BishopAccountability.org
 
 

Court Overturns Landmark Clergy Sexual Abuse Conviction

By Yukio Strachan
Digital Journal
December 26, 2013

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/crime/court-overturns-landmark-clergy-sexual-abuse-conviction/article/364645

[court document]

Philadelphia - In shocking blow to victims of child sexual abuse and their advocates, a Roman Catholic Church senior official who was found guilty of covering up child sexual abuse for years had his conviction overturned Thursday by a Pennsylvania appeals court.

"[W]e are compelled to reverse Appellant’s judgment of sentence," John T. Bender, the president judge of the 15-member appellate court, wrote in the 43-page opinion. "And, as there are no other offenses for which he was convicted in this case, Appellant is ordered discharged."

And with those words, the 2012 landmark criminal conviction against Monsignor William J. Lynn of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, who was found guilty of endangering the welfare of children by assigning a known pedophile priest to a parish where he subsequently raped a child, was dismissed.

"He's been in prison 18 months for a crime he didn't commit and couldn't commit under the law," said his attorney, Thomas Bergstrom, the Associated Press reported.

Child endangerment law: a matter of interpretation

The high court's decision rested on the interpretation of the state's child endangerment (“EWOC”) statue that was in place when Lynn was the archdiocese's secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004.

Prior to January 29, 2007, the 1972 statute read:

“A parent, guardian or other person supervising the welfare of a child under 18 years of age commits an offense if he knowingly endangers the welfare of the child by violating a duty of care, protection or support.”

A 2007 amendment added language and now reads:

“A parent, guardian or other person supervising the welfare of a child under 18 years of age, or a person that employs or supervises such a person, commits an offense if he knowingly endangers the welfare of the child by violating a duty of care, protection or support.”

Prosecutors had argued at trial that Lynn violated the statute by reassigning known predators to unsuspecting parishes in Philadelphia.

In particular, the prosecution pointed to Lynn's actions in relation to the former Rev. Edward V. Avery, a now convicted pedophile priest, as evidence at trial.

Doctors from Avery's treatment facility told Lynn in 1993 that he "should not be permitted to engage in any ministry that involved working with adolescents." Instead, Lynn transferred Avery to parishes with grade schools, where in 1999, he raped an altar boy.

But Lynn's attorney argued the state's child-endangerment law at the time did not apply to Lynn, "who was not a parent, guardian or other person supervising the welfare of a child and who had no direct involvement with the child, never met and never knew the child," according to court papers.

The statue only imposed criminal liability only upon those "directly" supervising children.

In other words, Lynn's attorney argued, his client's 2012 conviction couldn't be upheld because Lynn was the supervisor of a “person supervising the welfare of a child.”

When argued last year at trial, Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina rejected the argument.

Not this time. The three-judge Superior Court panel unanimously agreed with the argument and reversed her decision.

"Judgment of sentence reversed. Appellant is discharged," the court opinion reads.

We’re heartsick

Last year, when the guilty verdict was announced, survivors and advocates for clergy sexual abuse felt that justice was served for the hell that victims and their families were put through because of the negligence of priests like Lynn who put the protection of predator priests over the protection of vulnerable children.

“We felt that this conviction sent a very strong message that if you protect predators, you would be punished," Barbara Dorris, outreach director for the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests SNAP), told Raw Story. "We hoped it would cause other prosecutors to go after other people protecting pedophiles. We thought it was a trend, a start."

Thursday's decision left them gutted. “We’re heartsick,” Dorris told the media outlet.

What's the next step? According to the AP, Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams said he strongly disagreed with the decision.

"We most likely will be appealing," he said.

 

 

 

 

 




.

 
 

Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.