John Paul II the Great Deceiver and Bishop Brom of San Diego

The greatest Pope Deceiver is Pope John Paul II because he was able to cover-up the most heinous crime against thousands of children abused by his own Papal Pedophile-Priests Army within the Vatican and the Catholic Church for more than 26 years of his papacy... that's a quarter of a Century!






Well versed in the Bible and writer of countless encyclicals, homilies and speeches against communism and sins of all sorts, John Paul II was the CEO of his Bishops and together they were cohorts in the cover-up of the greatest crime against children in the history of the Catholic Church in the modern world.



When will Catholics ever learn? When will those "Ghetto Catholics" ever learn that true sainthood is not and cannot be declared by Pope Deceivers like Benedict XVI, John Paul II's papal clone, and therefore should NEVER call John Paul II a "saint" --- not in American soil nor by American lips.

Like any great leader, John Paul II the Great could not have done it alone. He succeeded in -- this greatest Catholic Deception of clergy sexual abuse cover-up -- together with his Cardinals and Bishops. A classic Bishop Deceiver is Robert Brom of San Diego. He himself is accused of sexual misconduct with a young seminarian in recent years.


Below are eight articles that help us understand this web of Catholic Deception unfolding right before our eyes:
1. Bishop Brom paying off the sex-suit against him, by John in DC, professional journalist
2. Bishop Brom's deceptive move of bankruptcy, by Marci Hamilton, a lawyer, staunch defender of clergy abuse victims
3. SNAP's statement on Bishop Brom's bankruptcy plan, by Mary Grant of Long Beach, SNAP Western Regional Director
4. Bishop Brom's Covering up a sexual-abuse crisis, by Mary Gail Frawley-O'Dea of the San Diego Tribune
5. Video of SNAP rally against the Diocese of San Diego
6. Pro-Bankruptcy and Pro-Bishop Brom, an article by J.F. Kelly, Jr., a retired Navy Captain and bank executive
7. Who is J.F. Kelly, Jr., by Sherlock (Holmes ala 21st Century), a lawyer
8. When S.D. diocese filed for bankruptcy, woman lost day in court over sex-abuse case that tore her family apart, By Mark Sauer, Union Tribune Staff Writer


San Diego Bishop who refused funeral for gay man settled high-priced sex suit
John in DC · 3/18/2005 07:41:00 PM ET

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/03/
Comments (40)

My oh my.
.
The Bishop settled a sexual abuse lawsuit for $100,000, while claiming that an investigation proved his innocence. Yet, rather than use that rock-solid evidence to prove his innocence and clear his good name, and the good names of other high-ranking clergy, he and the other clergy chose to pay off the young man who accused them of forcing him to have sex with them.
.
Yes, young man.
.
Now, we have no way of knowing if Bishop Brom did or didn't in essence commit date rape on this young man. You'll have to look at the facts and try to decide that for yourself. But it is interesting, in the context of him refusing a funeral for a gay man.
.
We report, you decide.



http://www.dallasnews.com/cgi-bin/bi/dallas/2002/

BISHOP ROBERT BROM




He is one of about a dozen U.S. bishops who have been accused of sexual misconduct in recent years. Catholic leaders in Minnesota, where Bishop Brom once headed the Diocese of Duluth, have paid a settlement to a former seminarian who alleged that he was coerced into sex.


A spokeswoman for the bishop recently told The Boston Globe that "minimal insurance" money was paid to the accuser, who agreed to retract his claim. Two archbishops who helped negotiate the deal in the mid-1990s said the man received roughly $100,000. The man alleged that in the 1980s, Bishop Brom and other high-ranking clergymen pressured him and other young men to have sex at a seminary in Winona, Minn. Bishop Brom has denied any sexual misconduct and has said that an investigation disproved what the former seminarian "thought he remembered."


In San Diego after Bishop Brom took over, questions arose about how his top aides handled the 1993 case of the Rev. Emmanuel Omemaga, who was accused of raping a 14-year-old girl after her grandfather's funeral, tying her to a bed and photographing her in bondage. The diocese has said it suspended the priest when it first learned of the accusation, then let him go home to the Philippines on vacation.


Police, meanwhile, began investigating and asked a priest who was one of the bishop's aides to alert them immediately upon Father Omemaga's return. "He agreed to do so" but instead waited five days, according to a police report. At that point, according to the report, the aide left a message saying that he had told the wanted man to call police and to consult an attorney. Father Omemaga vanished and remains the target of an arrest warrant. The aide has said he did everything he could do to bring his fellow priest to justice.


I did a little more digging on the good Bishop and found that whether or not he's a date rapists, he sure sounds like a liar.From the SD Union-Tribune, July 4, 2002 (via Lexis):

Less than three weeks after Bishop Robert Brom assured parishioners that no large settlements have been paid out in priest abuse cases since he took over 12 years ago, the Catholic diocese has acknowledged that a man who said he was molested as a boy received $250,000 in December.... Neither Brom nor Bernadeane Carr, the diocese's spokeswoman, would answer questions yesterday. "We don't have any further comments," Carr said.

------




Marci Hamilton, a prominent lawyer points out the strategy of deception of Bishop Brom, "the moral bankruptcy of grasping for cover rather than genuine remorse."
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20070222.html

San Diego Bishop Robert Brom Uses the Threat of Bankruptcy to Push for a Settlement in Consolidated Clergy Child Abuse Cases:
How the Diocese Is Wrongly Trying to Triangulate A Simple Issue of Accountability


By MARCI HAMILTON Thursday, Feb. 22, 2007

On Sunday, February 18, Roman Catholic Bishop Robert Brom distributed leaflets to the San Diego faithful in the pews. In the leaflets, he tried to make the case that the San Diego Diocese could be forced into Chapter 11 bankruptcy because of the 143 consolidated clergy abuse cases against the diocese for the hierarchy's role in the cover up of child abuse. . The leaflets tried to cloud the simple issue that the plaintiffs' suits really raise -- whether the Diocese and its hierarchy will take responsibility for their wrongs to children.

If the bankruptcy were filed, this would be the fifth U.S. diocese to declare bankruptcy. However, in the other four jurisdictions - Tucson, AZ; Portland, OR; Spokane, WA; and Davenport, IA-- the declaration of intent to file came on the eve of trial. Here, however, the declaration has come over a week before the trials are scheduled to begin, on February 28. It is thus geared toward setting the tone and context of ongoing pre-trial settlement discussions (which Bishop Brom specifically mentions)- pressuring plaintiffs to settle lower in order to avoid the inevitable delays of a bankruptcy filing.

The Triangulation Strategy - and Why It's Deceptive

Here is how Bishop Brom summarized the problem:
"We are painfully aware that the victims of abuse have suffered, and we want to treat all of them fairly and equitably. At the same time, good stewardship demands that settlements not cripple the ability of the Church to accomplish its mission and ministries. Consequently, we must consider how best to fairly compensate the victims while at the same time not jeopardizing our overall mission. If this cannot be done through settlement negotiations, the diocese may be forced to file a Chapter 11 reorganization in bankruptcy court."

Once again the Catholic Church's hierarchy is trying to triangulate the problem. Note the Bishop's use of language: the victims "have suffered," but there is no admission of the hierarchy's role in causing their suffering. And the Church's responsibility, as Brom styles it, is "to treat [the victims] fairly and equitably" and "to fairly compensate the victims" - not to accept accountability for its own role. Brom thus describes the abuse victims as if they were someone else's victims who had somehow landed on the Diocese's doorstep, and now must be cared for out of the simple generosity of the diocese.

Brom should have taken full public responsibility for the hierarchy's active role in the creation of more child sex abuse victims. The key to understanding this, and the other pending cases in California and elsewhere, is that they are aimed at the hierarchy's illegal, immoral, and soulless cover up of the abuse and the harm that flows from the secrecy, not the abuse per se.

More insidiously, Brom pits the victims against the parishioners, as if they were somehow adversaries. Of course, this is far from true: The victims were children of past parishioners. And if they had not been brave enough to come forward, then current parishioners' children would continue to be at the same risk as they were. These are two groups joined in a commonality of interest, not two groups at loggerheads.

This triangulation strategy is particularly unpersuasive in the San Diego context. Remember this is San Diego, home to some of the most expensive real estate in the country, and the non-religious property holdings of the Diocese are extensive and valuable beyond most person's imaginations. If they were sold off to serve a fair settlement, it is simply not accurate to say, as Bishop Brom does, that the result would be to "cripple" the Diocese's "mission and ministries." Nor would parishes or schools be affected. Indeed, it is hard to believe anyone in the diocese would even notice the sale of a few of the "unusually diverse real estate holdings, including commercial projects, apartment buildings, condominium complexes and undeveloped land" mentioned in the San Diego Union-Tribune's scathing editorial of Feb. 20.

Would This Bankruptcy Filing Be In Good Faith, As Is Legally Required?

Would such a filing be in good faith, as required under bankruptcy law? There is good reason to think not.

In a previous column, I discussed the Portland Archdiocese's bankruptcy filing, and suggested that a bankruptcy filing that is meant solely to avoid tort liability, is not a proper use of the federal bankruptcy code. That is a perfect description here.

In San Diego, the Diocese does not need reorganization, so much as it wants reduced financial responsibility for the harm it participated in causing. It is transparent that the threat of bankruptcy is intended to force the settlement to move closer to the diocese's demands. This, then, is asset protection, pure and simple.

A bankruptcy threat has force - for several reasons. First, federal bankruptcy immediately stops the clock through the operation of the "automatic stay" of pending litigation. Thus, bankruptcy stalls any forward movement for victims who have already been suffering for years.

Second, no federal bankruptcy moves quickly; such a filing would guarantee more years for these plaintiffs in litigation. Many victims are fragile, and the threat of prolonging the litigation, which already has a four-year history, can be excruciating. These victims do not relish the public attention, though they take on the psychological burden in order to see justice done in some fashion.
For this reason, a bankruptcy filing by the Diocese not only should fail the legal "good faith" standard, but would also be morally reprehensible.

Why Parishioners Familiar with Bankruptcy Law Won't Buy Brom's Argument

Parishioners need to understand, too, that a Chapter 11 federal bankruptcy filing can be very expensive. It will require the diocese to add top-flight bankruptcy attorneys to its already large stable of attorneys, and to pay the attorneys fees of the creditors' lawyers as well (the plaintiffs would be "creditors" under a federal bankruptcy). The cost is going to "reorganize" the already financially healthy diocese.

Moreover, all a bankruptcy filing does is delay the inevitable. If Brom's argument to parishioners is that he has to file for bankruptcy to save money, parishioners need to know that whether he files for bankruptcy or not, he will eventually have to settle with the victims the hierarchy created.

In short, Brom can settle now and move on, or settle in the future and pay the steep cost of a federal bankruptcy. The San Diego diocese's vast holdings make it possible for Brom to choose either option and still come out at the end of the process in a strong financial position, which makes it clear that a bankruptcy is hardly justified here.

The Real Issue: Keeping the Truth from Inhabiting the Public Square

The leaflets' talk of finances, though, is really just a smokescreen, intended to divert the discussion away from what is most important for the public, the victims, and the parishioners -- the truth.

As noted above, the first trial is scheduled to start on Feb. 28. As a defendant, Brom, in all likelihood, would be called to the stand. In the courtroom, he -- like any other witness - would be forbidden from lying, and subject to cross-examination. When that happens, the hierarchy's closely held secrets and machinations will be revealed in the public square.

If the trials go forward, the actions that created the conditions for serial child abuse will become palpable and real, in all their ugly detail, for all to see. It is one thing to read of the stories in the newspaper, or to hear about them second-hand. It is another to hear them from the mouths of those who were in power and created the conditions for child predators to prey on children. The message will extend well beyond those leafleted last Sunday to the local and national community. Doubtless, the fear of that public spectacle is what moves the hierarchy to grab for any available delay, no matter the financial cost, the further toll taken on victims, or the moral bankruptcy of grasping for cover rather than genuine remorse.

What Do You Think? Message Boards

Marci A. Hamilton is the Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University. An archive of her columns on church/state issues - as well as other topics -- can be found on this site. Professor Hamilton's most recent work is God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law (Cambridge University Press 2005).
.
.


-----------

SNAP Press Statement
.

Statement regarding threatened San Diego bankruptcy

February 18, 2007

Statement by Mary Grant of Long Beach, SNAP Western Regional Director 626 419-2930 cell, SNAPnetwork.org

This is simply a shrewd public relations move by a bishop desperate to kept clergy sex crimes covered up.

Brom is terribly afraid of upcoming civil trials where he will have to disclose, under oath and in open court, how much he knew about and how little he did about predator priests.

Only four out of 196 dioceses have ever sought bankruptcy protection. Each did do on the eve of potentially embarrassing civil trial at which top church officials would be forced to admit they protected dangerous priests over innocent kids.
Threats of bankruptcy are designed to guilt trip victims and frighten Catholics so that testimony isn’t given, the truth isn’t exposed and the church isn’t held accountable.
.
.

Links:
Current List OF BISHOPS WITH ABUSE ALLEGATIONS
San Diego – Bishop Robert Brom was accused of coercing a student into a sexual relationship at a seminary in Minnesota, where he once was rector and later ... www.sandiegosnap.org/BishopList.htm l


Catholic Bishops and Sex Abuse
BISHOP ROBERT BROM, He is one of about a dozen U.S. bishops who have been accused of sexual misconduct in recent years. Catholic leaders in Minnesota, ... www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/ resource-files/databases/DallasMorningNewsBishops.htm

Bishop Brom National Catholic Reporter - Find Articles
This letter is in response to the article "A people adrift in San Diego" (NCR, April 8) about Bishop Robert Brom's announcement to 98 parishes prohibiting
pages
.
Bishop Drom presided over the first Mass of the John Paul II the Great University Chapel in San Diego......the Bishop Deceiver praising the Greatest Pope Deceiver!


-------

A Diocese in Bankruptcy

Covering up a sexual-abuse crisis

By Mary Gail Frawley-O'Dea
San Diego Tribune - March 2, 2007

Earlier this month, Bishop Robert Brom issued a “pastoral statement," warning San Diego Catholics that their diocese might declare bankruptcy. Perhaps Brom hoped that area Catholics would not realize that “pastoral" and “bankruptcy" are oxymoronic terms when discussing the sexual-abuse crisis in the Catholic Church.

What is a pastor? Theologian Richard McBrien says that pastors focus more on people than on rules, are guided by the wisdom of experience and respond to the needs of flesh and blood individuals. Bishop Brom's bankruptcy does not seem to fit the pastoral bill.

The people most in need of focus in this situation are the alleged survivors of sexual abuse by priests. Their church hurt them and their loved ones deeply; healing is long and difficult and can be derailed by additional stressors, especially those levied by the abuser or, in this case, the abusers' protectors.

In addition to financial settlements, and often in the end more important to survivors, is the release of documents that convey information about the depth and breadth of sexual abuse in a diocese. It is those documents that allow survivors to help other survivors validate past abuse and perhaps, for the first time, begin to heal.

We have seen that Bishop Brom, along with other bishops of America, will go to extreme measures in order to continue to keep documents about sexual abuse in their domains forever enshrouded in secrecy. Bankruptcy accomplishes that.

In the process, concern for those harmed by sexually abusive priests pales in comparison with an ecclesiastical insistence on preserved power and prestige. These men cling to legal rules and strategies, and implement the unspoken rules of clerical omerta. Where is the pastoral focus on people rather than rules here?

Much wisdom has been accumulated since the Catholic sexual-abuse crisis exploded into the public square in 2002. Unfortunately, most of it seems to have been gleaned by survivors and their advocates who truly have become sadder but wiser about the church's intention to stonewall their efforts to obtain social justice through the release of documents.

Bishops such as Brom are cunning, hunkering down in bunkers of bankruptcy maneuvers, engaging the legal opportunities to hide that which is dearest to them -- their secrets. They seem to have learned nothing about the value of honesty, openness and integrity in the last five years and have not, as a group, fulfilled the promises made at their seminal Dallas 2002 meeting -- vows to be transparent about sexual abuse.

In Dallas, they heard the voices of victims but, if they were moved, most recovered their equilibrium quickly. At the meeting right after Dallas and at every meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops since, victims have been banned from speaking and from having direct contact with bishops. Where is the wisdom of experience with pain and suffering, betrayal and despair, harm done and healing sought here?

Flesh and blood individuals other than survivors also need pastoral care and integrity from their bishops. All Catholics need once and for all to know the truth, all the truth, about clerical exploitation of the young.

Catholics can forgive almost anything -- reconciliation is stamped into their DNA. Catholics know they have to confess all their sins to priests to obtain absolution. In turn, Catholics of San Diego and elsewhere must be told everything by their priests and bishops before they, as lay people, can grant absolution for the crimes committed against the young, and therefore against all Catholics.

And Catholics are not stupid. They know that if the Diocese of Portland paid more than $14 million in legal fees during its bankruptcy proceedings, bankruptcy is not about money. It is about secrets and about preserving secrets at any cost. Where is the response to the needs of flesh and blood individuals here?

When a diocese or a bishop has been morally bankrupt for a long time, financial bankruptcy may be just a blip on the ecclesiastical radar screen. But, for survivors and for all Catholics, another bankruptcy in a long series of betrayals still hurts.

Bishop Brom, we assume, has read the Gospels. He may want to reread Matthew 5:41: and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give them your cloak as well: and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Or, in San Diego, hand over the documents and reclaim a pastoral heart.

Frawley-O'Dea is the author of “Perversion of Power: Sexual Abuse in The Catholic Church" (Vanderbilt University Press, 2007).

-----------




Victim's Group Rallies Against Catholic Diocese


Video: Watch Video
http://www.kfmb.com/stories/story.83256.html

Last Updated:
03-07-07 at 2:07PM

The Catholic Diocese of San Diego is due in court Wednesday, just a week after filing for bankruptcy protection against a string of lawsuits claiming abuse by priests.

It was just a week ago when Bishop Robert Brom announced he had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection to put off going to trial in more than 140 lawsuits alleging sexual abuse by priests.

Bishop Brom says the decision was made because any damages awarded early in a trial could deplete resources, leaving nothing for other victims.

San Diego is now the fifth diocese to choose the option.

In its bankruptcy petition, the diocese listed total assets of $200 million and debts of the same amount. The move would allow the diocese to restructure its financial affairs, giving a federal court authority to supervise expenses.

Lawyers for the alleged victims have criticized the bankruptcy filing, saying the diocese was dodging its legal responsibilities and preventing the full disclosure of the facts involving the sex abuse claims.

Many of the alleged victims are expected to rally Wednesday afternoon to march to bankruptcy court.

--------


PRO-Bankruptcy and Pro-Bishop Brom!

J.F. Kelly, Jr. is a retired Navy Captain and bank executive who writes on current events and military subjects. He is a resident of Coronado, California.

But find out who he really is -- after you read his article... below! You won't be surprised why he is siding with Bishop Brom instead of the poor victims


Bankruptcy And The Bishop

by J. F. Kelly, Jr. [writer]
FRIDAY 3/10/07
http://www.theonerepublic.com/archives

Plaintive lawyers for alleged victims of sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests are in a furious tizzy over Bishop Robert Brom’s decision to file for Chapter 11 protection on behalf of the Diocese of San Diego. Variously described as a cop-out, an outrage and a cowardly act, one unhappy attorney characterized the decision as a cynical attempt to keep the truth from coming out. Another said that if he were a Catholic in San Diego, he’d be embarrassed.

Here’s a contrarian view. I’m a Catholic in the Diocese of San Diego. I am not embarrassed about being a Catholic. Indeed, I am proud of my religion and I support the Bishop’s decision. Moreover, I resent some of the vicious criticism being uttered against it, mostly by lawyers who appear motivated mainly by greed. I believe, furthermore, that there is a certain amount of excess hysteria being generated by activist advocates of alleged victims.

But first, let’s be clear on one thing. I am not an apologist for priests who were pedophiles or for bishops who covered up their despicable acts and reassigned them to other ministerial duties. Nor do I question that abuse was committed. As far as I’m concerned, castration would be appropriate for those who sexually abuse children. As for their superiors found guilty of any cover-up, I favor exiling them to the north coast of Alaska for the rest of their lives. Do I state my feelings on the seriousness of sexual abuse against children clearly enough?

All that said, I find it worthy of note that “victims” of sexual abuse half a century ago have just lately gotten around to emerging from the shadows to seek their fortunes, now that million dollar settlements and jury awards are in fashion and California has eliminated the statute of limitation. Let’s assume that they all actually did suffer abuse and were traumatized and filled with shame. What finally made them decide to come forward and sue if not a chance at a monetary windfall?

Still, I don’t want to trivialize the emotional damage they suffered and their entitlement to some kind of retribution. They were betrayed by their trusted priests who they probably believed to be incapable of wrongdoing. I believe that they should be made whole, if they can prove their allegations. I do not believe, however, that they should be made millionaires at the expense of the Catholic Church.

The diocese attempted to settle many of the 150 or so lawsuits brought against it. It became apparent that the demands would eventually exceed the financial resources of the diocese and its insurance coverage. Some claims would have been paid but others denied as liquid resources ran out. That would be grossly unfair to those victims who got little or nothing. Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection halts, for the time being at least, the individual cases from proceeding to trial. They will, instead, be consolidated under a bankruptcy judge who will sort things out. Individual settlements, however, will most likely be significantly lower than what a jury could award as punitive damages and therein, of course, lays the reason for the plaintiff lawyers’ indignation.

As everyone knows, punitive awards by juries have often lately exceeded the bounds of reasonableness and common sense. That’s especially true in highly emotional cases that have become causes celebres for activists, particularly when deep pockets are available to dip into. Recent settlements in abuse cases in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and the Diocese of Orange County averaged $1.3 million and $1.11 million, respectively. Juries often award far more. But how do you set a price on emotional damage stemming from an event that may have happened decades ago? In many cases, the perpetrators are dead, witnesses are non-existent, unavailable or unreliable and then, of course, there is the unreliability of childhood memories to consider.

Judges tend to take a less emotional view than juries do. Most judges have heard it all before. Jurors are more easily shocked and typically more sympathetic and magnanimous toward victims.

This sordid business has been a huge tragedy for the Catholic Church and those guilty of sexual abuse or of knowingly allowing abusers to have contact with children should be severely punished. Public anger should be focused on them, not on the entire Church which includes its members. The Church and the great majority of its priests have been a strong force for good and a generous source of assistance to the poor and downtrodden. No one who truly cares for our community should want to see it irreparably damaged financially because of the crimes of a relatively small minority of its priests.

Bankruptcy was not a cop-out. It was a business decision that any organization might have made under similar circumstances. Venomous attacks against the Church as a whole are unfair but, I suppose, not surprising, coming as they do from the plaintiff lawyers who will likely now be denied the huge fees that overly-generous jury awards would have generated. CRO

copyright 2007 J. F. Kelly, Jr.


--------


WHO is the REAL J.F. Kelly Jr ?
March 10, 2007

J. F. Kelly Jr. is a retired US Navy Captain who served aboard the USS Gridley with none other than Senator John Kerry. To see his picture go to fvk.squarespace.com/display/ ShowJournal?moduleId=635278&categoryId=71934 - 52k he is the third one on the right opposite Kerry.

He is a Republican of the ultra conservative stripe, by the way I am an independent with conservative leanings. Kelly writes just about weekly on every manner of topic ( he's retired remember) in the conservative One Republic.Org on-line journal. Their site is http://www.theonerepublic.com/archives/

Basically he is a jerk. He goes by J. F. Kelly Jr. to hide out but I found him out as James F Kelly, Navy Captain ......

Coronado is an Island off the San Diego Coast right near the Naval base...really expensive $$$$$ digs....really expensive....


Sherlock


-----------

How the San Diego Diocese Bankrutpcy affect victims' day in court.

When S.D. diocese filed for bankruptcy, woman lost day in court over sex-abuse case that tore her family apart

By Mark Sauer
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
March 11, 2007

OVERVIEW

Background: The Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego is facing about 150 lawsuits alleging sexual abuse by 60 priests from the 1950s to the '90s. Four cases were approaching trial when church officials filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Feb. 27, suspending the process. The first case, that of Nicki Rister, would have begun Feb. 28. Rister has alleged she was sexually abused as a teenager in 1972 by the Rev. Patrick O'Keeffe, then pastor of her church. O'Keeffe has since been removed from the priesthood. San Diego is the fifth U.S. Catholic diocese to seek bankruptcy protection in the face of numerous clergy sexual abuse lawsuits. The diocese and plaintiffs' attorneys were unable to reach a settlement over several years of mediation.

What's happening: Lawsuits ready for trial will wait while the bankruptcy proceedings play out in federal bankruptcy court. The diocese's liabilities and assets will be assessed. It could take a year or longer before decisions are made on payments to abuse victims and their attorneys.



Seeking Closure

He was tall, physically fit, with dark hair and blue eyes, a real charmer with an Irish accent. The high school girls nicknamed him “Father Hot Stuff.”

Nicki Rister said she was sexually abused in 1972 when she was 17 by the Rev. Patrick O'Keeffe. Her case against the San Diego diocese was hours from trial when it was suspended last month.

Read the rest of the article go to
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070311-9999-lz1n11sauer.html