|Church allowed abuse by priest for
Aware of Geoghan record, archdiocese still shuttled him from parish to parish
By Michael Rezendes email@example.com
Prepared by the Globe Spotlight Team: reporters
Matt Carroll, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Michael Rezendes, and editor Walter
January 6, 2002
First of two parts [See Part
[In this two-part article, links to the documents have been provided
by BishopAccountability.org. See also our library of over 100 archdiocesan
documents on Geoghan. With Part 1 of this article, the Globe published two related articles: A revered guest;
a family left in shreds, by Matt Carroll; and A
devout plea from Dussourd victims' relative, by Margaret Gallant. On January 26, 2002, the Boston Globe published a major analysis of the Geoghan file. See also the Boston Globe's web archive of the Spotlight Team's investigation of abuse in the Catholic church.]
Since the mid-1990s, more than 130 people have come forward with horrific
childhood tales about how former priest John J. Geoghan allegedly fondled
or raped them during a three-decade spree through a half-dozen Greater
Almost always, his victims were grammar school boys. One was just 4 years
Then came last July's disclosure that Cardinal Bernard F. Law knew about
Geoghan's problems in 1984, Law's first year in Boston, yet approved his
transfer to St. Julia's parish in Weston. Wilson D. Rogers Jr., the cardinal's
attorney, defended the move last summer, saying the archdiocese had medical
assurances that each Geoghan reassignment was "appropriate and safe."
|Former priest John J. Geoghan leaving
his family home in Scituate in November. (Globe Staff Photo / Jim
Davis) [version posted on the web]
But one of Law's bishops thought that the 1984 assignment of Geoghan
to St. Julia's was so risky, he wrote the cardinal a letter in protest. And for good reason, the Spotlight Team found: The archdiocese
already had substantial evidence of Geoghan's predatory sexual habits.
That included his assertion in 1980 that his repeated abuse of seven boys
in one extended family was not a "serious" problem, according
to an archdiocesan
record [one of several versions of a Geoghan chronology written by
Rev. Brian M. Flatley when Flatley was training to succeed McCormack as
Law's Delegate for sexual abuse cases, on which also see the Riley
report, p. 45, PDF p. 51].
And the St. Julia's assignment proved disastrous. First, Geoghan was
put in charge of three youth groups, including altar boys. In 1989, he
was forced to go on sick leave after more complaints of sexual abuse,
and spent months in two institutions that treat sexually abusive priests.
Even so, the archdiocese returned him to St. Julia's, where Geoghan continued
to abuse children for another three years.
Now, as Geoghan faces the first of two criminal trials next week, details
about his sexual compulsion are likely to be overshadowed by a question
that many Catholics find even more troubling: Why did it take a succession
of three cardinals and many bishops 34 years to place children out of
Donna Morrissey, a spokeswoman for Law, said the cardinal and other church
officials would not respond to questions about Geoghan. Morrissey said
the church had no interest in knowing what the Globe's questions would
Before Geoghan ever got to Weston in 1984, he had already been treated
several times and hospitalized at least once for molesting boys. [See
the Globe's useful summary
of Geoghan's history.] And he had been removed from at least two parishes
for sexual abuse. In 1980, for instance, he was ordered out of St. Andrew's
in Jamaica Plain after casually admitting he had molested the seven boys.
Five bishops and a cardinal
Cardinal Bernard Law (right) archbishop of Boston since 1984, knew
that former priest John Geoghan (below) abused young parishioners.
Daily, now bishop of Brooklyn, N.Y.
Banks, now bishop of Green Bay, Wis.
now bishop of Manchester, N.H.
Murphy, now bishop of Rockville Centre, N.Y.
Hughes, now archbishop of New Orleans
|Former priest John J. Geoghan was cycled
through six Greater Boston parishes despite years of abuse allegations.
(Globe staff file photo / Tom Landers)
[Photo caption—Patrick McSorley says he was abused at age 12 by
the Rev. John J. Geoghan in 1986. (Globe Photo / Sarah Brezinsky) Photo
"To find out later
that the Catholic Church knew he was a child molester— every
day it bothers me more and more."
Says he was abused at age 12 by the Rev. John J. Geoghan in
In 1981, after a year's sick leave, Geoghan was dispatched to St. Brendan's
in Dorchester, with little chance he would be placed under scrutiny: His
pastor for most of his 3 years there, the Rev. James H. Lane, has told
friends he was never warned that Geoghan had a history of sex abuse.
In September 1984, complaints that Geoghan had abused children at the
Dorchester parish prompted Law to remove him. Two months later, the cardinal
gave Geoghan a fresh start at St. Julia's.
Law allowed Geoghan to stay in Weston for more than eight years before
removing him from parish duty in 1993. But even that decision to recast
Geoghan as a functionary at a home for retired priests did not prevent
him from seeking out and molesting children, according to the multiple
civil suits and criminal charges filed against the 66-year-old Geoghan
[see the DA's statement and indictment].
Finally, in 1998, the church "defrocked" Geoghan, removing
him from the priesthood. [See memo confirming this action.]
Geoghan's criminal defense attorney, Geoffrey Packard, said his client
would have no comment on any of the allegations against him. Geoghan's
first trial on sexual molestation charges is scheduled for Jan. 14 in
Middlesex Superior Court. The second, more serious set of charges are
due to be tried in Suffolk Superior Court in late February. In the civil
lawsuits, Geoghan has no attorney, and is not contesting the charges.
The church's likely legal defense, as Rogers hinted in July, will be
that doctors deemed Geoghan rehabilitated. Church records obtained by
the Globe note that Geoghan was indeed medically cleared for the St. Julia's
assignment—but not until he had been at the parish for a month.
In 1984, there were still some clinicians who believed child molesters
could be cured. But other specialists had long since warned Catholic bishops
of the high risk that priests who had abused children would become repeat
What's more, specialists in child sexual abuse and attorneys who have
represented victims said, it ought to have been apparent to the archdiocese
by 1984 that someone with Geoghan's record of habitual sexual abuse should
not have been returned to a parish.
"In Geoghan's case, the church defied its own most basic values
of protecting the young and fostering celibacy," said A.W. Richard
Sipe, a former priest. Sipe, a psychotherapist and expert in clergy sexual
abuse, said he has long believed that the Catholic Church has been too
slow to deal with priests who molest children.
The Spotlight Team found evidence that one of Law's top subordinates
worried that Geoghan would cause further scandal at St. Julia's in Weston,
where he began work on Nov. 13, 1984. On Dec. 7, Bishop
John M. D'Arcy wrote to Law, challenging the wisdom of the assignment
in light of Geoghan's "history of homosexual involvement with young
Within the next week, two doctors cleared Geoghan for parish duty, according
to an archdiocesan
chronology that is in court files. It reads: "12/11/84 Dr. [Robert]
Mullins—Father Geoghan 'fully recovered.' . . . 12/14/84 Dr. [John
H.] Brennan: "no psychiatric contraindications or restrictions to
his work as a parish priest."
The files also contain a poignant—and prophetic—August 1982 letter
to Law's predecessor, the late Cardinal Humberto Medeiros, from the aunt
of Geoghan's seven Jamaica Plain victims, expressing incredulity that
the church to which she was devoted would give Geoghan another chance
at St. Brendan's after what he had done to her family.
"Regardless of what he says, or the doctor who treated him, I do
not believe he is cured; his actions strongly suggest that he is not,
and there is no guarantee that persons with these obsessions are ever
cured," Margaret Gallant said in her plea to Medeiros.
"It embarrasses me that the church is so negligent," Gallant
wrote. Archdiocesan records obtained by the Globe make it clear why Gallant
wrote her irate letter two years after the abuse: Geoghan had reappeared
in Jamaica Plain, and been seen with a young boy. The records note that
the next month, "Another letter from Mrs. Gallant. Why is nothing
being done?" [See the archdiocesan
From the Jamaica Plain case alone, the archdiocese's top officials were
aware of Geoghan's attraction to young boys, and how he picked his victims:
The affable Geoghan usually befriended Catholic mothers struggling to
raise large families, often alone. His offers to help, often by taking
the children for ice cream or praying with them at bedtime, were accepted
That is how 12-year-old Patrick McSorley, who lived in a Hyde Park housing
project, allegedly became a Geoghan victim in 1986—two years after
Geoghan's assignment to Weston.
According to McSorley, Geoghan, who knew the family from St. Andrew's,
learned of his father's suicide and dropped by to offer condolences to
his mother, who is schizophrenic. The priest offered to buy Patrick ice
"I felt a little funny about it," McSorley recalled in an interview.
"I was 12 years old and he was an old man."
Riding home after getting ice cream, McSorley says, Geoghan consoled
him. But then he patted his upper leg and slid his hand up toward his
crotch. "I froze up," McSorley said. "I didn't know what
to think. Then he put his hand on my genitals and started masturbating
me. I was petrified." McSorely added that Geoghan then began masturbating
When Geoghan dropped a shaken McSorley off at his mother's house, he
suggested they keep secret what had taken place. "He said, `We're
very good at keeping secrets,' " McSorley said.
For years, McSorley has battled alcoholism and depression. And now, as
the plaintiff in one of the lawsuits against Geoghan, McSorley is bitter.
"To find out later that the Catholic Church knew he was a child molester—every
day it bothers me more and more," McSorley says.
Many documents yet to be unsealed
The letters from Bishop
D'Arcy and Margaret
Gallant were among documents found by the Globe during a review of
the public files of 84 civil lawsuits still pending against Geoghan. But
for all Geoghan's notoriety, the public record is remarkably skeletal.
That is because almost all the evidence in the lawsuits about the church's
supervision of Geoghan has been under a court-ordered confidentiality
seal granted to church lawyers.
In November, acting on a motion by the Globe, Superior Court Judge Constance
M. Sweeney ordered those documents made public. The archdiocese appealed
to the state Appeals Court, arguing that the Globe—and the public—should
not have access to documents about the church's inner workings. But the
appeal was denied last month. The records, including depositions of bishops
and personnel files, are scheduled to become public on Jan. 26.
The cardinal and five other bishops who supervised Geoghan over the years
have been accused of negligence in many of the civil suits for allegedly
knowing of Geoghan's abuse and doing nothing to stop it. Never before
have so many bishops had to defend their roles in a case involving sexual
molestation charges against a single priest. The five, all since promoted
to head their own dioceses, are Bishops Thomas V. Daily of Brooklyn, N.Y.;
Robert J. Banks of Green Bay, Wis.; William F. Murphy of Rockville Center,
N.Y.; John B. McCormack of Manchester, N.H., and Archbishop Alfred C.
Hughes of New Orleans. Law and the five bishops have all denied the accusations
in legal filings.
No American diocese has faced a scandal of similar dimensions since 1992.
That year, in the Fall River Diocese, more than 100 of former priest James
Porter's victims surfaced publicly with evidence that Porter's superiors—including,
in the 1960s, then Monsignor Medeiros—shifted him from one parish
to another as parents learned of his compulsive abuse.
Since 1997, the archdiocese has settled about 50 lawsuits against Geoghan,
for more than $10 million—but with no confidential documents ever
Plaintiffs in the 84 pending lawsuits are refusing to settle their claims
as easily, and the church's internal documents are subject to being revealed
in the litigation. So the archdiocese has moved aggressively to keep information
about its supervision of Geoghan out of public view. One example: When
Law was named a defendant in 25 of the lawsuits, Rogers asked a judge
to impound any reference to the cardinal, arguing that his reputation
might be harmed. The judge refused.
On Dec. 17, Rogers sent the Globe's attorney, Jonathan M. Albano, a letter
threatening to seek legal sanctions against the newspaper and its law
firm if the Globe published anything gleaned from confidential records
in the suits. He warned that he would seek court-imposed sanctions even
if Globe reporters asked questions of clergy involved in the case.
For decades, within the US Catholic Church, sexual misbehavior by priests
was shrouded in secrecy—at every level. Abusive priests—Geoghan
among them—often instructed traumatized youngsters to say nothing
about what had been done to them. Parents who learned of the abuse, often
wracked by shame, guilt, and denial, tried to forget what the church had
done. The few who complained were invariably urged to keep silent. And
pastors and bishops, meanwhile, viewed the abuse as a sin for which priests
could repent rather than as a compulsion they might be unable to control.
Even Massachusetts law assured secrecy—and still does. For all
the years that Geoghan was molesting children, clergymen were exempt from
laws requiring most other caregivers to report incidents of sex abuse
to police for possible prosecution. It was only after last summer's revelations
that the archdiocese dropped its long-standing opposition to legislation
adding clergy to the list of "mandated reporters." But the legislation
died in committee.
Until recent years, the church also had little to fear from the courts.
But that has changed, as predicted in a 1985 confidential report on priest
abuse prepared at the urging of some of the nation's top bishops, Law
among them. "Our dependence in the past on Roman Catholic judges
and attorneys protecting the Diocese and clerics is GONE," the report
said. [See the 1985 Guidelines report by Rev. Michael R. Peterson, which included the 1985 Manual by Peterson, Rev. Thomas P. Doyle, and Ray Mouton.]
Since mid-December, the Globe has been requesting interviews with Law
and other Church officials. But the answer was delayed until Morrissey's
call late Friday, in which she said she would not even accept questions
in writing. Asked if that meant the Archdiocese had no interest in knowing
what the questions were, Morrissey replied: "That's correct."
In preparing this article, the Globe also sought interviews with many
of the priests and bishops who had supervised Geoghan or worked with him.
None of the bishops would comment. Of the priests, few would speak publicly.
And one pastor hung up the phone and another slammed a door shut at the
first mention of Geoghan's name.
After ordination, a record of abuse
There is no dispute that Geoghan abused children while he was at Blessed
Sacrament in Saugus after his 1962 ordination. The archdiocese has recently
settled claims on accusations that he did, and the church records obtained
by the Globe note that Geoghan in 1995 admitted molesting four boys from
the same family then. The unresolved issue in the remaining suits is whether
church officials knew of the abuse at the time.
A former priest, Anthony Benzevich, has said he alerted church higher-ups
that Geoghan frequently took young boys to his rectory bedroom. In news
reports after accusations against Geoghan surfaced publicly, Benzevich
was also quoted as saying church officials threatened to reassign him
as a missionary in South America for telling them about Geoghan. Benzevich
told his story to Mitchell Garabedian, who represents nearly all of the
plaintiffs in the civil suits against Geoghan and church officials, according
to an affidavit Garabedian filed.
But court records reviewed by the Globe show that when Benzevich appeared
in Garabedian's office for a pre-trial deposition in October 2000, he
was represented by Wilson Rogers 3d—the son of Law's principal attorney.
Then, under oath, Benzevich changed his story. He said he was not certain
that Geoghan had had boys in his room. And he said he could not recall
notifying superiors about Geoghan's behavior with children.
In a recent interview with the Globe, Benzevich said he does indeed remember
Geoghan taking boys to his room. He said Geoghan often sought to wrestle
with young boys—and liked to dress them in priest's attire. But
he repeated his sworn assertion that he does not recall notifying his
Before his deposition, Benzevich said, Wilson Rogers 3d approached him,
told him the church was trying to protect him from being named as a defendant,
and offered to represent him. His earlier statements to reporters, Benzevich
said, had been misconstrued.
Garabedian, citing the confidentiality order, refused to discuss the
Benzevich issue with the Globe. The church's financial liability in the
pending suits could increase dramatically if there is evidence Geoghan's
superiors knew of his abuse.
Geoghan's second assignment—in 1966 to St. Bernard's in Concord—ended
after seven months, according to a detailed chronology
of Geoghan's service prepared by the church which does not explain
why the assignment was so abbreviated.
The pending lawsuits include accusations that Geoghan again abused young
boys from several families in his next parish, St. Paul's in Hingham,
between 1967 and 1974. One of his alleged victims, Anthony Muzzi Jr.,
said in an interview last week that in addition to his own abuse, his
uncle caught Geoghan abusing his son. The uncle ordered Geoghan to leave
his house, and complained to the priest's superiors at St. Paul's.
That complaint to church officials coincides with the time frame when
Geoghan received in-patient treatment for sex abuse at the Seton Institute
in Baltimore, according to Sipe, the psychotherapist who was on Seton's
staff at the time. Sipe did not treat Geoghan.
During his assignment in Hingham, Geoghan found victims far afield, befriending
Joanne Mueller, a single mother of four boys who lived in Melrose. There
too, according to depositions, the priest became a regular visitor, a
spiritual counselor to Mueller and a helpmate to her boys, who were between
5 and 12.
One night, she testified, her second youngest son came to her, insisting
that she keep Geoghan away from him. "I don't want him doing that
to my wee-wee, touching my wee-wee . . ." Mueller recalled the boy
Mueller, according to her deposition, summoned her three other sons and
learned that Geoghan, while purporting to be taking them out for ice cream,
helping them with their baths, and reading them bedtime stories, had been
raping them orally and anally. Also, Mueller said, Geoghan was insisting
they tell no one. "We couldn't tell you because Father said it was
a confessional," she said one of her sons told her.
Mueller testified that she immediately took the boys to see Rev. Paul
E. Miceli, a parish priest at St. Mary's in Melrose who knew both Geoghan
and her family.
She testified that Miceli assured her that Geoghan would be handled by
appropriate church authorities and would "never be a priest again."
Mueller also said that Miceli asked her to keep the matter to herself:
"Bad as it was, he said, `Just try—don't think about it. It
will never happen again.' "
Miceli, until recently a member of Law's cabinet, contradicted Mueller
in his own deposition. He said he did not recall her name, and never received
a visit of the sort she described. But Miceli acknowledged receiving a
call from a woman saying Geoghan was spending too much time with her children.
Miceli testified that the caller said nothing about sexual abuse. Nonetheless,
Miceli said he drove to Geoghan's new parish in Jamaica Plain to relay
the woman's concerns to Geoghan face-to-face.
Family in need was vulnerable
If Mueller had unwittingly facilitated Geoghan's access to the children
in her home in Melrose, the same role was played by Maryetta Dussourd
at the priest's next stop: St. Andrew's, in the Forest Hills section of
Jamaica Plain, where he served from 1974 to 1980.
Dussourd was rearing her own four children—three boys and a girl—as
well as her niece's four boys. In her hardscrabble neighborhood, she said
in an interview, she hoped there was a priest the children could look
up to. Then she met Geoghan, who oversaw altar boys and Boy Scouts at
Geoghan, she recalled bitterly, was eager to help. Before long, he was
visiting her apartment almost every evening—for nearly two years.
He routinely took the seven boys out for ice cream and put them to sleep
But all that time, Geoghan regularly molested the seven boys in their
bedrooms, Dussourd said. In some cases, he performed oral sex on them,
according to court documents. Other times, he fondled their genitals or
forced them to fondle his—occasionally as he prayed.
A 1994 Archdiocesan memorandum, labeled "personal and confidential,"
said Geoghan would stay in the Dussourd home "even when he was on
retreat because he missed the children so much. He `would touch them while
they were sleeping and waken them by playing with their penises.' "
Dussourd discovered what was happening after the children finally told
her sister, Margaret Gallant. Horrified, Dussourd complained to the Rev.
John E. Thomas, the pastor of St. Thomas Aquinas, a nearby parish, according
to court documents and accounts by Dussourd and a church official who
asked that he not be identified.
Thomas confronted Geoghan with the allegations, and was taken aback when
Geoghan casually admitted they were accurate. "He said, `Yes, that's
all true,' " the official recalled. It was as if Geoghan had been
asked "if he preferred chocolate or vanilla ice cream."
Thomas immediately drove to archdiocesan offices in Brighton to notify
Daily. In Thomas's presence that Saturday afternoon, Feb. 9, 1980, Daily
telephoned Geoghan at St. Andrew's and, in a brief conversation, delivered
a curt directive: "Go home," the official said.
Geoghan protested, saying there was no one else to celebrate the 4 p.m.
Mass. "I'll say the Mass myself," Daily insisted. "Go home."
The official said Daily drove to Jamaica Plain and said Mass.
The Rev. Francis H. Delaney, who was Geoghan's pastor at St. Andrew's,
said in an interview that church officials never told him why Geoghan
disappeared from the parish.
Several weeks later, Dussourd said, a contrite Thomas came to her apartment
and told her that Geoghan had admitted to abusing the boys, but had excused
his behavior by telling the pastor, "It was only two families."
Thomas, echoing a tack common among clerics at the time, later pleaded
with Dussourd not to follow through on her threat to go public, she said.
He cited the years Geoghan had spent studying for the priesthood, and
the consequences for Geoghan if the accusations against him were publicized.
"Do you realize what you're taking from him?" Thomas asked,
according to Dussourd.
Thomas, who is now retired, declined to be interviewed.
A 1994 archdiocesan
document summarizing Geoghan's recurrent problems says of the seven
children: "Fr. Geoghan 'admits the activity but does not feel it
serious or a pastoral problem.' "
Geoghan spent the following year on sick leave, under treatment for his
compulsion, but living with family in West Roxbury. In February 1981,
he was sent to his fifth parish, St. Brendan's.
Almost immediately, Geoghan was working with First Communicants, befriending
young children and their parents, even taking some boys to his family's
summer home in Scituate, where—parents say they later discovered—he
sexually abused the youths.
Geoghan's free rein was made possible because the archdiocese said nothing
to Lane, St. Brendan's pastor, about Geoghan's history, according to a
teacher in the parish whom Lane has confided in.
The St. Brendan's teacher, who declined to be named, said that at first,
Geoghan's willingness to spend inordinate amounts of time with children
was admired. But over time, some parishioners became suspicious. "We
knew something wasn't right," the teacher said. "He just zeroed
in on some kids."
After two more years and more allegations of sexual abuse, Geoghan's
tenure at St. Brendan's came to an abrupt end in 1984, when Lane heard
complaints that Geoghan had molested children in the parish.
Lane, the teacher said, was so devastated that he broke down when he
told her the news. And, she said, he was incensed that he had not been
warned. "Father Lane was almost destroyed by this," the teacher
Lane is now retired. When a Globe reporter went to see him recently,
he slammed the door shut as soon as Geoghan's name was mentioned.
Law denies he tried 'to shift a problem'
In his own defense last summer, Law wrote in the Pilot, the archdiocesan
newspaper, "Never was there an effort on my part to shift a problem
from one place to the next."
The cardinal's assertion followed his disclosure, in court documents,
that he was informed in September 1984 of the four-year-old allegations
that Geoghan had molested the seven Jamaica Plain boys. In the court filing,
Law went on to say he then notified Geoghan that he was being removed
from St. Brendan's and was "in between assignments." [See the letter in which Law notified Geoghan.]
The legal response by the cardinal, narrowly drawn in response to the
lawsuit against him, omits any reference to Geoghan's molestation of children
at St. Brendan's in Dorchester.
Despite his record, Geoghan was assigned to St. Julia's. And in his first
two years, he was in charge of altar boys, religious education for public
school youngsters and a youth group, according to the church's annual
Three weeks after Geoghan arrived in Weston, Bishop
D'Arcy protested the assignment to Law, citing Geoghan's problems
and adding: "I understand his recent abrupt departure from St. Brendan's,
Dorchester may be related to this problem."
A copy of the letter contains a redacted paragraph, an apparent reference
to the Rev. Nicholas Driscoll, who confirmed last week that he had been
removed from St. Julia's before Geoghan's arrival—but for alcohol
and depression problems, not sexual abuse. So D'Arcy expressed concern
about "further scandal in this parish." If "something happens,"
parishioners will feel that the archdiocese "simply sends them priests
D'Arcy urged Law to consider restricting Geoghan to weekend duty "while
receiving some kind of therapy." The Globe could find no evidence
that Law accepted that advice. Retired Monsignor Francis S. Rossiter,
Geoghan's pastor at St. Julia's, refused to be interviewed last week.
But Church records note that Rossiter was aware of Geoghan's
The civil and criminal allegations Geoghan faces in Middlesex and Suffolk
counties suggest that he allegedly abused at least 30 more boys after
Law sent him to Weston in 1984—both before and after the half year's
sick leave in 1989.
After Geoghan's 1989 return to St. Julia's, it was another 38 months
before Law took him out of the parish. Three years later, Geoghan was
still seeking out victims, allegedly including an altar boy donning vestments
for a christening ceremony, according to the criminal charges. [See the indictment.]
The shuttling of Geoghan from one parish to another created a devastating
coincidence for one family. One boy he allegedly molested is the son of
a man who had been among the many sexually abused by Porter during the
1960s in the Fall River Diocese, according to Roderick MacLeish Jr., the
attorney who represented the man and 100 other Porter victims.
MacLeish declined to provide any information about the family, and said
a legal claim has yet to be filed over the son's treatment by Geoghan.
MacLeish, who has had substantial dealings with the Boston Archdiocese,
said he remains astonished at Rogers's assertion that Geoghan's assignments
were deemed safe by doctors. "No responsible clinician would have
said it was safe to transfer him to another parish in light of what the
church knew about his pattern of deviant behavior," MacLeish said.
This article was prepared by the Globe Spotlight Team: reporters Matt
Carroll, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Michael Rezendes; and editor Walter V. Robinson.
It was written by Rezendes firstname.lastname@example.org.