Bishop Joseph Imesch and the Handling of Molester Priests

By Dennis Robaugh
Patch
April 15, 2015

http://patch.com/illinois/joliet/bishop-joseph-imesch-and-handling-molester-priests-0

Joliet Diocese Settles Victims' Abuse Claims Against 'Savage, Scary' Priests for Over $4M

In February 2006, a judge allowed transcripts of depositions involving the Joliet Diocese to be made public. Bishop Joseph Imesch’s deposition, conducted on Aug. 11, 2005, included details about how he handled priests accused of misconduct involving young boys. Imesch retired in June 2006.

The deposition was conducted by attorney Jeff Anderson, a Minneapolis attorney who specializes in clergy abuse cases, and focused on the actions of the Rev. Gary Berthiaume, who was brought into the Joliet Diocese by Imesch in 1987 even after he was convicted of sexual abuse; his transfer of the Rev. Larry Gibbs; his handling of the Rev. Fred Lenczycki, convicted of molesting Hinsdale altar boys; the Rev. Ed Stefanich, convicted of molesting a Woodridge girl.

» RELATED: Joliet Diocese Settles Priest Abuse Claims for More than $4 Million

IMESCH: “As far as I can remember I think Gary admitted to me that he had done it before the conviction.”

ANDERSON: “If he had told you that he had committed the offense against the child, isn’t that evidence of the crime?”

IMESCH: “That’s a job for the police. I’m not going to get involved in that. That’s not my responsibility.”

ANDERSON: “And when you put him in that parish you didn’t alert the parishioners where you assigned him that he had had a credible allegation of sexual abuse, did you?”

IMESCH: “I don’t think that’s a credible allegation if nothing was charged.”

IMESCH: “Well, I think what happened happened. It was not considered a crime or a criminal activity so there was no reason for me not to transfer him.”

ANDERSON: “It is correct to say that you knowingly continued priests in ministry until the charter required their removal and you knew that credible allegations had been made against those clergymen, correct?”

IMESCH: “Yes.”

IMESCH: “It was inappropriate behavior, but I’m not sure that it was ever classified as sexual abuse.”

ANDERSON: “In other words, if the police report it to be sexual abuse and prosecute it, then it’s sexual abuse? If they don’t it’s not?”

IMESCH: “That would be what I follow, yeah.”

ANDERSON: “So if a priest is not prosecuted as far as you’re concerned that’s - it’s not a credible allegation?”

IMESCH: “That’s what I would follow.”

ANDERSON: “Before Christmas 1985 Bishop Kaffer confronted Father Stefanich about the allegations but the priest denied them, correct?”

IMESCH: “Yes.”

ANDERSON: “Did you give any thought to reporting the information that was in your possession and the possession of Bishop Kaffer and the diocese to turning it over to law enforcement to investigate?”

IMESCH: “I would not do that. There is no verification. There is no hard evidence that this was happening. And I’m not going to say, hey, police, go check on my priest.”

ANDERSON: “If they’re in active ministry wearing a Roman collar given the ability to minister the sacraments and serve as a priest publicly, is it anything that you can do as a bishop and their ultimate superior to prevent them from using their collar to locate and access youth?”

IMESCH: “No.”

ANDERSON: “So that when you continued those priests in ministry you made a decision to take a risk.”

IMESCH: “Sure. It was a risk but with a solid basis for it.”