BishopAccountability.org
	People Still to Be Heard in Diocese Sex Abuse Settlement By Sheryl Kornman Tucson Citizen [Tucson AZ] July 13, 2005 Although a federal judge approved the Diocese of Tucson's Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization plan Monday, the case will continue. A plan to pay known victims of sexual abuse by priests was accepted by Judge James Marlar. But several pending settlements and objections to decisions by a claimants' panel remain to be heard in bankruptcy court. The public hearing is at 10 a.m. Aug. 23 in federal bankruptcy court, 38 S. Scott Ave., Suite 204. Details of the sex abuse claims are sealed by the court to protect the privacy of claimants. Also, six cases of alleged sexual abuse by diocesan clergy are headed for trial in U.S. District Court, said Susan Boswell, lead bankruptcy attorney for the diocese. The claimants had the option of requesting a trial. The cost of the trials will be paid with money set aside in a litigation trust. It is estimated the awards in those cases could total $1.57 million, Boswell said. Also, about a dozen cases of alleged abuse are expected to be heard by a special master appointed by Marlar to review cases that were rejected by the tort claims committee, Boswell said. Retired Pima County Superior Court Judge Lena Rodriguez is the special master. An analysis by the diocese found that the estimated cost of settling anticipated future claims by people molested before Sept. 20, 2004 - when the Chapter 11 papers were filed - could be $4.05 million. Two "classes" of claimants will be allowed to come forward for an undetermined period: those who are minors and those who are adults with repressed memory. The diocese analysis found that 12 claims could be expected to name eight priests known to be child molesters. One priest may be named by four victims, one priest by two victims, and six other priests by one victim each, based on their past conduct. Dr. Jos? Santiago, a longtime Tucson psychiatrist and hospital administrator, and Paul Duckro, a psychologist employed by the diocese, said in an affidavit how they estimated the number and types of future claims. Santiago chaired the diocesan Sexual Misconduct Policy Review Committee in 2002. "There are two former priests who are currently incarcerated and whose acts of abuse occurred recently enough that there could still be minor victims who have not yet come forward," Duckro wrote in his report to the court. Duckro said that since the April 15, 2005, deadline for filing claims, the diocese has not heard from any victim who said he or she did not file a claim because of repressed memory. Santiago wrote that adults with repressed memory recover their memory through "publicity, therapy or traumatic or spontaneous recovery" and that, "by far, publicity is the greatest trigger for recovery of memory." And, he wrote, because most of the diocese abuse victims have been male and "males statistically do not seek therapy as much as females," Santiago does not believe a large number of people will come forward with memories of abuse recovered through therapy. Another factor likely to limit the number of victims who may come forward is "the fact that only a small percentage - 10 percent to 15 percent - of victims ever report the incident," the psychiatrist stated. Santiago concluded, "I do not think there is a likelihood that a significant number of minors will come forward while they are still minors." Minors in Arizona are under age 18. Santiago said he and Duckro divided the known priest perpetrators, about 17 priests, into two groups: pedophiles, who prefer children 10 and younger, and ephebophiles, who prefer young teenagers, to estimate how many and what kinds of abuse complaints may come forward. The reorganization plan sets aside $5 million from a $22.2 million settlement fund to compensate these future victims. The five-member panel appointed by Marlar to review sex abuse claims will continue to analyze claims as they come in.