A chance at justice
Statute of limitations work- around is a win
Justice, true justice on this mortal coil, is an elusive thing. Can there be recompense for a mother’s loss of a child? What is the payback for a life altered by a medical mistake? And the price of innocence stolen and faith undermined by sexual abuse? Immeasurable.
Yet, measure we must. It is what our earthly justice system strives for daily in courtrooms throughout the country.
Pennsylvania’s Superior Court ruled Wednesday that a plaintiff seeking to sue a Roman Catholic diocese for decades- old sexual abuse damage can proceed in her quest for some measure of justice.
The court denied a petition by the Diocese of Altoona- Johnstown to review the case en banc, meaning before the entire court panel. The impact of that decision is to allow to stand a June ruling by a three- person Superior Court panel that determined a lawsuit based on decades- old sexual abuse allegations can move forward. An Altoona area woman has sued the Altoona- Johnstown diocese for fraud and conspiracy related to the sexual abuse she said she suffered as a child in the 1970s and 1980s at the hands of a priest within that diocese.
Generally, lawsuits based on sexual abuse that occurred long ago are barred under Pennsylvania’s statute of limitations. But this lawsuit takes a different approach. The woman accuses the diocese of orchestrating an ongoing pattern of cover- up for abusive priests.
This pattern was well established in extensive grand jury investigations, one that pertained to the AltoonaJohnstown diocese specifically and that was released in 2016 and another statewide grand jury probe that was released a year ago.
Instead of the plaintiff suing for the sexual abuse per se, she is suing the church for hiding it — a fraud and a conspiracy she alleges began long ago and that continued through time, essentially until the 2016 release of the grand jury report. And that means her allegation falls within the pertinent statute of limitations for her particular claims.
The Superior Court’s read on this case could have wide- ranging impacts as numerous accusations of
sexual abuse and cover- up have been leveled against priests and the church. Short of a successful appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, more and similar lawsuits are certain to be filed.
Much evidence of abuse was unearthed by the grand jury investigations in Pennsylvania and beyond. But most of the people who were identified as victims will not see justice in the form of a criminal conviction of their alleged abuser due to the passage of time. Many apparent victimizers are dead. In other cases, the timing of the alleged abuse happened outside the statute of limitations.
In the wake of the grand jury investigations, many have sought ways to find justice for those who recounted horrifying tales of abuse. Adjusting the statute of limitations has been considered and will be considered again but that tack is troubled. The limitations exist for a reason: Memories fade, witnesses are lost.
This approach to the quest for earthly justice resonates: It does not directly address the sin of the original abuse but it deals with that farreaching stain of institutional coverup — if the claim meets the judicial standard. And that will be decided in a Blair County courtroom where the burden is on the plaintiff to prove the pattern of priestly abuse and the diocese’s subsequent conspiracy to hide it. It will be a high bar to clear, but the plaintiff should be given the chance.