CHICAGO (IL)
America Magazine
November 01, 2017
By Michael J. O’Loughlin
A Chicago man who filed a lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Chicago alleging sexual abuse by a notorious former priest has been ordered to repay the church for the money it spent defending itself, a Cook County circuit court judge ruled earlier this month. Church officials in Chicago say that revelations regarding other fraudulent cases could be forthcoming, a prospect that both the archdiocese and victim advocates say will be a disservice to genuine victims.
The man, identified in court documents only as John J. Doe, said in a 2015 lawsuit that he had been sexually assaulted by Daniel McCormack, a former priest who was convicted in 2007 of molesting five boys associated with a Chicago Catholic school that was connected to the parish where he was pastor.
While serving time in prison, Mr. Doe discussed plans for the lawsuit on the telephone with several people, including a cousin who had previously settled with the archdiocese over abuse claims against Mr. McCormack. During the initial phase of the lawsuit, lawyers for the archdiocese subpoenaed more than 300 hours of audio recordings from those phone calls. The church then found evidence they claimed proved Mr. Doe was lying about the abuse.
Mr. Doe eventually withdrew his case for reasons unrelated to the tapes, but he said he planned to refile. In July, the archdiocese filed its own suit against Mr. Doe, alleging that under an Illinois statute, the church was entitled to receive compensation for costs associated with defending itself against a bogus claim. Earlier this month, Judge Kathy M. Flanagan agreed with the church, ruling that based on “unrebutted and uncontradicted evidence,” the allegations were “not well-grounded in fact.”
John O’Malley, a lawyer for the archdiocese, told America that there is “a very difficult balance” in trying to be “good stewards” of the church’s financial resources, some of which is used to assist victims, while avoiding re-victimizing or re-injuring “the people coming forward” by questioning their allegations too rigorously.
Another lawyer representing the archdiocese, James C. Geoly, said that all cases brought against the church are subject to scrutiny but that in certain instances, there is “a healthy skepticism” because of the length of time that has passed since alleged abuse took place, as well as a plaintiff’s thin connections to the school, parish or neighborhood.
Church officials also said they had an ethical obligation to alert the court of potential fraud.
Paula Waters, chief communications officer for the archdiocese, said that Mr. Doe’s suit was “an affront to real victims.” She said some people have asked why the archdiocese appears to be “going after victims,” but she said that in Mr. Doe’s case, “We’re going after fraud.”
The managing director for SNAP, an advocacy group for victims of sexual abuse, told America that false allegations of clerical sexual abuse, which she noted are very rare, ultimately harm victims.
“When you want to report sexual abuse by a respected member of the community, it’s very difficult,” Barbara Dorris said. “Anything that makes it harder for a survivor or a child to report sexual abuse is a bad thing.”
“We want to make it easier for survivors to come forward, not harder. This is going to make it harder for victims to come forward,” she said.
Several people interviewed for this story said that they were unaware of similar cases in which a diocese was awarded money by courts from individuals who had made false accusations. But church officials and victims rights advocates agree that instances of fraud in abuse cases are rare.
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.
