that they can feed on them, from this obvious Bilderberger plot against Christianity.

[metmom]

If the guy is a witness to a crime about to be tried in her court she needs to say so and be prepared to prove it ~ in a different trial.

READ THE ARTICLE!!!!

She doesn't KNOW if he's a witness yet. How can she *prove* something that she doesn't know for sure? She was just letting him know that she knew of correspondence that indicated that he MIGHT be called as a witness.

And just what do you think would have happened if she had not mentioned this now and it came out later that she knew then and didn't say anything. All heck would have broken loose for her not revealing it.

She's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.

[MarkBsnr]

I don't know of ANY “raving anti-[Roman] Catholics” on FR.

Try some of these on your mirror:

[metmom]

Not only are Catholics humor challenged and sarcasm challenged, they are tongue-in-cheek challenged.

Lighten up.....

[Dr. Eckleburg]

What you'll find in statistics is that you usually need more than one sample cell

How about this? 524 claims settled for $166 million dollars...

JESUIT PRIESTS, SEX ABUSE VICTIMS ANNOUNCE SETTLEMENT

A clergy organization representing Jesuit priests in Western states has reached a $166.1 million agreement to settle approximately 524 claims of clergy sex abuse. The settlement is one of the largest in U.S. history relating to the Roman Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal...

Of course that settlement is dwarfed by the 2007 settlement by the Los Angeles archdiocese of $700 million being paid out to hundreds of victims of pederast priests in one diocese in one city.

The RCC is just a larger target.

A target of what?

[metmom]

The defense team's lapse in ethics is that profound.

Birds of a feather....

[Ransomed]

Secret Vatican Code follows:

Ont’day ivegay allay ouray ecretsay outay. Oray binoalbay onksmay illway aypay youay aya isitvay...

Eegardsfray

[metmom]

The defense team's lapse in ethics is that profound.

Birds of a feather....