Robert Finn, Kansas City Bishop, To Stand Trial In Abuse Case

Bishop Robert Finn, of Kansas City, Mo., leaves a meeting at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' annual fall assembly in Baltimore, Monday, Nov. 14, 2011. Finn was indicted in October for waiting five months to tell police about hundreds of images of alleged child pornography that were found on a priest's computer. He is the highest-ranking church member in the sex abuse scandal to face criminal charges. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

By Joshua J. McElwee
National Catholic Reporter

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- The first criminal case against a sitting U.S. bishop in the decades-long clergy sex abuse crisis will go forward after a county judge's decision Thursday that Bishop Robert Finn, head of the Kansas City-St. Joseph diocese, must stand trial on charges of failing to report suspected child abuse.

The decision, released April 5 by Jackson County, Mo., Circuit Court Judge John Torrence, denies several motions Finn's lawyers had brought in the case, arguing that charges against the bishop should be thrown out over questions of constitutionality and whether Finn can be considered a "mandated reporter" according to Missouri law.

"The Court finds that the evidence in this case is sufficient to allow a jury to conclude that Bishop Finn was a designated reporter as defined by Missouri law," Torrence wrote in his decision.

Read Judge John Torrence's order here.

The charge against Finn centers on the case of Fr. Shawn Ratigan, a diocesan priest who was arrested last May on charges of possession of child pornography. While the bishop said he was aware of questionable images on the priest's laptop as early as December 2010, Ratigan was not reported to police by the diocese until May 2011.

In separate indictments in October, prosecutors charged both Finn and the Kansas City-St. Joseph diocese as a whole with criminal misdemeanors in the case.

Finn and the diocese have pleaded not guilty to the charges. In motions filed by his lawyers in mid-February, the bishop had said that because others in the diocese were primarily tasked with reporting abuse, he was absolved of primary responsibility in the case and should not be considered a mandated reporter.

Thursday's decision clears the way for a trial in the case. A press statement Thursday morning from the Jackson County prosecutor's office -- which said prosecutors "were pleased" to read Torrence's ruling -- said the trial is currently set to begin Sept. 24.

In his six-page decision, Torrence answers the seven motions filed by lawyers in February for Finn and the diocese, denying all but two of their requests.

Among those Torrence denied is a request by Finn's lawyers to hold separate trials for the bishop and the diocese.
The motion, filed by Finn's lawyers, had alleged that a combined trial would necessarily subject the jury to "substantial prejudice" toward the bishop once they hear the evidence presented by prosecutors against the diocese. It also claimed that by trying the cases together, the judge would essentially pit the diocese and the bishop against one another at trial, creating "the potential for a mutually antagonistic situation between Bishop Finn and the Diocese."

Torrence writes, "The trial will not consist of complex issues and the jury should have no problem compartmentalizing the evidence" against the diocese and the bishop.

Torrence also writes that "serious consideration" will be given by the court to the use of "limiting instructions" in order to ensure that the jury is not biased in either case.

"This Court genuinely believes that a joint trial of both defendants will not result in actual prejudice to either party," he continued.

Two of the other motions denied by Torrence had argued that the charges against the bishop were unconstitutional both as applied in the case and "on their face."

Finn's lawyers argued that Missouri law requiring mandated reporters to "immediately report" suspected abuse was "unconstitutionally vague" because it doesn't specify exactly how quickly people are expected to report those suspicions.

"This Court finds and concludes that persons of ordinary intelligence have no difficulty understanding the meaning of 'immediately report,'" Torrence writes.

Finn's lawyers had also argued that Missouri law specifying people report to police when there is a "reasonable cause to suspect" child abuse could also be considered unconstitutionally vague in some situations.

Torrence writes that it is not up to the judge to imagine a situation where charges would be unconstitutional, but to apply them as seen in the "facts at hand."

"Suffice it to say that the facts in this case appear sufficient to allow a jury to conclude that, at various times, the defendants had reasonable cause to suspect a child may have been subjected to abuse," the order continues.

The judge granted requests by the defendants to extend pre-trial deadlines in the case and to quash additional subpoenas from the prosecution, saying they amount to a "post-Indictment discovery tool" in violation of Missouri law.

Finn's lawyers' February motions seemed to direct blame for the diocese's lack of response in the Ratigan case to Msgr. Robert Murphy, the diocesan vicar general, who received the first reports of concerns about the priest's behavior.

Asserting multiple times that Murphy had not provided Finn with anything more than brief, insubstantial updates regarding Ratigan in the year before the priest's arrest, the motion requesting separate trials alleged that the diocesan sex abuse response team "became solely responsible" for making a report to police about the priest.

Citing Murphy, who served as a member of the diocese's clergy sexual abuse response team until he was removed from the position last summer, the motion alleges Finn's obligations to report the suspected abuse "extinguished" when Murphy, who remains the diocese's vicar general, became aware of it.

Torrence writes that the "evidence in this case is sufficient to allow a jury to conclude that Bishop Finn was a designated reporter as defined by Missouri law."

Thursday's decision concerns one of two Missouri jurisdictions in which Finn has come under criminal scrutiny for his actions in the Ratigan case.

In a separate agreement with prosecutors in Clay County, Mo., in November, prosecutors suspended misdemeanor charges against the bishop in the case so long as Finn agreed to give the prosecutors immediate oversight of the Kansas City-St. Joseph diocese's sex abuse reporting procedures in their county.

As part of the agreement, Finn agreed to meet with diocesan parishes in the county to outline diocesan reporting procedures for suspected child abuse. Finn also agreed to monthly meetings with Clay County prosecutor Daniel White to discuss all reported suspicions of abuse in the county.

Finn held the parish meetings in the spring. A call to the Clay County prosecutor's office to inquire as to the status of the bishop's meeting with prosecutors was not immediately returned.

This column was originally published at the National Catholic Reporter. Joshua J. McElwee is an NCR staff writer. His email address is [e-mail].

Related on HuffPost:

Comments

[SimonBao]

09:29 PM on 04/13/2012

I've no opinion on Finn's guilt or innocence and won't speculate.

But it is way past time that a Roman Catholic bishop in the US finally face criminal charges.

Charges should have been filed against Bevilacqua here in Philadelphia, and perhaps he escaped justice through delays, senility, cancer and death. If his faith turns out to be grounded in reality, he's already in purgatory facing a long sentence there - if he's not someplace even worse.

But it's an indictment of America's cops, district attorneys, and state prosecutors (and the public) that none of these bishops has faced criminal charges till now.

[cminca]

05:37 PM on 04/14/2012

It is also an indictment against the same people if the Catholic Church is not being investigated under RICO for Racketeering:

"The specific goal of RICO is to punish the use of an enterprise to engage in certain criminal activities. A person who uses an enterprise to engage in a pattern of racketeering may be convicted under the RICO criminal statute (18 U.S.C.A. § 1963). An enterprise is defined as "any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity." A pattern is defined as "at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of [RICO's passage] and the last of which occurred within 10 years … after commission of a prior act of racketeering activity."

Racketeering activity under federal law includes a number of criminal offenses, including: ; ....Obstruction of Justice; obstruction of criminal investigation; obstruction of state or local law enforcement; witness tampering; retaliation against witness;... Money Laundering; ...sexual exploitation of children;...Bankruptcy fraud;....

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Racketeering

I'd particularly like to see the new Cardinal indicted on Bankruptcy fraud.

[SimonBao]

08:15 PM on 04/14/2012

I think you may want to consult with some prosecutors and defense attorneys.

They can explain to you better than I why there is zero chance of achieving a conviction in a criminal case on racketeering charges.

And thanks but I don't need a primer on the RICO statutes. But I do not think you've got any kind of persuasive argument here for a RICO prosecution.

[VinZenTexaN]

01:20 PM on 04/13/2012

Here this is what people need Imaginary gods and religion so they keep molesting kids !

If God exists, I hope he has a good excuse

Don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church

Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions

Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer

The Commandments Moses forgot:1)Thou shalt not rape 2)Thou shalt not keep slaves 3)Thou shalt not have sex with children 4)Thou shalt not kill anyone for their religious beliefs. And...5)Thou shalt not profit from the beliefs of others...

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish

"If god doesn't like the way I live, Let him tell me, not you."

Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities

[Forester]

12:46 PM on 04/13/2012

The RCC, for centuries a depraved institution in plain sight.

[TomMartin]

12:45 PM on 04/13/2012

If I heard of a report of molestation, I would tell the police even if I was not required to, unless I knew the police were already informed.

[NovemberScorp]

10:43 AM on 04/13/2012

Karma knows EVERYONES' address ! The Catholic Church condemns ... oh lets see ... divorced people, single parent families, gay and lesbians, women on birth control to name a few. And yet, they protect their own pedofiles and adulterers from public scrutiny. How two faced.

M. Ghandi once said " I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so UNLIKE your Christ." All one has to do is watch and listen. Soooo very hard to refute these words.

[TomMartin]

12:47 PM on 04/13/2012

Hindus must be amazed that you misspell the name of such an important person as M. Gandhi.

[NovemberScorp]

01:23 PM on 04/13/2012

Either that or they may be utterly dismayed that I did a typographical error .... what do you think? I'm so happy I'm not perfect and thank you for keeping me simply humble :)

[Debra Martinez]

09:35 AM on 04/13/2012

The Spirit......

Consider the Bible's use of the term "Spirit"
Bible writers used the Hebrew word "ru'ach "or the Greek word "pneu'ma" when writing about the spirit!

The scriptures themselves indicate the meaning of those words. For instance , Psalm 104:29
states: If you Jehovah take away their spirit [ru'ach] they expired, and back to the dust they go.' And James 2:26 notes that "the body without spirit it [pneu'ma] is dead.' In these verses, then, "spirit" refers to that which gives life to the body. Without spirit , the body is dead. Therefore the Bible the word ru'ach is translateed not only the "spirit " but also as "force" or life-force (the spark of life) that animates all living creatures.

Ecclessiates 12:7 states "The dust [of his body]returns to earth just as it happens to be and the spirit returns to God who gave it"
When the spirit , or life-force , leaves the body dies and returns to the GIVER of LIFE to where it came from . (Job34:14)

Gen 2:7 And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into the nostrils the BREATH of LIFE, and man became to be a LIVING SOUL.

John 5:28,29.... At the resurrection, Jehovah will form a new body for a person sleeping in death and bring it tyo life by putting spirit, or life-fore back into them...

[Debra Martinez]

09:41 AM on 04/13/2012

The Holy Scriptures talk's about these priest that are doing all kind's of evil..

[mcmutter]

07:26 AM on 04/13/2012

His daylong testimony Thursday marked a change in tempo at the trial. For three weeks, jurors had endured a drumbeat of testimony about local priests who allegedly fondled, raped, or tried to molest children.

Prosecutors turned to Doyle to give them a broader perspective about the longtime practices and processes within the Catholic Church - and how Bevilacqua, Lynn, and others may have applied or ignored them.

They contend that Lynn, as the archdiocesan official who investigated priests' misconduct and recommended their assignments, endangered children by not removing two priests he knew or suspected would abuse children.

A second defendant, the Rev. James J. Brennan, is accused of trying to rape a 14-year-old boy in 1996.

The 1994 list of suspected abusers has emerged as a key piece of evidence for both sides in the case.

Lynn's attorneys say he compiled the list and gave it to his superiors after combing hundreds of priests' secret personnel files in an attempt to gauge the breadth of the abuse problem.

They say he knew nothing about the shredding or a memo found 12 years later in a safe at archdiocesan offices that outlined Bevilacqua's order to destroy the list.

Prosecutors have disputed that version, contending that Lynn knew about the cardinal's directive and kept a version of the list on a diskette found in his office

[mcmutter]

07:22 AM on 04/13/2012

Cardinal Anthony J. Bevilacqua broke civil and church laws when he ordered aides in 1994 to shred a list identifying dozens of Philadelphia-area priests suspected of molesting children, an expert on canon law and clergy sex abuse testified on Thursday.

"That was like obstructing justice cubed," the Rev. Thomas P. Doyle told a Common Pleas Court jury. "He's got a list of men who may have abused children - and he's going to shred it?"

The assertion thrust the late cardinal squarely into the spotlight for the first time in the landmark child-sex-abuse and endangerment trial against his former secretary for clergy, Msgr. William J. Lynn.

And though an attorney for Lynn strove to paint Bevilacqua as a bossy micromanager who dictated how the Archdiocese of Philadelphia handled abuse cases, Doyle wouldn't give Lynn a pass.

[mcmutter]

07:04 AM on 04/13/2012

Uh .... child porn ... explicit filthy photos .... make that six Hail Mary's ..... and we'll just forget about this whole thing .....

[owlafaye]

04:25 AM on 04/13/2012

The Catholics twist and turn, duck and deny, spin and revise......they flee before justice and we must chase them, make them accountable...show their face in the sunlight.

These are despicable people.

[msiletta]

10:49 PM on 04/12/2012

Re: the bishop had said {that because} others in the diocese were primarily tasked with reporting abuse,

How convenient. He's blaming his underlings for not reporting the incidents. Who wants to take the rap? Quick, we need a scapegoat !!

[SueZbell]

05:28 PM on 04/12/2012

There need to be certain exclusions to the clergy/confessor sanctity of the confessional rules--anything that leaves in place an ongoing danger for a child.

[mcmutter]

07:06 AM on 04/13/2012

felonies ...

conspiracy to endanger innocent children ....

aiding and abetting ....

[phal4875]

02:51 PM on 04/12/2012

Thank goodness that there is no evidence that any of these people used contraception. That would be the big sin in the eyes of the Church.

[jer44]

10:32 AM on 04/12/2012

A good share of priests are gay, but let's not talk about that? Oh, Mother Mary!

[ThinkCreeps]

10:54 AM on 04/12/2012

Does it much matter what their sexuality is? Surely it's more important that they keep their sticky little hands off the vulnerable?

[Hillbilly49]

09:15 AM on 04/12/2012

The Roman Clergy have been rarely brought to justice; seeing the Boys of Rome doing some hard time might be a good start.

[mcmutter]

07:07 AM on 04/13/2012

bravo ... author .. author