ST. LOUIS (MO)
Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis
[with video]
July 7, 2014
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
For more information contact:
Gabe Jones
Community Relations Specialist
Phone: 314.792.7557
Today the Archdiocese of St. Louis and the sole plaintiff, a female known as Jane Doe 92, agreed to settle her lawsuit. A protective order in the case has precluded the Archdiocese from commenting on this matter until now. By the terms of the settlement agreement, other than this statement, the Archdiocese will not make any further statements or comments regarding this matter. At the request of the Plaintiff, the terms of the settlement agreement are confidential.
The Archdiocese has vigorously defended this case because it believes Jane Doe 92’s claims and allegations are false. Specifically, the Archdiocese denies that Jane Doe 92 was ever abused by Joseph Ross, a priest who was removed from ministry in 2002. We do not say this lightly. Jane Doe 92 made allegations in this case that her own family members dispute. She said her father witnessed the abuse by Ross and did nothing to stop it; her father denied this allegation under oath. In addition, Jane Doe 92 has been diagnosed, by her own treating doctors, with a medical condition that causes her to falsify claims, exaggerate symptoms and make inconsistent statements. Her own doctors and expert witnesses voiced doubts about her allegations and noted that they contained multiple inconsistencies. We simply do not believe her allegations are true.
In addition, as documented in public records, Jane Doe 92’s criminal charges against Father Ross were dropped by the government because the prosecution believed it could not prove her case. Father Ross was not the only person Jane Doe 92 has accused of rape. She previously alleged she was raped by another person. The government declined to prosecute charges against that person as well due to lack of evidence.
The purpose of a trial is to determine the truth. To allow the jury in this case to determine the truth, the Archdiocese actively sought to have Jane Doe 92’s treating doctors testify at trial because the Archdiocese believed the treating doctors would support the Archdiocese’s position that the abuse of Jane Doe 92 did not happen. Plaintiff took the highly unusual step of trying to block those doctors from testifying at trial.
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.