Lawsuit against Vatican abandoned....

And with good reason. The case lacked any merit. An Associated Press article by Dylan Lovan is reporting that: "Three men who sought to hold the Vatican liable in an American court for sexual abuses by Roman Catholic priests in a Kentucky diocese are abandoning the case.

Lawyers looked to question Pope Benedict XVI under oath but had to leap the high legal hurdle of the Vatican's sovereign immunity status in the U.S. But plaintiffs filed a motion on Monday asking a federal judge in Louisville to dismiss their claims.

Their attorney, William McMurry, said he was seeking to end the case because of an earlier court ruling that recognized the Vatican's immunity and failure to turn up new plaintiffs to add to the lawsuit who haven't yet been involved in a Catholic clergy abuse case.

'Virtually every child who was abused and will come forward as an adult has come forward and sued a bishop and collected money, and once that happens, it's over,' McMurry told The Associated Press. McMurry represented more than 240 abuse victims who settled with the Louisville Catholic archdiocese for $25 million in 2003.

The lawsuit was considered the first in the U.S. to make it to the stage of determining whether victims had a negligence claim against the Vatican, which argued the plaintiffs never showed a connection between Rome and the American clergy abuse scandal.

Filed in 2004 by the three men abused by priests in the Louisville diocese, it argues in part that U.S. bishops should be considered employees or officials of the Holy See.

The case was being closely watched as the clerical abuse scandal swirls around the Holy See. Lawsuits naming top Vatican officials were also filed recently in Wisconsin and another one in Oregon. Both are making their way through the federal courts and it wasn't immediately clear if dropping the Louisville lawsuit would affect them.

An attorney for the Vatican, which is referred to in the lawsuit as the Holy See, said the Kentucky lawsuit lacked merit.

'This development confirms that, contrary to what the plaintiffs' lawyers repeatedly told the media, there has never been a Holy See policy requiring concealment of child sexual abuse,' attorney Jeffrey Lena said in a statement. 'The theory crafted by the plaintiffs' lawyers six years ago misled the American public.'

'That the case against the Holy See always lacked merit does not mean that the plaintiffs themselves did not suffer as a result of sexual abuse,' Lena said. 'But bringing this case only distracted from the important goal of protecting children from harm.'

The judge must still rule on whether the case can be dismissed, but attorneys on both sides say it has virtually ended.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from the Holy See in the Oregon lawsuit that was filed in 2002 by a Seattle-area man who said a priest molested him in the late 1960s. Attorneys there are also arguing that priests are Vatican employees for the purpose of American law.

The Wisconsin lawsuit claims top leaders at the Vatican knew about allegations of sexual abuse at St. John's School for the Deaf outside Milwaukee and called off internal punishment of the accused priest, the Rev. Lawrence Murphy.

McMurry wrote in the Kentucky dismissal motion that an earlier court ruling that recognized the Vatican's immunity allowed the plaintiffs to proceed on the narrow argument that U.S. bishops are officials or employees of the Holy See.

McMurry said because of the court's determination, 'the grant of jurisdiction was so narrow that it's meaningless.'

The Vatican has argued that its U.S. bishops act independently, control their own budgets and are not employees of the Holy See.

McMurry said one of the plaintiffs, Michael J. Turner, was involved in the 2003 settlement against the Louisville archdiocese, which voided his ability to seek a claim from the Vatican. Two other plaintiffs, James O'Bryan and Donald Poppe, alleged abuses that occurred several decades ago.

'In both cases the bishops in question are deceased and further discovery regarding the bishops' actions is believed to be impossible,' the motion said.

McMurry said a months-long search for new victims who haven't settled in a clergy abuse case failed to find any willing to come forward.

'No one who has not sued a bishop is in a position to help us despite our best efforts over the past several months," McMurry said.'"

Readers of this Blog will recall my posts some five years ago regarding the attempt to paint the Catholic Church as a "criminal organization" engaged in coverup of child sexual abuse. See here and here. Leading the charge back then was attorney Daniel Shea, who asserted in an email written to me that the Church, "..is a criminal institution and those who contribute to it any longer are aiding and abetting this criminal conduct called obstruction of justice."

Once again that accusation has been shown to have no merit. It's time to move on.

Another myth exposed.

An unholy agenda resurfaces....

"You seem to be blinded by the ability of Ratzinger and Co. to engage in an international conspiracy to obstruct justice..." (Attorney Daniel Shea in a 2003 email written to me).

Vatican City, March 25, 2010 (Zenit.org).

The following is the full text of the statement given to the New York Times on Wednesday by Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the director of the Vatican press office.


The tragic case of Father Lawrence Murphy, a priest of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, involved particularly vulnerable victims who suffered terribly from what he did. By sexually abusing children who were hearing-impaired, Father Murphy violated the law and, more importantly, the sacred trust that his victims had placed in him.

During the mid-1970s, some of Father Murphy's victims reported his abuse to civil authorities, who investigated him at that time; however, according to news reports, that investigation was dropped. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was not informed of the matter until some twenty years later.

It has been suggested that a relationship exists between the application of Crimen sollicitationis and the non-reporting of child abuse to civil authorities in this case. In fact, there is no such relationship. Indeed, contrary to some statements that have circulated in the press, neither Crimen nor the Code of Canon Law ever prohibited the reporting of child abuse to law enforcement authorities.*

In the late 1990s, after over two decades had passed since the abuse had been reported to diocesan officials and the police, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was presented for the first time with the question of how to treat the Murphy case canonically. The Congregation was informed of the matter because it involved solicitation in the confessional, which is a violation of the Sacrament of Penance. It is important to note that the canonical question presented to the Congregation was unrelated to any potential civil or criminal proceedings against Father Murphy.

In such cases, the Code of Canon Law does not envision automatic penalties, but recommends that a judgment be made not excluding even the greatest ecclesiastical penalty of dismissal from the clerical state (cf. Canon 1395, no. 2). In light of the facts that Father Murphy was elderly and in very poor health, and that he was living in seclusion and no allegations of abuse had been reported in over 20 years, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith suggested that the Archbishop of Milwaukee give consideration to addressing the situation by, for example, restricting Father Murphy's public ministry and requiring that Father Murphy accept full responsibility for the gravity of his acts. Father Murphy died approximately four months later, without further incident.


* Readers of this Blog know that I addressed this fact years ago here at La Salette Journey. See this post and this one.