Clergy Sexual Offender List

source link:

One of the most difficult things for a victim to do is to publicly accuse their perpetrator. Such action usually follows a long period of personal struggle about what repercussions such action will have, both on the victim’s family, and on the perpetrator and their family. One of the most successful tactics that church hierarchies use in such situations is to deny knowledge of any other allegations against the offending clergy person, which has the effect of leaving the victim feeling as if they alone are responsible for the destruction of the perpetrator’s career. However, many victims who proceed to a court case discover that the hierarchy has a long history of ignoring or suppressing previous complaints. This list is a long-awaited step in the fight against the church’s deliberate isolation of victims – an opportunity for victims to discover what the churches fail to tell them.

The list has grown so large – it now comprises over 200 confirmed offenders and many more whose names have been suppressed, settlements have been kept private, or against whom allegations have been made – I have had to split it into sections to minimise download times and facilitate access. All sections are accessible both from this main page and from each other section.  The list of initials of alleged perpetrators is on this page only.

There are many instances of abuse of other kinds by church leaders – financial, physical, nutritional, emotional, spiritual – this list does not include perpetrators of those abuses. Sex crimes by church lay workers are also not included, although teachers in church schools and youth club leaders are heavily represented among lay perpetrators.  Also, some denominations and sects appear to be vastly under-represented in the following list. Different churches have different reasons for this, and suggested reasons are listed at the bottom of the page.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER that many offenders, caught in one denomination, will move to another. Similarly, many perpetrators move cities or states, and even countries, to avoid retribution. For that reason, little importance should be placed in the denominations and locations of perpetrators listed below. Also, there is a huge difference between having one’s licence (or faculties) revoked, and being defrocked. Many times the church revokes a priest’s licence/faculties, which basically takes away their entitlement to practice at that time, but does not laicise the offender. So while they may be (possibly only temporarily) stopped from preaching or administering the sacraments, they are still entitled to use the title Reverend (or Father), still entitled to retirement benefits, long service leave and other employment-related status.

Clergy offenders are listed here in alphabetical order. Convicted or charged offenders (or where complaints are confirmed by church investigations) are listed first, including their conviction date and other details. Where their birth year is unknown, their age at time of conviction is included if known. Sexual offences are not subject to becoming “spent convictions” (Criminal Records Act 1991 S. 7(1)(b) -click here to read) and therefore the list includes convictions that date back many years. Clergy against whom an allegation has been made but no confirmation has been recorded are listed by initials only, in order to avoid charges of libel. The validity of public interest in publishing names of offenders was endorsed in the Australian Press Council Adjudication no.918 (April 1997), which may be read here (this link will open in a new window; after reading, simply close it to return to this page).

Perps A-D * Perps E-K * Perps L-P * Perps Q-Z

ALLEGED OFFENDERS (initials used are full names, not abbreviations or nicknames)

Some of these people are no longer clergy, some are no longer in Australia, and some are dead. Only some of these people are still in active ministry. For this reason, do NOT assume that any clergy person known to you who holds initials matching any on this list is the same person.

An asterisk next to the initials indicates the allegations have been substantiated, either through multiple complaints, admissions by the perpetrator or investigations by the church, even though no criminal conviction has been obtained. A number in front of a pair of initials indicates the number of perpetrators reported who hold those initials. Where a number and an asterisk fall together, at least one of the perpetrators with those initials has substantiated allegations against them.

If you wish to add an offender, please email me with details of the offence. If you wish to know whether your abuser is on this list, check for matching name or initials, then email me giving details, and I will reply. Because of confidentiality issues, I may not be able to disclose all the information I have, but where possible I will.

In addition, nearly 30 bishops and archbishops around the world have resigned or been stood down in the wake of abuse allegations either directly against them or mishandled by them.  The list of them can be found here.

Other countries: I have found it more than enough work trying to keep track of Australian perpetrators, without including an international list. However, it is important to realise that many perpetrators will change countries, or go on leave overseas, either to “let things cool down” or to escape prosecution. Hence keeping an eye on overseas lists of perpetrators may well show up some of those who change countries. Perhaps the most comprehensive US list is atwww.survivorsfirst.org Their database contains the names of 1600 mostly RCC priests, all of whom have been named in either news articles or lawsuits. USA JW perpetrators are recorded at www.silentlambs.org Other databases are maintained, many cover allegations as well as confirmed perpetrators. See linkspage for more clergy abuse sites.

Under-represented churches

Uniting Church – The Uniting Church in Australia has only been in existence since 1977. Given the normal length of time between an offence and its subsequent complaint, this could be one reason for the lack of Uniting ministers convicted of offences. The Uniting Church also has a strong social justice ethic, and was (I believe) the first denomination to implement a sexual abuse protocol. This may have helped to minimise the occurrence of offences. Observation of recent cases suggests that UCA Victoria deals with complaints more completely and appropriately than UCA NSW.

Jehovah’s Witness – Difficult to find information relevant to Australia. One problem is that they “keep it in the family”. Pretty much anything short of murder, the members are supposed to see the elders as the first line of action. And the elders squash it right there. Other difficulties include –
* any “sin” has to be witnessed by at least two eye-witnesses before it will be dealt with as a matter of church discipline (based on Matt 18:15, Deut 19:15, 1 Tim 5:19). Although fortunately the two witnesses don’t have to witness the same event at the same time.
* if the offender denies it, they’re assumed to be innocent
* if they “repent” (even privately) the issue is considered resolved
* the JW policy is to rest on clergy-penitent privilege and not report to civil authorities – which in the US also involves claiming separation of church and state in order to reject outside interference
* if a complainant goes against that, they risk being disfellowshipped. Disfellowshipping is a severe punishment, comprising total rejection by the congregation. Disfellowshipped members are not even to be acknowledged in the street. The incentive to carry out the disfellowshipping is high because you can get disfellowshipped just for associating with someone who’s already been disfellowshipped.
There are at least two elders in the US who have resigned as a protest over the way the JWs were dealing with sexual abuse in the church. JW abuse stories can be found at http://www.exjws.net/sexabuse/abuseguestlog.htm Statistics of abuse in the JW church are at the Watchtower observer site (JC=Judicial Commssion – 3 elders who decide re complaints, publishers are those who sell JW publications door-to-door, DA=disassociated, DF=disfellowshipped). The bottom of that page includes a link to an explanation of the methods of statistical analysis that the author used. I also include an account that indicates the magnitude of the problem as far back as 1970.
Note: Generally, the more cult-like the church, the harder it is for abuse victims to come forward, and the less likely it is that any complaints will reach the public arena.

Credits: In 2000, the Eros Foundation in Australia published a book entitled “Hypocrites” focussing on the high incidence of sexual crime in the church. Information from this source has been helpful in compiling the following list. “Hypocrites” can be read online in the archives of the National Library (PDF files, including illustrations) or as a text-only document on this site by clicking on this link. Further details were obtained from “The Australian Paedophile and Sex Offender Index” by Deborah Coddington. Data was also sourced from http://www.crimenet.com.au (to whom I express heartfelt appreciation for their co-operation) and http://www.antichrist.com.au/index.html (no longer operational), Broken Rites, news articles and other sources.

Note: Many people have asked me for my source for individual pieces of information. Unfortunately, I can’t always recall, and early on I wasn’t recording specifics. All future additions will have sources referred to at the end of each listing, and older listings will be updated where possible.