Abuse victims launch protest
8 people let diocese know they think Catholic officials have delayed paying them $1.38M
By Adam Parker
Eight people held signs and cited financial hardship while protesting outside the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charleston on Monday, saying the church was late in paying funds awarded in a settlement of sexual abuse cases.
The protest was endorsed by the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, commonly known as SNAP.
Larry Mullen, one of the victims, said Catholic officials have found excuses to delay payment of $1.375 million in a settlement negotiated by Charleston attorney Gregg Meyers in the wake of a larger class-action lawsuit that required the diocese to pay up to $12 million to victims and their families.
A group of victims who opted out of that larger agreement are the plaintiffs in Meyers' separate settlement.
"Some of us have had to file bankruptcy, some of us have had to apply for food stamps and some of us are about to lose our homes because of this delay," Mullen said in a statement, adding that the lack of resolution felt "like salt is being rubbed in our wounds."
The diocese has said it could not pay Meyers' clients until all legal claims were resolved. The diocese also cited an unauthorized addition of a plaintiff to Meyers' settlement.
"We are happy to abide by the original agreement," said diocese spokesman Steve Gajdosik at the time. "The money is there, but we cannot pay it with this pending action."
Meyers said Monday that he received a letter from the diocese last week asserting that because he had not signed a release and had added a 12th plaintiff after the settlement had been negotiated, along with new demands, the diocese was forced to rely on the court for resolution.
The two sides are waiting for a hearing with Dorchester Circuit Judge Diane Goodstein.
Reach Adam Parker at 937-5902 or aparker@postandcourier.com.
Comments
ColdBud (anonymous) says...
Organized religion is our only real "devil".
December 9, 2008 at 7:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
Were these people not paying their own bills before the courts' decision? Have they been waiting for someone else to pay their bills since the courts' decision?
I don't doubt that these people are due compensation, but this accounting leaves many unanswered questions.
December 9, 2008 at 10:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- S.C. losing port traffic to other states
- Out with old ...
- Water — 'The smell is gone'
- Cart gives Buddy new lease on life
- Schools plan to update visitor-security system
- GenPhar site 'red-tagged'
- Man, 17, killed in motorcycle wreck
- Off campus
- Historic manor house used by Girl Scouts is among buildings that might be torn down to make way for future
- Biting research
