Archive

Supreme Court muzzles grand jury report on priest abuse until challenges are resolved | TribLIVE.com
Pennsylvania

Supreme Court muzzles grand jury report on priest abuse until challenges are resolved

Deb Erdley
webGreensburgCathedral
Jason Cato
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg's Blessed Sacrament Cathedral on Tuesday, May 22, 2018.
GreensburgCathedral2
Jason Cato
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Greensburg's Blessed Sacrament Cathedral on Tuesday, May 22, 2018.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which stayed the release of a sweeping secret grand jury investigation into allegations of sexual abuse in Catholic dioceses across the state, said Monday it will withhold the report to give unindicted people named in it a chance to challenge its findings.

In an unsigned opinion that shed light on last week’s brief ruling, the justices said “many individuals” named in the grand jury report that examined decades of abuse reports in six dioceses, including Greensburg and Pittsburgh, petitioned the court, saying they were denied due process to defend their reputations.

Noting that reputation is a right under the state constitution and that some petitions have yet to be reviewed, the justices said they will review the temporary stay once those challenges “can be resolved, or an informed and fair determination can be made as to whether a continued stay is warranted.”

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro initially said he would make the report public this week. Although he did not oppose the delay, he is urging the court to act swiftly.

“While we did not oppose giving the court a matter of days to conduct a careful review and promptly rule on these motions, that time is quickly expiring,” Shapiro spokesman Joe Grace said.

“Individuals named in the grand jury report filed motions, including a request for a stay, to permanently suppress the voices of victims of widespread sexual abuse within the Catholic Church,” Grace said. “The Office of Attorney General stands in total opposition to that position and is fighting with all of its legal ability to ensure the publication of this report.”

The justices did not put any time limits on their stay.

The grand jury that met in Pittsburgh for 22 months completed its work at the end of April. Under grand jury secrecy rules, the names of those challenging its report remain sealed.

Although it has yet to be publicly released, the 800-plus page grand jury report was given to officials in the dioceses of Pittsburgh, Greensburg, Harrisburg, Erie, Allentown and Scranton in May. Spokesmen for six dioceses, where officials are believed to be crafting their responses, said church officials had no objection to its release.

Abuse victims who testified before the investigative panel and attorneys who represented them said they were shocked when the Supreme Court blocked the release of the document.

The high court intervened to block the release of the report last week after Judge Norman A. Krumenacker III, the grand jury supervisor, denied a series of petitions filed by unindicted individuals seeking an opportunity to cross-examine their accusers.

Debra Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-320-7996, [email protected] or via Twitter @deberdley_trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.