Bishop Tod Brown of Orange County could face prison time

News Resources Tools Columns Documents ACI Group

Contenidos del sub-menu

Comments: 4

Bishop Tod Brown of Orange County

Santa Ana, Calif., Oct 10, 2007 / 10:49 am (CNA).- Yesterday afternoon witnessed the first time that a judge began criminal contempt-of-court proceedings against a U.S. Catholic bishop. The hearing against Bishop Tod Brown of the Diocese of Orange County could result in a sentence ranging from a verbal warning to jail time.

On Tuesday, Bishop Brown waived his arraignment for violating a court order, which is the equivalent of him entering a plea of not guilty.

The bishop caused Judge Gail Andler to open a contempt of court hearing by sending Monsignor John Urell out of the country to receive medical treatment, before he had finished completing his testimony in a sexual abuse lawsuit.

The attorneys of the plaintiff in the sexual abuse case asserted that Bishop Brown sent Msgr. Urell, who was responsible for handling diocesan sexual abuse allegations, to Canada for psychological treatment before he could conclude his deposition.

The bishop stated that while he knew Msgr. Urell would be called back for further deposition, the treatment center in Canada, which focuses on care of the clergy, could admit Urell immediately.

Bishop Brown decided to send Urell because he broke down during a deposition with the plaintiff’s attorneys.

"When Msgr. Urell was there for half a day, he couldn't take it because he was too upset about having to testify about hiding all these allegations," Venus Soltan, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys said in court. "This is plain and simply hiding the facts."

Callahan disagreed emphasizing there was not a court order in effect when Urell went to Canada, and that he also did not know anything about the current sexual abuse case in question.

Superior Court Judge Gail Andler listened to the opening statements in Bishop Brown’s contempt of court case before postponing the hearing until December 3 and ordering a subpoena on Urell until the same date.

Also being heard that day is a motion filed by Callahan to dismiss the contempt matter altogether.

"I was disappointed that the judge didn't rule. We were hoping that the bishop would have the opportunity to exonerate himself by telling the truth but he didn't get the opportunity," Callahan said.

John Manly, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said outside court that he was pleased the judge had allowed the contempt hearing to go forward and that he intends to call Urell in to complete his testimony on Dec. 3.

Comments: 4

Subscriber comments:

Published by: Rev S. G. Villegas, S.T.
Caldwell ID 05/19/2009 01:04 PM EST

Again we see the secular government breaking its own laws, specifically the constitutional First amendment prohibition of congress, and by extension any form of secular government, making laws or interfering with the freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof. The encroachment of government, including the courts, into the matters of the church and church governance, is a phenomenon of late whereby the secular grants itself the rights and privileges to do whatever it wishes, due to its abandon of respect for the church as separate and equal to the government. The judge in this case has no jurisdiction over the church whatsoever and church functionaries, the bishop himself and those he pretends to "protect", are guarded from this type of secular government encroachment, in the same way that diplomatic immunities protect diplomats from this type of encroachment; or at least in theory it should be. The judge and those in the area of this type of thinking will have the eternal judgment of God to contend with. God have mercy on their secular souls.

Published by: Greg Bullough
Doylestown, PA, USA 10/12/2007 11:06 AM EST

Of course there are no psychiatric treatment facilities in Orange County, in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, in the State of California, or in the whole of the United States. Interesting how otherwise robust priests, when called to account for their actions, so often seem to fall physically or mentally ill, and have to be sent far, far, away and/or out of sight, isn't it?

Published by: Evelyn
Bismarck ND 10/11/2007 06:07 PM EST

Why can't the church remove these Bishops .Parishes are put in danger and people are being scandalized. I don't understand why a stronder stand can't be taken. Why should we need state or local law point out to us what is wrong illegal and harmful. This is upside down!ASction needs to be taken in the church!

Published by: Rev. James F. Moran
Alexandria, VA 10/11/2007 08:22 AM EST

Todd Brown knew very well what he was doing. Urell was about to spill the beans, and Brown didn't want that to happen. It's about time the hierarchy of our church realizes they are NOT above the law!

ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):


NAME:
CITY/STATE/COUNTRY:
EMAIL:
COMMENT:

PLEASE ENTER THE SECURITY CODE DISPLAYED ABOVE:
Chars:

* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages.

ADVERTISING
CNA does not necessarily endorse these advertisers. Please proceed with discretion. If you feel that a website announced has inappropriate or offensive content, please send it by e-mail to catholicna@catholicna.com