Guam passed a law, lifting the Statutes of Limitations in 2016. It has only been two years, and already almost 200 alleged victims have come forward. The latest one to come forward is a woman who claimed that Father Jack Niland exposed himself to her when she was 10 years old. The woman is suing the Archdiocese for 5 million dollars. According to the Guam Daily Post:
Regarding her story, this is my response: Where were her parents? Her parents left their 10 year old child on the beach alone without supervision? What made these parents think that it was okay to leave their 10 year old child on a beach and not think that their child would not get into the water and drown?In 1976, when she was 10, J.E.L. recalled playing in the sand at her family's beach when Niland parked his car and walked up to her and introduced himself as Father Jack. The girl was scared because he was a stranger but answered his questions because she was raised to be obedient to priests, court documents state.The lawsuit states Niland asked the minor if she wanted to see his "gun" and performed a sex act. Niland allegedly told her he'd be seeing her at Eskuelen Pale Sunday School and left.J.E.L. alleges the incident affected her attendance at the school as she walked around in fear and had anxieties about seeing Niland. She was frightened when she saw him, the lawsuit states.
Pennsylvania is considering lifting the Statutes of Limitations so that the Churches in Pennsylvania can be sued for millions of dollars. Well, we are already seeing that Boston is STILL paying for those millions of dollars even after 15 years and even after the settlement was supposed to be already settled out of court.
The same thing will happen to Guam. The latest lawsuit against the Archdiocese is by J.E.L on August, 2018. Next year, there will be more lawsuits. And we will see the same thing the following year even after the settlements are paid off. After the first settlement is paid off, many more will come making allegations of sexual abuse, rape, and molestation. Like Boston, the Archdiocese of Agana will continue to be in "out of court settlements" for many years to come.
Many people are already suspecting that these allegations are false, and simply want money from the Church. Even J.E.L.'s story is questionable to some people because it is unheard of to see very young children alone by themselves on a beach without family members around. Even the 6 year old boy who almost drowned at the beach was not left alone. See the story here. So, why was this 10 year old girl left alone on a beach where no one was able to even see Father Jack Niland exposing himself to her?
Furthermore, the lawyers of these alleged victims are even asking for the transfer of the deeds of properties. According to the Pacific Daily News (the bold is mine):
Clergy sex abuse accusers are supposed to be paid by the defendants "no later than the close of business on the 90th day" after the memorandum of settlement's execution.
Payments include the transfer of the deed of any property that the parties agreed to in the settlement.
In the United States, properties were sold and the money was used to pay the victims of sex abuse. But in Guam, they are asking for the TRANSFER of the deed of properties? How did this agreement come about, and which of the lawyers made this agreement? Who is the Archdiocese going to transfer the deed of property to? Is the deed going to be transferred to the alleged victims or to a lawyer of the alleged victims? Is the Archdiocese going to transfer the deed of property to the alleged victims and it would be up to the alleged victims to fight over which portion they want? Or perhaps, the Archdiocese is going to transfer the deed to a lawyer, and the lawyer will decide who gets what portion? Bear in mind, however, that the real winners of these sex abuse allegations are always the lawyers. They also get a portion of the payment.
Where is CCOG and LFM? They got together to destroy the church. Let's see them get together to save the church since they started this mess.
ReplyDeleteYes, amazing! CCOG and LFM's silence is deafening! Just goes to show that their only purpose was to get rid of Archbishop Apuron and close the seminary.
DeleteThey want the transfer of property? Oh Gee I wonder what property that would be? Hmmmm.
ReplyDeleteCatholic school enrollment this school year has really dropped compared to last year. St Francis School and San Vicente School enrollment is low. Will these schools be closed and be put up for sale next?
DeleteChancery property is for sale. Why? Heard that Bishop Byrnes may be leaving. Maybe it doesn't matter to him the sale of a historic property since he won't be here long anyway. Local priests are now politicking as to who may be the next bishop.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 12:52 pm,
DeleteI have not heard that Archbishop Byrnes was leaving. How can that be? He is the Coadjutor Archbishop until Archbishop Apuron retires or is removed.
Also, Guam's law forbids the sale of any historic building. The Chancery is considered a historic building because St. Pope John Paul II stayed there.
He says he is the Archbishop. Even at the Masses, the priests only mention 'our Bishop Michael Byrnes'. They don't even mention Archbishop Anthony Apuron. But the brothers during Eucharist do include 'Archbishop Byrnes and Archbishop Anthony Apuron' in the petitions.
DeleteHope the next bishop is not one of those who are deeply involved in trying to get rid of the Way. Father Jeff San Nicolas? Father Mike Crisostomo? Monsignor James Benavente? Please no!
DeleteDear Anonymous at 1:09 pm,
DeleteArchbishop Byrnes is not above the canon law. The Holy See already told Archbishop Byrnes that the Appeals is going on and canon law is very clear on the matter. If Archbishop Byrnes wants to violate canon law, he is not the first bishop to do so. After all, we are already seeing bishops doing immoral and unfair practices all in the name of "for the good of the Church."
I recall when law was passed, ccog said that they can come together to rebuild the church....I don't think they are capable to do that when all church properties will be evaluated and considered for sale....especially seeing that more law suits to come...
Deleteccog and all thier money combined will not be enough....
Just saying...
I’ve been to several masses at Barrigada. The neo priest there does not include Archbishop Anthony in the petitions. Just letting you know.
ReplyDeleteWhat is a “neo” priest? Does he have a name? I was brought up refer to priest as father. Would you please define what “neo” priest means?
DeleteDiana, you are right that the parents of J.E.L. did not have enough care of their little girl at the beach. It is dangerous for a 10 years old to walk alone at the ocean. A huge wave could come and swallow! Then who is responsible? But I would be careful not to blame the parents for the act of Jack Niland. It is never a good idea to blame the victim of serious crime.
ReplyDeleteFr. Jack was well aware that what he was doing was a criminal act. There is no excuse for that! One has to look into one's conscience to find the command of the Lord to resist temptations coming from our own bad nature. Fr. Jack refused to listen to the Lord and chose, with full knowledge, to act criminally. The grave nature of his crime is that he was a Catholic priest!
That is the reason we have to pray for these depraved creatures who are the soldiers of the devil disguised in priestly garbs. Satan has a plan to corrupt the Catholic clergy by crushing their stature and leading them to temptation. Once he has these willing criminals in the church, he will reign on their shameless actions until the whole consecrated priestly order will appear criminal. This is an evil plan worthy of its mastermind, the devil. We have to pray that our bishops would catch and expunge these candidates for priesthood from the seminaries, from the parishes, from the leadership of the Holy Catholic Mother Church. This is also what our catechists always tell us to hate sin, resist the devil and oppose his work in the universe!
Dear Faithfully yours,
DeleteI believe that the accused is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Because Father Jack is deceased, he cannot defend himself. Also, I am not putting blame on the parents. I am questioning the validity of J.E.L.'s story. Her story is similar to Mark Apuron but in the reverse.
Mark Apuron claimed he was raped by his uncle and then goes back to a room full of people and sat quietly with his parents. Yet, no one in that room including his parents noticed anything out of the ordinary with Mark. How convenient that no one heard or saw anything, and we have to rely on Mark's testimony without any investigation?
In the same way, there were no witnesses around to see Father Jack molest J.E.L., and we have to rely on her testimony without any investigation?
Our society is built on the principle that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This means that we cannot judge an accused guilty. We follow this rule of law.
Yes, Diana, a defendant is assumed innocent at the court of law until proven guilty. The court of law is bound to make this assumption to protects those who might be falsely accused. But what if the court of law says otherwise? What if they have concluded that the defendant was guilty? Should the defendant still be considered innocent? Or is he a convict already? This question applies to Fr. Gordon MacRae, as well, whom you like to quote. I generally agree with your approach to this explosive topic of a potentially innocent convict priest. But I would be careful in claiming innocence with 100 % surety because the court of law said otherwise.
Delete---------
Excerpt from New Hampshire attorney general's report on Father Gordon MacRae
March 3, 2003
The Rev. Gerald MacRae was convicted in 1994 on five sexual assault counts stemming from his abuse of teenage boys while he was stationed at St. Bernard's parish in Keene, N.H., in the 1980s. During those years, MacRae repeatedly molested three brothers whom he first met during an earlier assignment in Marlborough.
http://archive.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/documents/nhag_macrae_139.htm
-----------
This is alarming. When I say Fr. Jack Niland did what he did will full knowledge of the grave nature and criminality of his act, I voice a view that is not bound by the court of law. Many people agree with me because they loathe sinful clergy sexually abusing and preying on their kids, although we are not accountable to the court in voicing this public view. I would be careful not to associate the NCW communities with a tolerance for sinful behavior.
Pope Francis says about the scandal in Philadelphia: ”We showed no care for the little ones, we abandoned them. We did not act in a timely manner, realizing the magnitude and the gravity of the damage done to so many lives. No effort to beg pardon and to seek to repair the harm done will ever be sufficient. Looking ahead to the future, no effort must be spared to create a culture able to prevent such situations from happening, but also to prevent the possibility of their being covered up and perpetuated.”
https://www.vox.com/2018/8/20/17759694/pope-francis-catholic-sex-abuse-scandal-pennsylvania-report-apologizes
Sean O'Malley, Cardinal of Boston quotes the Holy See: "There are two words that can express the feelings faced with these horrible crimes: shame and sorrow. The Holy See condemns unequivocally the sexual abuse of minors. The abuses described in the report are criminal and morally reprehensible." The Pope said this well before and without a possible formal conviction at the court of law of Pennsylvania in a distant future.
Cardinal Sean adds: "The Pennsylvania Grand Jury’s report and the first-hand expressions of horror and devastating pain experienced by survivors once again wrench our hearts with the unimaginable that tragically is all too real for those who carry this pain. Once again we hear each excruciating word they share. We remain shamed by these egregious failures to protect children and those who are vulnerable."
http://www.cardinalseansblog.org/
We have to pray for the victims of these egregious crimes who suffered greatly by the hands of unscrupulous priests, bishops and cardinals, who committed, covered up and perpetuated their crimes. Lord Jesus, have compassion on our Holy Mother Church, have mercy on us!
Dear Faithfully yours,
DeletePlease see my response in the following weblink:
https://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2018/08/in-response-to-faithfully-yours.html
All fake victims!!! It's all about the money Mark's family even before he was born turned against the family and now I don't know my uncle but I'll try to get some of that money Devil's money what is shiting to destroy an honest man a man of God
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 2:10 pm,
DeleteThere may be a few who are genuine victims. For example, I can see how Father Brouillard was able to molest his victims. Because he was a priest, he was able to molest altar servers. Because he worked for the Boy Scouts, he was able to molest boys who joined the Boy Scouts.
Nevertheless, because Father Brouillard confessed to child sexual abuse, all kinds of accusers came out of the woodwork.....accusers who were NOT altar servers or members of the Boy Scouts. There was also a non-Catholic claiming he was an altar server and sexually molested by Father Brouillard. This non-Catholic claimed he was an altar server in a Catholic Church and was sexually molested. Apparently, this non-Catholic was unaware that one of the requirements for being an altar server in a Catholic Church is to receive Holy Communion. See the weblink below:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.guampdn.com/amp/812219001
There were also a couple of women claiming to be sexually abused by Father Brouillard. There needs to be an investigation to these allegations in order to determine the truth.
The sad thing about all this is that the Church has become the enemy. We had bishops and priests who knew about McCarrick and did nothing about it. We had priests like Fr. Brouillard who preyed on kids, and a bishop who shipped him off-island to hurt more kids. We have people like CCOG, LFM, and JW claiming to love the Church but introduced a law to destroy the church. That law made it possible for anyone to launch a lawsuit against the Church.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 4:38 pm,
DeleteNo. Satan is the enemy. We need to always pray for our priests, bishop, and the rest of the Church so they can be strong to resist evil.