-Caveat Lector-
http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/geoghan/
Church allowed abuse by priest for years
Aware of Geoghan record, archdiocese still shuttled him from parish
to parish
By Globe Staff, 1/6/02
Former priest John J. Geoghan leaving his family home in Scituate in
November. (Globe Staff Photo / Jim Davis)
THE SERIES
Part I:
Church allowed abuse by priest for years
A revered guest; a family left in shreds
DOCUMENTS
Letter to Cardinal Law from Rev. D'Arcy
Handwritten letter to Cardinal Medeiros from Margaret Gallant
Typed version
Places and dates of Geoghan's service
Nov. 22, 1999 indictment
Dec. 9, 1999 indictment
FROM THE ARCHIVES
NOVEMBER 30, 2001
Judge's ruling frees documents in Geoghan case
JULY 27, 2001
Law defends his response in clergy sex abuse case
DECEMBER 10, 1999
Ex-priest pleads not guilty to rape, molestation charges
JUNE 7, 1998
Cardinal announces defrocking of priest
JUNE 4, 1998
Church pays priest's accusers
FEBRUARY 13, 1997
Priest's 'sick leave' cited
FEBRUARY 4, 1997
Retired priest is sued again for sexual misconduct
JULY 11, 1996
Woman charges priest abused her three sons
CONTACT THE GLOBE
� The Boston Globe Spotlight team would like to hear from readers
willing to share information on this issue. The Spotlight phone
number is (617) 929-3208.
� Confidential messages can also be left at (617) 929- 7483.
� The e-mail address for the Spotlight team is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This article was prepared by the Globe Spotlight Team: reporters Matt
Carroll, Sacha Pfeiffer, and Michael Rezendes; and editor Walter V.
Robinson. It was written by Rezendes.
First of two parts
Since the mid-1990s, more than 130 people have come forward with
horrific childhood tales about how former priest John J. Geoghan
allegedly fondled or raped them during a three- decade spree through
a half-dozen Greater Boston parishes.
Almost always, his victims were grammar school boys. One was just 4
years old.
Then came last July's disclosure that Cardinal Bernard F. Law knew
about Geoghan's problems in 1984, Law's first year in Boston, yet
approved his transfer to St. Julia's parish in Weston. Wilson D.
Rogers Jr., the cardinal's attorney, defended the move last summer,
saying the archdiocese had medical assurances that each Geoghan
reassignment was "appropriate and safe."
But one of Law's bishops thought that the 1984 assignment of Geoghan to St. Julia's
was so risky, he wrote the cardinal a letter in protest. And for good reason, the
Spotlight Team found: The archdiocese already had subst
antial evidence of Geoghan's predatory sexual habits. That included his assertion in
1980 that his repeated abuse of seven boys in one extended family was not a "serious"
problem, according to an archdiocesan record.
And the St. Julia's assignment proved disastrous. First, Geoghan was put in charge of
three youth groups, including altar boys. In 1989, he was forced to go on sick leave
after more complaints of sexual abuse, and spent m
onths in two institutions that treat sexually abusive priests.
Even so, the archdiocese returned him to St. Julia's, where Geoghan continued to abuse
children for another three years.
Now, as Geoghan faces the first of two criminal trials next week, details about his
sexual compulsion are likely to be overshadowed by a question that many Catholics find
even more troubling: Why did it take a succession
of three cardinals and many bishops 34 years to place children out of Geoghan's reach?
Donna Morrissey, a spokeswoman for Law, said the cardinal and other church officials
would not respond to questions about Geoghan. Morrissey said the church had no
interest in knowing what the Globe's questions would be.
Before Geoghan ever got to Weston in 1984, he had already been treated several times
and hospitalized at least once for molesting boys. And he had been removed from at
least two parishes for sexual abuse. In 1980, for ins
tance, he was ordered out of St. Andrew's in Jamaica Plain after casually admitting he
had molested the seven boys.
In 1981, after a year's sick leave, Geoghan was dispatched to St. Brendan's in
Dorchester, with little chance he would be placed under scrutiny: His pastor for most
of his 3 years there, the Rev. James H. Lane, has told f
riends he was never warned that Geoghan had a history of sex abuse.
In September 1984, complaints that Geoghan had abused children at the Dorchester
parish prompted Law to remove him. Two months later, the cardinal gave Geoghan a fresh
start at St. Julia's.
Law allowed Geoghan to stay in Weston for more than eight years before removing him
from parish duty in 1993. But even that decision to recast Geoghan as a functionary at
a home for retired priests did not prevent him fro
m seeking out and molesting children, according to the multiple civil suits and
criminal charges filed against the 66-year-old Geoghan.
Finally, in 1998, the church "defrocked" Geoghan, removing him from the priesthood.
Geoghan's criminal defense attorney, Geoffrey Packard, said his client would have no
comment on any of the allegations against him. Geoghan's first trial on sexual
molestation charges is scheduled for Jan. 14 in Middlesex
Superior Court. The second, more serious set of charges are due to be tried in
Suffolk Superior Court in late February. In the civil lawsuits, Geoghan has no
attorney, and is not contesting the charges.
The church's likely legal defense, as Rogers hinted in July, will be that doctors
deemed Geoghan rehabilitated. Church records obtained by the Globe note that Geoghan
was indeed medically cleared for the St. Julia's assig
nment -- but not until he had been at the parish for a month.
In 1984, there were still some clinicians who believed child molesters could be cured.
But other specialists had long since warned Catholic bishops of the high risk that
priests who had abused children would become repeat
offenders.
What's more, specialists in child sexual abuse and attorneys who have represented
victims said, it ought to have been apparent to the archdiocese by 1984 that someone
with Geoghan's record of habitual sexual abuse should
not have been returned to a parish.
"In Geoghan's case, the church defied its own most basic values of protecting the
young and fostering celibacy," said A.W. Richard Sipe, a former priest. Sipe, a
psychotherapist and expert in clergy sexual abuse, said he
has long believed that the Catholic Church has been too slow to deal with priests who
molest children.
The Spotlight Team found evidence that one of Law's top subordinates worried that
Geoghan would cause further scandal at St. Julia's in Weston, where he began work on
Nov. 13, 1984. On Dec. 7, Bishop John M. D'Arcy wrote
to Law, challenging the wisdom of the assignment in light of Geoghan's "history of
homosexual involvement with young boys."
Within the next week, two doctors cleared Geoghan for parish duty, according to an
archdiocesan chronology that is in court files. It reads: "12/ 11/84 Dr. [Robert]
Mullins -- Father Geoghan `fully recovered.' . . . 12/14
/ 84 Dr. [John H.] Brennan: "no psychiatric contraindications or restrictions to his
work as a parish priest."
The files also contain a poignant -- and prophetic -- August 1982 letter to Law's
predecessor, the late Cardinal Humberto Medeiros, from the aunt of Geoghan's seven
Jamaica Plain victims, expressing incredulity that the c
hurch to which she was devoted would give Geoghan another chance at St. Brendan's
after what he had done to her family.
"Regardless of what he says, or the doctor who treated him, I do not believe he is
cured; his actions strongly suggest that he is not, and there is no guarantee that
persons with these obsessions are ever cured," Margaret
Gallant said in her plea to Medeiros.
"It embarrasses me that the church is so negligent," Gallant wrote. Archdiocesan
records obtained by the Globe make it clear why Gallant wrote her irate letter two
years after the abuse: Geoghan had reappeared in Jamaica
Plain, and been seen with a young boy. The records note that the next month, "Another
letter from Mrs. Gallant. Why is nothing being done?"
>From the Jamaica Plain case alone, the archdiocese's top officials were aware of
>Geoghan's attraction to young boys, and how he picked his victims: The affable
>Geoghan usually befriended Catholic mothers struggling to rai
se large families, often alone. His offers to help, often by taking the children for
ice cream or praying with them at bedtime, were accepted without suspicion.
'To find out later that the Catholic Church knew he was a child molester � every day
it bothers me more and more.'
PATRICK MCSORLEY (above)
says he was abused at age 12 by the Rev. John J. Geoghan in 1986. (Globe Photo / Sarah
Brezinsky)
That is how 12-year-old Patrick McSorley, who lived in a Hyde Park housing project,
allegedly became a Geoghan victim in 1986 -- two years after Geoghan's assignment to
Weston.
According to McSorley, Geoghan, who knew the family from St. Andrew's, learned of his
father's suicide and dropped by to offer condolences to his mother, who is
schizophrenic. The priest offered to buy Patrick ice cream.
"I felt a little funny about it," McSorley recalled in an interview. "I was 12 years
old and he was an old man."
Riding home after getting ice cream, McSorley says, Geoghan consoled him. But then he
patted his upper leg and slid his hand up toward his crotch. "I froze up," McSorley
said. "I didn't know what to think. Then he put his
hand on my genitals and started masturbating me. I was petrified." McSorely added
that Geoghan then began masturbating himself.
When Geoghan dropped a shaken McSorley off at his mother's house, he suggested they
keep secret what had taken place. "He said, `We're very good at keeping secrets,' "
McSorley said.
For years, McSorley has battled alcoholism and depression. And now, as the plaintiff
in one of the lawsuits against Geoghan, McSorley is bitter. "To find out later that
the Catholic Church knew he was a child molester --
every day it bothers me more and more," McSorley says.
Many documents yet to be unsealed
The letters from Bishop D'Arcy and Margaret Gallant were among documents found by the
Globe during a review of the public files of 84 civil lawsuits still pending against
Geoghan. But for all Geoghan's notoriety, the publ
ic record is remarkably skeletal. That is because almost all the evidence in the
lawsuits about the church's supervision of Geoghan has been under a court-ordered
confidentiality seal granted to church lawyers.
In November, acting on a motion by the Globe, Superior Court Judge Constance M.
Sweeney ordered those documents made public. The archdiocese appealed to the state
Appeals Court, arguing that the Globe -- and the public --
should not have access to documents about the church's inner workings. But the appeal
was denied last month. The records, including depositions of bishops and personnel
files, are scheduled to become public on Jan. 26.
The cardinal and five other bishops who supervised Geoghan over the years have been
accused of negligence in many of the civil suits for allegedly knowing of Geoghan's
abuse and doing nothing to stop it. Never before have
so many bishops had to defend their roles in a case involving sexual molestation
charges against a single priest. The five, all since promoted to head their own
dioceses, are Bishops Thomas V. Daily of Brooklyn, N.Y.; Ro
bert J. Banks of Green Bay, Wis.; William F. Murphy of Rockville Center, N.Y.; John B.
McCormack of Manchester, N.H., and Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes of New Orleans. Law and
the five bishops have all denied the accusation
s in legal filings.
No American diocese has faced a scandal of similar dimensions since 1992. That year,
in the Fall River Diocese, more than 100 of former priest James Porter's victims
surfaced publicly with evidence that Porter's superiors
-- including, in the 1960s, then Monsignor Medeiros -- shifted him from one parish to
another as parents learned of his compulsive abuse.
Since 1997, the archdiocese has settled about 50 lawsuits against Geoghan, for more
than $10 million -- but with no confidential documents ever made public.
Plaintiffs in the 84 pending lawsuits are refusing to settle their claims as easily,
and the church's internal documents are subject to being revealed in the litigation.
So the archdiocese has moved aggressively to keep i
nformation about its supervision of Geoghan out of public view. One example: When Law
was named a defendant in 25 of the lawsuits, Rogers asked a judge to impound any
reference to the cardinal, arguing that his reputation
might be harmed. The judge refused.
On Dec. 17, Rogers sent the Globe's attorney, Jonathan M. Albano, a letter threatening
to seek legal sanctions against the newspaper and its law firm if the Globe published
anything gleaned from confidential records in th
e suits. He warned that he would seek court-imposed sanctions even if Globe reporters
asked questions of clergy involved in the case.
For decades, within the US Catholic Church, sexual misbehavior by priests was shrouded
in secrecy -- at every level. Abusive priests -- Geoghan among them -- often
instructed traumatized youngsters to say nothing about wh
at had been done to them. Parents who learned of the abuse, often wracked by shame,
guilt, and denial, tried to forget what the church had done. The few who complained
were invariably urged to keep silent. And pastors and
bishops, meanwhile, viewed the abuse as a sin for which priests could repent rather
than as a compulsion they might be unable to control.
Even Massachusetts law assured secrecy -- and still does. For all the years that
Geoghan was molesting children, clergymen were exempt from laws requiring most other
caregivers to report incidents of sex abuse to police f
or possible prosecution. It was only after last summer's revelations that the
archdiocese dropped its long-standing opposition to legislation adding clergy to the
list of "mandated reporters." But the legislation died in
committee.
Until recent years, the church also had little to fear from the courts. But that has
changed, as predicted in a 1985 confidential report on priest abuse prepared at the
urging of some of the nation's top bishops, Law amon
g them. "Our dependence in the past on Roman Catholic judges and attorneys protecting
the Diocese and clerics is GONE," the report said.
Since mid-December, the Globe has been requesting interviews with Law and other Church
officials. But the answer was delayed until Morrissey's call late Friday, in which she
said she would not even accept questions in wri
ting. Asked if that meant the Archdiocese had no interest in knowing what the
questions were, Morrissey replied: "That's correct."
In preparing this article, the Globe also sought interviews with many of the priests
and bishops who had supervised Geoghan or worked with him. None of the bishops would
comment. Of the priests, few would speak publicly.
And one pastor hung up the phone and another slammed a door shut at the first mention
of Geoghan's name.
After ordination, a record of abuse
There is no dispute that Geoghan abused children while he was at Blessed Sacrament in
Saugus after his 1962 ordination. The archdiocese has recently settled claims on
accusations that he did, and the church records obtain
ed by the Globe note that Geoghan in 1995 admitted molesting four boys from the same
family then. The unresolved issue in the remaining suits is whether church officials
knew of the abuse at the time.
A former priest, Anthony Benzevich, has said he alerted church higher-ups that Geoghan
frequently took young boys to his rectory bedroom. In news reports after accusations
against Geoghan surfaced publicly, Benzevich was
also quoted as saying church officials threatened to reassign him as a missionary in
South America for telling them about Geoghan. Benzevich told his story to Mitchell
Garabedian, who represents nearly all of the plaintif
fs in the civil suits against Geoghan and church officials, according to an affidavit
Garabedian filed.
But court records reviewed by the Globe show that when Benzevich appeared in
Garabedian's office for a pre-trial deposition in October 2000, he was represented by
Wilson Rogers 3d -- the son of Law's principal attorney. T
hen, under oath, Benzevich changed his story. He said he was not certain that Geoghan
had had boys in his room. And he said he could not recall notifying superiors about
Geoghan's behavior with children.
In a recent interview with the Globe, Benzevich said he does indeed remember Geoghan
taking boys to his room. He said Geoghan often sought to wrestle with young boys --
and liked to dress them in priest's attire. But he r
epeated his sworn assertion that he does not recall notifying his superiors.
Before his deposition, Benzevich said, Wilson Rogers 3d approached him, told him the
church was trying to protect him from being named as a defendant, and offered to
represent him. His earlier statements to reporters, Ben
zevich said, had been misconstrued.
Garabedian, citing the confidentiality order, refused to discuss the Benzevich issue
with the Globe. The church's financial liability in the pending suits could increase
dramatically if there is evidence Geoghan's superio
rs knew of his abuse.
Geoghan's second assignment -- in 1966 to St. Bernard's in Concord -- ended after
seven months, according to a detailed chronology of Geoghan's service prepared by the
church which does not explain why the assignment was
so abbreviated.
The pending lawsuits include accusations that Geoghan again abused young boys from
several families in his next parish, St. Paul's in Hingham, between 1967 and 1974. One
of his alleged victims, Anthony Muzzi Jr., said in
an interview last week that in addition to his own abuse, his uncle caught Geoghan
abusing his son. The uncle ordered Geoghan to leave his house, and complained to the
priest's superiors at St. Paul's.
That complaint to church officials coincides with the time frame when Geoghan received
in-patient treatment for sex abuse at the Seton Institute in Baltimore, according to
Sipe, the psychotherapist who was on Seton's staf
f at the time. Sipe did not treat Geoghan.
During his assignment in Hingham, Geoghan found victims far afield, befriending Joanne
Mueller, a single mother of four boys who lived in Melrose. There too, according to
depositions, the priest became a regular visitor,
a spiritual counselor to Mueller and a helpmate to her boys, who were between 5 and 12.
One night, she testified, her second youngest son came to her, insisting that she keep
Geoghan away from him. "I don't want him doing that to my wee-wee, touching my wee-wee
. . ." Mueller recalled the boy saying.
Mueller, according to her deposition, summoned her three other sons and learned that
Geoghan, while purporting to be taking them out for ice cream, helping them with their
baths, and reading them bedtime stories, had been
raping them orally and anally. Also, Mueller said, Geoghan was insisting they tell no
one. "We couldn't tell you because Father said it was a confessional," she said one of
her sons told her.
Mueller testified that she immediately took the boys to see Rev. Paul E. Miceli, a
parish priest at St. Mary's in Melrose who knew both Geoghan and her family.
She testified that Miceli assured her that Geoghan would be handled by appropriate
church authorities and would "never be a priest again." Mueller also said that Miceli
asked her to keep the matter to herself: "Bad as it
was, he said, `Just try -- don't think about it. It will never happen again.' "
Miceli, until recently a member of Law's cabinet, contradicted Mueller in his own
deposition. He said he did not recall her name, and never received a visit of the sort
she described. But Miceli acknowledged receiving a c
all from a woman saying Geoghan was spending too much time with her children.
Miceli testified that the caller said nothing about sexual abuse. Nonetheless, Miceli
said he drove to Geoghan's new parish in Jamaica Plain to relay the woman's concerns
to Geoghan face-to-face.
Family in need was vulnerable
If Mueller had unwittingly facilitated Geoghan's access to the children in her home in
Melrose, the same role was played by Maryetta Dussourd at the priest's next stop: St.
Andrew's, in the Forest Hills section of Jamaica
Plain, where he served from 1974 to 1980.
Dussourd was rearing her own four children -- three boys and a girl -- as well as her
niece's four boys. In her hardscrabble neighborhood, she said in an interview, she
hoped there was a priest the children could look up
to. Then she met Geoghan, who oversaw altar boys and Boy Scouts at the parish.
Geoghan, she recalled bitterly, was eager to help. Before long, he was visiting her
apartment almost every evening -- for nearly two years. He routinely took the seven
boys out for ice cream and put them to sleep at night
.
But all that time, Geoghan regularly molested the seven boys in their bedrooms,
Dussourd said. In some cases, he performed oral sex on them, according to court
documents. Other times, he fondled their genitals or forced t
hem to fondle his -- occasionally as he prayed.
A 1994 Archdiocesan memorandum, labeled "personal and confidential," said Geoghan
would stay in the Dussourd home "even when he was on retreat because he missed the
children so much. He `would touch them while they were s
leeping and waken them by playing with their penises.' "
Dussourd discovered what was happening after the children finally told her sister,
Margaret Gallant. Horrified, Dussourd complained to the Rev. John E. Thomas, the
pastor of St. Thomas Aquinas, a nearby parish, according
to court documents and accounts by Dussourd and a church official who asked that he
not be identified.
Thomas confronted Geoghan with the allegations, and was taken aback when Geoghan
casually admitted they were accurate. "He said, `Yes, that's all true,' " the official
recalled. It was as if Geoghan had been asked "if he
preferred chocolate or vanilla ice cream."
Thomas immediately drove to archdiocesan offices in Brighton to notify Daily. In
Thomas's presence that Saturday afternoon, Feb. 9, 1980, Daily telephoned Geoghan at
St. Andrew's and, in a brief conversation, delivered a
curt directive: "Go home," the official said.
Geoghan protested, saying there was no one else to celebrate the 4 p.m. Mass. "I'll
say the Mass myself," Daily insisted. "Go home." The official said Daily drove to
Jamaica Plain and said Mass.
The Rev. Francis H. Delaney, who was Geoghan's pastor at St. Andrew's, said in an
interview that church officials never told him why Geoghan disappeared from the parish.
Several weeks later, Dussourd said, a contrite Thomas came to her apartment and told
her that Geoghan had admitted to abusing the boys, but had excused his behavior by
telling the pastor, "It was only two families."
Thomas, echoing a tack common among clerics at the time, later pleaded with Dussourd
not to follow through on her threat to go public, she said. He cited the years Geoghan
had spent studying for the priesthood, and the co
nsequences for Geoghan if the accusations against him were publicized. "Do you realize
what you're taking from him?" Thomas asked, according to Dussourd.
Thomas, who is now retired, declined to be interviewed.
A 1994 archdiocesan document summarizing Geoghan's recurrent problems says of the
seven children: "Fr. Geoghan `admits the activity but does not feel it serious or a
pastoral problem.' "
Geoghan spent the following year on sick leave, under treatment for his compulsion,
but living with family in West Roxbury. In February 1981, he was sent to his fifth
parish, St. Brendan's.
Almost immediately, Geoghan was working with First Communicants, befriending young
children and their parents, even taking some boys to his family's summer home in
Scituate, where -- parents say they later discovered -- h
e sexually abused the youths.
Geoghan's free rein was made possible because the archdiocese said nothing to Lane,
St. Brendan's pastor, about Geoghan's history, according to a teacher in the parish
whom Lane has confided in.
The St. Brendan's teacher, who declined to be named, said that at first, Geoghan's
willingness to spend inordinate amounts of time with children was admired. But over
time, some parishioners became suspicious. "We knew so
mething wasn't right," the teacher said. "He just zeroed in on some kids."
After two more years and more allegations of sexual abuse, Geoghan's tenure at St.
Brendan's came to an abrupt end in 1984, when Lane heard complaints that Geoghan had
molested children in the parish.
Lane, the teacher said, was so devastated that he broke down when he told her the
news. And, she said, he was incensed that he had not been warned. "Father Lane was
almost destroyed by this," the teacher said.
Lane is now retired. When a Globe reporter went to see him recently, he slammed the
door shut as soon as Geoghan's name was mentioned.
Law denies he tried 'to shift a problem'
In his own defense last summer, Law wrote in the Pilot, the archdiocesan newspaper,
"Never was there an effort on my part to shift a problem from one place to the next."
The cardinal's assertion followed his disclosure, in court documents, that he was
informed in September 1984 of the four-year-old allegations that Geoghan had molested
the seven Jamaica Plain boys. In the court filing, La
w went on to say he then notified Geoghan that he was being removed from St. Brendan's
and was "in between assignments."
The legal response by the cardinal, narrowly drawn in response to the lawsuit against
him, omits any reference to Geoghan's molestation of children at St. Brendan's in
Dorchester.
Despite his record, Geoghan was assigned to St. Julia's. And in his first two years,
he was in charge of altar boys, religious education for public school youngsters and a
youth group, according to the church's annual dir
ectories.
Three weeks after Geoghan arrived in Weston, Bishop D'Arcy protested the assignment to
Law, citing Geoghan's problems and adding: "I understand his recent abrupt departure
from St. Brendan's, Dorchester may be related to
this problem."
A copy of the letter contains a redacted paragraph, an apparent reference to the Rev.
Nicholas Driscoll, who confirmed last week that he had been removed from St. Julia's
before Geoghan's arrival -- but for alcohol and de
pression problems, not sexual abuse. So D'Arcy expressed concern about "further
scandal in this parish." If "something happens," parishioners will feel that the
archdiocese "simply sends them priests with problems."
D'Arcy urged Law to consider restricting Geoghan to weekend duty "while receiving some
kind of therapy." The Globe could find no evidence that Law accepted that advice.
Retired Monsignor Francis S. Rossiter, Geoghan's pas
tor at St. Julia's, refused to be interviewed last week. But Church records note that
Rossiter was aware of Geoghan's history.
The civil and criminal allegations Geoghan faces in Middlesex and Suffolk counties
suggest that he allegedly abused at least 30 more boys after Law sent him to Weston in
1984 -- both before and after the half year's sick
leave in 1989.
After Geoghan's 1989 return to St. Julia's, it was another 38 months before Law took
him out of the parish. Three years later, Geoghan was still seeking out victims,
allegedly including an altar boy donning vestments for
a christening ceremony, according to the criminal charges.
The shuttling of Geoghan from one parish to another created a devastating coincidence
for one family. One boy he allegedly molested is the son of a man who had been among
the many sexually abused by Porter during the 1960
s in the Fall River Diocese, according to Roderick MacLeish Jr., the attorney who
represented the man and 100 other Porter victims.
MacLeish declined to provide any information about the family, and said a legal claim
has yet to be filed over the son's treatment by Geoghan.
MacLeish, who has had substantial dealings with the Boston Archdiocese, said he
remains astonished at Rogers's assertion that Geoghan's assignments were deemed safe
by doctors. "No responsible clinician would have said it
was safe to transfer him to another parish in light of what the church knew about his
pattern of deviant behavior," MacLeish said.
Tomorrow: What Geoghan told his pyschotherapists -- and the archdiocese.
Save 50% on home delivery of The Boston Globe
� Copyright 2002 Boston Globe Electronic Publishing Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
