Catholic Church officials deny responsibility for supervising priests in damages lawsuit

By Giselle Wakatama
ABC News
February 9, 2016

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-10/catholic-church-officials-deny-responsibility/7152604

The late bishop Leo Clarke's estate is now being pursued as part of a damages case brought by a woman known as LG. Photo by Dan Cox

The Catholic Church is arguing it has no responsibility for the supervision of its priests, as it fights a damages case launched by an alleged victim of a dead priest in the New South Wales Hunter Valley.

A 2013 special commission of inquiry found the Catholic Church knew that father Denis McAlinden was a paedophile, dating back to the 1950s.

Among officials who allegedly knew was the late bishop Leo Clarke, whose estate is now being pursued as part of a damages case brought by a woman known as LG.

The inquiry found the former bishop failed to report McAlinden throughout the 20 years he was in his job.

The inquiry also found Clarke's inaction in relation to the paedophile priest was inexcusable.

LG alleged she was sexually abused by McAlinden between 1974 and 1984, when McAlinden came to her home for the purposes of counselling her mother and further the church's work as a religious organisation.

The alleged abuse included rape and fondling.

She is also seeking damages from the Maitland-Newcastle Catholic Diocese for psychiatric injury.

The diocese has distanced itself from clergy members, saying clergy have a certain degree of autonomy and independence under canon law, and it is not responsible for supervising them.

Its argument is outlined in a defence to an amended statement of claim, tendered to court by LG's lawyers.

"The defendants … say that clergy and parishes had/have a certain degree of autonomy and independence under canon and civil law.

"School and parishes had/have a certain degree of autonomy and independence under canon and civil law."

The diocese is also arguing the alleged abuse never happened.

"The defendants do not admit the plaintiff suffered injury and harm as alleged," said the diocese.

"The defendants deny any breach of any duty of care prior to 17 May, 1976."

The diocese also said if the court found that LG was abused, it would only admit a breach of duty of care for any assaults after May 17, 1976.

That is the same day McAlinden resigned as a parish priest in the Maitland-Newcastle Catholic Diocese.

The church has paid out millions of dollars to Hunter Valley clerical abuse survivors, and the Maitland-Newcastle Catholic Diocese has issued a statement in response to the current legal action.

"The diocese is currently involved in a Supreme Court case with an alleged survivor of child sexual abuse," the statement said.

"The courts are designed to be 'adversarial' in nature, and the diocese has repeatedly tried to avoid this through negotiating a settlement.

"The diocese will not publicly discuss a person's claim for compensation, but remains hopeful that a just and equitable outcome may yet be achieved."

The matter is due to return to court on February 11.

McAlinden died in a nursing home in 2005, without having ever been charged in New South Wales.

The Special Commission of Inquiry heard McAlinden allegedly had a history of sexually abusing children over five decades.

It alleged he was a chronic paedophile offender and, at all times during this period, he was a priest under the jurisdiction of the Maitland-Newcastle Catholic Diocese.

The commission said the earliest reported incident of sexual abuse by McAlinden was in 1949, and the latest in 1996.

The inquiry found that many people had identified themselves as victims of McAlinden.

The diocese's child protection unit Zimmerman Services said it had had contact with at least 28 victims.

The commission said it was aware of a number of other McAlinden victims, but the total number would never be known.

It said the fact he spent various periods 'on loan' from the diocese, in remote and overseas locations such as the Philippines and Papua New Guinea where he had access to children, is one reason why the total number of McAlinden victims could not be determined.

It concluded that, given McAlinden's alleged prolific offending, it was readily conceivable the total number of his victims was more than 100.