ShareThis Page
Gag order precedes trial on Philadelphia priest molestation charges |

Gag order precedes trial on Philadelphia priest molestation charges

The Associated Press
| Monday, February 24, 2014 8:00 p.m

PHILADELPHIA — A judge issued a gag order on Monday as another Roman Catholic priest prepares to go on trial in Philadelphia over abuse claims.

A former altar boy has accused the Rev. Andrew McCormick of sexually assaulting him after Mass one day in 1997.

McCormick, 57, vows to fight the charges. His lawyer has previously called the accuser “opportunistic,” suggesting he came forward once McCormick was publicly suspended, perhaps with an eye to suing the church.

The accuser contacted police in 2012 and said news accounts of the Jerry Sandusky and Philadelphia archdiocese sex-abuse trials compelled him to come forward. He said he had been sexually assaulted in a rectory bedroom.

Defense lawyer William Brennan, speaking before the gag order was imposed, described the trial accuser’s complaint as a “lone, unsubstantiated, decades-old allegation.”

Philadelphia prosecutors have been investigating priest abuse allegations in Philadelphia for a decade and gained several convictions.

The office won a 2012 trial conviction of Monsignor William Lynn, the first American church supervisor charged with felony child endangerment for keeping pedophiles in ministry. However, an appeals court overturned the conviction in December, finding the law was misapplied. Lynn was released from prison after 18 months, about half his minimum sentence. Prosecutors are appealing.

Lynn is on house arrest at a city rectory, waiting to hear whether the state Supreme Court will hear the appeal.

Meanwhile, the Philadelphia archdiocese announced this weekend that it would permanently remove two more accused priests from ministry, upon finding complaints of long-ago abuse credible.

Categories: Pennsylvania
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.