|
Appellate Court Rules Against Salesians
The
State of California Appellate Court decided this week unanimously in
favor of Joey Piscitelli, Northern California Director of SNAP, who
was sexually abused as a child at the hands of Salesian Priest, Fr.
Steven Whelan, Vice Principal of Salesian High School in Richmond
California.
Santillan v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Fresno, B194219, COURT
OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION
EIGHT, 163 Cal. App. 4th 4; 77 Cal. Rptr. 3d 343; 2008 Cal.
App. LEXIS 756, May 21, 2008, Filed, Review denied by,
Request granted, Request denied by Santillan (George) v.
Roman Catholic Bishop of Fresno, 2008 Cal. LEXIS 9940 (Cal.,
Aug. 13, 2008)
Doe v. Salesian Society, B198136, COURT
OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION
EIGHT, 159 Cal. App. 4th 474; 71 Cal. Rptr. 3d 565; 2008
Cal. App. LEXIS 138, January 29, 2008, Filed |
Statement by Joey
Piscitelli
The vindictive
hateful battle of 5 years in California brought by the Salesians
has culminated into a high Appellate court decision in my favor, but
the Salesians will still not apologize, and never will. I was
continuously molested by a Salesian priest when I was a child, and I
was forced to keep quiet when I spoke up against the Salesian
molestation machine 30 years ago. The abuse started when Fr. Whelan
masturbated in front of me, while his friend convicted molester Bro.
Sal Billante witnessed the incident and did not report it. The
abused then escalated into sexual physical abuse and attacks in the
school that lasted 2 years.
I
filed suit in California in 2003, and the Salesian Order responded
by calling me a liar, and vowing to make an example out of me. I
became a SNAP leader, and held many events and protests for dozens
of victims all over North California.
The Salesians hired several law firms, and promised to destroy me in
Superior Court. They deposed my wife, brothers and sisters, friends,
neighbors, aunts, uncles, cousins, old classmates, fellow workers,
and my ailing father. They hired public spokespersons and made
public statements calling me a liar, and a sick disturbed man.
The Salesian Priests and High School I attended has the World
Record for the most accused sex offenders at one location. They
include Fr. Dabbenne, Fr. Lorenzoni, Fr. Whelan, Fr. Presenti, Bro.
Billante, Fr. Miani, Fr, Mengon, Fr. Danielson, Bro. Martinez, Bro.
Pacheco, Bro. Vas, Mr. Vitone, and Mr. Bonds.
The Salesians refused to settle my suit, and mocked me by saying
they would not=2 0even settle for one dime. Their army of lawyers
spent an estimated several million dollars to fight their court
battle, promising victory at many church events and press
conferences.
Some say that the Salesians escalated their monetary ammunition
because I was a voice for victims in SNAP, some say that Cardinal
Levada chipped in millions for their fight because I was a thorn in
his side. Maybe both, I’ll never know.
I went to a court jury trial in July of 2006, and the Salesians
continuously and viciously thrashed my therapist, my wife, friends,
my children, and me. They relentlessly thrashed my deceased mother,
and my ailing father. After a two week bloody court battle, the jury
deliberated. While the jury deliberated, the Salesian attorneys, and
the head Salesian official, Fr, Purdy, laughed and high fived each
other, and celebrated their victory before the verdict was even
read.
The jury then read the
verdict – and I had won.
The Salesians filed an appeal in Superior Court, and lost. Then they
filed an appeal in the high Appellate Court. Cardinal Levada and
Bishop Niederhauer staunchly supported the Salesians, who are nested
in the Diocese of San Francisco’s backyard. The Salesians promised
churchgoers and the public and the Diocese they would absolutely
prevail at the Appellate Court, and continued to thrash my family
and me publicly for another 2 years.
One Salesian Priest proclaimed at an event, “We will win at the
Appellate Court, because God is on our side.”
My question is : What God would that be?
It took
two years to reach the Appellate Court hearing. The Salesians hired
even more lawyers, and an army of Salesian lawyers filled the
benches at the Appellate Court hearing 2 months ago. The Salesian
lawyers dominated the
Appellate Court hearing, and the judges said the decision would take
2 months.
Yesterday, the
Appellate Court unanimously ruled against Salesians. Perhaps my
deceased mother in heaven heard the horrible thrashing the Salesians
gave her in court, or maybe God had enough of their vindictive
behavior, or perhaps it was both. In any case, justice has finally
been served.
JOHN DOE v. SALESIANS
Case Study: Mary Help of Christians School, Florida
|
I. Background:
Salient to the dynamic of this case from a
behavioral perspective is the pattern and practice of the Salesian
Society itself: It is the third largest religious society in the
Roman Catholic Church. It rivals the Jesuits for power within the church
and has a large number of cardinals including the present Vatican
Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone.
The Society of St. John Bosco (SDB) is the
most closely organized (controlled) religious group that I have ever
come in contact with. I say this on the basis of reviewing scores of
documents in the cases of sexual abuse by members of the society in
California where 21 or 22 SDB priests and brothers have been identified
as sexual predators. Some have been convicted of abuse and others sent
to prison. I have served as an expert trial witness in the case of Fr.
Richard Presenti (Oakland) and as an expert in the case of Fr. Titian
Miani (Los Angeles). In the process of my study of the pattern and
practice of abuse within the Society of Don Bosco I reviewed documents
and depositions in the cases of priests who admitted or were convicted
of abusing minors—Fr. Bernard Dabbenne, Fr. Steven Whelan, Bro. Sal
Billante among others. There is no need to further prove that wide
spread abuse of minors does occur within the Society.
I have reviewed numerous depositions and
documents in the case of Mr. F. versus MARY HELP OF CHRISTIANS SCHOOL, THE
SALESIAN SOCIETY, INC., and THE SALESIAN SOCIETY OF FLORIDA, INC. The
opinions I will express are based on the documents already mentioned
above plus others I will list below.
Seasoned clinicians and lawyers who have
worked with the Society have said that it is, “the most unrepentant and
defiant” religious group they have ever experienced in regard to sexual
abuse within its ranks. My experience has been similar.
II. Context &
Consciousness of Sexual Behavior Within the Society:
-
The founder, Don Bosco established an
operational principle for the members of his Society—the
Preventive System. This meant that the priests and brothers were
to demonstrate care (and God’s love) by example—avoiding physical
punishment (beatings common in his day in educational institutions
of the 1800s) and physical contact, even pats on the back that could
be construed as physical affection. i.e. “Teachers,
crafts masters and assistants must be of acknowledged morality. They
should strive to avoid as they would the plague, every kind of
affection or sentimental friendship for their pupils, and they
should remember that the wrongdoing of one alone is sufficient to
compromise an educational institute.” The consciousness of
this danger was reinforced by sexual transgressions even early in
the establishment of the Society. *
-
In the training of the men for the
society a great deal of emphasis was placed on the avoidance of
Particular Friendships (PF). This referred not only to sexually
intimate associations between members of the community, but also,
and primarily to the violation of the directive to avoid
“sentimental friendships” with pupils. Cf. The Catholic
Encyclopedia, (1957).
-
Particular friendships do refer to the
danger of homosexual association and behavior not only
between members of the Society, but especially between members of
the Society and the boys under their care.
-
Rules such as the need for two
prefects at all times in a dormitory, never to touch a student or to
become attached to one boy, never to be alone with one boy, etc, all
are based on the knowledge of the danger of sexual involvement.
-
In spite of Papal directives not to
admit candidates who demonstrate homosexual tendencies into
religious life the Vocation Directors and the Provincials of the
Salesians, do admit and educate homosexually oriented men into the
society. The presence of Jorge Acosta and dozens of other Salesians
who have proven to be homosexual by their behavior are all examples
of the intrinsic duality at the core of the Society.
-
Bro. Jorge had a homosexual
orientation and sexual experience prior to his acceptance into the
Society. He revealed his history to the Salesian psychologist who
interviewed him and administered the MMPI. The Provincial and a
confessor knew his sexual orientation and his past activity. Acosta
states that he was also (sent to) interviewed by Fr. Benedict
Groeschel who was well known as an “expert” in sexuality of
Catholic clergy, especially homosexuality.
-
In reviewing scores of depositions of
Salesian priests/superiors/provincials I have never read of one who
ever admitted he knew of any Salesian who abused a boy. In
this case Fr. Dominic De Blasé, provincial from 1979 to 85, said,
“I never…received any report from any community, anyone at all
about sexual misconduct of any Salesian.” (Deposition P. 51) This
statement, as denials by other Salesians, needs to be closely
parsed for rationalization and mental reservations. It is uncanny
and frankly unbelievable that of the dozens of Salesian priests
questioned not one knew of any sexual activity within the Society.
In toto it gives the appearance of a cult-like quality of
conditioning.
-
Bro. Jorge was transferred into Mary
Help of Christians school after being accused of being “poison”
in another community. He confessed sexual activity to Fr.
Dick McCormick.
-
Family System was the “buzz word”
at MHOC that indicated that the priests could show a certain amount
of physical affection to the students in spite of the fact that it
was counter to the tradition of no touching. This variation
from the traditional rule was practiced by the superiors—Fr. David
Gonder and Fr. Pat Logan. (J A Deposition, P. 68)
-
Acosta was reported to the superior of
the school, Fr. Dave Gonder, for sexual activity with a student in
terms of “Brother Jorge has been doing things that he not ought to
be doing.” And his response was, “Brother Jorge will be sent for
counseling and this is the way we usually deal with these things.”
-
Even after admitting sexual
involvement with 3 minor students Bro. Jorge was sent to West
Haverstraw to help coach youngsters in basketball camp. He was also
encouraged to renew his vows.
III. Broader Context of Sexual Behavior
Among Clergy Who Profess Celibacy and Documents on Which My Opinions Are
Based
1.
There is a vast
literature that extends over centuries that refers to the sexual
activity of Catholic clergy with minors, especially boys. Among the most
classic is the 1049 C.E. dissertation of St. Peter Damian, The Book
of Gomorrah, addressed to Pope Leo IX. Reference to this and other
historical church documents can be found in a book I coauthored — Sex,
Priests, and Secret Codes: The Catholic Church’s 2000 Year Paper Trail
of Sexual Abuse (2006).
2.
Some recent church
documents I have reviewed to form my opinion of the practice and process
of sexual activity within the Salesian Society are:
DE DELICTO
SOLLICITATIONIS: EVOLUTIO HISTORICA, DOCUMENTA COMMENTARIUS
by
Fr. John Ortega Uhink, S.J. (1954). This is the definitive study on the
Vatican secret document sent to Catholic bishops in 1962 that directs
them how to handle priests who solicit sex under the guise of, in the
place of, in relationship to, and in or around confession. In 1996 an
official of the Holy Office said that this document was to be
interpreted broadly to include clergy who were “morally” deficient—that
is priests who are sexually active. Paragraph #71 deals with priests who
have sex with men. Paragraph #73 deals with priests who have sex with
children (impuberibus) and animals (bestialitas). This
Instructio was in effect until it was superceded by another, but
non-secret directive SACRAMENTOUM SANCTITATIS TUTELA
(2002).
3.
The Salesians are
educators, especially of high school students, but they are not
prominent in national educational groups such as the National Catholic
Educational Association. Even in the 1950s Franciscan, Benedictine,
Christian Brothers and Jesuit educators were forging new ground in the
assessment of candidates for the priesthood. Catholic professional
groups were studying “Personality Development” (Thomas N.
McCarthy 1958, Christian Brothers La Salle College, Philadelphia). Other
religious educators were beginning to take seriously the
“Psychological Evaluation of Religious Candidates” with the use of
psychometric tests such as the MMPI (William Bier, S.J. Fordham
University, 1959). And others were asking serious questions like “Are
Minor Seminarians Immature?” (Martin F. Pable, O.F.M. Cap. 1967). In
1963 psychologist Norman T. Bowes published Professional
Evaluation of Religious Aspirants a digest of 3,000 evaluations
of candidates for religious life. In November 1971 Conrad Baars, a
psychiatrist, addressed bishops gathered at the Vatican to comment on
the mental health of Catholic priests based on the treatment of 1,500
clergy. (“The Role of the Church in the Causation, Treatment and
Prevention of the Crisis in the Priesthood”)
IV Opinions Based on the Documentation
and Experience (Including those Listed Above)
1.
The Society of Don
Bosco is a tightly held—almost cult-like—group that is somewhat
isolated by its organization. It is remarkably distinct from other
religious communities and Orders that I have studied and experienced;
that includes: Augustinians, Benedictines, Paulists, Dominicans,
Capuchins, Crosiers, Jesuits, Marianists, Marists, Oblates (OMI),
Oblates of St. Francis de Sales, Maryknoll, Josephites, Carmelites,
Trinitarians, Trappists, and others. From my observation the Salesian
society is designed to be closed—self-contained in construct and
operation—that is evidenced by its non acknowledgement of abuse within
its ranks.
2.
Although Fr. Clement
Cardillo, a trained psychologist, administered the MMPI along with the
“Draw a House-Tree-Person” he kept no records and none were kept in the
personnel file of Jorge. Cardillo admitted knowing Fr. Benedict
Groeschel, but has no idea about why someone would consult him. He had
never met a candidate who had “latent homosexual tendencies.”
(47:16) This statement strains the credulity of many clinicians that
have treated priests.
3.
The massive denial
that pervades the Salesian communities from the superiors on down is
very remarkable. In other circumstances it would perhaps be called
pathological “lying.” The denial seems to be in the service of
preserving the image of the Society—the bella figura so vital in
the Italian church.
4.
The institutional
denial obviates the use of code words so common in other religious
communities or dioceses that have to deal with situations or crises of
sexual activity in their ranks. Documentation from Salesian communities
is sparse. In all of the documents referring to Jorge “doing things he
not ought to” is the closest phrase to addressing known sexual abuse
that was found.
5.
In Bro. Jorge’s
evaluations he is criticized for “spending” too much money, being “lazy”
or too “worldly” and on the other hand is praised for being pleasant,
and “he seems to love children.” The recorded evaluations are of no
depth or substance. He was called “poison” and sent to another community
indicating that he was a bad influence. But not one word records the
sexual activity in the institutions that he was aware of and involved
in. Could it be possible that he was the only one with that awareness
and involvement?
6.
Brother Jorge was
transferred to a position where he had contact with minors after he was
known to be an abuser. This is typical of the disposition of abusing
clerics demonstrated in numerous reliable studies including one I did
from the documents of five dioceses. (Cf. Sipe, Another View of
Abuse, 2007) Over 58 percent of clergy who were reported for
abuse were reassigned without treatment.
7.
Grand Jury investigations
and reports are extremely helpful in understanding the pattern and
practice of dealing with abusing clerics: reassignment to another
position/ place/ school/ parish or country often without informing the
new community about the behavior or to avoid prosecution is common in
the investigations. Documented instances of this behavior by some
Salesians are recorded in the US and Australia. Such behavior can
possibly be even be exaggerated in the Salesian Society because of its
predominantly Italian roots and since so many of the members and even
superiors protest ignorance of any abuse.
8.
Three Grand Jury
reports are particularly relevant since the Salesians have schools,
youth centers, summer camps, and parishes in some or all of the
following areas—Boston, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.
Suffolk County Supreme Court Special Grand Jury Report (May 6,
2002); The Sexual Abuse of Children in the Roman Catholic
Archdiocese of Boston issued by the Office of the
Attorney General Commonwealth of Massachusetts (July 23, 2003);
Report of the Grand Jury First Judicial District of
Pennsylvania, Criminal Trial Division (September 17, 2003). It would be
incredible for Salesians to claim that because few or none of their
members were cited in any report that their pattern and practice differs
substantially from that outlined in these investigations.
9.
In 1972, at the
request of the United States Bishops, the Kennedy-Heckler report on
The Catholic Priest in the United States: Psychological
Investigations was published. Its findings are
fundamental to understanding the psychosexual development of priests
including members of the Salesian Society. (Two/thirds of priests are
underdeveloped and 8 percent maldeveloped.)
10.
My own ethnographic
study of the celibate/sexual behavior or Catholic priests conducted
between 1960 and 1985—A Secret World: Sexuality and the Search for
Celibacy—(1990) estimated that 6 percent of priests in
the United States get involved sexually with minors. This compares very
closely to the conclusion of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice
survey published as A Report on the Crisis in the Catholic Church
in the United States (2004). That study claims that priests
ordained between those years averaged 6.6 percent rate of
reported abuse. (Cf. Pp. 30-7). The Salesians in the United States are
hard pressed to claim that they are exempt from similar percentages.
11.
The massive denial
of knowledge of abuse within the Society is incredible and
reprehensible regardless of the cultural and institutional factors that
contributed to its development and preservation.
May 9, 2008
Back to Top |
|