A high school friend of Stephen Reinboldt, the man whose family says was sexually abused by former U.S. House speaker Dennis Hastert, says he was “the nicest, kindest soul.”
Pam Snell was a cheerleader when Reinboldt was the equipment manager for the wrestling team at Yorkville High School in Illinois. She remembers traveling with Reinboldt on team trips, and says he was someone who “was trying to be accepted.”
Reinboldt’s sister, Jolene Burdge, says her brother was abused by Hastert, who was a teacher and wrestling coach at the high school before his career in politics. Reinboldt died in 1995.
Burdge says her brother told her before he died that his first homosexual contact was with Hastert, and that it lasted through high school.
___
3:30 p.m. (CDT)
Several former members of Congress say there were no hints that Dennis Hastert had any personal problems when the Illinois Republican was U.S. House speaker.
Former U.S. Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia was a member of the House GOP leadership when Hastert became speaker.
He says that during the tumultuous days in 1998, when Republicans settled on Hastert to replace Newt Gingrich as speaker, they didn’t research his background. Davis says “there’s no time for internal vetting” during such a situation.
But looking back after last week’s indictment, Davis says it’s now obvious to him that Hastert was “fighting some demons.”
Former Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia says Republicans turned to Hastert to succeed Gingrich partly because “there wasn’t any inkling of anything” hidden in Hastert’s past.
___
This story has been corrected to show Hastert was chosen as U.S. House speaker in 1998, not 1999.
___
6:50 a.m. (CDT)
A Montana woman says the FBI interviewed her about her allegations that her brother had a sexual relationship with Dennis Hastert, the high school wrestling coach who became speaker of the House.
Hastert was charged last week in a federal indictment that alleges he agreed to pay $3.5 million to someone from Yorkville, the Illinois town where he taught and coached high school wrestling, so the person would stay quiet about “prior misconduct.”
Jolene Burdge of Billings, Montana, told The Associated Press Thursday that the FBI interviewed her in mid-May about Hastert. She says her brother told her before he died in 1995 that his first homosexual contact was with Hastert and that the abuse lasted throughout high school.
In an interview aired Friday on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Burdge identified her brother as Stephen Reinboldt.
Full article: http://www.ktvn.com/story/29247375/latest-on-hastert-sister-says-man-had-sex-with-ex-speaker
A Catholic archdiocese with a landmark legal legacy in child sexual abuse now faces criminal complaints in its handling of them.
In 1983, attorney Jeff Anderson filed a civil case of priest sexual abuse of minors against a U.S. archdiocese in St. Paul, Minnesota. It opened a floodgate of victims who came forward with clergy sex abuse stories across the country.
On Friday, Ramsey County prosecutor John Choi leveled six counts at the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. He accused it of encouraging, causing or contributing to the sexual abuse of three victims by a priest in 2010 and 2011.
Each count is a “gross misdemeanor,” and each carries a maximum of one year in prison and/or a $3,000 fine. The complaint focuses on abuse by former priest Curtis Wehmeyer, but it and an accompanying document say his case was just one of many that the archdiocese let slide.
A representative of the archdiocese has been summoned to answer to the complaint in court on June 12.
The archdiocese will cooperate with Choi’s office, Auxiliary Bishop Andrew Cozzens said in a statement Friday. “We deeply regret the abuse that was suffered by the victims of Curtis Wehmeyer and are grieved for all victims of sexual abuse,” he said.
Felony abuser
Wehmeyer was convicted in February 2013 on 20 felony charges of sexual abuse against minors and possession of child pornography, the archdiocese said in a statement. He was sentenced to five years in prison, and since then has been charged again with similar criminal sexual misconduct.
In 2012, the archdiocese booted Wehmeyer from the ministry. In March this year, Pope Francis permanently ejected him from clergy status.
And St. Paul Archbishop John Nienstedt promised to do better.
“I am deeply saddened and have been profoundly affected by the stories I continue to hear from victims/survivors of clergy sexual abuse. My focus, and the focus of the archdiocese, is to do all we can to keep children safe while offering resources for help and healing,” he said in a statement then.
‘Turned a blind eye’
That was too little too late for prosecutor Choi, who said the archdiocese protected Wehmeyer and kept him in its system while he continued abusing children.
“When confronted with disturbing information about Curtis Wehmeyer, church officials time and time again turned a blind eye,” he told reporters Friday.
To tackle the problem of sexual abuse by clergy, the archdiocese created the “Promoter for Ministerial Standards Program” in 2005 to supervise offending members. To Choi, it was an empty shell — or worse.
“What was purported to be a best practice in monitoring and supervising wayward priests was in reality a sham,” he said. And news of Wehmeyer’s behavior grew worse.
“As time progressed, the information about Curtis Wehmeyer became more alarming and more specific,” he said. Much of the 44-page complaint and the 35-page petition are dedicated to Wehmeyer’s missteps and problems: From sexual issues, to alcohol addiction, DWIs and illegal drug use — to uncomfortable approaches made on boys.
Hanging around boys’ bathroom
The priest had been seen hanging around the boys’ bathroom, and been caught loitering in an area of a park notorious for hook-ups, the documents said.
A priest Wehmeyer had unspecified questionable contact with was keeping his distance, and Wehmeyer had approached children in odd ways, the documents allege.
He once hit on teen boys in a book store, asking one if he was in the mood for sex, according to the documents.
The last incident was reported to the archdiocese, which said it would place restrictions on Wehmeyer and have him evaluated at a treatment center for clergy.
In 2005, he was required to participate in the archdiocese’s monitoring program, and although he showed signs he was not complying with it, the program’s head let him slip through it, the complaint said.
Prosecutors called the program “window dressing.”
Promoted to pastor
With knowledge of Wehmeyer’s past, Archbishop Nienstedt later promoted him to pastor.
“Are you aware of my past? Are you aware of my record?” Wehmeyer said he asked Nienstedt at the time. Nienstedt brushed it off, the documents said.
And in 2009, Wehmeyer became pastor at two churches at the same time — St. Thomas the Apostle, and Blessed Sacrament.
In the two years that followed, he abused at least three more boys on parish grounds, for which he was later convicted.
“During at least the summer of 2010, Wehmeyer sexually abused VICTIM-1 multiple times, including touching the boy’s penis and buttocks and exposing himself to VICTIM-1,” the complaint read. He gave the boy weed and beer and showed him pornography.
He did the same with a second boy that summer, and a year later, he repeated the abuse with a third boy, getting him high and drunk to the point that he was incapacitated. The boy built barriers with pillows in a bed they shared to keep Wehmeyer away, the documents said. But that didn’t work.
Turned in to police
In June 2012, a church deacon turned Wehmeyer in to police, and a mother reported to police the abuse of her two children.
All three boys will require psychological treatment as will a traumatized sibling of one of the boys, the documents said, and prosecutors are holding the archdiocese accountable for that fact due to its “act, word and omission.”
The costs for treatment could climb over $100,000.
Wehmeyer’s was not the only case the archdiocese swept under the rug, the documents said, which named more examples of clergy who abused children. “Respondent has a long history of not effectively addressing sexual abuse committed by some of its clergy,” it read.
But Wehmeyer is the most recent after a long prior history of abuse within the archdiocese, it read, and one of the worst.
Three years ago several prominent members of the Riverdale Jewish Center (RJC), the 700-member Modern Orthodox congregation, met privately with their longtime rabbi, Jonathan Rosenblatt, and offered to arrange a generous buyout for him. They told him that the persistent rumors about his allegedly inappropriate behavior with boys and young men were bound to become public at some point and it would be in his and his family’s best interest, and for the congregation as well, if he accepted an offer to resign quietly.
If he didn’t, he was told, “this could all end badly,” according to a member of the congregation with knowledge of the meeting.
“It was not meant as a threat, but rather that it would hit the press eventually and no one would see things as he did,” the person explained this weekend.
“Unfortunately, he refused, and now it’s all out there,” the person said, referring to a thorough New York Times May 31 report on Rabbi Rosenblatt’s “unusual” behavior that included inviting young men to discuss personal matters while sitting naked in the sauna with him.
The rabbi insisted, in the meeting, that he had done nothing wrong and had complied with previous requests from shul officials that he limit his gym invitations to young men rather than boys. His wife, Tzipporah, an attorney, who was present at the meeting, was said to have warned of a possible legal case if RJC took action against the rabbi based on illegal touching.
The synagogue board met for more than four hours on Monday night, debating next steps. While nothing was resolved regarding the fate of the rabbi, the board agreed to hire a public relations firm. For now there is an air of sadness, frustration and confusion among congregants, some of whom, including supporters, are hoping the rabbi will resign and spare them more public scrutiny. Others seem prepared to rally around the rabbi and hope the negative attention will soon blow over. And it appears the rabbi is not prepared to step down.
In response to a Jewish Week request this week for an interview, he sent a brief “official” statement through his “adviser,” Adam Friedman. It does not defend against or even mention the specific accusations against him, but rather frames the controversy as one over ideology.
Rabbi Rosenblatt wrote that as a rabbi he has served “with devotion, guided by high standards — religious and professional.
“My career in leadership has not been without ideological contentiousness,” he continued. “There is significant reason to believe that the attack on my reputation is being promoted by those whose real attack is on my beliefs and principles. The respected rabbi of an important congregation would, for some, represent a significant trophy in the predatory quest to discredit his ideas and, possibly, an opportunity to change the nature of the community he leads.”
But those close to the situation see the response as an attempt to divert attention away from the rabbi’s behavior with young men. And there is puzzlement over his reference to an “ideological” struggle, since Rabbi Rosenblatt is seen as a centrist within Modern Orthodoxy.
“Bottom line, he had a chance to avoid embarrassment for himself, his family and the shul,” said the person who knew of the settlement offer. “But he brought this on himself.”
Open Secret
For most of the rabbi’s more than three decades at RJC, his habit of inviting young men to play squash or racquetball, followed by a shower and sauna with them, was an open secret in the congregation.
“It was a joke among the teenage boys and young men,” one congregant recalled. “We’d ask each other, ‘did you go to the shvitz with the rabbi?’”
But times have changed, as have societal norms. There is more awareness of and less tolerance for behavior viewed as sexually predatory, even if it is not invasive — especially when initiated by figures of authority and spiritual leaders.
Rabbi Rosenblatt (no relation to this reporter) is the scion of a prominent family — his great-grandfather was famed cantor Yossele Rosenblatt and his grandfather, Samuel Rosenblatt, was the rabbi of a major Baltimore synagogue for more than 50 years. Even some congregants urging for his resignation now note that he is a man of many talents and attributes — a brilliant scholar of English literature as well as Judaic texts, with a gift for eloquent oratory, a strong voice for Modern Orthodoxy when many of his colleagues have moved to the right, and a caring and compassionate pastor, always there for families in times of need.
But even some of his biggest defenders say his lack of self-awareness, or arrogance, in denying the disturbing quality of his behavior, and his inability or unwillingness to curb it, contributed mightily to his current difficulties.
“He has this blind spot,” said one RJC member of several decades. “He thought he could get away with this behavior.”
Samuel Klagsbrun, a prominent local psychiatrist, described Rabbi Rosenblatt’s behavior as “a classic case of disassociation, where one separates the reality of his actions from his belief system.” It makes for a particularly strong divide when the person is a public figure with a reputation for good works, said Klagsbrun, who noted that he does not know Rabbi Rosenblatt.
“If he was warned and continued his actions — a rabbi risking being chastised — it’s obvious that his need for that connection with the young people was significant,” he added.
But Debbie Jonas, an RJC member and mother of Rabbi Davidi Jonas, who grew up in Riverdale, said her son was one of many young teenagers who went to the gym with the rabbi, and that “it was like any health club or locker room,” with people wrapped in towels. Jonas was one of several people that Rabbi Rosenblatt’s adviser, Adam Friedman, recommended The Jewish Week contact for comment. She said the rabbi “takes himself seriously as a mentor, and I give him tremendous credit for my Davidi’s spiritual development.” And she said that more than two dozen rabbis who served as rabbinic interns at RJC were sending letters to the shul in support of Rabbi Rosenblatt.
One member of the congregation for more than 20 years said that sitting through services at RJC this past Shabbat was a particularly painful experience.
“Nothing was said publicly” about the Times article, he said, noting that in Rabbi Rosenblatt’s absence, there was an expectation that the president or other official would address the problem from the pulpit. But that did not occur. (Rabbi Rosenblatt is nearing the end of a six-month sabbatical, spending much of his time in Boston and doing research at Harvard University.)
On Shabbat morning there was much private discussion among fellow worshippers, said the congregant, who like more than a dozen people interviewed for this article, requested anonymity because of personal connections to the synagogue.
The conversation ranged from labeling the Times story “character assassination” to hopes that the rabbi step down and spare the synagogue further shame, to talk of preparing for a difficult, and perhaps legal, battle over the rabbi’s future.
‘Unanswered Questions’
The publicity over Rabbi Rosenblatt comes at a difficult time for RJC, which has lost some of the energy, and membership, it once had and as it is looking to revitalize itself. It appears that older members of the synagogue, who have been the beneficiary for decades of Rabbi Rosenblatt’s soaring sermons, thoughtful teachings and compassionate pastoral care, are more inclined to have the rabbi stay on than younger members who have reacted most critically to the allegations, perhaps envisioning their sons being at risk of the rabbi’s outreach.
It should also be noted that over the years, some members left RJC for other synagogues. So those who stayed may have made their peace with the rabbi’s questionable behavior.
One young professional, an RJC member for less than two years, said he was shocked by the revelations in the Times article and was particularly upset at the synagogue’s lay leadership’s refusal to comment publicly on Shabbat.
“People are confused and upset,” he said. “There are so many unanswered questions.”
Chief among them, particularly for outsiders, is how could the congregation’s lay leaders have allowed the rabbi to remain in his position of authority decades after learning of his sauna sessions with boys and young men?
Several former leaders acknowledged that, as one said, “It’s easy to look back now” and recognize that mistakes were made in handling the situation. But he stressed that it was more complicated than it appears.
He and others interviewed noted that the rabbi performed his primary congregational responsibilities masterfully. The complaints came most directly from Sura Jeselsohn, a member whose zealous pursuit of this case led some to describe her as the rabbi’s Javert, a reference to the “Les Miserables” villain who devoted his life to tracking down a minor thief.
“In a bizarre way she helped the rabbi’s case” because she was seen as inordinately devoted to bringing him down, one member observed.
There were never reported allegations of sexual touching or criminal complaints, and there were practical concerns that any attempt to force the rabbi out could result in a painful legal suit.
Perhaps most significant is the serious confusion over the “gray area” of the rabbi’s actions — not illegal but widely considered inappropriate — that led feelings of loyalty toward him to trump taking more forceful action.
“People would say ‘I support the rabbi, but I wouldn’t let my son go to the shvitz with him,’” one congregant noted. “Isn’t that crazy?”
In a sense, the rabbi’s insistence that none of his behavior was problematic led to the congregation’s “gift” of allowing it to continue.
The rabbi’s critics tend to view the situation in a more direct way — that he had a problem, whether he acknowledged it or not, and that he had compromised his ability to serve his community.
Those who informed the rabbi that their sons were reluctant to accept his gym invitations were told that the problem was not his but their sons.’
Going Public
What changed the dynamic was that Yehuda Kurtzer, who heads the American branch of the Shalom Hartman Institute, went to The New York Times some months ago with his story. He recounted how as a Columbia University student at 19, he was “horrified and embarrassed” when the rabbi, unclothed, invited him into the sauna.
After Rabbi Rosenblatt was invited to speak to the students at the SAR Academy in Riverdale last fall, Kurtzer, whose young son attends the school, complained to the principal. He later wrote of his concerns about Rabbi Rosenblatt on a listserv of alumni of Wexner Foundation programs. That prompted a response from other participants with similar stories of their encounters with the rabbi going back a number of years, and the campaign took on renewed urgency.
[The Jewish Week has made reference to the rabbi’s unusual behavior several times over the last 15 years, without naming him. Most recently, in January 2013, this reporter’s column posed this question: “What, if anything, should be done about a synagogue rabbi who has a long history of inviting teenage boys and young men in their 20s to go to the gym with him, shower together, and share intimate talk in the sauna, making at least some of them feel deeply uncomfortable? No allegations have come to light about the rabbi crossing the line, but is this normal socializing or inappropriate behavior?”
The reason for not naming Rabbi Rosenblatt, or writing a full story, was that none of the young men who made allegations against him were willing to speak “on the record,” for attribution. Kurtzer is the first and only to do so.]
Lessons Learned?
Some stories about rabbinic impropriety are black and white, from physical and sexual abuse to spying on women in a state of undress. This one is not, and it is difficult to find the right words even to describe Rabbi Rosenblatt’s behavior with young men. The same invitation to play squash, shower and talk in the sauna resulted in some young men bonding with the rabbi and expressing gratitude for a mentoring relationship; others called it “predatory” and “outrageous.” The New York Times labeled it “unusual.”
Confusion abounds as well in the congregants’ range of responses. Some knew of his behavior for decades and ask now, “So what’s the big news?” Others are upset that board leaders took matters into their own hands, seeking to monitor the rabbi’s interactions with young men without informing the congregation at large.
Until our rabbinic organizations and synagogues cede power to outside experts to monitor the behavior of rabbis, the pattern will continue: peers will take precedence over possible victims. Surely we must recognize by now that rabbis, like everyone else, can have both inspiring and harmful traits. Those characteristics are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they make us human. So it’s possible that the same rabbi who shows great compassion and sensitivity to some can also present a threat to others.
It’s up to the leaders, members and rabbi of RJC to resolve this issue in a way that is dignified and fair. But it’s too late to do it quietly, under the radar. They had that chance decades ago, but no longer.
The victims continue searching for that bridge. The bridge to normalcy.
They’re the 26 victims of convicted child sexual predator Jerry Sandusky, the former football coach at Penn State University. They’re the mostly prepubescent boys he abused in unimaginable ways in empty Nittany Lions locker rooms and showers, and in hotel rooms and cars, and even in his own home.
It’s in those terror-filled places, far away from objecting eyes, where this sexually violent pedophile used the enticing carrot of Penn State football to take away their clothes, their ability to trust, and their innocence.
Sandusky’s victims, now adults, search for that bridge to normalcy every day. Experts say the bridge from horror to healing is one not easily found. I experienced that close up. Shortly after the Sandusky story became front-page news, I interviewed a man who was sexually abused as a child, not by Sandusky, but by a family member. He told me that as he watched the story unfold on TV one day, he curled up in his living-room chair in a fetal position, pulled a blanket over his head, and trembled uncontrollably. Child sexual abuse: a long-tentacled monster.
Pennsylvania Rep. Michael Regan, a Republican from Northern York County, plans to introduce a bill soon that would name the Pennsylvania Turnpike bridge that spans the Susquehanna River from York to Dauphin counties the Joseph V. Paterno Memorial Bridge.
Paterno loyalists will cheer the measure. I’m not among them. I’ve always believed the late Penn State head football coach could have, should have, done more to stop Sandusky after learning of his deplorable deeds — many committed in the university’s Lasch Football Building.
Unanswered questions remain about Paterno’s role in the decision by former college administrators not to report to outside authorities what they learned Sandusky was doing to young boys.
Say what you will about Paterno having reported what he knew about Sandusky to his superiors — that he met his baseline legal obligation. I’ve always contended that had one of the young boys been a Paterno grandson, the old coach would have handled it much differently.
But what many of us cannot get past is an email uncovered by investigators and written by former PSU athletic director Tim Curley to his colleagues after Paterno informed him about Sandusky.
In it, Curley refers to a meeting he had that day with then-PSU President Graham Spanier and indicates that he and Spanier apparently discussed the Sandusky incident two days earlier. He also refers to a conversation the day before with Paterno. It’s not known what Paterno may have said. Curley then indicates that he no longer wants to contact child welfare authorities just yet.
”After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps,” Curley wrote.
Curley apparently preferred to keep the situation an internal affair and talk things over with Sandusky instead of notifying the state’s child welfare agency.
”I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved (Sandusky),” Curley continued.
For those who view this case objectively, and not through blue-and-white glasses, 409 victories and crisp fall afternoons in Beaver Stadium, there’s but one way to interpret that damning email.
There may come a time when it will be appropriate to name a bridge after Joe Paterno, but that time is not now. There’s no telling what additional information regarding his role in the Sandusky case will emerge during the trials of Spanier, Curley, and former university senior VP Gary Schultz. What’s the hurry? The bridge will be there.
Jerry Sandusky will spend up to 60 years behind bars after being found guilty on 45 counts of child sex abuse. He’ll essentially spend the rest of his life in prison.
Many of his victims, who will never have a bridge named after them, know exactly how he feels.
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2015-06-08 00:37:112015-06-08 00:37:11Phil Gianficaro, Column: Where's the victims' bridge?, Burlington County Times
On September 30, notoriously, Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) resigned from Congress after evidence surfaced to show that Foley had sent highly inappropriate instant messages to a teenage boy who is a former congressional page.
Foley, of course, isn’t the only one in trouble: Congressional leaders are in very hot water too. Neither House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) nor his staff acted on information about Foley’s transgression. And others in the Republican leadership who knew Foley was a potential problem, yet failed to act decisively, include House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-OH); John Shimkus (R-IL), head of the Page Board; Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA), whose page was involved; and Rep. Thomas Reynolds (R-NY), chair of the House Republican campaign organization.
Not a single one of these five Republicans did anything more than tell Foley to behave himself – even though they were all hearing reports suggesting the Congressman was conversing with children on the web in disturbing ways. Appallingly, they even allowed Foley to remain as Chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus.
To its credit, the right-leaning Washington Times has called for Hastert’s removal – taking a clear stand that the need to combat pedophilia is a value that transcends petty concerns of political interest. Hastert deserves whatever he gets, as far as I’m concerned, but no one, least of all the Republicans, should think they can get out from under this scandal by scapegoating a few in their leadership.
The Republicans are attempting damage control by arguing that the leadership did not know enough to act. But its members surely should have been wise to the terrible damage child abuse by trusted authority figures can inflict, and the importance of acting to halt and prevent it. Have they learned nothing from the Catholic Church child abuse scandal – which exhibits clear parallels to what happened here?
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, the Evidence Was Clear, But Ignored
The evidence against Foley was not subtle, nor was it difficult to find. All House leaders had to do, to investigate, was to contact former pages and ask if Foley was a problem.
When they finally did so last week, other pages quickly came forward with even more damning emails from Foley – messages that were just “sick sick sick sick,” to quote one of the pages.
The pages had been told to steer clear of Foley since 2001 (at least). And we’re supposed to believe the leadership had too little information to justify even a cursory investigation? Sorry — that cannot wash.
Members of Congress should know by now that sex crimes against children (even when they are in their teens) are extremely serious – and that child predators are typically serial perpetrators. It is not as if childhood sexual abuse never lands on their agenda – they recently, amidst much self-congratulation, passed the Adam Walsh bill, which I discussed in a previous column.
The Catholic Church abuse scandal coverage also underlined the fact that disregarding signs of abuse puts children at risk – with a major charge against the Church being its leadership’s callous disregard of the needs of children under the care of its priests.
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, the Press and Law Enforcement Also Failed to Pursue the Abuse Allegations
Sadly, the House hardly stands alone in keeping Foley’s activities a secret. The Miami Herald and the St. Petersburg Times (and likely others) received copies of emails or heard rumors, yet stayed silent. When one page’s parents asked that the issue be dropped, editors dutifully dropped it, as though only one child was at risk, which is hardly ever true with child predators.
This, too, mirrors the clergy child abuse scandal – before the Boston Globe finally went public with the story, decades of abuse had already occurred. And even though the Globe deserves credit for breaking the story, its editorial board sat on that story for many months before putting it into print.
Just as so many prosecutors had failed to act against church wrongdoers before the Globe‘s series, so too did the FBI fail to act against Foley. It was notified of the Foley allegations in July, and did nothing until now. Finally, ABC News revealed the claims, and the evidence supporting them, last Friday.
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, Children Were the Last Priority
Throughout this scandal, as in the disgraceful Catholic Church clergy child abuse scandal, strong warning signs indicating child abuse were not treated with the deadly seriousness they deserve.
Reynolds says he told Hastert about the issue, but he left it at that. And Hastert, for his part, cannot even remember being told by Reynolds about the reports regarding Foley. To make matters worse, Hastert tried to excuse his forgetfulness by insinuating that this was basically unimportant information lost in the shuffle: “If Reynolds told me,” Hastert says, “it was in a line of things, and we were in the middle of another crisis this spring, so I just don’t remember that.”
Early on, Hastert responded to the criticism of his handling of the matter with a laconic “[w]ould have, could have, should have” – as if the issue were barely worthy of his comment, or his time.
Hastert wasn’t the only one to grossly underplay the seriousness of the accusations. Tony Snow, the President’s press secretary, first referred to the emails as “simply naughty emails” — as though they were quaint 1950’s pin-up posters, rather than invitations to underage sex (and underage drinking, to facilitate the sex).
No matter where you look in the Catholic Church’s scandal, you can similarly find this tone and this attitude. These men are busy – don’t bother them with irrelevant details, like children.
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, Blame-Shifting Attempts Fail to Convince
When the press and public sounded a wake-up call to remind him that this was a very serious issue, Hastert tried to deflect blame for his failures on Foley, claiming Foley had “duped” and “deceived” him. To this day, Catholic bishops and cardinals persistently point to the deviant priests alone, without taking the full measure of their own responsibility for the endangerment of children.
Hastert ought to have been aware that child predators lie all the time, and thus should not have relied on Foley himself as the primary source of information about Foley’s own alleged crimes! After all, do police investigations stop with an interview of the alleged defendant?
The key point here is that blame lies on Foley, but it cannot be confined to Foley – any more than blame in the clergy abuse scandal can be confined to the priests who directly abused children.
The motivation of those in power, in each case, was to protect an institution: To save the Church’s, or Congress’, or the Republican Party’s power and reputation. It was also to further secure the power of individual men. It should go without saying that no reputation, and no power, that is built on lies, and on the cover-up of serious crimes, is worth protecting.
The Foley Scandal Redoubles the Need for Hearings on Childhood Sexual Abuse Within Powerful Organizations
Ironically, the House could have easily educated itself about the dangers of child abuse within powerful organizations – about the cover-ups by abusers, the serial natures of such crimes, and about the lasting damage such crimes inflict on their victims – had it only held hearings on the clergy abuse scandal some time in the five years since the Boston Globe broke the Catholic Church’s story to the world.
Not to do so, was a craven decision. After all, if the perpetrators and enablers reported by the Boston Globehad been anything other than clergy and church hierarchy, the House members would have stampeded each other to chair hearings. By comparison, look at what happened following the deaths of two girls in Florida after sexual assaults, and what happened after Elizabeth Smart’s kidnapping: lightning-quick legal reform, press conferences, and a lot of mutual back-slapping.
Yet with the clergy abuse crisis, we have tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of known victims (from multiple religious institutions at this point), and the House members act as though they don’t read the papers and as though their staffers don’t receive victims’ calls. I have documented this phenomenon in my book, God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law; suffice it to say that our elected representatives far too often sacrifice the public good in order to curry favor with the religious vote, a perversely corrupt practice.
Had the House held hearings, its members would have learned enough not to be able – or even to be able to claim in public – to have been “duped” and “deceived” by Foley’s lies. Here are a few specific things they would have learned:
(1) They would have learned that child predators are usually “nice guys,” whom people trust – and thus that Foley could be a good friend and colleague to them, and a nightmare to children, at the same time.
(2) They would have learned that child predators carefully and patiently “groom” their victims, often using the Internet, so that even if the Foley emails they knew about had, indeed, only been “overly friendly,” they might have signaled there was far worse still to come. Where there is smoke there is too often fire, when it comes to child abuse. And here, there was smoke: Asking about the well-being of a particular teen page is disturbing; asking for the page’s photo, is more so.
(3) Finally, and perhaps most importantly, they would have learned that telling a child predator to behave himself, and then sending him back to a workplace full of teens impressed, and perhaps also intimidated, by his high rank, is like chastising an alcoholic and then sending him right back into a well-stocked bar.
Here’s something else they might have learned that might have forestalled this scandal – they might have learned that Foley himself was a victim of clergy abuse by a Catholic priest when he was between 13 and 15 years old. We only learned this once he checked himself into a rehab center once the scandal broke. Those involved in the clergy abuse crisis, including victims, their families, counselors, and lawyers, can tell you that when the truth is finally aired, it often lends victims the wherewithal to come forward. If the House had pursued the truth instead of pandering to the religious institution, Foley might have been getting help since 2001, instead of preying on children on the Internet.
Even before the Foley scandal, it was very clear that the House should have held hearings on the clergy abuse scandal. Now, an untold number of victims, the Republican Party, and the institution as a whole are paying the price for this extraordinary abdication of the larger public good. Hold hearings now: It’s high time.
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2015-06-07 03:04:242015-06-07 03:04:24Marci Hamilton, Congressman Mark Foley's Disgrace and Resignation: What Congress Should Have Learned - And Didn't - From the Catholic Church Clergy Abuse Scandal
As an enthusiastic young teacher and wrestling coach at the high school here, former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert reliably had one student at his side, former classmates say. Stephen Reinboldt, a smart, slender, likable student who rose to become class president, was the wrestling team’s equipment manager. For four years, he arrived at practice early and stayed late, traveled with Mr. Hastert to overnight tournaments, even when only one wrestler was competing, and went for long rides in the coach’s sports car, sometimes driving it.
On Friday, Mr. Reinboldt’s younger sister, Jolene Burdge, said her brother, who died in 1995, was also sexually abused by Mr. Hastert, but hid the fact for years because he thought no one would believe him.
“Mr. Hastert had plenty of opportunities to be alone with Steve because he was there before the meets,” Ms. Burdge said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “He was there after everything because he did the laundry, the uniforms.”
The allegation comes a week after Mr. Hastert, who served for eight years as House speaker, was indicted on charges of making cash withdrawals, totaling $1.7 million, to evade detection by the authorities and lying to investigators.
J. Dennis Hastert, then the House speaker, in his Capitol Hill office in 2007.
DOUG MILLS / THE NEW YORK TIMES
Two people briefed on the F.B.I. investigation told The New York Times that Mr. Hastert was using the money to pay a former student hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide the fact that Mr. Hastert sexually abused him decades ago.
The former student is identified in the indictment only as “Individual A.” Ms. Burdge’s comments marked the first time that a possible victim of Mr. Hastert has been publicly identified. ABC reported that Ms. Burdge said she did not ask Mr. Hastert for money and did not know the identity of Individual A.
At Ms. Burdge’s home in Montana on Friday, a man who answered the door said she was not available. But the man, who did not identify himself, said her statements were accurately reported by ABC.
Mr. Hastert is scheduled to appear in court next week in Chicago. His lawyer did not return calls on Friday.
Stephen Reinboldt in 1971.
In the interview on ABC, Ms. Burdge called Mr. Hastert, who taught and coached at Yorkville high school from 1966 until 1981, a father figure to her brother. She said she learned of the years of abuse when her brother revealed to her that he was gay eight years after he left high school.
“I asked him, ‘When was your first same-sex experience?’ ” she said. “He looked at me and said, ‘It was with Dennis Hastert.’ I was stunned.”
She continued, “And he just turned around and kind of looked at me and said, ‘Who is ever going to believe me?’ ”
Ms. Burdge said she believed the abuse ended when her brother moved away after his high school graduation in 1971. Mr. Reinboldt died of AIDS at age 42.
Document | Indictment of John Dennis Hastert Federal authorities accused the former House speaker of structuring withdrawals from various accounts in order to avoid bank reporting requirements.
She also said she confronted Mr. Hastert when he unexpectedly came to her brother’s funeral, telling him, “I want you to know that your secret didn’t die here with my brother.”
Ms. Burdge said she tried for years to get news organizations, including ABC News, and advocacy groups to pursue the story. She began in 2006 after it was revealed that Mr. Hastert had covered up claims that Representative Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, had sent sexually explicit emails to congressional pages.
She said she had given up on exposing Mr. Hastert. Then, two weeks ago, just before Mr. Hastert was indicted, she was contacted by the F.B.I.
“That’s when I just kind of lost it and said, ‘Oh my God, I can’t believe — I never thought I was going to get this phone call,’ ” she said.
In interviews, former students say Mr. Hastert was popular, partly because his classes often consisted of little more than watching movies, and because his teams kept winning. He also seemed to have a new Porsche almost every year, each a different color, and would let certain boys drive it — not just around the parking lot, but on long rides.
“Some guys got to drive the Porsche and some didn’t,” said Jeff Nix, who was a student at the time. “We always wondered what you had to do to get to drive the Porche. Steve got to drive the Porsche.”
Yearbooks show that Mr. Reinboldt was a class officer every year, a member of the French and Letterman’s Clubs, and was student council president in his senior year.
“He was a smart kid. Kind of shy, but the best manager we ever had,” said Mr. Nix, who helped manage the wrestling team with Mr. Reinboldt. “He always had everything ready.”
Bob Dhuse, 63, who was a star wrestler during the period when Mr. Reinboldt was the manager, said he never saw any sort of abuse or hint of inappropriate behavior involving the coach.
In an interview before Mr. Reinboldt’s sister came forward, Mr. Dhuse recalled going to the state tournament in Bloomington, Ill., with Mr. Reinboldt and Mr. Hastert in 1970, when Mr. Dhuse was co-captain. Mr. Hastert drove the two students in his blue Porsche. He had his own hotel room, Mr. Dhuse said, while the two teenagers shared a room.
“He was a single guy at the time, and that’s what he drove,” said Mr. Dhuse, now a corn and soybean farmer in the Yorkville area, said of the coach’s flashy car.
Another member of the team around that time, Gary Matlock, said he went on a Boy Scout trip with Mr. Reinboldt led by Mr. Hastert to the Bahamas. He said Mr. Reinboldt wanted to be part of the wrestling team but did not quite have the athletic ability, “so he became a jack of all trades who assisted the coach.”
“I saw nothing except a shining example and mentor,” he said of Mr. Hastert.
Like many who went to Yorkville High School, Mr. Matlock remained in the small farming town. Over the decades, he said, there had been no rumors about Mr. Hastert.
“This town used to be so small,” he said. “Forget 24 hours — you knew all the gossip in 24 minutes.”
But since the news of Mr. Hastert’s indictment a week ago, he said, none of Mr. Matlock’s high school friends have called to mull over the allegations. “It’s just been a big hush,” he said. “The community is in shock.”
But some residents who were still absorbing the news of Mr. Hastert’s indictment said they were even more disturbed by Friday’s revelations.
“I just wonder how many more of them are going to come out of the woodwork,” said John Toschak, an electrician, adding that many Yorkville residents seemed to still support Mr. Hastert.
“They love him here. You can’t find anybody who would say anything bad about Denny.”
http://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpg00SOL Reformhttp://sol-reform.com/News/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Hamilton-Logo.jpgSOL Reform2015-06-07 02:56:372015-06-07 02:56:37JULIE BOSMAN and DAVE PHILIPPS, Woman Says Dennis Hastert Abused Her Brother in High School, The New York Times
Latest on Hastert: Friend: Reinboldt ‘nicest, kindest soul’, 2 News
/in Minnesota /by SOL ReformA high school friend of Stephen Reinboldt, the man whose family says was sexually abused by former U.S. House speaker Dennis Hastert, says he was “the nicest, kindest soul.”
Pam Snell was a cheerleader when Reinboldt was the equipment manager for the wrestling team at Yorkville High School in Illinois. She remembers traveling with Reinboldt on team trips, and says he was someone who “was trying to be accepted.”
Reinboldt’s sister, Jolene Burdge, says her brother was abused by Hastert, who was a teacher and wrestling coach at the high school before his career in politics. Reinboldt died in 1995.
Burdge says her brother told her before he died that his first homosexual contact was with Hastert, and that it lasted through high school.
___
3:30 p.m. (CDT)
Several former members of Congress say there were no hints that Dennis Hastert had any personal problems when the Illinois Republican was U.S. House speaker.
Former U.S. Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia was a member of the House GOP leadership when Hastert became speaker.
He says that during the tumultuous days in 1998, when Republicans settled on Hastert to replace Newt Gingrich as speaker, they didn’t research his background. Davis says “there’s no time for internal vetting” during such a situation.
But looking back after last week’s indictment, Davis says it’s now obvious to him that Hastert was “fighting some demons.”
Former Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia says Republicans turned to Hastert to succeed Gingrich partly because “there wasn’t any inkling of anything” hidden in Hastert’s past.
___
This story has been corrected to show Hastert was chosen as U.S. House speaker in 1998, not 1999.
___
6:50 a.m. (CDT)
A Montana woman says the FBI interviewed her about her allegations that her brother had a sexual relationship with Dennis Hastert, the high school wrestling coach who became speaker of the House.
Hastert was charged last week in a federal indictment that alleges he agreed to pay $3.5 million to someone from Yorkville, the Illinois town where he taught and coached high school wrestling, so the person would stay quiet about “prior misconduct.”
Jolene Burdge of Billings, Montana, told The Associated Press Thursday that the FBI interviewed her in mid-May about Hastert. She says her brother told her before he died in 1995 that his first homosexual contact was with Hastert and that the abuse lasted throughout high school.
In an interview aired Friday on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Burdge identified her brother as Stephen Reinboldt.
Full article: http://www.ktvn.com/story/29247375/latest-on-hastert-sister-says-man-had-sex-with-ex-speaker
Ben Brumfield, Minnesota Catholic archdiocese charged in sex abuse, CNN
/in Minnesota /by SOL ReformA Catholic archdiocese with a landmark legal legacy in child sexual abuse now faces criminal complaints in its handling of them.
In 1983, attorney Jeff Anderson filed a civil case of priest sexual abuse of minors against a U.S. archdiocese in St. Paul, Minnesota. It opened a floodgate of victims who came forward with clergy sex abuse stories across the country.
On Friday, Ramsey County prosecutor John Choi leveled six counts at the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. He accused it of encouraging, causing or contributing to the sexual abuse of three victims by a priest in 2010 and 2011.
Each count is a “gross misdemeanor,” and each carries a maximum of one year in prison and/or a $3,000 fine. The complaint focuses on abuse by former priest Curtis Wehmeyer, but it and an accompanying document say his case was just one of many that the archdiocese let slide.
A representative of the archdiocese has been summoned to answer to the complaint in court on June 12.
The archdiocese will cooperate with Choi’s office, Auxiliary Bishop Andrew Cozzens said in a statement Friday. “We deeply regret the abuse that was suffered by the victims of Curtis Wehmeyer and are grieved for all victims of sexual abuse,” he said.
Felony abuser
Wehmeyer was convicted in February 2013 on 20 felony charges of sexual abuse against minors and possession of child pornography, the archdiocese said in a statement. He was sentenced to five years in prison, and since then has been charged again with similar criminal sexual misconduct.
In 2012, the archdiocese booted Wehmeyer from the ministry. In March this year, Pope Francis permanently ejected him from clergy status.
And St. Paul Archbishop John Nienstedt promised to do better.
“I am deeply saddened and have been profoundly affected by the stories I continue to hear from victims/survivors of clergy sexual abuse. My focus, and the focus of the archdiocese, is to do all we can to keep children safe while offering resources for help and healing,” he said in a statement then.
‘Turned a blind eye’
That was too little too late for prosecutor Choi, who said the archdiocese protected Wehmeyer and kept him in its system while he continued abusing children.
“When confronted with disturbing information about Curtis Wehmeyer, church officials time and time again turned a blind eye,” he told reporters Friday.
To tackle the problem of sexual abuse by clergy, the archdiocese created the “Promoter for Ministerial Standards Program” in 2005 to supervise offending members. To Choi, it was an empty shell — or worse.
“What was purported to be a best practice in monitoring and supervising wayward priests was in reality a sham,” he said. And news of Wehmeyer’s behavior grew worse.
“As time progressed, the information about Curtis Wehmeyer became more alarming and more specific,” he said. Much of the 44-page complaint and the 35-page petition are dedicated to Wehmeyer’s missteps and problems: From sexual issues, to alcohol addiction, DWIs and illegal drug use — to uncomfortable approaches made on boys.
Hanging around boys’ bathroom
The priest had been seen hanging around the boys’ bathroom, and been caught loitering in an area of a park notorious for hook-ups, the documents said.
A priest Wehmeyer had unspecified questionable contact with was keeping his distance, and Wehmeyer had approached children in odd ways, the documents allege.
He once hit on teen boys in a book store, asking one if he was in the mood for sex, according to the documents.
The last incident was reported to the archdiocese, which said it would place restrictions on Wehmeyer and have him evaluated at a treatment center for clergy.
In 2005, he was required to participate in the archdiocese’s monitoring program, and although he showed signs he was not complying with it, the program’s head let him slip through it, the complaint said.
Prosecutors called the program “window dressing.”
Promoted to pastor
With knowledge of Wehmeyer’s past, Archbishop Nienstedt later promoted him to pastor.
“Are you aware of my past? Are you aware of my record?” Wehmeyer said he asked Nienstedt at the time. Nienstedt brushed it off, the documents said.
And in 2009, Wehmeyer became pastor at two churches at the same time — St. Thomas the Apostle, and Blessed Sacrament.
In the two years that followed, he abused at least three more boys on parish grounds, for which he was later convicted.
“During at least the summer of 2010, Wehmeyer sexually abused VICTIM-1 multiple times, including touching the boy’s penis and buttocks and exposing himself to VICTIM-1,” the complaint read. He gave the boy weed and beer and showed him pornography.
He did the same with a second boy that summer, and a year later, he repeated the abuse with a third boy, getting him high and drunk to the point that he was incapacitated. The boy built barriers with pillows in a bed they shared to keep Wehmeyer away, the documents said. But that didn’t work.
Turned in to police
In June 2012, a church deacon turned Wehmeyer in to police, and a mother reported to police the abuse of her two children.
All three boys will require psychological treatment as will a traumatized sibling of one of the boys, the documents said, and prosecutors are holding the archdiocese accountable for that fact due to its “act, word and omission.”
The costs for treatment could climb over $100,000.
Wehmeyer’s was not the only case the archdiocese swept under the rug, the documents said, which named more examples of clergy who abused children. “Respondent has a long history of not effectively addressing sexual abuse committed by some of its clergy,” it read.
But Wehmeyer is the most recent after a long prior history of abuse within the archdiocese, it read, and one of the worst.
Minnesota Catholic archdiocese charged in sex abuse _ National_World News – WDSU Home
Gary Rosenblatt, Riverdale’s ‘Open Secret’ Goes Public, The Jewish Week
/in Uncategorized /by SOL ReformThree years ago several prominent members of the Riverdale Jewish Center (RJC), the 700-member Modern Orthodox congregation, met privately with their longtime rabbi, Jonathan Rosenblatt, and offered to arrange a generous buyout for him. They told him that the persistent rumors about his allegedly inappropriate behavior with boys and young men were bound to become public at some point and it would be in his and his family’s best interest, and for the congregation as well, if he accepted an offer to resign quietly.
If he didn’t, he was told, “this could all end badly,” according to a member of the congregation with knowledge of the meeting.
“It was not meant as a threat, but rather that it would hit the press eventually and no one would see things as he did,” the person explained this weekend.
“Unfortunately, he refused, and now it’s all out there,” the person said, referring to a thorough New York Times May 31 report on Rabbi Rosenblatt’s “unusual” behavior that included inviting young men to discuss personal matters while sitting naked in the sauna with him.
The rabbi insisted, in the meeting, that he had done nothing wrong and had complied with previous requests from shul officials that he limit his gym invitations to young men rather than boys. His wife, Tzipporah, an attorney, who was present at the meeting, was said to have warned of a possible legal case if RJC took action against the rabbi based on illegal touching.
The synagogue board met for more than four hours on Monday night, debating next steps. While nothing was resolved regarding the fate of the rabbi, the board agreed to hire a public relations firm. For now there is an air of sadness, frustration and confusion among congregants, some of whom, including supporters, are hoping the rabbi will resign and spare them more public scrutiny. Others seem prepared to rally around the rabbi and hope the negative attention will soon blow over. And it appears the rabbi is not prepared to step down.
In response to a Jewish Week request this week for an interview, he sent a brief “official” statement through his “adviser,” Adam Friedman. It does not defend against or even mention the specific accusations against him, but rather frames the controversy as one over ideology.
Rabbi Rosenblatt wrote that as a rabbi he has served “with devotion, guided by high standards — religious and professional.
“My career in leadership has not been without ideological contentiousness,” he continued. “There is significant reason to believe that the attack on my reputation is being promoted by those whose real attack is on my beliefs and principles. The respected rabbi of an important congregation would, for some, represent a significant trophy in the predatory quest to discredit his ideas and, possibly, an opportunity to change the nature of the community he leads.”
But those close to the situation see the response as an attempt to divert attention away from the rabbi’s behavior with young men. And there is puzzlement over his reference to an “ideological” struggle, since Rabbi Rosenblatt is seen as a centrist within Modern Orthodoxy.
“Bottom line, he had a chance to avoid embarrassment for himself, his family and the shul,” said the person who knew of the settlement offer. “But he brought this on himself.”
Open Secret
For most of the rabbi’s more than three decades at RJC, his habit of inviting young men to play squash or racquetball, followed by a shower and sauna with them, was an open secret in the congregation.
“It was a joke among the teenage boys and young men,” one congregant recalled. “We’d ask each other, ‘did you go to the shvitz with the rabbi?’”
But times have changed, as have societal norms. There is more awareness of and less tolerance for behavior viewed as sexually predatory, even if it is not invasive — especially when initiated by figures of authority and spiritual leaders.
Rabbi Rosenblatt (no relation to this reporter) is the scion of a prominent family — his great-grandfather was famed cantor Yossele Rosenblatt and his grandfather, Samuel Rosenblatt, was the rabbi of a major Baltimore synagogue for more than 50 years. Even some congregants urging for his resignation now note that he is a man of many talents and attributes — a brilliant scholar of English literature as well as Judaic texts, with a gift for eloquent oratory, a strong voice for Modern Orthodoxy when many of his colleagues have moved to the right, and a caring and compassionate pastor, always there for families in times of need.
But even some of his biggest defenders say his lack of self-awareness, or arrogance, in denying the disturbing quality of his behavior, and his inability or unwillingness to curb it, contributed mightily to his current difficulties.
“He has this blind spot,” said one RJC member of several decades. “He thought he could get away with this behavior.”
Samuel Klagsbrun, a prominent local psychiatrist, described Rabbi Rosenblatt’s behavior as “a classic case of disassociation, where one separates the reality of his actions from his belief system.” It makes for a particularly strong divide when the person is a public figure with a reputation for good works, said Klagsbrun, who noted that he does not know Rabbi Rosenblatt.
“If he was warned and continued his actions — a rabbi risking being chastised — it’s obvious that his need for that connection with the young people was significant,” he added.
But Debbie Jonas, an RJC member and mother of Rabbi Davidi Jonas, who grew up in Riverdale, said her son was one of many young teenagers who went to the gym with the rabbi, and that “it was like any health club or locker room,” with people wrapped in towels. Jonas was one of several people that Rabbi Rosenblatt’s adviser, Adam Friedman, recommended The Jewish Week contact for comment. She said the rabbi “takes himself seriously as a mentor, and I give him tremendous credit for my Davidi’s spiritual development.” And she said that more than two dozen rabbis who served as rabbinic interns at RJC were sending letters to the shul in support of Rabbi Rosenblatt.
One member of the congregation for more than 20 years said that sitting through services at RJC this past Shabbat was a particularly painful experience.
“Nothing was said publicly” about the Times article, he said, noting that in Rabbi Rosenblatt’s absence, there was an expectation that the president or other official would address the problem from the pulpit. But that did not occur. (Rabbi Rosenblatt is nearing the end of a six-month sabbatical, spending much of his time in Boston and doing research at Harvard University.)
On Shabbat morning there was much private discussion among fellow worshippers, said the congregant, who like more than a dozen people interviewed for this article, requested anonymity because of personal connections to the synagogue.
The conversation ranged from labeling the Times story “character assassination” to hopes that the rabbi step down and spare the synagogue further shame, to talk of preparing for a difficult, and perhaps legal, battle over the rabbi’s future.
‘Unanswered Questions’
The publicity over Rabbi Rosenblatt comes at a difficult time for RJC, which has lost some of the energy, and membership, it once had and as it is looking to revitalize itself. It appears that older members of the synagogue, who have been the beneficiary for decades of Rabbi Rosenblatt’s soaring sermons, thoughtful teachings and compassionate pastoral care, are more inclined to have the rabbi stay on than younger members who have reacted most critically to the allegations, perhaps envisioning their sons being at risk of the rabbi’s outreach.
It should also be noted that over the years, some members left RJC for other synagogues. So those who stayed may have made their peace with the rabbi’s questionable behavior.
One young professional, an RJC member for less than two years, said he was shocked by the revelations in the Times article and was particularly upset at the synagogue’s lay leadership’s refusal to comment publicly on Shabbat.
“People are confused and upset,” he said. “There are so many unanswered questions.”
Chief among them, particularly for outsiders, is how could the congregation’s lay leaders have allowed the rabbi to remain in his position of authority decades after learning of his sauna sessions with boys and young men?
Several former leaders acknowledged that, as one said, “It’s easy to look back now” and recognize that mistakes were made in handling the situation. But he stressed that it was more complicated than it appears.
He and others interviewed noted that the rabbi performed his primary congregational responsibilities masterfully. The complaints came most directly from Sura Jeselsohn, a member whose zealous pursuit of this case led some to describe her as the rabbi’s Javert, a reference to the “Les Miserables” villain who devoted his life to tracking down a minor thief.
“In a bizarre way she helped the rabbi’s case” because she was seen as inordinately devoted to bringing him down, one member observed.
There were never reported allegations of sexual touching or criminal complaints, and there were practical concerns that any attempt to force the rabbi out could result in a painful legal suit.
Perhaps most significant is the serious confusion over the “gray area” of the rabbi’s actions — not illegal but widely considered inappropriate — that led feelings of loyalty toward him to trump taking more forceful action.
“People would say ‘I support the rabbi, but I wouldn’t let my son go to the shvitz with him,’” one congregant noted. “Isn’t that crazy?”
In a sense, the rabbi’s insistence that none of his behavior was problematic led to the congregation’s “gift” of allowing it to continue.
The rabbi’s critics tend to view the situation in a more direct way — that he had a problem, whether he acknowledged it or not, and that he had compromised his ability to serve his community.
Those who informed the rabbi that their sons were reluctant to accept his gym invitations were told that the problem was not his but their sons.’
Going Public
What changed the dynamic was that Yehuda Kurtzer, who heads the American branch of the Shalom Hartman Institute, went to The New York Times some months ago with his story. He recounted how as a Columbia University student at 19, he was “horrified and embarrassed” when the rabbi, unclothed, invited him into the sauna.
After Rabbi Rosenblatt was invited to speak to the students at the SAR Academy in Riverdale last fall, Kurtzer, whose young son attends the school, complained to the principal. He later wrote of his concerns about Rabbi Rosenblatt on a listserv of alumni of Wexner Foundation programs. That prompted a response from other participants with similar stories of their encounters with the rabbi going back a number of years, and the campaign took on renewed urgency.
[The Jewish Week has made reference to the rabbi’s unusual behavior several times over the last 15 years, without naming him. Most recently, in January 2013, this reporter’s column posed this question: “What, if anything, should be done about a synagogue rabbi who has a long history of inviting teenage boys and young men in their 20s to go to the gym with him, shower together, and share intimate talk in the sauna, making at least some of them feel deeply uncomfortable? No allegations have come to light about the rabbi crossing the line, but is this normal socializing or inappropriate behavior?”
The reason for not naming Rabbi Rosenblatt, or writing a full story, was that none of the young men who made allegations against him were willing to speak “on the record,” for attribution. Kurtzer is the first and only to do so.]
Lessons Learned?
Some stories about rabbinic impropriety are black and white, from physical and sexual abuse to spying on women in a state of undress. This one is not, and it is difficult to find the right words even to describe Rabbi Rosenblatt’s behavior with young men. The same invitation to play squash, shower and talk in the sauna resulted in some young men bonding with the rabbi and expressing gratitude for a mentoring relationship; others called it “predatory” and “outrageous.” The New York Times labeled it “unusual.”
Confusion abounds as well in the congregants’ range of responses. Some knew of his behavior for decades and ask now, “So what’s the big news?” Others are upset that board leaders took matters into their own hands, seeking to monitor the rabbi’s interactions with young men without informing the congregation at large.
Until our rabbinic organizations and synagogues cede power to outside experts to monitor the behavior of rabbis, the pattern will continue: peers will take precedence over possible victims. Surely we must recognize by now that rabbis, like everyone else, can have both inspiring and harmful traits. Those characteristics are not mutually exclusive; in fact, they make us human. So it’s possible that the same rabbi who shows great compassion and sensitivity to some can also present a threat to others.
It’s up to the leaders, members and rabbi of RJC to resolve this issue in a way that is dignified and fair. But it’s too late to do it quietly, under the radar. They had that chance decades ago, but no longer.
Riverdale’s ‘Open Secret’ Goes Public _ The Jewish Week
Phil Gianficaro, Column: Where’s the victims’ bridge?, Burlington County Times
/in Pennsylvania /by SOL ReformThe victims continue searching for that bridge. The bridge to normalcy.
They’re the 26 victims of convicted child sexual predator Jerry Sandusky, the former football coach at Penn State University. They’re the mostly prepubescent boys he abused in unimaginable ways in empty Nittany Lions locker rooms and showers, and in hotel rooms and cars, and even in his own home.
It’s in those terror-filled places, far away from objecting eyes, where this sexually violent pedophile used the enticing carrot of Penn State football to take away their clothes, their ability to trust, and their innocence.
Sandusky’s victims, now adults, search for that bridge to normalcy every day. Experts say the bridge from horror to healing is one not easily found. I experienced that close up. Shortly after the Sandusky story became front-page news, I interviewed a man who was sexually abused as a child, not by Sandusky, but by a family member. He told me that as he watched the story unfold on TV one day, he curled up in his living-room chair in a fetal position, pulled a blanket over his head, and trembled uncontrollably. Child sexual abuse: a long-tentacled monster.
Pennsylvania Rep. Michael Regan, a Republican from Northern York County, plans to introduce a bill soon that would name the Pennsylvania Turnpike bridge that spans the Susquehanna River from York to Dauphin counties the Joseph V. Paterno Memorial Bridge.
Paterno loyalists will cheer the measure. I’m not among them. I’ve always believed the late Penn State head football coach could have, should have, done more to stop Sandusky after learning of his deplorable deeds — many committed in the university’s Lasch Football Building.
Unanswered questions remain about Paterno’s role in the decision by former college administrators not to report to outside authorities what they learned Sandusky was doing to young boys.
Say what you will about Paterno having reported what he knew about Sandusky to his superiors — that he met his baseline legal obligation. I’ve always contended that had one of the young boys been a Paterno grandson, the old coach would have handled it much differently.
But what many of us cannot get past is an email uncovered by investigators and written by former PSU athletic director Tim Curley to his colleagues after Paterno informed him about Sandusky.
In it, Curley refers to a meeting he had that day with then-PSU President Graham Spanier and indicates that he and Spanier apparently discussed the Sandusky incident two days earlier. He also refers to a conversation the day before with Paterno. It’s not known what Paterno may have said. Curley then indicates that he no longer wants to contact child welfare authorities just yet.
”After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps,” Curley wrote.
Curley apparently preferred to keep the situation an internal affair and talk things over with Sandusky instead of notifying the state’s child welfare agency.
”I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved (Sandusky),” Curley continued.
For those who view this case objectively, and not through blue-and-white glasses, 409 victories and crisp fall afternoons in Beaver Stadium, there’s but one way to interpret that damning email.
There may come a time when it will be appropriate to name a bridge after Joe Paterno, but that time is not now. There’s no telling what additional information regarding his role in the Sandusky case will emerge during the trials of Spanier, Curley, and former university senior VP Gary Schultz. What’s the hurry? The bridge will be there.
Jerry Sandusky will spend up to 60 years behind bars after being found guilty on 45 counts of child sex abuse. He’ll essentially spend the rest of his life in prison.
Many of his victims, who will never have a bridge named after them, know exactly how he feels.
Column_ Where’s the victims’ bridge_ – Burlington County Times_ Phil Gianficaro _ Local Columnist _ Human Interest _ Humor
Marci Hamilton, Congressman Mark Foley’s Disgrace and Resignation: What Congress Should Have Learned – And Didn’t – From the Catholic Church Clergy Abuse Scandal
/in Uncategorized /by SOL ReformOn September 30, notoriously, Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) resigned from Congress after evidence surfaced to show that Foley had sent highly inappropriate instant messages to a teenage boy who is a former congressional page.
Foley, of course, isn’t the only one in trouble: Congressional leaders are in very hot water too. Neither House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) nor his staff acted on information about Foley’s transgression. And others in the Republican leadership who knew Foley was a potential problem, yet failed to act decisively, include House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-OH); John Shimkus (R-IL), head of the Page Board; Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA), whose page was involved; and Rep. Thomas Reynolds (R-NY), chair of the House Republican campaign organization.
Not a single one of these five Republicans did anything more than tell Foley to behave himself – even though they were all hearing reports suggesting the Congressman was conversing with children on the web in disturbing ways. Appallingly, they even allowed Foley to remain as Chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus.
To its credit, the right-leaning Washington Times has called for Hastert’s removal – taking a clear stand that the need to combat pedophilia is a value that transcends petty concerns of political interest. Hastert deserves whatever he gets, as far as I’m concerned, but no one, least of all the Republicans, should think they can get out from under this scandal by scapegoating a few in their leadership.
The Republicans are attempting damage control by arguing that the leadership did not know enough to act. But its members surely should have been wise to the terrible damage child abuse by trusted authority figures can inflict, and the importance of acting to halt and prevent it. Have they learned nothing from the Catholic Church child abuse scandal – which exhibits clear parallels to what happened here?
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, the Evidence Was Clear, But Ignored
The evidence against Foley was not subtle, nor was it difficult to find. All House leaders had to do, to investigate, was to contact former pages and ask if Foley was a problem.
When they finally did so last week, other pages quickly came forward with even more damning emails from Foley – messages that were just “sick sick sick sick,” to quote one of the pages.
The pages had been told to steer clear of Foley since 2001 (at least). And we’re supposed to believe the leadership had too little information to justify even a cursory investigation? Sorry — that cannot wash.
Members of Congress should know by now that sex crimes against children (even when they are in their teens) are extremely serious – and that child predators are typically serial perpetrators. It is not as if childhood sexual abuse never lands on their agenda – they recently, amidst much self-congratulation, passed the Adam Walsh bill, which I discussed in a previous column.
The Catholic Church abuse scandal coverage also underlined the fact that disregarding signs of abuse puts children at risk – with a major charge against the Church being its leadership’s callous disregard of the needs of children under the care of its priests.
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, the Press and Law Enforcement Also Failed to Pursue the Abuse Allegations
Sadly, the House hardly stands alone in keeping Foley’s activities a secret. The Miami Herald and the St. Petersburg Times (and likely others) received copies of emails or heard rumors, yet stayed silent. When one page’s parents asked that the issue be dropped, editors dutifully dropped it, as though only one child was at risk, which is hardly ever true with child predators.
This, too, mirrors the clergy child abuse scandal – before the Boston Globe finally went public with the story, decades of abuse had already occurred. And even though the Globe deserves credit for breaking the story, its editorial board sat on that story for many months before putting it into print.
Just as so many prosecutors had failed to act against church wrongdoers before the Globe‘s series, so too did the FBI fail to act against Foley. It was notified of the Foley allegations in July, and did nothing until now. Finally, ABC News revealed the claims, and the evidence supporting them, last Friday.
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, Children Were the Last Priority
Throughout this scandal, as in the disgraceful Catholic Church clergy child abuse scandal, strong warning signs indicating child abuse were not treated with the deadly seriousness they deserve.
Reynolds says he told Hastert about the issue, but he left it at that. And Hastert, for his part, cannot even remember being told by Reynolds about the reports regarding Foley. To make matters worse, Hastert tried to excuse his forgetfulness by insinuating that this was basically unimportant information lost in the shuffle: “If Reynolds told me,” Hastert says, “it was in a line of things, and we were in the middle of another crisis this spring, so I just don’t remember that.”
Early on, Hastert responded to the criticism of his handling of the matter with a laconic “[w]ould have, could have, should have” – as if the issue were barely worthy of his comment, or his time.
Hastert wasn’t the only one to grossly underplay the seriousness of the accusations. Tony Snow, the President’s press secretary, first referred to the emails as “simply naughty emails” — as though they were quaint 1950’s pin-up posters, rather than invitations to underage sex (and underage drinking, to facilitate the sex).
No matter where you look in the Catholic Church’s scandal, you can similarly find this tone and this attitude. These men are busy – don’t bother them with irrelevant details, like children.
As in the Clergy Child Abuse Scandal, Blame-Shifting Attempts Fail to Convince
When the press and public sounded a wake-up call to remind him that this was a very serious issue, Hastert tried to deflect blame for his failures on Foley, claiming Foley had “duped” and “deceived” him. To this day, Catholic bishops and cardinals persistently point to the deviant priests alone, without taking the full measure of their own responsibility for the endangerment of children.
Hastert ought to have been aware that child predators lie all the time, and thus should not have relied on Foley himself as the primary source of information about Foley’s own alleged crimes! After all, do police investigations stop with an interview of the alleged defendant?
The key point here is that blame lies on Foley, but it cannot be confined to Foley – any more than blame in the clergy abuse scandal can be confined to the priests who directly abused children.
The motivation of those in power, in each case, was to protect an institution: To save the Church’s, or Congress’, or the Republican Party’s power and reputation. It was also to further secure the power of individual men. It should go without saying that no reputation, and no power, that is built on lies, and on the cover-up of serious crimes, is worth protecting.
The Foley Scandal Redoubles the Need for Hearings on Childhood Sexual Abuse Within Powerful Organizations
Ironically, the House could have easily educated itself about the dangers of child abuse within powerful organizations – about the cover-ups by abusers, the serial natures of such crimes, and about the lasting damage such crimes inflict on their victims – had it only held hearings on the clergy abuse scandal some time in the five years since the Boston Globe broke the Catholic Church’s story to the world.
Not to do so, was a craven decision. After all, if the perpetrators and enablers reported by the Boston Globehad been anything other than clergy and church hierarchy, the House members would have stampeded each other to chair hearings. By comparison, look at what happened following the deaths of two girls in Florida after sexual assaults, and what happened after Elizabeth Smart’s kidnapping: lightning-quick legal reform, press conferences, and a lot of mutual back-slapping.
Yet with the clergy abuse crisis, we have tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of known victims (from multiple religious institutions at this point), and the House members act as though they don’t read the papers and as though their staffers don’t receive victims’ calls. I have documented this phenomenon in my book, God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law; suffice it to say that our elected representatives far too often sacrifice the public good in order to curry favor with the religious vote, a perversely corrupt practice.
Had the House held hearings, its members would have learned enough not to be able – or even to be able to claim in public – to have been “duped” and “deceived” by Foley’s lies. Here are a few specific things they would have learned:
(1) They would have learned that child predators are usually “nice guys,” whom people trust – and thus that Foley could be a good friend and colleague to them, and a nightmare to children, at the same time.
(2) They would have learned that child predators carefully and patiently “groom” their victims, often using the Internet, so that even if the Foley emails they knew about had, indeed, only been “overly friendly,” they might have signaled there was far worse still to come. Where there is smoke there is too often fire, when it comes to child abuse. And here, there was smoke: Asking about the well-being of a particular teen page is disturbing; asking for the page’s photo, is more so.
(3) Finally, and perhaps most importantly, they would have learned that telling a child predator to behave himself, and then sending him back to a workplace full of teens impressed, and perhaps also intimidated, by his high rank, is like chastising an alcoholic and then sending him right back into a well-stocked bar.
Here’s something else they might have learned that might have forestalled this scandal – they might have learned that Foley himself was a victim of clergy abuse by a Catholic priest when he was between 13 and 15 years old. We only learned this once he checked himself into a rehab center once the scandal broke. Those involved in the clergy abuse crisis, including victims, their families, counselors, and lawyers, can tell you that when the truth is finally aired, it often lends victims the wherewithal to come forward. If the House had pursued the truth instead of pandering to the religious institution, Foley might have been getting help since 2001, instead of preying on children on the Internet.
Even before the Foley scandal, it was very clear that the House should have held hearings on the clergy abuse scandal. Now, an untold number of victims, the Republican Party, and the institution as a whole are paying the price for this extraordinary abdication of the larger public good. Hold hearings now: It’s high time.
FindLaw’s Writ – Hamilton_ Congressman Mark Foley’s Disgrace and Resignation
JULIE BOSMAN and DAVE PHILIPPS, Woman Says Dennis Hastert Abused Her Brother in High School, The New York Times
/in Uncategorized /by SOL ReformAs an enthusiastic young teacher and wrestling coach at the high school here, former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert reliably had one student at his side, former classmates say. Stephen Reinboldt, a smart, slender, likable student who rose to become class president, was the wrestling team’s equipment manager. For four years, he arrived at practice early and stayed late, traveled with Mr. Hastert to overnight tournaments, even when only one wrestler was competing, and went for long rides in the coach’s sports car, sometimes driving it.
On Friday, Mr. Reinboldt’s younger sister, Jolene Burdge, said her brother, who died in 1995, was also sexually abused by Mr. Hastert, but hid the fact for years because he thought no one would believe him.
“Mr. Hastert had plenty of opportunities to be alone with Steve because he was there before the meets,” Ms. Burdge said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “He was there after everything because he did the laundry, the uniforms.”
The allegation comes a week after Mr. Hastert, who served for eight years as House speaker, was indicted on charges of making cash withdrawals, totaling $1.7 million, to evade detection by the authorities and lying to investigators.
J. Dennis Hastert, then the House speaker, in his Capitol Hill office in 2007.
DOUG MILLS / THE NEW YORK TIMES
Two people briefed on the F.B.I. investigation told The New York Times that Mr. Hastert was using the money to pay a former student hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide the fact that Mr. Hastert sexually abused him decades ago.
The former student is identified in the indictment only as “Individual A.” Ms. Burdge’s comments marked the first time that a possible victim of Mr. Hastert has been publicly identified. ABC reported that Ms. Burdge said she did not ask Mr. Hastert for money and did not know the identity of Individual A.
At Ms. Burdge’s home in Montana on Friday, a man who answered the door said she was not available. But the man, who did not identify himself, said her statements were accurately reported by ABC.
Mr. Hastert is scheduled to appear in court next week in Chicago. His lawyer did not return calls on Friday.
Stephen Reinboldt in 1971.
In the interview on ABC, Ms. Burdge called Mr. Hastert, who taught and coached at Yorkville high school from 1966 until 1981, a father figure to her brother. She said she learned of the years of abuse when her brother revealed to her that he was gay eight years after he left high school.
“I asked him, ‘When was your first same-sex experience?’ ” she said. “He looked at me and said, ‘It was with Dennis Hastert.’ I was stunned.”
She continued, “And he just turned around and kind of looked at me and said, ‘Who is ever going to believe me?’ ”
Ms. Burdge said she believed the abuse ended when her brother moved away after his high school graduation in 1971. Mr. Reinboldt died of AIDS at age 42.
Document | Indictment of John Dennis Hastert Federal authorities accused the former House speaker of structuring withdrawals from various accounts in order to avoid bank reporting requirements.
She also said she confronted Mr. Hastert when he unexpectedly came to her brother’s funeral, telling him, “I want you to know that your secret didn’t die here with my brother.”
Ms. Burdge said she tried for years to get news organizations, including ABC News, and advocacy groups to pursue the story. She began in 2006 after it was revealed that Mr. Hastert had covered up claims that Representative Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, had sent sexually explicit emails to congressional pages.
She said she had given up on exposing Mr. Hastert. Then, two weeks ago, just before Mr. Hastert was indicted, she was contacted by the F.B.I.
“That’s when I just kind of lost it and said, ‘Oh my God, I can’t believe — I never thought I was going to get this phone call,’ ” she said.
In interviews, former students say Mr. Hastert was popular, partly because his classes often consisted of little more than watching movies, and because his teams kept winning. He also seemed to have a new Porsche almost every year, each a different color, and would let certain boys drive it — not just around the parking lot, but on long rides.
“Some guys got to drive the Porsche and some didn’t,” said Jeff Nix, who was a student at the time. “We always wondered what you had to do to get to drive the Porche. Steve got to drive the Porsche.”
Yearbooks show that Mr. Reinboldt was a class officer every year, a member of the French and Letterman’s Clubs, and was student council president in his senior year.
“He was a smart kid. Kind of shy, but the best manager we ever had,” said Mr. Nix, who helped manage the wrestling team with Mr. Reinboldt. “He always had everything ready.”
Bob Dhuse, 63, who was a star wrestler during the period when Mr. Reinboldt was the manager, said he never saw any sort of abuse or hint of inappropriate behavior involving the coach.
In an interview before Mr. Reinboldt’s sister came forward, Mr. Dhuse recalled going to the state tournament in Bloomington, Ill., with Mr. Reinboldt and Mr. Hastert in 1970, when Mr. Dhuse was co-captain. Mr. Hastert drove the two students in his blue Porsche. He had his own hotel room, Mr. Dhuse said, while the two teenagers shared a room.
“He was a single guy at the time, and that’s what he drove,” said Mr. Dhuse, now a corn and soybean farmer in the Yorkville area, said of the coach’s flashy car.
Another member of the team around that time, Gary Matlock, said he went on a Boy Scout trip with Mr. Reinboldt led by Mr. Hastert to the Bahamas. He said Mr. Reinboldt wanted to be part of the wrestling team but did not quite have the athletic ability, “so he became a jack of all trades who assisted the coach.”
“I saw nothing except a shining example and mentor,” he said of Mr. Hastert.
Like many who went to Yorkville High School, Mr. Matlock remained in the small farming town. Over the decades, he said, there had been no rumors about Mr. Hastert.
“This town used to be so small,” he said. “Forget 24 hours — you knew all the gossip in 24 minutes.”
But since the news of Mr. Hastert’s indictment a week ago, he said, none of Mr. Matlock’s high school friends have called to mull over the allegations. “It’s just been a big hush,” he said. “The community is in shock.”
But some residents who were still absorbing the news of Mr. Hastert’s indictment said they were even more disturbed by Friday’s revelations.
“I just wonder how many more of them are going to come out of the woodwork,” said John Toschak, an electrician, adding that many Yorkville residents seemed to still support Mr. Hastert.
“They love him here. You can’t find anybody who would say anything bad about Denny.”
Woman Says Dennis Hastert Abused Her Brother in High School – NYTimes