Jump to content


Church Loses "Emotional Distress Case"


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
247 replies to this topic

#1 smac97

smac97

    Places Sun, Moon & Stars In The Sky

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,283 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 07:17 AM

This just in:  

Quote

The Mormon church and one of its former officers in King County have been slapped with a $4.2 million verdict for negligence and intentionally inflicting emotional distress on two sisters in a case of child sex abuse.

On Friday, a jury found that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had done nothing to prevent Peter Taylor, a lay officer in the Federal Way stake (a geographic unit of the church), from sexually molesting his stepdaughter despite knowing about the abuse. The girl's younger sister also was a victim, the jury found.

During the trial, police testified that the church had thwarted their attempts to investigate the charges by shielding clergy and maintaining that any information they might have was secret under a priest-penitent privilege.

"No jury likes people that use religion to cover up for the fact that they were protecting child molesters," said Tim Kosnoff, the plaintiffs' lawyer. "It was clear they wanted to send a message to the Mormon church with this verdict."

Seattle attorney Tom Fry, who represented the church, said he was "shocked and surprised" by the ruling.

"I think the jury got it dead wrong," he said, noting that the court had found that Taylor had not been acting as an officer of the church when he molested his stepdaughters.

"The church abhors any type of child abuse," Fry said.
...
Church officials have not yet decided whether to appeal.
More details here:

Quote

A Washington state jury has ordered The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to pay at least $2.5 million to two sisters who alleged their bishop failed to protect them from a stepfather who sexually abused them for years.

The church also is on the hook for an additional $1.7 million unless its attorneys can convince a judge that it shouldn't have to pay for damages related to Peter Taylor, who served just over four years in prison for the crimes.

Seattle attorney Timothy Kosnoff, known for filing similar lawsuits in other states, called the ruling a win for victims often abandoned by church leaders who try to keep sexual abuse under wraps by not reporting it to police.

His client, Jessica Cavalieri, 24, said she hopes the verdict is a wake-up call for the church and a "sign to other victims that they too can have their voices heard."

Church attorney Von Keetch, however, called Friday's verdict "a miscarriage of justice," and said he will encourage church leaders to appeal.

Jurors, he said, were more interested in sending a message than considering the evidence.
...
In the lawsuit, Jessica says Taylor began sexually abusing her back in 1988 - a horror that would continue for a decade. When she mustered the courage to tell a friend in junior high, the friend told the ward's then-bishop, Bruce Hatch.

Hatch invited Jessica and her mother to speak with him, Kosnoff said, telling her mother the meeting was about tension between daughter and stepfather. When Jessica went in alone first, Kosnoff said, Hatch told her to be glad she had not told civil authorities, who would try to destroy her family.

Hatch then spoke with her parents, but never mentioned the abuse, Kosnoff said. Believing her mother had been told, Jessica felt abandoned, she said.

Taylor soon focused his attentions on Ashley, Jessica's younger sister.

When Jessica confided in a friend about the abuse in an e-mail years later, the friend sent the e-mail to her own parents, who then alerted the current bishop of the ward, Stan Wade.

Wade called the family in for an interview, and Taylor confessed to the abuse, Kosnoff said. Jessica's mother was then told by the stake president that civil authorities would be alerted, he said.

When Ashley later told their mother Taylor had abused her, the mother called authorities to report a second case. She then realized church leaders had never reported the abuse of Jessica, Kosnoff said.

The lawsuit alleged an LDS social services therapist who discussed the abuse with Jessica also did not report the allegations to police.

Wade and the stake president later refused to cooperate with police investigating the case, Kosnoff said.

Washington laws don't make clergy mandatory reporters of suspected child sexual abuse. But Kosnoff successfully argued in court that Hatch was acting as a social services counselor when Jessica came to him for help.

The judge on the case allowed that question to go to jurors.

Making clergy subject to the law, said Keetch, is a stretch. Social service  counselors are defined as professionals who encourage the welfare of children or provide services to families.

The church also disputes Kosnoff's version of events. Keetch said Hatch maintained on the witness stand he never had any confirmation that abuse was occurring.

Keetch also points to testimony from several of Jessica's friends.

One in particular, they said, testified that Jessica had told her she lied to Hatch, denying the abuse when confronted.

The church also points to Jessica's own e-mail, in which she writes: "When my mom found out I had been abused, do you know what she said, 'Jessica, you can't tell anyone. You know how embarrassed Grandma and Grandpa would be. If you want we could go down and file a police report, but then everyone's life would be ruined.' So I never did anything."

Said Keetch, "Our position was Bishop Hatch did not know."

The church notes several efforts it has taken in recent years to ensure it follows state reporting laws for child sexual abuse.

Chief among them: a toll-free number for its lay clergy to call for information on how to handle allegations of abuse.

Keetch calls any allegation that it is a haven for abusers "ridiculous."
I recall reading some posts by Tim Kosnoff on the RfM board a few years back.  He was suing the LDS Church in Oregon.  Here's the text of some of the RfM messages on that:

Quote

Abuse Victims File Suit Against LDS
Date:  Jan 09 20:25
Author: Tim Kosnoff
Mail Address: [email protected]
We filed suit a couple of hours ago in Multnomah County Circuit Court, Portland, OR on behalf of twelve men who were sexually abused by Frank Curtis, the same High Priest and Primary Teacher who abused Jeremiah Scott. The allegations against the Mormon Church are similar to those made in Scott regarding the Church's longstanding knowledge and concealment of the child sexual abuse.

We expect there will be news coverage in the Utah press and elsewhere tomorrow. Feel free to call me tomorrow at 425-637-3070 or email me anytime if you have any questions. 

________

Subject:  I hope you take that scumsucking trash to the cleaners
Date:  Jan 10 08:21
Author: Bob
Mail Address: 
I hope you lower the boom on those bastards. It couldn't happen to a more deserving group of people. You realize that the Mormon PR machine is a well-greased association of professional liars with alot of money. Mormons are seasoned Pros at lying and twisting the truth(over 170 years of experience), so you have your hands full. Good luck!
This lawsuit later settled:

Quote

The Mormon Church covered up its knowledge of a High Priest's sexual molestation of young boys for more than a decade according to a Portland, Oregon lawsuit that the church paid $3,000,000.00 to settle.  The charges were brought by one of the priest's victims, Jeremiah Scott.

Today, Scott's mother made a statement describing the Mormon Church as a, "sanctuary for pedophiles.  The church is so concerned about its public image," Sandra Scott charged, "that it hide the truth from me that it had recycled a known pedophile into a position of authority in the church where he had unlimited access to young children."  Scott's legal team hailed the settlement as, "the first big step for one victim in the long struggle to expose the Mormon Church's epidemic pattern of providing a safe and secret haven for child molesters."
...
In a statement attacking the pretrial rulings of Multnomah County Circuit Judge Ellen Rosenblum, the church stated that it paid Scott $3,000,000.00 only because it would have cost "significantly more in legal fees and other costs" to continue with the litigation.  "Nothing could be further from the truth," responded one of Scott's attorneys, Timothy Kosnoff of Bellevue, Washington. "The Mormon Church settled this case because they knew any jury would be outraged by the proof that the church had known for years that Franklin Curtis was a serial pedophile.  The church not only venerated Curtis as a High Priest, but it made him a scout leader and Sunday School teacher -- and then hid the fact that he was a molester from the whole congregation."
And then there's this lawsuit, again involving Mr. Kosnoff:

Quote

A Kent man who says he was the victim of sexual abuse more than 20 years ago has filed a lawsuit against the Mormon church, alleging that church officials shielded the abuser for more than a decade, effectively allowing him to molest at least five other local children.

Ken Fleming, 42, said he brought the case against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because he wanted to hold officials accountable for turning a blind eye as family after family reported that Jack Loholt, the leader of a church-sponsored Boy Scout troop, had molested their children.
...
Tim Kosnoff, the attorney representing Fleming, said this wide-cast net allows more potential child abusers to gain the authority and respect accorded to clerics. The attorney, who has brought numerous sexual abuse cases against the Catholic Church, is involved with at least seven involving Mormons here and in Utah. Washington state has the fourth-highest Mormon population in the country.

"It's more or less the same thing you see in the Catholic Church," Kosnoff said.

"Except that I think it's much worse because there's a far greater number and all of these men are held out as clergylike, worthy of the highest respect and trust, with an imprimatur of moral worthiness."
Mr. Kosnoff is "'looking at' other cases and expect more lawsuits in the future."  He even set up a website, http://www.stopmormonsexualabuse.com/ , which is no longer online, but which, according to this website, included the following:

Quote

Click on www.stopmormonsexualabuse.com and you will immediately find yourself being addressed by lawyers who are already making the assumption that you are a victim of sexual abuse:

Quote

You Are Not Alone.

For years the Mormon Church has been a safe haven for child molesters. It is time for the Mormon Church to take responsibility for the injuries to scores of children that it�¢â?¬â?¢s clergy has perpetrated. Attorneys Jeffrey Anderson, Timothy Kosnoff, and David Slader organized the Victims of Mormon Sexual Abuse Project to help those victims.

I imagine our critics are going to have a good time with this.

-Smac

#2 Rollo Tomasi

Rollo Tomasi

    Brings Forth Plants

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,858 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 07:44 AM

Those are some pretty big settlements and verdicts.  Does anyone know whether the Church pays these from tithing funds or some other pot of money?

#3 Arlon James

Arlon James

    Beloved Child

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 983 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 07:44 AM

Lawyers are sowing the seeds of mankind's destruction.  I wonder if these guys are members of the ACLU?  Lawsuites like this are just part of the ever growing business of bilking any group that has a few bucks in their coffers.  I'm going to speculate and say, if this becomes a nation wide trend, I think many people will be more and more hesitant to take callings involving youth.  Who the heck wants the risk of being accused of something like that?    You know how this will go; if one person in the church happens to turn out to be a bonified molester, then ALL mormons MUST be molesters.... same attitude that developed about the RCC clergy.


Edit:  I'm picturing leagues of hungry, unscrupulous lawyers drudging up any and all who have a beef with the church in cities all across the country.  The sad part is that while any legitimate victims  are seeking compensation, and rightfully so, they will be lumped in and confused with the hordes of sharks who now smell blood in the water.  


LAWYERS OF THE WORLD IGNITE!


Okay, okay we'll make an acception for smac.....

Edited by Arlon James, 22 November 2005 - 08:24 AM.


#4 The_Monk

The_Monk

    Smiter of Ignorance

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,111 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 07:52 AM

Didn't you *know* we were a haven for child molestors?  

Certainly there must be some that goes on, but in this case it sounds like the jury wasn't entirely fair.  The Bishop had conflicting reports.

#5 auteur55

auteur55

    Separates Water & Dry Land

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,885 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 07:57 AM

There may be some monsters in the church. This would be upsetting but not surprising. What I don't like is the insinuation of some form of conspiracy/cover up within the higher ranks of the church which I don't believe in the least. It is hard for us to expect common men, who are volunteering there personal to fulfill a calling to always be smart enough to handle issues as heavy as sexual abuse. Society is always trying to send a message in the form of millions of dollars, they also love to make an enemy of powerful institutions.

#6 BMD

BMD

    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 07:59 AM

Well, we of ISKCON (International Society for Krsna Consciousness) have certainly learned our own lessons about placing individuals (without proper background screening) in supervisory capacities over youth, and iit should get a message across to all religious groups: Kids DO grow up, and they TELL.

ys,
BMD.

Edited by BMD, 22 November 2005 - 08:02 AM.


#7 The_Monk

The_Monk

    Smiter of Ignorance

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,111 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:04 AM

But BMD, the guy doing the abusing wasn't in any supervisory capacity over youth. He was abusing his own daughters at home. The problem came with the conflicting stories told to the Bishop, who did not think that the abuse had been fimrly established, so he did not contact authorities.

#8 BMD

BMD

    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:14 AM

dillfest, on Nov 22 2005, 08:04 AM, said:

But BMD, the guy doing the abusing wasn't in any supervisory capacity over youth. He was abusing his own daughters at home. The problem came with the conflicting stories told to the Bishop, who did not think that the abuse had been fimrly established, so he did not contact authorities.

Quote


The father, as Priesthood leader in the home, certainly DOES have a "supervisory capacity over youth", not only as their biological  source, but in the eyes of the Church.

ys,
BMD.

#9 The_Monk

The_Monk

    Smiter of Ignorance

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,111 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:20 AM

Sure, but the difference is that the Church did not call him as a Father, did not grant him authority as a Father, and he  wasn't acting in official Church capacity when he was comitting this abuse.  There's quite a difference, that I see, vis-a-vis the culpability of the Church between a (nominally) LDS father comitting abuse on his children in his home and a Church leader abusing the children of others on a scout campout or something.

#10 juliann

juliann

    Suffers from McCog-dis

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,718 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:39 AM

BMD, on Nov 22 2005, 08:14 AM, said:

The father, as Priesthood leader in the home, certainly DOES have a "supervisory capacity over youth", not only as their biological  source, but in the eyes of the Church.

I think it is the other way around.  The father has control over the church.  

What surprises me is that there is no law mandating church leaders to report.  Still,  if there is not...this case should have had no merit on that alone.

This idea that any church has to be sent a message is absurd.   They have all gotten several at this point.  
The three-fold sources of truth about man and the universe:  science, the scriptures, and continuing revelation, and how we can know them.
~Dallin Oaks
http://newsroom.lds....vard-law-school

#11 Legend

Legend

    Member: Moves Upon the Waters

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:42 AM

dillfest, on Nov 22 2005, 08:20 AM, said:

a Church leader abusing the children of others on a scout campout or something.

You mean like this?  http://www.sltrib.co...arch/ci_3229665

Here in the "corridor" we hear (on the local news) WAY TOO MUCH of this kind of abuse!
"We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality." - Ayn Rand

#12 cinepro

cinepro

    It's pronounced "cinepro"

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,534 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:47 AM

I think it's sad that, whoever was "at fault", the girls got attacked in the first place.

If the money helps them find some peace and move on, as well as overcome any ill feelings they may have towards the Church and the Bishop, I don't have a huge problem with it.

If it were Christ's money, I couldn't imagine a better place for it than with victims of child abuse.  If it is the Corporation of the First Presidency's money, than it would be better used to grow the assets of the corporation, and is being wasted as the result of an overly litigious society and an ignorant jury.
The LDS Stake Medium Council Blog

In spite of the world's arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God's prophets.

The Flood and the Tower of Babel,  by Donald W. Parry, assistant professor of Hebrew at BYU, Ensign, Jan 1998, 35

#13 BMD

BMD

    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:53 AM

The Church recognized his calling (from God) to be a father, and in performing official capacities pertaining thereto, necessarily placed him in such proximity to his victim to enable him to perform his nefarious criminal acts, report of which to the Bishop (acting as an agent for the Church) was not immediately relayed to the appropriate civil authorities, as the D&C stipulates it must.

Perhaps in addition to counseling fathers as to what constitutes appropriate behavior with their children, the Church should pay more attention to training her Bishops not to fall back on "seat-of-the-pants inspiration" in the performance of their own responsibilities.

ys,
BMD.

#14 The_Monk

The_Monk

    Smiter of Ignorance

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,111 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:57 AM

Quote

The Church...  necessarily placed him in such proximity to his victim to enable him to perform his nefarious criminal acts
   ...

#15 charity

charity

    Creator of quilts

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,142 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 08:59 AM

The victim in this case is in a far worse situation now than she was.  When you get revenge, you don't "feel better."  You feel worse because you are disobeying God.  Vengeance is the Lord's.
But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 2 Timothy 2:2


#16 Legend

Legend

    Member: Moves Upon the Waters

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 09:02 AM

charity, on Nov 22 2005, 08:59 AM, said:

The victim in this case is in a far worse situation now than she was.  When you get revenge, you don't "feel better."  You feel worse because you are disobeying God.  Vengeance is the Lord's.
And what would your advice have been to this victim? In your opinion, what should she have done, nothing?
"We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality." - Ayn Rand

#17 Familyof4

Familyof4

    Member: Moves Upon the Waters

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 291 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 09:28 AM

Quote

Lawsuites like this are just part of the ever growing business of bilking any group that has a few bucks in their coffers

Outragous comment!!  If there is child abuse it is NOT the Lawyers fault and I thank God that we HAVE Lawyers to expose and jail these Wolves in Sheeps clothing.

If money is the only way to get the attention of the church..then so be it.
I pay my tithe and shrek at how my hard earned money is going for this..but if it can help a child ..then so be it..

Edited by Familyof4, 22 November 2005 - 09:28 AM.


#18 charity

charity

    Creator of quilts

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,142 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 09:30 AM

She should have channelled her anger against the source of her distress. The abuser.  Or her mother who told her not to tell anyone. But of course, they didn't have any money.  

But the only healing she will ever get is through forgiveness.  We cannot heal as long as we do not forgive those who hurt us.  And you cannot forgive when extracting vengeance. Every dollar she spends of that settlement will drive her further away from a healthy state.
But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 2 Timothy 2:2


#19 BMD

BMD

    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 09:36 AM

Legend, on Nov 22 2005, 09:02 AM, said:

charity, on Nov 22 2005, 08:59 AM, said:

The victim in this case is in a far worse situation now than she was.  When you get revenge, you don't "feel better."  You feel worse because you are disobeying God.  Vengeance is the Lord's.
And what would your advice have been to this victim? In your opinion, what should she have done, nothing?

Quote

My question too, charity. What constitutes the girl's "disobedience to the Lord" here-

1. Telling?
2. Seeking remunerative compensation?(that may never restore those feelings of purity and innocence that every kid should be allowed to grow up with?)

Is she now "worse off"?

ys,
BMD.

#20 USU78

USU78

    Dr. Pepper Addict

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,166 posts

Posted 22 November 2005 - 09:53 AM

This:

Quote

The Church recognized his calling (from God) to be a father, and in performing official capacities pertaining thereto, necessarily placed him in such proximity to his victim to enable him to perform his nefarious criminal acts, report of which to the Bishop (acting as an agent for the Church) was not immediately relayed to the appropriate civil authorities, as the D&C stipulates it must.

is nonsense.  The Church is not "placing" any parent anywhere, and any parent who is abusing his children is doing so against the multifarious and constant counsel of the Church to fathers.  The father is not the agent of the Church, and any imputation of liability for intentional, criminal acts of members to the Church is a travesty, overturning centuries of legal precedent.  But of course that matters not at all to "outcome oriented" persons who care not a lick for due process.

Quote

Perhaps in addition to counseling fathers as to what constitutes appropriate behavior with their children, the Church should pay more attention to training her Bishops not to fall back on "seat-of-the-pants inspiration" in the performance of their own responsibilities.

This is a mean-spirited and unwarranted slam.  Knock it off.  You have no idea what you're talking about and are parroting RfM bigotry when you say this.
In the immortal words of? Socrates...I DRANK WHAT???!!!


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users