 |
Bad in Boston Rule of Law: Deny, Deny, DenyBy Rick Horowitz
Now the last thing you want to do, in a matter of such delicacy, such sensitivity, is overreact. What's called for at moments like these is understanding, not inflammatory rhetoric. Getting angry will only make the situation worse, don't you agree? Of course you do. I'm so glad we've had this conversation. So: Shall we start the bidding with "Sickening"? "Horrendous"? "Disgusting"? "Outrageous"? We're talking Boston. We're talking pedophile priests. And we're talking, most of all, about the man at the top: Cardinal Bernard F. Law. Cardinal Law has been resorting to the law lately, and the results haven't been pretty. If only his name were "Heart"... We pause here to insert the requisite disclaimers: The vast majority of priests, in Boston and elsewhere, have done nothing wrong. Mistreatment of children by those in positions of trust isn't limited to one religion, or to one profession. Allegations are not the same as facts. Now back to our regularly scheduled rant. Can you believe this guy?! He's blaming the victim! Just when you think that the cardinal couldn't possibly appear less sympathetic, just when you think that his incredibly tin ear couldn't possibly look any tinnier, there's his response to one of the multitude of lawsuits being filed against him. This one came from Gregory Ford, now 24 years old, and Ford's parents, alleging that the Rev. Paul R. Shanley, then a Boston-area priest, abused Gregory from 1983 to 1989, starting when the child was only 6. The Rev. Shanley, as it happens, is a longtime advocate of sexual relations between men and boys. The Rev. Shanley, it appears, even spoke in favor of such behavior at a 1979 meeting that reportedly led to the formation of a curious little coterie called the North American Man-Boy Love Association. None of which -- nor the allegations of molesting teenage boys back in 1966 -- would likely have been known to You the Parishioner. All of which, though, was hidden away in archdiocesan records, some of them decades old. Records of which Cardinal Law and his predecessor were apparently aware. Records which the Fords' lawsuit finally pried loose and made public. Oops. Meanwhile, the Boston Globe has gotten hold of the document -- six pages, filed in Middlesex Superior Court in April -- that was the cardinal's first legal response to the Fords' lawsuit. Worse than oops. "The defendant says that the Plaintiffs were not in the exercise of due care, but rather the negligence of the Plaintiffs contributed to cause the injury or damage complained of..." And for that matter, any damages ultimately assessed against the cardinal "should be reduced in proportion to the said negligence of the Plaintiffs..." How's that again? "The negligence of the Plaintiffs" -- the parents, the boy -- "contributed to cause the injury or damage complained of"? Why? Because they were foolish enough to believe that Gregory would be in good hands, not groping hands, when they entrusted him to the care of a priest? That's negligence!? What nerve! What utter -- We agreed we'd stay calm, didn't we? Yes, we did. OK then. "The negligence of the Plaintiffs" is only one of several defenses the cardinal's attorney is presenting, the Globe reports. And the language, some experts are saying, is boilerplate; lawyers always defend against a lawsuit by arguing that the plaintiffs bear some of the blame. In fact, the Globe says, the cardinal's attorney offered the very same argument -- though few people noticed -- responding to earlier lawsuits alleging multiple molestations by the infamous John J. Geoghan, another priest supposedly under the cardinal's stellar supervision. Well, as long as it's just boilerplate... Do you feel better about it now? Do you think that the victims, and their parents, and the rest of Boston's Catholics feel better about it now? Or do they feel betrayed yet again? Call it the sin of Strategy. Posted 4/30/02. Get
award-winning commentary from syndicated columnist Rick Horowitz twice
every week.
|
  |
Rick Horowitz
