THE STORY MONEY CAN’T BUY: Why Did Inquirer Turn Down Ad Rebutting DA’s Case Against Catholics?

Filed under: Featured News,Government |

Why did the cash-hungry Philadelphia Inquirer turn down $58,000 for an ad that was to contain the message below from the Catholic League for Religious & Civil Rights?

That’s what appears to have happened.

League President Bill Donohue wanted to comment on the sentencing of the Philadelphia Archdiocese’s Father Charles Engelhardt and lay teacher Bernard Shero for rape of a then-juvenile victim “Billy Doe”.

PHILA. INQUIRER bannered this sensational story on Jun. 13. But it would not print a $58,000 advertisement that rebutted in detail the DA's case against two men who may have been innocent, but have been sentenced to hard time.

PHILA. INQUIRER bannered this sensational story on Jun. 13. But it would not print a $58,000 advertisement that rebutted in detail the DA’s case against two men who may have been innocent, but have been sentenced to hard time.

Donohue said, “When we at the Catholic League first heard a boy was allegedly raped by three different persons, two of whom were priests, we were immediately suspicious. After all, how many times in American history has anyone been raped three times by three different persons? The more we learned, the more we were convinced ‘Billy Doe’ was a congenital liar, school dropout, thief, and drug addict, a punk who sought to cash in on the prevailing animus against priests.

“Father Engelhardt, whom no one has ever proved even met ‘Billy Doe,’ was sentenced to six to 12 years in prison; Shero was hit with eight to 16.

“My statement, which was submitted to the Philadelphia Inquirer as an ad, was turned down. It’s not every day a failing metropolitan newspaper rejects $58,000, even when the contents make the paper look bad for not doing its job.”

The 40-year-old Catholic League defends the right of Catholics – lay and clergy alike – to participate in American public life without defamation or discrimination.

Following are the contents of Donohue’s advertisement, which the Inkie refused to publish.

“One of the most outrageous miscarriages of justice ever witnessed has been taking place right before us in Philadelphia. Three Catholic priests, and one Catholic layman, have been railroaded by an ambitious DA. That the media have failed to report fully and accurately on this story is also a disgrace. But it is not too late to set the record straight.

“It may even provoke a second look at what really happened.

“On Mar. 22, 2012, Edward Avery, a former priest who had a record of sexual abuse, pleaded guilty to abusing ‘Billy Doe’ and was sent to prison. On Jan. 17, 2013, he appeared in court as a witness and was asked, ‘Did you do it?’ He said he never touched ‘Doe.’ So why did he plead guilty? Because he and his lawyers were convinced that if he was found guilty, he was facing more than 20 years in prison; he was offered a plea bargain on the eve of his trial, and he took it. Thus, his sentence was reduced to a maximum of five years, and at age 69, that matters. This was the first time Avery was asked by the District Attorney’s prosecutors whether he committed the crime. Why wasn’t he asked prior to this time? No one has offered an explanation.

“Avery had reason not to mess with Judge M. Teresa Sarmina. After all, she showed her bias when she made a patently false statement against the Catholic Church, and then, after I called her out, she walked it back; defense attorneys followed through, asking her to recuse herself.

“She said she misspoke.

“Sarmina didn’t misspeak when Msgr. William Lynn was on trial for conspiracy: to show a pattern of misconduct, she allowed into evidence 21 cases of sexual abuse dating back to 1948, three years before Lynn was born. She misspoke again on Jun. 14, 2012 when she instructed the jury that Lynn did not have to act with criminal intent in order to be found guilty of conspiring to endanger the welfare of a child; the next day she reversed herself, confusing the jury. The jury found Lynn innocent of conspiracy but guilty of endangering the welfare of a child.

“Lynn’s alleged guilt is tied to Avery’s alleged crime. If Avery is innocent, so is Lynn. Moreover, so are Father Charles Engelhardt, 66, and Bernard Shero, 50, both convicted of raping ‘Billy Doe’; they are in jail and were sentenced Jun. 12. The priest was sentenced to six to 12 years in prison, and Shero is looking at eight to 16.

“How did we get to this stage? In the grand jury report of Sep. 26, 2001, the grand jury was charged ‘to investigate the sexual abuse of minors by individuals associated with religious organizations and denominations.’ The DA at the time was Lynne Abraham. After the second grand jury was convened, I decided to challenge her on how she initially reacted. On Mar. 31, 2011, I sent her a letter in the overnight mail asking her to identify which ‘religious organizations and denominations’ she pursued, other than the Roman Catholic Church. Not surprisingly, she did not reply; in other words, she cherry-picked the Catholic Church.

“No matter; in 2005, Abraham came up empty. She knew she couldn’t prosecute old cases, and that is why not a single priest was prosecuted. The big losers were the taxpayers — they got ripped off by having to fund this wild-goose chase.

“In 2011, the new DA, Seth Williams, tried to outdo Abraham. He set his sights on the hierarchy, hoping to nail a bishop .He failed. The best he could do was to get Msgr. Lynn, a top aide to Philadelphia Archbishop Anthony Bevilacqua. Williams was assisted by the grand jury: It never once asked anyone from the Philadelphia Archdiocese Review Board, which polices these matters, to testify.

“Ana Maria Catanzaro, who chaired the panel, said she was ‘shocked at the sweeping statements that were made.’ Indeed, there are more than 20 factual errors in the grand-jury report, misrepresentations that have yet to be corrected.

“No one has explained why Williams could exploit the very same law found wanting by Abraham.

“How could it be that in 2005 when Abraham looked at the state statute for endangering the welfare of children, she concluded that Bevilacqua and Lynn could not be charged under that law, but Williams found the identical statute perfectly applicable in 2011?

“The key witnesses for Williams in the four cases — Avery, Lynn, Engelhardt and Shero — were the alleged victims, ‘Billy Doe’ and Mark Bukowski.

“Bukowski went AWOL shortly after joining the Marines and got a less-than-honorable discharge. Arrested three times, he is known for deceiving law enforcement. His own mother has accused him of stealing from her husband. He testified before the grand jury that Father James Brennan attacked him when he was fully clothed at the age of 14. But then someone rewrote the grand-jury testimony to say he was raped 11 times!

“It is not easy to see how this might have happened since he testified that neither of them was naked when the alleged rape took place. He also told the grand jury that Brennan exposed himself to him, but at the trial he said he wasn’t sure this happened. Furthermore, Bukowski recanted this accusation during an archdiocese inquiry.

“The jury was deadlocked on two charges against Brennan. Bukowski has been in prison for drugs, theft, identify theft, filing a false report, running a stop sign, and driving without a license.

“There will be a retrial.

“The real star witness is ‘Billy Doe.’ DA Williams had been looking for a case that fell within the statute of limitations so he could prosecute Lynn for child endangerment, and now he struck gold. The hunger to get Lynn led prosecutors to accuse him of ‘supplying’ Avery ‘with an endless amount of victims.’

“This monstrous charge — that Lynn operated a conveyor belt of boys readied to be molested — has never been substantiated. It is an outrageous lie. ‘Billy Doe’ says it was the DA’s office that secured a civil attorney for him to sue the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. If so, it raises serious questions about an attorney referenced by the DA’s office who stands to make millions if his client prevails.

“I have asked the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to launch an investigation. Avery took a lie detector test and passed. Engelhardt also took a polygraph and passed. Engelhardt and Shero have no prior arrests. Now compare them to ‘Billy Doe.’

“‘Billy Doe’ has a long record of drug abuse, ranging from marijuana to LSD and heroin. He has been kicked out of two high schools, and has been arrested time and again for drugs and theft. Indeed, his revolving-door lifestyle has subjected him to drug rehabilitation 23 times. He never stops: Even after he became the number-one witness, he was arrested twice for drugs, including intent to distribute 56 bags of heroin.

“Whether it was due to drugs, or is just a reflection of who he is, is unclear, but we know one thing for sure: This guy has a real problem keeping his stories straight.

“‘Billy Doe’ says he was raped by Father Engelhardt. If this were true, his story would at least be consistent. It is not. He told an archdiocese social worker that the priest forced him to engage in oral sex, and then anally raped him for five straight hours. He told the DA’s office he had two encounters with the priest, both involving masturbation. He told the grand jury he had one session, and it involved oral sex. So which is it?

“According to his own brother, the rape couldn’t have happened since it allegedly took place in the sacristy at a time when several other males were going in and out. Indeed, the doors were open.

“When ‘Billy Doe’ was asked about these stories during the trial, he said he was high on heroin when he spoke to the social worker and therefore couldn’t remember what he said to her.

“However, he managed to remember everything else that happened that day.

“‘Billy Doe’ told the grand jury that when he was a 5th grader, Father Avery pulled him aside while he was putting away some choir bells; Avery supposedly told him he was going to do to him what Father Engelhardt allegedly did.

“But the bell story is not believable. At the trial of Engelhardt and Shero, three teachers, including the music director, testified that only 8th-grade boys were allowed to help the maintenance crew. That’s because the bell cases weighed more than 30 lb.; Billy weighed only 63 lb.

“More important, ‘Billy Doe’ told the social worker that he was assaulted, and then anally raped — twice — by Father Avery; he said he ‘bled for a week.’ But when he spoke to the police, he reported no violence: there was no punching and no anal sex.

“He told Detective Andrew Snyder he was abused four times, but was never raped.

“‘Billy Doe’ said he was also raped by Shero. Predictably, he shifted his story three times. He gave the social worker two different locations where it allegedly took place, and then he came up with an even different location when he spoke to the cops. The details of what supposedly happened also kept evolving.

“After he was allegedly raped by Engelhardt and Avery, ‘Billy Doe’ said he avoided them by switching Masses. But that contradicts what his own mother said: She kept a calendar of his activities, and her son’s story doesn’t jive. The priests at the parish also refute ‘Billy Doe’s’ account.

“The alleged rapes supposedly traumatized ‘Billy Doe’ to such a degree that he said he began smoking pot at age 11, and experienced massive personality changes after being raped twice when he was 10, and once when he was 11. But his mother, a registered nurse, disputes this: She testified to a grand jury that there weren’t any personality changes until he was booted from a Catholic high school at age 14. By the way, he was kicked out for drugs and carrying brass knuckles.

“‘Billy Doe’ also claimed that he missed a lot of school after he was raped during the fourth quarter of the 1999-2000 school year. But his report card shows he was never absent.

“Lynn, Avery, Engelhardt and Shero are sitting in jail because of charges made by ‘Billy Doe’; Besides the accuser’s testimony, which is riddled with inconsistencies, there were no corroborating witnesses or physical evidence to back his story. Furthermore, his account was contradicted by a least eight witnesses interviewed by detectives: priests, nuns, teachers, the music director, his former drug counselor, and his older brother. His mother’s understanding of events, as evidenced by the calendar she kept, also differs from his testimony, as do church records.

“Is it any wonder the DA’s office was stunned when the jury found Father Engelhardt and Mr. Shero guilty? Why did Williams deem ‘Billy Doe’ a credible witness when he was never vetted? Everyone knew he was saddled by so much baggage that he wouldn’t qualify for a ten cent loan. So why was he accepted to finger these men?

“Four Catholic men have been framed. The media have definitely dropped the ball on this story. But it is not too late to ask some tough questions. This colossal injustice cannot stand. [Note: The most authoritative account of what happened can be found at Ralph Cipriano’s blog, bigtrial.net.]”

The Inquirer had not returned a phone call to confirm Donohue’s allegation by the time this article was published.

Share
Create PDF    Send article as PDF   

6 Responses to THE STORY MONEY CAN’T BUY: Why Did Inquirer Turn Down Ad Rebutting DA’s Case Against Catholics?

  1. “Why Did Inquirer Turn Down Donahue’s Ad?”

    Maybe because Bill twists and ignores FACTS and creates new ones for his benefit? Maybe people are tired of Bill D slandering and flinging mud and innuendos at anyone who dares disagree with him?

    Maybe because the words that flow from his pen show him to one of the least-Christian-acting people on the planet?

    Isabel Sinton
    June 21, 2013 at 11:26 am

  2. “Why did the cash-hungry Philadelphia Inquirer turn down $58,000 for an ad that was to contain the message below from the Catholic League for Religious & Civil Rights?”

    Just because Bill Donohue has the money doesn’t give him control of the newspaper. He seems to be a pushy little guy from what I’ve read.

    drwho13
    June 21, 2013 at 12:49 pm

  3. Careful in accepting any info from the Master of Misinformation. Donohue is beating out Marciel and Corapi as champion from making money off the Catholic Church.

    Recently he said on EWTN that Soros founded two organizations but neither one was founded by Soros. He tried to print libel in Kansas City but wise heads avoided his calumny.

    Donald Dohr
    June 21, 2013 at 2:34 pm

  4. Great headline. You’re illustrating the point that the Philadelphia Inquirer will not print an editorial disguised as an advertisement even if some bully tries to force them to take $58,000 to do it.

    I’m glad you’re publicizing this ignoble attempt at corrupting journalism. If you want to write an editorial that no one else will print, you’ll have to start your own newspaper.

    Sarah
    June 21, 2013 at 4:29 pm

  5. Dear Sarah:

    Print advertisements routinely advertise opinions. Have you ever noticed a political ad in a newspaper, by chance?

    Furthermore, customers are not “bullies,” they are just customers. Southern segregationists argued that Black customers were “bullies” when they complained about being denied access to the business simply because they were Black.

    It’s a free country & a free press – but a free marketplace as well. Whoever owns the Inkie this month has a right to turn away customers for many reasons, but this is not an unlimited right. Does it apply to denying the largest denomination in America the right to make its case, even when they willingly pick up the full tab for it? That’s not so clear.

    editor @pr
    June 23, 2013 at 8:51 pm

  6. “Does it apply to denying the largest denomination in America the right to make its case, even when they willingly pick up the full tab for it?”

    What are you talking about?

    Since when has Bill Donohue become an official of the RCC? He’s a private Catholic individual with an opinion, no different than any other Catholic.

    drwho13
    June 27, 2013 at 2:25 pm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>