Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CT: Catholic diocese charged under RICO for predator priest coverup

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:49 PM
Original message
CT: Catholic diocese charged under RICO for predator priest coverup
The lawsuit says the Norwich Diocese, its former bishop, Daniel Reilly, and its current vicar general, the Rev. Thomas McBride, should be held accountable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act - more commonly known as RICO - for conspiring to cover up the criminal conduct of abusive priests.
The complaint was brought by a Connecticut woman, identified only as "Jane Doe," who alleges that she was molested by the Rev. Thomas W. Shea, now deceased, in 1976. Shea has been accused of sexually abusing at least 16 girls in the 11 parishes he served in the Norwich Diocese.

According to published reports and the current lawsuit, Shea was transferred numerous times from the time of the first complaints, in the 1950s, until he was placed on leave by Reilly in 1983. Reilly, who retired as bishop of the Worcester, Mass., diocese in 2004, was bishop of the Norwich Diocese from 1975 to 1994.

In addition to citing the details of Shea's history, the lawsuit gives examples of five other cases involving priests who have been the subject of abuse accusations, including the Revs. Bruno Primavera, Robert Marcantonio, Peter Inzerillo, Richard Buongirno and Bernard Bissonnette. In all of the cases cited, according to the lawsuit, the priests were transferred to new parishes after sexual abuse complaints were made against them, at which point they abused again.

...The lawsuit accuses the defendants of "intentionally, recklessly and/or negligently" concealing the criminal conduct of certain priests, failing to report criminal conduct, obstructing justice, evading criminal investigation, prosecution and liability, bribing victims to keep criminal conduct secret and engaging in mail and/or wire fraud, among other things.

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=139E36AE8B9ECF031637332C5AA12733?diaryId=8883

RICO is one way to go. It sure traps a lot of other people. Michael Vick was looking at possible RICO charges.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. Finally. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. took the blessing out of my mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. There are times RICO has some benefits. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. It's about time. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-09 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. tis a criminal organization, that avoids the laws of
every state in which it operates. So what if they have a make-believe collection of scary fairy tales? that matters not.

organized crime? - RICO is precisely the right response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. Can't be easy for these victims . . . but good this is going forward --- !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
7. as a former Catholic, it has always struck me as more than ironic . . .
that the Catholic Church, the bastion of sex-negative dogma for centuries, is having to pay billions of dollars to victims of sexual abuse by members of their clergy . . . all of the good fathers who were telling us "don't do that" were, in fact, "doing that" on a regular basis -- and generally to the most vulnerable members of their flocks . . .

I guess there's a lesson here somewhere -- though "practice what you preach" just seems so trite . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-09 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Good for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC