Archive for Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Vatican offers 3 reasons it’s not liable for abuse

March 31, 2010


— Dragged deeper than ever into the clerical sex abuse scandal, the Vatican is launching a legal defense it hopes will shield the pope from a lawsuit in Kentucky seeking to have him answer attorneys’ questions under oath.

Court documents obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press show that Vatican lawyers plan to argue that the pope has immunity as head of state, that American bishops who oversaw abusive priests weren’t employees of the Vatican, and that a 1962 document is not the “smoking gun” that provides proof of a cover-up.

The Holy See is trying to fend off the first U.S. case to reach the stage of determining whether victims actually have a claim against the Vatican itself for negligence for allegedly failing to alert police or the public about Roman Catholic priests who molested children.

The case was filed in 2004 in Kentucky by three men who claim they were abused by priests and claim negligence by the Vatican. Their attorney, William McMurry, is seeking class-action status for the case, saying there are thousands of victims across the country.

“This case is the only case that has been ever been filed against the Vatican which has as its sole objective to hold the Vatican accountable for all the priest sex abuse ever committed in this country,” he said in a phone interview. “There is no other defendant. There’s no bishop, no priest.”

The Vatican is seeking to dismiss the suit before Benedict XVI can be questioned or documents subpoenaed.

The preview of the legal defense was submitted last month in U.S. District Court in Louisville. The Vatican’s strategy is to be formally filed in the coming weeks. Vatican officials declined to comment on Tuesday.

Plaintiffs in the Kentucky suit argue that U.S. diocesan bishops were employees of the Holy See, and that Rome was therefore responsible for their alleged wrongdoing in failing to report abuse.

They say a 1962 Vatican document mandated that bishops not report sex abuse cases to police. The Vatican has argued that there is nothing in the document that precluded bishops from calling police.

With the U.S. scandal reinvigorated by reports of abuse in Europe and scrutiny of Benedict’s handling of abuse cases when he was archbishop of Munich, the Kentucky case and another in Oregon have taken on greater significance. Lawyers as far away as Australia have said they plan to use similar strategies.

At the same time, though, the hurdles remain enormously high to force a foreign government to turn over confidential documents, let alone to subject a head of state to questioning by U.S. lawyers, experts say.

The United States considers the Vatican a sovereign state — the two have had diplomatic relations since 1984. In 2007, U.S. District Court Judge John Heyburn rejected an initial request by the plaintiffs to depose Benedict.

“They will not be able to depose the pope,” said Joseph Dellapenna, a professor at Villanova University Law School and author of “Suing Foreign Governments and their Corporations.”

“But lower level officials could very well be deposed and there could be subpoenas for documents as part of discovery,” he said.

McMurry last week filed a new court motion seeking to depose the pope; Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, currently Vatican secretary of state but for years the pope’s deputy at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; Cardinal William Levada, an American who currently heads the Congregation; and Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the Vatican’s representative in the U.S.


anon1958 8 years, 2 months ago

"The United States considers the Vatican a sovereign state".

Herein lies a huge problem that can be cured politically. Every American that loves children and hates sexual predators that prefer to eat children should demand that their elected representatives overturn and reject the aforementioned treaty. There can be little doubt that the pedophiles in the Catholic church have raped more of our children than Al Queda has murdered. Of course on must factor in the circumstance that the children were raped repeatedly and Al Queda can only kill you once.

Now suppose some small country in South or Central America ran a decades long pedophile protection racket and that knowledge became public. How long do you think it would be before we sent in some covert operatives to clean the place up. We sent the army into Panama after Noriega because he was a drug dealer. Why dont we send the army in to the Vatican City to extract a few American high level Catholic pedophile protectors.

The Irish have a huge beef over the criminal mistreatment of their orphans, why dont we take a page from Ronald McDonald Regan's playbook, team up with some violent extremists and send the IRA into the Vatican City for some payback. Regan did guns for money, surely his avid admirers wont criticize Obama for some "guns for kids".

Personally I am hoping some huge oil reserves will be discovered deep below the Vatican City, then we can go in and give the place the same kind of treatment we gave Iraq.

anon1958 8 years, 2 months ago

dang, meant to say Regan did "drugs for guns"..... oh well lol same thing for the most part.

feeble 8 years, 2 months ago

"Every American that loves children and hates sexual predators that prefer to eat children should demand that their elected representatives overturn and reject the aforementioned treaty."

What about the predators who aren't cannibals, can we hate them too?

I think the Vatican should elevate a new Pope, so we can get some hawt, liturgical Pope on Anti-Pope action.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.