June 17, 2002

NO CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST PRIESTS 

IN ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE CASES 

Trenton, NJ – Mercer County Prosecutor Daniel G. Giaquinto announced today that his office will not file criminal charges against 12 priests from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Trenton accused of sexual misconduct.  Based on the applicable law, the nature of the incidents, and the ages of the victims at the time of offense and time of reporting, all 20 cases reviewed by the prosecutor’s office were determined to be beyond the statute of limitations.

“I can think of few, if any, sexual assaults that are as repugnant as those which use trust in the clergy to get at child victims,” Prosecutor Giaquinto said.  “As detestable as this is, we will not be able to prosecute because the statute of limitations has run.”

“It is extremely commendable that Bishop Smith made the decision to break with past practice and come forward with this information,” he continued.  “This new leadership in the diocese has been extremely cooperative during this investigation.”

FACTUAL OVERVIEW

Based on a decision by Bishop John Smith of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Trenton, on or about April 2, 2002, the diocese advised the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office of complaints involving sexual misconduct made against priests over the past 50 years.  Eventually, the diocese forwarded complaints involving 15 victims to the prosecutor’s office.  Subsequently, five additional victims contacted the office independently of Bishop Smith’s announcement, for a total of 20 victims.  The alleged incidents dated from the 1960s to the mid-1990s, with the victims ranging in age from approximately 11 to the mid-30s at the time of the occurrence.  Twelve of the alleged victims are male; eight are female.

The complaints allege kissing, fondling, mutual masturbation, oral sex and sodomy.  Some victims allege that alcohol, marijuana and pornography were used to seduce them.  Most of the sexual abuse alleged was not a singular episode, but consisted of multiple incidents that occurred over a period of time.

Twelve priests have been named in the incidents.  The diocese provided the identities of eight of these priests and four were obtained by those victims who independently contacted this office.  Three of the accused priests are deceased, five have left the priesthood, and two are still active.  One priest was unable to be named by the victim and thus his current status is unknown.  Of the two priests who are still active, the diocese is aware of their identities and locations.

The twelfth priest, Jean Level Eliscard, was prosecuted by this office in 1995 for the sexual assault of a 13-year old girl.  The assault occurred in September 1994 and was immediately reported by the diocese.  Eliscard pled guilty, was sentenced to three years probation and returned to Haiti.  If he ever returns to New Jersey, he is subject to registration requirements under Megan’s Law.

The prosecutor’s office is currently investigating an attempted extortion case involving one of the accused priests who has left the priesthood and the diocese by someone who may have been a victim of sexual assault.

PROCEDURAL STEPS

Each file was examined by Prosecutor Giaquinto, First Assistant Prosecutor Charles E. Waldron, Assistant Prosecutor Dorothy Hersh and Detective Sergeant Mary Ellen Schragger.  A chart of the applicable statute of limitations, which is attached, was prepared for review.  The facts of each complaint were then assessed to determine whether the statute of limitations had expired.  In those instances where it was not apparent from the information provided from the diocese whether the statute of limitations had expired, additional investigative work was performed.  In several instances alleged victims were interviewed in order to determine the nature of the offense, when it occurred, and whether the victim wished to cooperate in an investigation and prosecution.

Difficulties were encountered while reviewing the cases, including the possibly inaccurate memory of the victims and the lack of proper identification by the diocese.  Records sometimes were incomplete, vague and nonspecific.  They did not contain adequate identifiers for the victims or fully explain the nature of the alleged sexual misconduct.  The prosecutor’s office found it necessary to use its Identification Unit to determine some of the victims’ dates of births and addresses as well as the current locations of the priests. 

FINDINGS OF FACT

Criminal Liability of the Priests

In all cases involving the allegations made against priests for sexual misconduct, the statute of limitations has run.  This was determined after carefully reviewing the victim’s age at the time of offense and of reporting of the offense, the nature of the sexual assault, and the applicable statute of limitations.  Due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office will be unable to prosecute any of the alleged wrongdoers who are still living.

Moreover, due to the passage of time and the failure to immediately refer these matters to law enforcement, as well as the sometimes inadequate internal investigation performed by the diocese, it is impossible to determine which, if any, of these alleged incidents actually occurred.  The Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office is simply unable to either proceed with prosecution against the priests or to exonerate them of the alleged offenses.

Criminal Liability of Members of the Diocese

The Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office also analyzed the facts of each case to determine whether any member or members of the diocese committed a crime or offense in failing to timely notify law enforcement of the allegations.  Accordingly, the following statutes and their applicable statute of limitations were reviewed:

1)      N.J.S.A. 2C:29-1, Obstructing Administration of Law, Statute of Limitations – 5 years;

2)      N.J.S.A. 2C:29-3, Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution, Statute of Limitations – 5 years;

3)      N.J.S.A. 2C:29-4, Compounding, Statute of Limitations – 7 years; and,

4)      N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.10, Reports of Child Abuse; and N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.14, Violations Including Failure to Make Report, Statute of Limitations – 1 year. 

In all instances examined by this office, the statute of limitations had expired and therefore it was decided that further investigation against members of the diocese was not warranted.  In addition to the above, based on the information received by this office, it did not appear that the policy decision made by the diocese at the time these complaints were received was made with a criminal intent. 

It is an affirmative defense to the crime of compounding if the financial benefit did not appear excessive for the harm caused by the offense.  Settlement agreements were reviewed to determine if the compounding statute had been violated.  In that regard, the amounts paid were not found to be exorbitant or unreasonable in light of the alleged harm caused.

It should also be noted that crimes involving sexual assault of adults are not mandatory reporting crimes.  That is, a possessor of that information is not under a legal obligation to report the same to authorities.  On the other hand, New Jersey law requires the reporting of child abuse to the Division of Youth and Family Services.  However, upon a reading of the statutes N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.9 through 8.20, it appears that the obligation to report child abuse applies only when the victim is still underage.  It is clear that the intent of these statutes is to protect the child and to afford the relevant authorities the ability to remove the child from a harmful environment.  In this regard, the investigation revealed that in all except one instance involving child victims, the matters were not reported to the diocese until the victims were already adults.  Accordingly, in those incidents it was deemed that the diocese did not violate a duty to report the allegation to the Division of Youth and Family Services or to law enforcement.

AGREEMENT WITH THE DIOCESE

Prosecutor Giaquinto further stated that the Diocese of Trenton and the Mercer County Prosecutor’s Office now have an agreement that all matters of suspected sexual assault or child abuse by members of the clergy will be reported to law enforcement.  This agreement will be committed to writing at a later date and the effort in this regard is being led on a statewide basis by the Division of Criminal Justice, New Jersey Attorney General’s Office.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Prosecutor Giaquinto stated that statutory revisions are necessary in order to clarify the circumstances under which the timely reporting of child abuse and sexual assault allegations is mandatory.  These efforts will be coordinated with the Prosecutors’ Association of New Jersey and the state Division of Criminal Justice. 

“The failure to report these matters to law enforcement on a timely basis prevented a thorough investigation of the allegations,” Prosecutor Giaquinto stated.  “This caused an inability to prosecute or exonerate depending on the weight of the evidence.  We are confident that, under the current leadership of the diocese, this situation will not repeat itself.”