The following documents pertain to the U.S. Attorney’s agreement
with the Archdiocese of Boston, and to the Scanlan case generally. See
Denise Lavoie, Archdiocese,
Prosecutors Agree to Deal over Withheld Information (November 18,
2005) for an account of some documents and their relevance.
The crucial document for the U.S. Attorney’s agreement is #14
below, Vicar General Murphy's inaccurate assessment of Scanlan's suitability
for a VA chaplaincy.
* The claim that Murphy didn't know what he was signing must account for
memo #13 stating that the form was completed
per Murphy's request, and with memo #10
showing that Murphy was involved in the VA chaplaincy plan from its inception.
* The claim that Murphy had no adverse information on Scanlan's "general
behavior or conduct" must account for a House of Affirmation report
#23 that Scanlan was infatuated with a
young man, and Bishop Banks's notes #7 on
alleged misconduct at a youth facility and a parish. Both were in Scanlan's
file when Murphy signed the form.
* See also Attorney
General Reilly's assessment of Murphy's overall performance in Boston.
The following documents were selected from the Scanlan documents publicly
filed in Ford et al. v. Law et al., and are presented in the order in
which they were written. The documents were redacted before filing, but
we have made additional redactions to protect the personal information
of accusers and accused. The entire Scanlan file comprises 430 pages,
but is not complete as filed with the court. For example, it does not
include the House of Affirmation's entire 1986 assessment of Scanlan.
| 1. |
Assignment
Record of William J. Scanlan. [SCANLON-2 001] |
| |
|
| 2. |
Letter
from Scanlan to Cardinal Law, resigning from Pilgrim Center. Dated
11/3/86. [SCANLON-2 046] |
| |
|
| 3. |
Letter
from Cardinal Law to Scanlan about possible chaplain assignment
on Long Island. Dated 12/3/86. [SCANLON-2 048_049] |
| |
|
| 4. |
Letter
from Scanlan about his House of Affirmation assessment, which
he says requires "clarification." He and Joe Hart have been
meeting, and Hart, who is HoA's staff person in their Boston office,
could help clarify Scanlan's condition. Hart apparently wrote such
a letter on 5/6/87 (see reference in document #23
below) describing the HoA assessment of Scanlon as too negative. Dated
4/29/87. [SCANLON-2 070] |
| |
|
| 5. |
Notes
by Auxiliary Bishop
Robert J. Banks on meeting
with an angry Scanlan, who was demanding to be in "good standing"
so that he could pursue his plans of youth work. As far as the Long
Island possibility went, Scanlan was "under impression that he
was going to take it over - whole island." "So I suggested
that he see someone from H of Aff." This document is tagged:
"special file for my office Wm. Scanlan". Dated 5/87. [SCANLON-2
113] |
| |
|
| 6. |
Notes
on HoA's Joe Hart and his opinions about how Scanlan should be treated.
Dated 1987, but appears to reference a letter by Hart dated 5/6/87.
[SCANLON-2 114] |
| |
|
| 7. |
Notes
by Banks about allegations that Scanlan “fools around with kids”
and had problems at Pilgrim House, and that a DA “had received
complaints about him” at St. Timothy’s in Norwood. Dated
7/3-7/87. Banks writes, “His reactions of innocence were appropriate
and I said matter was ended unless I had back up to the charges.”
[SCANLON-2 118-119] |
| |
|
| 8. |
Memo
to Bishop Alfred Hughes about Scanlan’s secret archives,
summarizing the previous document “about possible overinvolvement
with boys” and stating that Scanlan “had undergone testing
at the House of Affirmation.” Dated 9/28/93. [SCANLON-2 151] |
| |
|
| 9. |
Letter
from Scanlan to Rev. Paul Miceli asking for a VA chaplaincy outside
the archdiocese. Dated 5/7/98. [SCANLON-2 207] |
| |
|
| 10. |
Memo
from Miceli to Law and Bishop Murphy urging the VA chaplaincy
as a way to "build on the goodwill" of a still "manipulative"
but "kinder and gentler" Scanlan. Dated 5/12/98. [SCANLON-2
206] |
| |
|
| 11. |
Cardinal
Bernard Law’s statement of Scanlan’s good character
and recommendation of him for a military chaplaincy: “I am unaware
of anything in his background which would render him unsuitable to
work with minor children.” Dated 6/1/98. [SCANLON-2 212] |
| |
|
| 12. |
Letter
from Rev. John Coleman of the VA confirming the hiring of Scanlan.
Dated 11/24/98. [SCANLON-2 241] |
| |
|
| 13. |
Memo
from the priest who prepared the U.S. government form according
to Vicar General Murphy's instructions. Dated 5/8/99. [SCANLON-2 245] |
| |
|
| 14. |
Vicar
General William F. Murphy’s statement of no “adverse information”
on a U.S. Government form for Scanlan’s VA employment. Dated
5/12/99. [SCANLON-2 246-247] |
| |
|
| 15. |
San
Francisco request for statement of Scanlan’s “good standing,”
so that he might engage in ministry at a Menlo Park school and parish
where he was living while he worked for the VA. Dated 5/26/99. [SCANLON-2
248] |
| |
|
| 16. |
Letter
from Vicar General Murphy confirming Scanlan’s good standing.
Dated 6/7/99. [SCANLON-2 249] |
| |
|
| 17. |
Internal
church form signed by Vicar General Murphy confirming Scanlan’s
good standing, including statements that Scanlan had never been
involved in an incident of sexual misconduct. Not dated. [SCANLON-2
007] |
| |
|
| 18. |
Scanlan’s
denial that he sexually abused a 12-year-old girl. Dated 5/15/00.
[SCANLON-2 253-254] |
| |
|
| 19. |
Allegation
that Scanlan sexually abused a 12-year-old girl, described in
a memo from Rev. Charles Higgins to Cardinal Law and Vicar General
Murphy. Dated 5/17/00. [SCANLON-2 261-262] |
| |
|
| 20. |
Memo
from Sr. Rita McCarthy to Rev. Higgins describing an interview with
Scanlan's accuser. Dated 5/20/00. [SCANLON-2 256-258] |
| |
|
| 21. |
Letter
from Scanlan's lawyer to the archdiocesan lawyer listing "facts
which prove" Scanlan's innocence. Dated 5/30/00. [SCANLON-2
275-277] |
| |
|
| 22. |
Memo
from Higgins to Murphy and Miceli, describing Scanlan as angry, but
also citing "substantial information that we have received exonerating
Fr. Scanlan" and describing the investigation that Higgins
is working on with Wilson Rogers, the archdiocesan lawyer. Dated 5/31/00.
[SCANLON-2 280] |
| |
|
| 23. |
Summary
of Scanlan’s file, quoting from a 1986 House of Affirmation
report that mentions Scanlan’s “infatuation with the
young man.” Dated 6/12/00. [SCANLON-2 281-282] |
| |
|
| 24. |
Unsigned
report of a phone call with a parent of the alleged victim, who "feels
abandoned by the Archdiocese" and anxious regarding the whereabouts
of Scanlan. After interviewing the girl, Higgins allegedly said to
her parents, "I believe her. It happened." Dated 7/24/00.
[SCANLON-2 333] |
| |
|
| 25. |
Letter
from Scanlan to Higgins, hoping that "this case brings to light
some of the inadequacies and unjust aspects of this policy."
Dated 9/1/00. [SCANLON-2 336] |
| |
|
| 26. |
Memo
from Cardinal Law accepting Scanlan’s reinstatement in his VA
chaplaincy in accord with the decision of the archdiocesan Review
Board, with attached minutes of the board. The minutes stipulate "that
the complainant and her family continue to be offered support for
outpatient counseling and pastoral support as they deal with the impact
of these events on their family." Dated 9/8/00 and 9/27/00. [SCANLON-2
398-399] |
| |
|
| 27. |
Letter
from Scanlan to Higgins, asking for reimbursement and saying that
"as dedicated priests we are easy prey to the whimsical accusations
of the sick and the angry." Dated 10/14/00. [SCANLON-2 352] |
| |
|
| 28. |
Letter
to Scanlan from Higgins confirming that “we cannot conclude
that the alleged incident(s) more likely than not occurred.”
Dated 10/18/00. [SCANLON-2 403] |
| |
|
| 29. |
Letter
to Scanlan’s accuser from Higgins, confirming that “we
cannot conclude that the alleged incident(s) more likely than not
occurred.” Dated 10/18/00. [SCANLON-2 354] |
| |
|
| 30. |
Letter
from Sr. Rita McCarthy announcing that after a brief extension therapy
for the alleged victim and her family will end. The Review Board's
stipulation of continued therapy is not mentioned. Dated 1/9/01. [SCANLON-2
379] |
| |
|
| 31. |
Letter
from the alleged victim's lawyer objecting to the ending of therapy
and stating the family's continuing need. Dated 5/17/01. [SCANLON-2
382-383] |
| |
|
| 32. |
Sr.
Rita McCarthy's response to the previous letter, granting another
brief extension solely for the alleged victim, after which therapy
will end. She explains that "the clinical appropriateness
of the modality of treatment and length of care are significant issues
considered by our Internal Utilization Review Committee." Dated
7/11/01. [SCANLON-2 384] |
| |
|
Compilation prepared 11/19/05 by BishopAccountability.org. Supplemented
on 11/22/05.