|
February 1, 2006
Dear Colorado Legislator:
Three bills have recently been introduced in the
Colorado legislature that would either remove or modify statutes of
limitation in cases of child sexual molestation committed by someone
who works for a private institution (the sponsors are Senator Joan
Fitz-Gerald and Representative Alice Madden, Senator Paula Sandoval
and Representative Rosemary Marshall, and Representative Gwyn Green).
Furthermore, these bills would allow private institutions to be
prosecuted if they are held to be “vicariously libel.” Exempt from
these measures are public institutions. Public schools, for example,
are shielded under the provision of sovereign immunity, and there is
nothing in any of these bills that would eliminate this glaring
inequity.
These bills are not only discriminatory in both
intent and practice, they unfairly tip the scales of justice against
the accused. Indeed, the bill by Fitz-Gerald and Madden also permits
a civil action “against a defendant who is deceased or
incapacitated.” In other words, Fitz-Gerald thinks that priests who
died when Jimmy Carter was president—or those who are currently
suffering from Alzheimer’s—should be eligible to stand accused of a
crime even though it is impossible for them to defend themselves. And
if this doesn’t work, then the Catholic Church should be eligible for
a massive lawsuit under the provision of vicarious liability. But if
the accused is a public school teacher, then sovereign immunity should
protect both him and the public school industry from prosecution.
It’s actually worse than this. In their joint
statement on this issue, Colorado’s three bishops—Archbishop Charles
Chaput, Michael Sheridan and Arthur Tafoya—say that “Under Colorado
law, even if there were no sovereign immunity (their italics)
the victim of a public school teacher’s misconduct must initiate his
or her claim by filing a formal notice no later than 180 days after
the incident. Moreover, the damages for such claims against
government defendants are capped at $150,000.”
But under these three bills, if the alleged
abuser is a parochial school principal, the accused will be given two
years to file suit even if the alleged crime occurred a generation
ago. However, public school principals who are accused of the
identical crime at the identical time are purposely allowed to get off
scot-free. And unlike the public schools, there is no cap on damages
that parochial schools might have to pay—the sky’s the limit. The
“deep pockets” of the parish—or perhaps the diocese—might even be
subject to vicarious liability.
As if all this weren’t enough, the three bills
are premised on the assumption that child sexual abuse is worse in
parochial schools than in public schools. The empirical evidence,
however, shows just the opposite is true.
Arguably the nation’s leading student of sexual
abuse in the schools is Professor Charol Shakeshaft of Hofstra
University. A few years ago, she was commissioned by the U.S.
Department of Education to review all the studies that have been done
nationwide on this problem. Her report, “Educator Sexual Misconduct:
A Synthesis of Existing Literature,” was released in 2004.
Shakeshaft’s conclusion: nearly 10 percent of
American students are the victims of unwanted sexual attention by
public school employees—ranging from sexual comments to rape—in their
school years. When asked how these statistics compared to priestly
sexual abuse, Shakeshaft said, “the sexual abuse of students in
schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.” Get the
point? None of the bills under consideration target the very venue
where the sexual abuse of children is most rampant!
By way of analogy, consider the following. Would
it make sense to crack down on gambling by targeting church bingo but
not the numbers racket? Would it make sense to crack down on drugs by
targeting cigarettes but not cocaine? Would it make sense to crack
down on street crime by targeting jaywalkers but not muggers?
According to a March 31, 2002 news story in the
Denver Post, 84 teachers in Colorado were found guilty of
either child sexual assault or child abuse between the years 1991 and
2002. Yet under these three bills, not one of these teachers will
face prosecution, nor will any of the molesting teachers since 2002 be
brought up on charges. As a matter of fact, the entire public school
establishment will escape being prosecuted for vicarious liability.
State Senator Paula Sandoval, who co-sponsored
one of the bills, was recently asked why public institutions should be
exempt from the reach of her legislation. Her candor was refreshing:
“I think the law should apply to everybody,” she said, “but my guess
is there would be probably a lot of opposition by the CEA (Colorado
Education Association).”
Colorado lawmakers have a moral and legal
obligation to treat all parties equally. Either these bills should be
amended to blanket all institutions, or they should be rejected as
discriminatory. Unequal justice is injustice, and it is profoundly
un-American, as well.
Sincerely,
William A. Donohue, Ph.D.
President
|
