Archdiocese abuse report spurs call for prosecution, may spark more civil litigation

The release of a report documenting decades of alleged child sexual abuse in the Baltimore Archdiocese has spurred a call for prosecution and may spark scores of lawsuits against the church by now-adult victims – litigation likely to be aided by a law reviving claims that expired due to the statute of limitations.

The report released Wednesday by Attorney General Anthony Brown redacts the names of the alleged perpetrators but not the approximate locations and dates of the alleged abuse.

The Maryland Crime Victims’ Resource Center said in a statement Wednesday that it “will continue to push for the names of perpetrators.”

“MCVRC will seek indictments of any child sex abusers living, and indictments of any who concealed or enabled criminal predatory acts on Maryland’s youth,” the center added. “We hope to have the cooperation and leadership of Maryland’s prosecution in that endeavor.”

Montgomery County State’s Attorney John McCarthy, who had not seen the report, provided a prosecutor’s perspective that no prosecution would occur without the alleged victim’s voluntary cooperation.

UPDATE: Victims demand more transparency from Archdiocese of Baltimore after sex abuse report

“We have a victim-centered approach to prosecuting crime” of this nature, McCarthy said. “We try not to retraumatize victims. I would never force a victim to participate in a case such as this.”

McCarthy said prosecuting child sex abuse cases, even with a victim willing to testify, would be difficult due to the passage of time since the alleged crime. For example, witnesses may have died and evidence likely lost.

“There would be lots of dead ends,” McCarthy said of the prosecution trail. “These are not DNA cases.”

Another consideration would be whether the statutory time for bringing a prosecution may have expired, McCarthy said, adding the applicable statute of limitations is the deadline in effect when the alleged offense occurred.

Until recently, the statute of limitations for an “attempted” rape in Maryland was one year, McCarthy said as an example. That time limit has been eliminated but would likely apply to years’ old offenses, he added.

The report itself would “absolutely not” be admissible as evidence in any prosecution because its contents are “classical hearsay,” McCarthy said, referring to the prohibition on out of court statements being admitted for their truth.

“You can’t confront a report,” McCarthy added, referring to a defendant’s constitutional right to confront his or her accusers. “You can’t confront and cross-examine a report.”

RELATED: Report on childhood sexual abuse brings reckoning for Archdiocese of Baltimore

The report, however, could serve as a “starting point” for a law enforcement investigation by local law enforcement, he said.

Police could seek the cooperation of the attorney general’s office, which knows the names of the alleged perpetrators and victims redacted in the report, McCarthy added.

As for civil litigation, the victims named in the report already know they have a cause of action. But the unredacted details of the alleged abuse, including its approximate place and time, may spur other alleged victims who were there then to bring suit.

“We certainly hope so,” said attorney Robert Jenner, who represents child abuse victims.

“A lot of people don’t come forward because they believe they are the only ones,” added Jenner, of Jenner Law in Baltimore. “This (report) gives them the validation they were looking for for the past 50 years. It gives them the encouragement, the courage to come forward and tell their stories.”

The alleged victims’ main hurdle in surviving the defendants’ motions to dismiss would likely be the statute of limitations. That time limit, however, will likely be lifted for all child abuse cases under legislation passed by the General Assembly that Gov. Wes Moore is expected to sign into law in the coming weeks.

The 2023 Child Victims Act, Senate Bill 686, would enable abuse survivors who missed their chance to sue under existing statutes of limitations to have another chance to bring lawsuits against alleged abusers and the institutions accused of protecting them, such as schools, camps and religious entities.

The judges hearing the dismissal motion would be tasked with deciding whether the law reviving claims formerly barred by the statute of limitations complies with the defendant’s constitutional right to due process. The losing parties would have the right to appeal, placing the claim on hold until the issue is ultimately resolved either by the Maryland or U.S. Supreme Court.

Brown, the attorney general, stated in a February advice letter that the Child Victims Act would not be “clearly unconstitutional.”

“If the General Assembly chooses to provide victims of child sexual abuse an expanded chance for justice, I can in good faith defend the legislation should it be challenged in court,” Brown wrote.

Archbishop William E. Lori said in a statement that “today’s report from the Maryland Attorney General is first and foremost a sad and painful reminder of the tremendous harm caused to innocent children and young people by some ministers of the Church.”

“The detailed accounts of abuse are shocking and soul searing,” he added. “It is difficult for most to imagine that such evil acts could have actually occurred. For victim-survivors everywhere, they know the hard truth: These evil acts did occur.”