|
Published: December 27, 2007
Asking for trouble?
Fresno bishop names priest accused of sexual misconduct as high school rector
A priest of the Diocese of Fresno found by a superior court jury to have more likely than not sexually molested a young man more than 20 years ago has been named rector of a diocesan Catholic high school.
In December 2006, a superior court jury empanelled in a civil lawsuit against the Fresno diocese voted 9-3 that Fr. Eric Swearingen had molested former altar boy Juan Rocha when Rocha was between 12 and 15 years old.
The December 2007 edition of Central California Catholic Life, Fresno’s diocesan newspaper, reports that Fr. Swearingen has now been named by Bishop John Steinbock as rector of San Joaquin Memorial High School in Fresno, effective Jan. 1.
 Rocha, now a sergeant in Army Special Forces, accused Swearingen of molesting him in the mid-1980s at two different parishes -- St. Alphonsus in Fresno and Our Lady of Guadalupe in Bakersfield. Rocha claims that memories of the alleged abuse did not surface until 2002, when he filed a criminal complaint against the priest. But the Fresno County district attorney’s office dismissed the criminal case for lack of evidence. Rocha then filed a civil lawsuit seeking monetary damages against the Fresno diocese.
In December 2006, after eight days of deliberation, the jury told Superior Court Judge Donald Black that it was hopelessly deadlocked on one element of the case: whether the Diocese of Fresno knew or should have known about the alleged abuse. While the jury’s 9-3 vote finding that Rocha’s allegations of abuse were true was legally sufficient to sustain the charge against Swearingen, it repeatedly deadlocked on the second question -- never reaching the minimum of 9 votes needed to find the allegations against the diocese true or false. As a result, Judge Black declared a mistrial.
During the trial, Rocha testified that Swearingen allowed him to sleep overnight at the rectory and there abused him. The diocese has not denied that Rocha spent nights at the rectory. Swearingen, said diocesan lawyer Carey Johnson, knew nothing of a 1929 diocesan policy forbidding laymen from staying in rectories. Swearingen also took the stand in his own defense, denying that he ever molested Rocha, testifying that he was instead trying to lend a helping hand to a troubled teenager.
While the trial was in progress, Rocha offered to settle the lawsuit with the diocese for $1 if it agreed to defrock Swearingen, but Bishop Steinbock, who insisted on Swearingen’s innocence, refused. An internal investigation by the Diocese of Fresno reportedly concluded that the charges against Swearingen were “not credible.”
A retrial of the case had been set for May 14. But on May 4, lawyers from both sides agreed to arbitration – a process that substitutes a retired judge for the jury. Unlike a jury trial, arbitration proceedings are not open to the public.
Swearingen took a leave of absence as pastor of Holy Spirit parish in Fresno’s upscale Woodward Park neighborhood during the trial, but returned after it ended. According to the parish web site, he remains pastor.
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 3:00 AM By jjc
Suppressed memory allegations are notoriously unreliable. No diocese should automatically accept such claims as automatically valid. The case went to civil trial, where the bar is not particularly high, and a "hung jury" verdict resulted. This makes it a judgement call by the Bishop. This priest may be guilty, but if the Bishop believes him innocent,he should standby him.
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 6:14 AM By Jon
Imagine a 30-year-old white woman coming forward and claiming that she just recalled that 20 years ago she was sexually abused by her black male public school teacher. Who denies that she would be instantly dismissed in the media and by the public as a racist kook? Well, why then are the same “recalled memory” charges against Catholic priests accepted as credible?
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 6:43 AM By Central Valley
This is no surprise to anyone in the Fresno diocese. Fr. Lesteri was found cruising the internet for gay sex and also took money from his parish in Merced. Today Lestiri is found on the diocese television station. He is director of liturgy in the diocese and is the administrator of a parish in Fresno. Right is wrong and wrong is right int he diocese of John Steinbock.Just look at the reward Steinbock gives his boys, while he persecutes the orthodox like Fr. Joe Baca. If Fresno is lucky Steinbock will retire early. God help the man who comes after Steinbock, he will alot of cleaning up to do.
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 9:26 AM By Fr. M.P.
An accusation is not a conviction, is it? Or have we digressed to guilty until proven innocent? If that is the case, the enemy only needs to find someone to accuse every priest and then there will be none, just what the enemy wants.
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 9:43 AM By Mary Pitcher
The only question I have is what good can come from placing Swearingen in this position? How can this be best for the families of San Joaquin Memorial High School? It's time for families to stand together and demand real pastoral care from their Bishop and all who work for him.
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 10:28 AM By John Harris
The author of this has failed to mention that the Fresno Dist Attorney found no merit for a criminal case after careful evaluation, and the plaintiff had several recorded cases of mental instability. The $1 pitch was a failed PR ploy... this case (and multiple similar cases) are always about the money. Regardless of the court of popular opinion (media) The Church is rock solid and Fr Eric is an outstanding pastor. I have no doubt he will do great things at San Joaquin Memorial High School.
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 12:12 PM By Wm Hamilton
RE John Harris comment above: The article did mention what you said it did not. Here is the quote: "But the Fresno County district attorney’s office dismissed the criminal case for lack of evidence."
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 12:27 PM By John L. Sillasen
Why is it so difficult to assess the moral condition of a man, especially one in the spotlight?
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 1:24 PM By Anita Salsedo
As long as the people in this Diocese keep supporting this corruption it will continue. Why would the Bishop think anybody cares? Didn't the congregation stand and cheer when this shamed priest returned?
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 4:58 PM By Central Valley
Anita,
They also cheered when Fr. Lestiri came back into ministry, even after he took money from the parish and was cruising the internet for gay sex? Bp. Steinbock will always back up his boys.....
|
Posted Thursday, December 27, 2007 7:31 PM By George
Any man of God - shepherd of his flock - who perpetrated such a horrific travesty upon one of his charges should stand up (like a man), admit his faults before God and his fellows, apologize to his innocent victim, and take responsibility for his actions. The entire priesthood, church hierarchy, and the Church itself loses all credibility and moral authority when one unrepentant predator is permitted to go unpunished. The church was not established to create a sexual playground for its clergy, but as a place of salvation, peace and refuge for God’s children. If this priest committed these acts against this child and refuses to make amends and restitution, despite confessions and priestly forgiveness, I pity his soul when God extracts payment. Each day a victim suffers from a perpetrator’s denials only compounds the sin. Confessing to another priest is easy. Confession to the victim is what is necessary for penance. Non-conviction in a court of law matters not – God knows the truth, and so do you. True men of God take personal responsibility for their actions.
|
Posted Friday, December 28, 2007 6:50 AM By hrh
Sales of Kool-Aid must be brisk in the Fresno Diocese.
|
Posted Friday, December 28, 2007 10:33 AM By Christopher Zehnder
To my mind, the evidence against Swearingen is thin; I have my doubts about this suppressed memory business. What seems significant to me in this story is that, whether Swearingen is guilty or not, the bishop would have the imprudence to place him as rector of a high school.
|
Posted Friday, December 28, 2007 11:52 AM By John W.
Well the Novus Ordonarians continue to support these corrupt and perverted priests and bishops, while Traditionalists are called all types of names and insults thrown at them for simply trying to be faithful and supportive of Rome and The Holy Father!!
|
Posted Friday, December 28, 2007 2:12 PM By Sheila
John W
Quit blaming the Novus Ordonarians for the sex scandals. Some of the sex scandals dare back to the 50's and early 60's the time the trads want to go back to. Maybe we ought to go back to the times when the popes had mistresses and there other questionable going ons in the Church. Oh well! at least these popes said the Tridentine mass. The church was marred by scandals throughout the ages. Luckily we have had some decent popes since the late 1800's.
|
Posted Friday, December 28, 2007 2:25 PM By jenny
gives the good men of god a bad name.
|
Posted Friday, December 28, 2007 5:45 PM By TD
The moral vacuum that is so obvious among the members of the clerical elite and among many lay believers as well. Something is wrong when an entire class, the leadership/authority class, cannot see the evil in sexual abuse and its cover-up
|
Posted Saturday, December 29, 2007 8:58 AM By T. Mada
From Oscar and Emmy Award-winning filmmakers Allie Light and Irving Saraf, in partnership with Carol Monpere, also an Emmy Award-winner, comes their latest film, The Sermons Of Sister Jane: Believing the Unbelievable. This documentary is an engaging portrait that sparkles with the courage, wit and humanity of Sister Jane Kelly, who combines her deep spiritual faith with her equally powerful commitment towards resistance and change.
When Sister Jane discovered that a priest in her church was molesting young men and stealing from the congregation, and when the evidence was ignored by the church, she contacted the press, creating a scandal. Throughout the film she shares her progressive views on issues such as birth control, homosexuality, and women priests. She impels the Catholic Church to return to egalitarian roots of community. The scenes filmed at Plowshares, an organization she created to feed and serve the poor and homeless, demonstrate Sister Jane’s powerful ability to translate her faith into profoundly meaningful action. This touching documentary, skillfully produced by these acclaimed filmmakers, reveals Sister Jane’s long struggle to speak out against what she believed was wrong, and how this ongoing battle ultimately has heart-breaking results.
http://www.linktv.org/programs/dd_sermons
|
Posted Saturday, December 29, 2007 4:23 PM By Ann
I don't know if the charges against Fr. Eric are true or not and I'm inclined to believe he is innocent, but Bishop Steinbock continues to exhibit horrible discretion. This can do nothing but bring more bad publicity to the diocese.
Please Holy Father, send us a wise and holy bishop!
|
Posted Saturday, December 29, 2007 6:49 PM By Innocent III
Ann, I agree that regardless of Fr. Eric's guilt or innocence, this was a colossally stupid move by the bishop. Between this and giving Fr. Lastiri two positions of importance in the diocese, it's almost as if the bishop is rubbing our noses in it: "How dare you accuse one of my guys? THIS will teach you annoying sticklers a lesson." Hey, you know who would have been perfect for the position at SJM? Fr. Joseph Baca. Anyone have his number?
|
Posted Saturday, December 29, 2007 7:01 PM By John L. Sillasen
I would think Sr Jane was not the one who made the scandal, but the corrupt priest and congregation ... what she did was to bring the scandal to light, so public pressure could end it.
|
Posted Sunday, December 30, 2007 12:49 PM By Steve
There is outrage in parts of Spanish society following declarations made over Christmas from the Bishop of Tenerife, Bernardo Álvarez. His comments were that there are youngsters who want to be abused, and he compared that abuse to homosexuality, describing them both as prejudicial to society. He said that on occasions the abuse happened because the there are children who consent to it.
‘There are 13 year old adolescents who are under age and who are perfectly in agreement with, and what’s more wanting it, and if you are careless they will even provoke you’, he said. Bishops and Cardinals in this country have said the same thing.
|
Posted Sunday, December 30, 2007 1:28 PM By John L. Sillasen
Steve, he's correct. That is because homosexuality contains a variety of depraved effects in people. Kids follow the "nurturing" of those who influence them the most ... "care givers", parents, foster homes, etc. The critical thing is not what kids or anyone else wants, it's what God wants. Does God want bishops to excuse deviant behavior because it's easier for the bishop, or does God want deviant behavior corrected? Is the bishop meant by God to turn a blind eye to the infamy being thrust upon many, or does God want the bishop to give his life putting a stop to it?
|
Posted Sunday, December 30, 2007 3:41 PM By hrh
John L Sillasen writes, referring to the despicable rantings (The Devil made him do it?!?!) of a Spanish miter: Steve, he's correct. That is because "homosexuality contains a variety of depraved effects in people." ?Che? Can someone translate this for me?
|
Posted Sunday, December 30, 2007 3:45 PM By Steve
JLS: God wants the RCC to stop abusing Catholic children and covering it up. The RCC sustains these abusing priests. They continually put the children in there care at risk of being abused by child abusing priests over and over again. Start believing the victims and pray hard that more of them have the courage to come forward like Sergeant Rocha has to expose his perpetrator.
|
Posted Sunday, December 30, 2007 9:23 PM By John L. Sillasen
Steve, I agree with you 100%. The "Spanish miter" said some kids invite sexual abuse. What's to argue? They do. Haven't you been around lots of kids? If so, you will see it on occasion. But why did you seem to jump to the conclusion that I was supporting child abuse? The only thing I know of this bishop is that he was reported to have said that one statement. It is a factual statement. It only goes to demonstrate the agony of the whole damned abuse situation -- some kids are formed into the masochistic role of perversion. A Bible parallel: The woman used by "pimps" who had seven demons cast out of her. This abuse is absolutely abominable ... It is absolutely no excuse for a bishop to write off such kids, if that is what he is doing. Which brings up the question of what is that Bishop doing about child sex abuse, both within and without the Church?
|
Posted Sunday, December 30, 2007 11:17 PM By Steve
JLS: I guess you didn't get my point. Believe the victims instead of the perps and the hierarchy that covers it up. There is no more room for excuses from the hierarchy of the RCC. Sergeant Rocha was abused by this priest and it was covered up. His courage in exposing his perpetraitor is beyond youre comprehenson. If you cain't see what the problem is then you need some kind of help to understand it. The Bishop in question is doing nothing to protect children from abusing priests. If you think he is then you need more help understanding child abuse in the RCC. The best thing you can do to enlighten youreself is to talk to the victims and here what they have to say. I have, and that's why I know you and others like you don't have a clue about what you are talking or writing about.
|
Posted Monday, December 31, 2007 9:31 AM By John L. Sillasen
Steve, why are you jumping irrationally on me? I just told you that I agreed with you. Your initial post did not provide any information that bears on what you are arguing. I simply responded to the info in the post. Still, you are posting an argument based on hearsay ... If there is evidence, then post it. This stuff needs to come to light. I recall reading something about the case of Sgt Roca. Yes, you make an important point when you say that his courage is beyond my comprehension. So, why not take it one more step, Steve, and explain it further ... or in this case, it might be good to provide a link to a comprehensive look.
|
Posted Monday, December 31, 2007 1:04 PM By tom amadeo
Shiela--no one can deny the terrible behavior of some members of the Church hierarchy and laity throughout history,indeed since the fall of man through Adam and Eve.But present bad behavior cannot ever be justified on the basis that someone else has already behaved badly.To suggest that clerical bad behavior was more acceptable to "trads" BECAUSE the perpetrators said the Tridentine Mass is outragious.But bad behavior,coupled with bad doctrine is worse than either alone.In the past,bad behavior may have been tolerated,but today is seems to be encouraged.But by far the most important question I have is: as the laity what can we do remedially,since the hierarchy seems impotent in this regard,and would rather that we just shut up.But,pious phrases,wishful thinking,and BLIND obedience,were not ,are not and will not be, effective. Action,in accordance with dogmatic church doctrine of course,must be decisive.The inner establishment has not tried,except by giving lip service, to do anything meaningful to correct the problems.Who will,then?Are we not obliged to try?
|
Posted Monday, December 31, 2007 1:50 PM By John L. Sillasen
tom amadeo, one thing I've noticed about the Church today is the lack of organization of the laity. I grew up playing and working in teams ... I know what tight teamwork can accomplish. I simply do not run into it these days.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 01, 2008 11:14 AM By Betty
I'd like to hear more about this "lack of organization of the laity" I have personal feelings about this lack of organization because of various rebuffs that I have received but I don't want to go into details here.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 01, 2008 2:31 PM By John L. Sillasen
If you want an example of organization or teamwork, look at sports teams at play, or pit crews at races, or highly disciplined military units in action ... any time you have an objective that can be seen and desired by the whole group, and you have good leadership, then you can have great organization. I see it all the time, apart from any Church activity ... my question is why this is. I was thinking about this earlier today: A lot of Catholic organizations are heavy with paid staffers ... so, guess what? If they were ever to reach their goal, then they'd be out of a job. The laity needs to consider doing the things needed to be done but without paid leadership. This goes for the clergy too ... it is the reason for vows of poverty in some organizatioins ... have you lately seen the "poverty" of the groups?
|
Posted Tuesday, January 01, 2008 4:01 PM By Betty
I think we could do without the paid staffers. Some people like me ask questions like, "How much are you paying them? How did you select that particular person? What qualifications does she have? How come you didn't advertise that position so that other people could apply for it? There may have been other people more qualified who would accept a lower salary. People like me who ask questions are treated very badly as if it's none of my business.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 01, 2008 7:12 PM By John L. Sillasen
Betty, keep asking the questions. Jesus tells us to ask, seek and knock, the acronym in English is ASK.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 02, 2008 6:34 AM By BJ
Absolutely the last thing our church needs is another high profile case of 'dubious relationship' between priest and minor! The bishop must surely know that this appointment will only reanimate the interest in the whole series of tragic evil stories and therefore yet again attract the understandable opprobrium of well intentioned,and not so well intentioned, non catholics,bringing even more sustained hatred of our beloved church - again generated by actions from within!
No doubt the bishop has his reasons.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 02, 2008 10:56 AM By John L. Sillasen
Well, why not look at it this way, since the priest is already in position: If he nabs one of the kids, then whose fault would it be? His, the Bishop's, or that community's?
|
Posted Wednesday, January 02, 2008 4:55 PM By Steve
All of the above!
|
Posted Wednesday, January 02, 2008 9:49 PM By newsgal
Is anyone out there a concerned parent of a SJM student willing to speak out? If so please email me @ alisha.gallon@abc.com
|
Posted Thursday, January 17, 2008 12:11 PM By Debbie
I am not shocked by this happening.When these cases were being investigated by the State Attorneys office,the Vatican refused to cooperate.They found in one diocese alone 1000 cases of sexual abuse.I don't know what happened but the government choose not to make public or prosecute all these pedophile priests.One of the investigating attorney's said it was like having dealings with organized crime.The had great difficulty in any kind of real cooperation with the investigation.I was raped as a child by catholic preists.I tried to tell other people when I was a child and living in the area where it was happening.I was told by a priest who came to counsel my mother after I tried to tell her, that I was a very bad child for saying what I was saying.Of coarse I knew he was lying and that obviously he was the one who was protecting bad people.When we moved away I told again a catholic nun and of coarse they went immedietly to the head priest. I was told I would be killed if I ever told anyone before we moved away.
I chooce to try and tell again because there were children still being harmed in the city that we had left.When I told the nun at this other congregation in the city that we had moved to, they promised me they would put all the people in jail but that I could not tell anyone else.I had to keep the secret or many people would either be very angry at me or hurt.They promised that what had happened to me or the other children would never be done to another child.I remember having nightmares and waking up screaming for a couple of months during this time.
At first I was afraid if I told I would be killed,then after being brave enough to tell anyways, I was told if I continued to remember children could possibly be harmed or not protected.I had to repress everything all over again.The memories resurfaced later after I had my daughter.I did not remember until 3 or 4 years later that catholic preists were apart of the abuse besides two of my relatives.
|
Posted Thursday, May 22, 2008 10:32 AM By Michael
Do the readers of this article understand our court system? In a civil case it’s MUCH easier to prove something than in a criminal case. The burden is lower, suspect evidence is allowed, etc. Also, remember he took the witness stand himself... Would guilty people take the stand?
I am also deeply troubled that people are assuming the man is guilty. Does anyone here who posted know the man personally? How about any close friends? Has his friends abandoned him? What about his Parrish, have they left? Or do the people who REALLY know him stand by him? If he were a “bad” person who performed those types of horrible activities, wouldn’t people get squeamish around him? Mothers and fathers are smart about things like this…
Overwhelmingly people who are true perverts are not one-time offenders; they live this sinful and wicked lifestyle… So, my question is, has this man had ANY other accusations against him?
I hope and pray that I do not have something like this happen to me (being accused falsely); as it appears, our world uses unrighteous judgments to determine someone’s guilt or innocence.
Finally, I ask the posters of this blog, would you want to Lord to judge you as you have judge this man?
|
© California Catholic Daily 2007. All Rights Reserved.
|