UNITED STATES
Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests
POSTED BY DAVID CLOHESSY ON MAY 23, 2013
We’re used to bishops backpedalling on clergy sex crimes. It’s worrisome, however, when newspapers backpedal on those crimes.
Lately, editors at two big city dailies have made unsettling decision in covering clergy sex cases.
For as long as I can remember (and I’ve been involved in this almost 25 years), virtually every news outlet has named clerics who are accused in civil lawsuits of assaulting kids. Ditto with other defendants who are high profile: coaches, teachers, doctors, politicians and the like. It’s a nearly universal practice and rarely even questioned (except sometimes by friends and relatives of the accused).
But last week, a new civil lawsuit was filed against a Chicago archdiocesan priest. The article about the case noted that local Catholic officials had, years ago, released a list of credibly accused clerics. Then, the Chicago Tribune story included this sentence:
“The Chicago Tribune is not naming the former priest sued Thursday because he is not on that list.”
Is this is some sort of new Tribune policy – not naming accused child predators who are sued UNLESS their employer has identified them as credibly accused? And if so, what prompted this sudden and unexplained shift in the Tribune’s position? Do Tribune editors realize they’ve done something that few other editors have done?
Why does withholding the priest’s matter?
Because kids are safer when credibly accused child molesters are publicly identified.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.