Monthly Archives: September 2012

How Child Molesters Get Away with It: Enablers Help Evade Detection

September 25, 2012

By TIM KOSNOFF

“In Plain View,” an article in the latest (Sept. 24, 2012) issue of The New Yorker Magazine, ostensibly is about the world’s current most infamous sexual abuser of children, Jerry Sandusky.

No doubt there are a 1,001 lessons being learned from this case. And we welcome the media spotlight on the social scourge that is child sexual abuse.
Malcolm Gladwell’s piece is pitch perfect because it so deftly gets at what we battle daily: How do child molesters get away with it? How do they escape detection, prosecution and often continue to abuse scores of victims over a lifetime? “In Plain View: How Child Molesters Get Away With It” describes much of what we see in our casework, with textbook accuracy.

Abusers get away, more often than not, because of enablers. Enablers are those who, for various reasons, simply can’t bring themselves to believe that pedophiles, suspected or accused or maybe even arrested-and-convicted, could have possibly done such things.

Gladwell recounts the case of a charismatic young Canadian grade-school P.E. teacher thought to have sexually molested boys. Despite suspicions of parents and evidence from victims, the teacher’s peers said they just couldn’t believe he was capable of such behavior. When the teacher threatened to sue parents of an alleged victim, the parents decided to drop their charges.

The Gladwell piece is accurate in its description of the typical modus operandi of a child molester — selecting possible victims, grooming them, etc.

But pedophiles also count on support from enablers: those who rise to their defense for no better reason than because observers believe it’s impossible for such people to commit the crimes. The Canadian teacher, after all, was an apparently happily married young man, as though that alone somehow was enough to eliminate him from suspicion and contradict the evidence presented by victims.

Or, just as bad, persons well-known in public enjoy reputations based on little more than their own accomplishments. Sandusky? Well, didn’t he make the exemplary effort to launch the charity Second Mile for the benefit of needy kids (never mind that the “selfless” gesture was in retrospect calculated precisely to provide him with easy access to young boys)? Wasn’t he, in fact, such a legendary good guy that Second Mile was cited in 1990 as recipient of a “Points of Light” plaudit from President George H.W. Bush?

When child-molesters have thus been honored in public, those who don’t know any better feel inclined to further deify them

The New Yorker article recalls a particularly ironic passage written by Bill Lyon of the Philadelphia Inquirer paying tribute to Sandusky’s apparent selflessness:

“In more than one motel hallway, whenever you encountered him and offered what sounded like even the vaguest sort of compliment, [Sandusky] would blush and an engaging, lopsided grin of modesty would wrap its way around his face. He isn’t in this business for recognition. His defense plays out in front of millions. But when he opens the door and invites in another stray, there is no audience. The ennobling measure of the man is that he has chosen the work that is done without public notice.”

Perhaps one makes particular note of Lyons’ unfortunate uses of the phrases “no audience,” “without public notice” and “invites in another stray.”

As to the notion of youthful victims giving “notice” to authorities about sex predators, we’ve seen the futility of such efforts. What’s particularly difficult for prosecutors or even attorneys representing victims in civil cases: taking the word of a minor over the word of an adult. Recently, we had a call from a prospective client from out of state whose child was abused in the restroom of a church during Sunday school by an adult who was supposed to be supervising the kids. The alleged abuser was an attorney. The case was taken to police but local prosecutors declined to prosecute.

So, what are we left with? We have the word of a minor against the word of an attorney (make that “Attorney” with a capital “A”) — that, and no criminal conviction. In this way, the pool of enablers extends beyond the disbelieving acquaintances and clueless, sycophantic reporters and award-givers. Enablers include the very public officials whose job it is to see to it society is protected from such sexual predators.

If someone you know needs help, you can contact us:

Our attorneys are highly experienced in childhood sexual abuse law and offer free initial consultations to potential clients. We are also willing to assist other attorneys in sexual abuse cases. Please call 206-257-3590, or email us directly. Conversations will be kept confidential, and even if you are unsure about a lawsuit, often we can direct you to the assistance you need. You will be treated with compassion and respect.

Toll free: 855-529-4274
Tim Kosnoff, direct: 425-837-9690
Dan Fasy, direct: 206-462-4338
Kosnoff Fasy, Seattle office: 206-257-3590

One Writer Asks: ‘Just How Flagrant Does a Pedophile Need to be Before the People Around Him Contact the Police?’

September 19, 2012

By TIM KOSNOFF

A great value of contemporary journalism and published commentary is that technology has made it easy for readers to offer instant responses. These modern-day letters to the editor often are as revealing as the writing that prompted them. A Sept. 10 New York Times op-ed piece, for example, by staff columnist Frank Bruni, is interesting not just for its substance but also for the readers’ reactions (there were about 150 at last glance).

Bruni cites a pair of high-profile cases of child sex predators. One, inevitably, is the infamous Jerry Sandusky.
Most of the column is about Missouri Catholic priest Rev. Shawn Ratigan, and a superior who, upon learning of Ratigan’s crimes, “acted no less despicably,” Bruni writes, than did Sandusky’s bosses at Penn State. At that institution, football easily won the day versus the concerns about ongoing criminal behavior Sandusky committed against kids.

As for Ratigan, Bruni asks rhetorically: “Just how flagrant does a pedophile need to be before the people around him contact the police?”

The columnist then recounts how, in 2010, a parochial-school principal notified the diocese in western Missouri about Ratigan’s strange behavior. It included making kids stick their hands in his pockets to retrieve pieces of candy. Later, “hundreds of troubling, furtively taken photographs were found on his laptop, according to court testimony given too long after that fact. One showed a toddler’s genitals.”

Was Ratigan arrested and jailed? Hardly, after a suicide attempt he was counseled, reassigned and deemed fit to say Mass for youth groups and even oversee an Easter-egg hunt attended by children. He later was caught trying to take an under-the-table photo up the skirt of the young daughter of his parishioner hosts.

It wasn’t until May of 2011 that an official from the diocese revealed knowledge of Ratigan’s child porn. Within the past month Ratigan was convicted, as was Bishop Robert W. Finn, the latter for failing to report what he knew.

The Finn conviction, Bruni notes, makes him “the first American bishop to be found criminally culpable for his inaction in the face of suspected child abuse.”

Bruni then writes that “I’m less interested in the grim milestone of Bishop Finn’s conviction than in the crucial lessons his story reiterates.”

He cites other once-revered institutions such as Penn State and the Boy Scouts of America, where officials notoriously labored “to protect their reputations or simply to avoid conflict” by failing to report sex crimes committed under their watch.

The Bruni piece, here again, generated many dozens of reader responses. One is worth noting if only because it suggests just how easily it can be for some to miss the point entirely about tacit approval of sex crimes by officials at revered institutions.

The unsigned comment apparently asks readers to place the Bruni column within the context of all the good that has been done by Catholic “communities of men and women who kept the cultures of the east and west alive in copied and recopied manuscripts through the dark ages.

“And communities of men and women who gave their very lives to protect children abandoned on streets and to take care of the sick that no one else would touch.

“And communities of men and women who unselfishly taught generations of young children regardless of their race, color or religion.

“And communities of men and women who sacrificed their lives on battlefields ministering to the wounded and the dead but never raising a hand or weapon in self defense.

“And communities of men and women who have fought injustice and gone to jail in acts of civil disobedience against discrimination and wholesale killing.

“And communities of men and women who go into danger zones of earthquakes, floods, civil war to bring aid to those in need regardless of race, color, politics or creed.”

Perhaps the author of the above somehow feels such honorable behavior means we needn’t be so harsh in dealing with the criminal minority within the institution. The irony is that we should deal with such crimes precisely because of the examples of better nature eloquently cited in the passage.

If someone you know needs help, you can contact us:

Our attorneys are highly experienced in childhood sexual abuse law and offer free initial consultations to potential clients. We are also willing to assist other attorneys in sexual abuse cases. Please call 206-257-3590, or email us directly. Conversations will be kept confidential, and even if you are unsure about a lawsuit, often we can direct you to the assistance you need. You will be treated with compassion and respect.

Toll free: 855-529-4274
Tim Kosnoff, direct: 425-837-9690
Dan Fasy, direct: 206-462-4338
Kosnoff Fasy, Seattle office: 206-257-3590

Catholic Officials Finagle Church Finances to Seem Poorer for Court Settlements, Investigation Finds

September 11, 2012

By TIM KOSNOFF

Decades of childhood sexual abuse by Catholic clergy is a grim reality for untold thousands of victims and a source of disgust for non-victims. It would be difficult to find anyone unaware of these cases and the resulting media coverage.

But another kind of malfeasance by Catholic church officials is less well known. It’s the topic of an investigation by the highly regarded periodical The Economist. In a recent issue of the London-based magazine (paper and online), the reporting is largely concerned with the ways Catholic officials have finagled church finances in order to seem poorer when court settlements are at hand.
The authors observe: “The sins involved in Catholic Church book-keeping are not as vivid or grotesque as those on display in the various sexual-abuse cases that have cost the American church more than $3 billion so far; but the financial mismanagement and questionable business practices would have seen widespread resignations at the top of any other public institution.”

The article is titled “The Catholic Church in America: Earthly Concerns,”

The piece indicates that church officials seemingly at every echelon are either incompetent or manipulative when it comes to raising and spending money from public and private sources. This has become an obvious strain on the institution as officials deal with the need to pay out an estimated $1 million per abuse settlement — a total of $3.3 billion during the past 15 years, with more than a third of it paid in California alone.

But matters could get worse for a church that may count a third of the U.S. population as members or former members.

“The [$3.3 billion] total is likely to increase as more states follow California and Delaware in relaxing the statute of limitations on these crimes, most of which were reported long after they happened,” according to the article. “For an organization with revenues of $170 billion that might seem manageable. But settlements are made by individual dioceses and religious orders, whose pockets are less deep than those of the church as a whole.”

The piece cites my colleague, Jeff Anderson, an attorney who represents abuse victims, as asserting that legislatures in 10 states (Arizona, Illinois, New York, Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Ohio and California) are trying to extend statutes of limitation regarding such crimes.

The article continues: “If any of these efforts succeeds, the expectation . . . is that some of the affected dioceses would seek Chapter 11 protection while they attempt to settle the cases. (Troubled dioceses generally settle suits just before the bishop is due in court.) The diocese of Honolulu could be the next to go bankrupt. In May it was hit by a pair of new lawsuits after the extension of Hawaii’s statute of limitations for victims of abuse.”

No less an eminence than New York’s Timothy Dolan, elevated to Cardinal last January, is said to be spending “substantial” amounts of money lobbying members of his state’s assembly to keep the current statute of limitations in place.

Reporters for The Economist seem to have done exhaustive work poring over public records and other documents in an effort to tally up church losses. Investigators claim the massive settlement payouts now have brought the church, despite its enormous wealth, to the edge of a liquidity crisis. The belief is that such a crisis could cause the church to seek “publicly raised debt” to cover settlement costs. Obviously the vast sums demanded by juries can’t be covered by the $10 a week the average parishioner is said to drop into the offering basket at weekly Mass.

Nor, one can be fairly certain, would the church’s apparent financial woes earn the institution much sympathy, not among those who have been sickened by ceaseless reports of sexual crimes and certainly not among the many victims and their loved ones.

If someone you know needs help, you can contact us:

Our attorneys are highly experienced in childhood sexual abuse law and offer free initial consultations to potential clients. We are also willing to assist other attorneys in sexual abuse cases. Please call 206-257-3590, or email us directly. Conversations will be kept confidential, and even if you are unsure about a lawsuit, often we can direct you to the assistance you need. You will be treated with compassion and respect.

Toll free: 855-529-4274
Tim Kosnoff, direct: 425-837-9690
Dan Fasy, direct: 206-462-4338
Kosnoff Fasy, Seattle office: 206-257-3590