Blog Archives

Bishop John McCormack files: Complaints didn’t dim bishop’s faith in priests


Bishop John McCormack files: Complaints didn’t dim bishop’s faith in priests Papers shed light on McCormack’s role

From Bishop Accountability.

Original story appeared in the Concord Monitor.

By Annmarie Timmins and Amy McConnell         Concord (NH) Monitor         June 6, 2002

http://www.cmonitor.com/stories/front2002/local/documents060602_2002.shtml

Bishop John McCormack has said little about his work handling allegations  of clergy sexual abuse for the Archdiocese of Boston other than that he mishandled some of the cases. Nearly 1,000 pages of internal church documents  involving 10 accused priests released Tuesday provide a better understanding  of his role.

McCormack dealt with dozens of difficult allegations with a mixed record, moving priests quickly out of their assignments but showing leniency for some even as the accusations mounted. The files aren’t complete, however, and it is unclear how the church ultimately resolved each case.

McCormack declined to comment for this story through his spokesman, Pat McGee, saying he had not looked at the documents in nearly a decade.

In most cases, McCormack responded to allegations by questioning the priest, asking his staff to question the alleged victims and then immediately sending the priest for treatment to one of two centers the archdiocese favored.

The exception was the case of Father Ernest Tourigney, where the alleged  victims complained of McCormack’s dallying response.

It is also clear that during treatment and after, McCormack was unfailingly  supportive of the accused priests, even deciding against trying to remove  one because he didn’t want to upset him. In another case, he concluded  one parent’s concerns were unfounded simply because McCormack knew the accused priest and believed his denials. Here is a closer look at what the files in six of the cases show about  McCormack’s involvement:

 Joseph Birmingham

Last month, McCormack said publicly that he’d mishandled cases of sexual abuse allegations during his time in the archdiocese. Among those, he said, was the case of Joseph Birmingham.

The files show that the church had been receiving complaints of sexual misconduct against Birmingham since 1964. One came from a priest. In 1987, according to the church records, Birmingham resigned for health reasons and went to therapy.

Two months later, Cardinal Bernard Law asked McCormack to respond to a parent who had heard rumors of Birmingham’s misconduct and was worried about his own son, who had been an altar boy for Birmingham.

McCormack knew Birmingham well. The two had been in a seminary together and had served together at a Salem, Mass., parish. McCormack had also  heard allegations before.
In April 1987, McCormack followed up on Law’s request and asked Birmingham about the allegations. He wrote back to the parent.
“He assured me there is no factual basis to your concern regarding your son and him,” McCormack wrote. “From my knowledge of Father Birmingham and my relationship with him, I feel he would tell me the truth and I believe he is speaking the truth in this matter.”

McCormack discouraged the man from raising the issue with his son, but he offered the number of the church’s counselors if the father decided otherwise.

Birmingham died in 1989. The archdiocese, McCormack in particular, continued  to receive complaints of sexual misconduct against him. Today, nearly  40 men have accused him of abuse.

A lawyer for one victim has accused McCormack of covering up the abuse  and helping transfer Birmingham around as the allegations mounted. McCormack  has said he had no role in assigning or moving priests while working in Boston.

Ronald Paquin

In 1981, Father Ronald Paquin crashed his car on Interstate 93 in Tilton  after spending a weekend with four teenage boys in a Bethlehem cabin.  One boy died.

The police report concluded that Paquin had fallen asleep at the wheel.  Two months ago, the parents who lost their son filed a wrongful death suit against the church claiming Paquin fell asleep because he’d been up the previous night drinking and having sex with one or more of the boys.

There is almost no mention of the accident in the church files released  this week. The files do contain notes and memos on nearly 20 allegations that came to the archdiocese against Paquin between 1990 and 2000.

At least eight of those victims came forward when McCormack worked in  Boston. Paquin admitted some of the abuse, acknowledged his sexual attraction  to boys and showed no empathy for his victims, according to internal church  records.

McCormack’s response to the allegations was to send Paquin for treatment, assign him a mentor and restrict his ministry so he wasn’t serving with  children.

“I told (Paquin) that it was important for him to go to (treatment)  because of the civil liabilities of the archdiocese and our moral obligations to the parishioners involved,” McCormack wrote in Paquin’s file in  June 1990. Still, complaints continued to come to McCormack that Paquin was spending  time alone with boys. McCormack asked Paquin about the allegations and  recommended continued treatment and restricted ministry.

“I think there is a serious concern how he has expressed his care and concern for young boys,” McCormack wrote in Paquin’s file in September 1990. “It seems to be from mixed motives. It seems that         he does have a true concern for them, but also he has his own needs of affection which get expressed in unhealthy ways.”

McCormack put Paquin on sick leave and sent him to Maryland for treatment. “I told him the archdiocese wants to help him in every way.”

McCormack also met with concerned parishioners from Paquin’s church. He took their concerns to Paquin and asked Paquin how he planned to change his ways. He noted Paquin’s response, including a plan to stop allowing boys to sleep in his bed.

Six months later, Paquin was nearing the end of his treatment in Maryland, and McCormack was preparing to put Paquin back to work, perhaps doing hospital or nursing home ministry.

“We agreed that he is not free to work with young people,” McCormack wrote, “even though there is very little, if any, concern about his  acting out impulsively.”

McCormack assigned Paquin to live in a Massachusetts parish and found him work at a hospital. Meanwhile, allegations about Paquin’s past abuse and current behavior came to the archdiocese. A priest, among others, reported that Paquin was visiting boys from his former parish.

In March 1994, an aide asked McCormack whether the archdiocese could do more than simply offer counseling to the victims who called. Internal church documents show that officials believed it was likely there were  more victims than had come forward.

“Should we be making some kind of contact with any place Ron Paquin has been stationed?” Father John Dooher wrote. There is no indication in the church documents that McCormack responded or that the archdiocese pursued that recommendation.

Three months later, in June 1994, McCormack and his review board, which helped him decide the fate of accused priests, concluded that Paquin should be banned from public ministry and suggested that Paquin ask to be removed from the priesthood. Paquin refused, and neither McCormack nor the review board insisted. In the next six years, after McCormack had left the archdiocese, the review board urged Paquin to remove himself from the priesthood three more times.   He refused each request.

By 2000, the last date noted in the church records released, the archdiocese had received 20 complaints against Paquin.

John Hanlon

The case of Father John Hanlon is unlike the others in that it is the only one that was investigated by the police. The records do not say how  the police became involved, but by the time McCormack entered the picture in August 1993, Hanlon was headed to a criminal trial.

McCormack’s name appears on just one memo in the case. In August 1993,  he summarized the allegations against Hanlon for the church’s personnel  files and noted that he asked fellow priests to help him reach the alleged  victim.

“We want to be of help to the young man as well as to take whatever  steps need to be taken to address this matter,” McCormack wrote.

Hanlon was convicted in a Massachusetts court in March 1994 of two charges of rape and two charges of assault with intent to rape. He was sentenced to three consecutive life sentences.

Paul Mahan

McCormack took five allegations of sexual misconduct to Father Paul Mahan in August 1993 and listened as Mahan said he was innocent. Still, McCormack told Mahan he’d have to be assessed and go on administrative leave.

Law asked McCormack to follow up on the suggestion of one victim’s parent that the church do more to support parents. The parent suggested a support group just for parents of victims.

“It is my hope that we can gather in church and through prayer and worship have a further opportunity to ask God to be with us in these difficult  days,” Law wrote to the parent.

The file does not indicate whether McCormack followed up.

In October 1994, nearly a year after McCormack first approached Mahan, he received a report from another priest who was concerned that Mahan  had his young nephew and two young friends living with him in his Massachusetts  home.  McCormack told Mahan that had to end. But McCormack did not initially ask the boys whether they had been harmed. McCormack, who had a master’s degree in social work by this time, thought to do so after a doctor suggested it.

An unsigned memo in the file shows that church officials contacted a state social worker to help them interview the boys and discussed the possibility of reporting any findings to the state.

 Ernest Tourigney

When McCormack was told in June 1992 that Father Ernest Tourigney needed six months of psychiatric treatment, the priest had allegedly molested at least three boys – one of them for eight years – in several Massachusetts  parishes, according to church documents.

In late June, Law and McCormack met with several alleged victims, who  later told McCormack the archdiocese was operating in a “circle the wagons” mentality. At that meeting, Law and McCormack told victims   that Tourigney would not return to parish work, according to their letter.

But the archdiocesan response was too slow and meager for a victim named  James, who hired a lawyer.

“However, even though Fr. Tourigney was allowed to remain a Priest,his behavior was not addressed and my client was totally ignored,”   wrote the lawyer. “He was not comforted or offered counseling. He  was neglected and made to believe that the Church had no compassion or desire to confront Fr. Tourigney and remove him from contact with Parishioners.”

Two months later – and eight months after their initial meeting with Law and McCormack – Tourigney’s victims still weren’t satisfied by the archdiocese’s actions. McCormack, they said, had promised the matter would be resolved  in a meeting with Tourigney just after the holidays.

“We are into February, and while he vacations on the Cape, the Archdiocese is rife with indecision,” said their letter of February 1993. “On a recent trip to Boston, I and (name blocked out) phoned your office.   I left an urgent message of my itinerary, stated when I would be leaving,  and asked to hear from you. It is now February 20, 1993 and neither I  nor (name blocked out) have heard a word from you.”

More than a month later, McCormack tried to set up a meeting between Law  and one of the victims. The victim, McCormack said, wanted to voice his  concerns about how the archdiocese handled priests who had admitted to  sexual abuse.

“You may recall that after (Tourigney) was assessed at Southdown  for these matters he was returned to parish ministry,” McCormack wrote in March 1993. “Mr. (name blocked out) cannot get over this and wants to make sure that you and I and anyone who was responsible realizes  that this should not happen again. I think it might be helpful in his  healing process to meet with you for a half hour some time with me.”

By May 1993, Tourigney had been placed on administrative leave. But that’s not all his victims wanted of the archdiocese. The archdiocese needed  to begin handling sexual abuse by priests as a criminal matter and creating investigative teams to find other abused children, they wrote to McCormack  in August 1993. The church’s reluctance to do so appeared to be based on “potential  negative political ramifications,” they stated.

By the next spring, archdiocesan officials had become skeptical that their  containment and supervision of Tourigney had reformed his urges. Tourigney,  one official advised McCormack, should be asked to leave the priesthood  for private life – even though he might pose a risk to the public.

“Then he would be free to accept such offers as he sees fit,” the official wrote in May 1994. “It is not a happy solution, because  it leaves him as a potential danger to young men, but perhaps the seriousness of the invitation might get him to think of more effective ways to deal  with his problem.”

No records indicate whether Tourigney left the priesthood or where he lives today.

Richard Matte

In 1992, McCormack summarized three allegations of sexual misconduct against Father Richard Matte – one of which came from a concerned priest – and admitted he was unsure how to proceed.

Matte denied the accusations but volunteered that he’d been falsely accused  years before. The case had never been resolved, but Matte said he had  gone for treatment.

“I am not sure what side to support in the understanding of Father Matte’s behavior,” McCormack wrote in Matte’s personnel file. “Part of me sees him as being very indiscreet. He also speaks about not remembering  things. Then I wonder whether he is denying.”

McCormack sent Matte to a Maryland treatment center for an assessment. The file does not include the center’s response, but by the time an additional allegation came to McCormack’s office in April 1993, Matte was at a Canadian treatment center the church used often.

In a letter to Matte, McCormack relayed the new allegations and offered  support. “I am sure this report will be upsetting to you, Dick,” he wrote. “If there is something I can do to help, Dick, let me know.  You are in my prayers.”

McCormack continued to offer support, even deciding against asking Matte to remove himself from the priesthood for fear he was already too emotionally  unstable. At the time, McCormack knew Matte had told doctors the accusations weren’t entirely untrue, according to the records.

McCormack and his review board decided in November 1993 that Matte should find a counselor and work outside of public ministry. They would not put him in a parish or in a role where he’d be near adolescent males.

In May 1994, McCormack took two more allegations to Matte and noted in the file that Matte was devastated. Again he was supportive.

Matte didn’t like the place McCormack had found for him, so McCormack offered to keep looking. “He has to park his car on the street,” McCormack wrote. “He is fearful it could be stolen or damaged.”

Matte’s file ends with an April 1998 memo detailing another complaint from a man who said Matte’s abuse had made it impossible to have a close relationship with his son and wife. “He is . . . afraid that maybe he can never change, even though he wants to,” wrote the nun who spoke with him.

Sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic archdiocese of Boston


Sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic archdiocese of Boston

The sexual abuse scandal in Boston archdiocese was part of a series of Catholic sex abuse cases in the United States and Ireland. In early 2002, Boston Globe coverage of a series of criminal prosecutions of five Roman Catholic priests thrust the issue of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests into the national limelight.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] The coverage of these cases encouraged other victims to come forward with their allegations of abuse resulting in more lawsuits and criminal cases.[11]

As it became clear that there was truth to many of the allegations and that there was a pattern of sexual abuse and cover-up in a number of large dioceses across the USA, what had originally appeared to be a few isolated cases of abuse exploded into a nationwide scandal. The resulting scandal created a crisis for the Catholic Church in the United States, encouraging victims in other nations to come forward with their allegations of abuse, thus creating a global crisis for the Church.

Ultimately, it became clear that, over several decades in the 20th century, priests and lay members of religious orders in the Catholic Church had sexually abused minors on a scale such that the accusations reached into the thousands. Although the majority of cases were reported to have occurred in the United States, victims have come forward in other nations such as Ireland, Canada and Australia. A major aggravating factor was the actions of Catholic bishops to keep these crimes secret and to reassign the accused to other parishes in positions where they had continued unsupervised contact with youth, thus allowing the abusers to continue their crime.

History

Boston Globe coverage

In 2002, criminal charges were brought against five Roman Catholic priests in the Boston area of the United States (John Geoghan, John Hanlon, Paul Shanley, Robert V. Gale and Jesuit priest James Talbot) which ultimately resulted in the conviction and sentencing of each to prison.[12] The ongoing coverage of these cases by The Boston Globe thrust the issue of “sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests” into the national limelight.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][13] The coverage of these cases encouraged other victims to come forward with their allegations of abuse resulting in more lawsuits and criminal cases.[11]

In 2003, the series of articles in the Boston Globe received a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service. The Globe was honored, according to the Pulitzer website, “for its courageous, comprehensive coverage … an effort that pierced secrecy, stirred local, national and international reaction and produced changes in the Roman Catholic Church.”

Alleged cover-ups

Grassroots public advocacy groups like Voice of the Faithful focused on Cardinal Law after documents revealed his extensive role in covering up incidents of sexual misconduct of his priests. For example, Cardinal Law moved Paul Shanley and John Geoghan from parish to parish within the diocese despite repeated allegations of molestation of children under the priests’ care. Later, it was discovered that Father Shanley even advocated the North American Man-Boy Love Association. Under questioning, the cardinal stated that, when a priest committed a sex crime, the cardinal said his practice was to seek the analysis of psychiatrists, clinicians and therapists in residential treatment centers before deciding whether a priest accused of sexually abusing a child should be returned to the pulpit.

In 1984, John Brendan McCormack became Secretary for Ministerial Personnel in the Archdiocese of Boston. In this position, McCormack was Cardinal Law‘s point person on hearing complaints against priests accused of sexual misconduct and removing some of them from active duty.[14] He was later accused of taking too little action in handling John Geoghan, a Boston priest who allegedly molested over 130 children during his ministry.[14]

In 1990, after receiving complaints from an alleged victim, he removed one priest from duty and sent him to treatment, only for the same priest to later serve as a hospital chaplain.[15] He also wrote conciliatory letters to another priest accused of pedophilia and who once defended the North American Man/Boy Love Association,[16] then failing to notify the diocese to which that priest was later transferred of the accusations made against him.[15]

Cardinal Law’s response

Cardinal Law’s term as Archbishop of Boston began in popularity but quickly declined into turbulence towards the end of his term. Allegations and reports of sexual misconduct by priests of the Archdiocese of Boston became widespread causing Roman Catholics in other dioceses of the United States to investigate similar situations there. Cardinal Law’s actions and inactions prompted public scrutiny of all members of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the steps they had taken in response to past and current allegations of sexual misconduct at the hands of priests. The events in the Archdiocese of Boston exploded into a national Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal.

Law’s public statements and depositions during the abuse crisis claimed that the Cardinal and Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston did not initially have the expertise to understand pedophilia and ephebophilia and relied upon doctors’ recommendations.[17] In January 2002, Law stated, “I promulgated a policy to deal with sexual abuse of minors by clergy. This went into effect on Jan. 15, 1993,” and also noted that the, “policy has been effective.”[18] His depositions echoed those sentiments.[17]

Impact on the diocese

Settlements in the Boston, Massachusetts suits were estimated to be up to $100 million. In some cases insurance companies have balked at meeting the cost of large settlements, claiming the actions were deliberate and not covered by insurance. This was additional financial damage to the Archdiocese, which already faced the need to consolidate and close parishes due to changing attendance and giving patterns. In June 2004, much of the land around the Archdiocese of Boston headquarters was sold to Boston College, in part to raise money for legal costs associated with scandal in Boston.[19][20]

Resignation of Cardinal Law

Law submitted his resignation to the Vatican and Pope John Paul II accepted his resignation on December 13, 2002.

In a statement and apology Cardinal Law said, “To all those who have suffered from my shortcomings and mistakes I both apologize and from them beg forgiveness”. He remained cardinal, which is a separate appointment, and participated in the 2005 papal conclave.

Handling by Bishop Lennon

Bishop Richard Lennon‘s appointment as apostolic administrator of the Boston archdiocese, following the resignation of Cardinal Law, brought criticism from some sex-abuse victims’ groups. This criticism increased after Bishop Lennon‘s appearance in the Frontline Documentary “Hand of God.” The movie documents the history of a Salem, Massachusetts sex scandal and its effects on the film maker’s own family. Lennon closes the Salem parish despite the fact it is not losing money for the Church. Then, when the movie’s filmmaker attempts to film the administrative building where his brother reported his own sexual abuse, Lennon exits the building, shoves the camera, declares he won’t “feel bad about this” after being told why the filmmaker wants to film the building’s exterior, attempts to avoid any discussion of the sex scandal by refusing to talk about anything other than the Church’s private property rights, and responds to the film maker’s claim that he doesn’t care by calling the filmmaker a “sad little man.”

Archbishop O’Malley

Bishop Sean O’Malley was appointed Archbishop of Boston on July 1, 2003, having already dealt with sexual abuse scandals in the dioceses of Palm Beach and Fall River.

In September 2003, the Archdiocese settled most of the abuse-related claims for $85 million.[21]

In June 2004, the archbishop’s residence and the chancery in Brighton and surrounding lands were sold to Boston College, in part to defray costs associated with abuse cases.[22][23][24] The offices of the Archdiocese were moved to Braintree, Massachusetts; Saint John’s Seminary remains on that property.

On August 25, 2011, Cardinal Seán O’Malley released a list of 159 names of priests who had been accused of sexually abusing a minor.[25] The publication mentioned that 250 priests in the archdiocese had been accused but 69 names were omitted because they were either deceased, weren’t active ministers, had not been publicly accused, or were dismissed or left prior to canonical proceedings. An additional 22 names were omitted because the accusations could not be substantiated; nine of these priests were still in active ministry

Sexual abuse cases in the Boston archdiocese

John Birmingham

In 1987, after at least 23 years of child molesting by Father Joseph Birmingham during which time he was shuffled to various parishes, the mother of an altar boy at St. Anns wrote to Law asking if Birmingham had a history of molesting children. Cardinal Law wrote back “I contacted Father Birmingham. … He assured me there is absolutely no factual basis to your concern regarding your son and him. From my knowledge of Father Birmingham and my relationship with him, I feel he would tell me the truth and I believe he is speaking the truth in this matter.” [26]

As a result of the unlawful sex, the Archdiocese of Boston lost millions of dollars in fines and settlements. It also funded the legal defense of accused priests. The archdiocese slipped into large financial deficits.[citation needed] The Archdiocese closed sixty-five parishes before Cardinal Law stepped down from service.

In response to the scandal, over fifty priests signed a letter declaring no confidence in Cardinal Law and asking him to resign [27] – something that had never before happened in the history of the Roman Catholic Church in America.

Paul Desilets

Paul Desilets, a retired Quebec priest, has been indicted on 27 counts of indecent assault and battery dating back to his time as a parish priest in Bellingham, Mass., between 1978 and 1984. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is seeking extradition.[28]

Robert V. Gale

Robert V. Gale was sentenced to 4.5–5 years in prison in 2004 after pleading guilty to repeatedly raping a boy in Waltham during the 1980s.[29][30] Gale (who had been treated in 1987 following years of abusing children[31][32][33][34]) began a restricted ministry around 1992,[35] living at St. Monica’s in South Boston while studying at the University of Massachusetts.

Cardinal Law, who had the ultimate authority, signed off on letting Gale remain at St. Monica’s. An adolescent reported that Gale abused him in his room/office in the rectory just a few months after Law’s decision was made.[30][32][35]

John Geoghan

John Geoghan (1935 – 2003) was accused of sexual abuse involving more than 130 children. Charges were brought in Cambridge, Massachusetts, concerning accusations of a molestation that took place in 1991. Geoghan was defrocked in 1998. He was found guilty in January 2002 of indecent assault and battery for grabbing the buttocks of a 10-year-old boy in a swimming pool at the Waltham Boys and Girls Club in 1991, and was sentenced to nine to ten years in prison.

The trial included testimony from the victim; from a psychiatrist, Dr. Edward Messner, who treated Geoghan for his sexual fantasies about children from 1994 to 1996; and from Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes, who testified that he banned Geoghan from the swimming club after a complaint that he had been proselytizing and had prurient conversations there.

After initially agreeing to, and pulling out of, a $30 million settlement with 86 of Geoghan’s victims, the Boston archdiocese settled with them for $10 million, and is still negotiating with lawyers for other victims. The most recent settlement proposed is $65 million for 542 victims. The settlements are being made because of evidence that the archdiocese had transferred Geoghan from parish to parish despite warnings of his behavior. Evidence also arose, as a result of allegations against Geoghan, that the archdiocese displayed a pattern of shipping other priests to new parishes when allegations of sexual abuse were made.

Two other cases were charged against Geoghan in Boston’s Suffolk County. One case was dropped without prejudice when the victim decided not to testify. In the second case, two rape charges were dismissed by a judge after hotly contested arguments because the statute of limitations had run out. The Commonwealth’s appeal of that ruling was active at the time of Geoghan’s death, and remaining charges of indecent assault in that case were still pending at that time.

On August 23, 2003, while in protective custody at the Souza-Baranowski Correctional Center in Shirley, Massachusetts, Geoghan was strangled and stomped to death in his cell by Joseph Druce, a self-described white supremacist and inmate serving a sentence of life without possibility of parole for killing a man who allegedly made a sexual pass after picking Druce up hitchhiking. An autopsy revealed the cause of death to be “ligature strangulation and blunt chest trauma.” There have been questions raised about the wisdom and propriety of placing these two men in the same unit, since prison officials had been warned by another inmate that Druce had something planned.[15]

Paul Shanley

According to Leon Podles in his book Sacrilege: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church, “In late 1993, Shanley was sent to the Institute of Living in Hartford, Connecticut, for evaluation. The Boston archdiocese has refused to release this evaluation, but other released files show that Shanley admitted to nine sexual encounters, of which four involved boys, and that he was diagnosed as “narcissistic” and “histrionic.” Shanley admitted that he was “attracted to adolescents” and on the basis of this confession, the Boston archdiocese secretly settled several lawsuits against Shanley. The archdiocese of Boston in 1993 had to admit to the diocese of San Bernardino part of the truth about Shanley, and the bishop of San Bernardino immediately dismissed him.”

In February 2005, Shanley was found guilty of indecent assaults and the rape of a male minor and received a sentence of 12 to 15 years in prison. Shanley’s case remains controversial because the allegations of abuse came only after the victim (now an adult) alleged that he “recovered” memories of the abuse from approximately 20 years earlier. The notion of “repressed memory” is highly controversial and has been excluded from several courts of law.[36] The manner in which the accusations against Shanley arose and enormous attention in the media also have given rise to questions about the validity of the convictions.[37][38][39][40][41]

Robert A. Ward affair

In February 2002, Rev. Robert A. Ward was accused of molesting an altar boy in Boston 1970. [42] [43][44][45] Records show that the archdiocese knew at least as early as 1995 that the pastor used cocaine and had been treated for drug abuse. The records also show that in 1999 Ward admitted to downloading of child pornography from the internet, a discovery made when a technician repaired Ward’s computer and noticed the sexually explicit material. Ward was suspended by the Archdiocese of Boston in February 2002 and defrocked by the Vatican in 2005 [46]

References