L.A. now the flash point on priest abuse

It was, in fact, the release of church documents in the Boston archdiocese that paved the way for the California law.

"When the public began to get an idea for how widespread such abuse was, the story had legs," says Drivon, who had made attempts at such legislation before but failed. "We thought the timing was right, and we were correct."

Kathryn Freberg, a lawyer for 76 sex-abuse clients, won two large settlements in 2001. She agrees that the timing has been right. "The fall of Bernard Law in Boston has opened the floodgates here," she says.

But besides a higher number of Catholics in Los Angeles, several factors make the story different in California:

• The state's lack of a cap on punitive damages means the church could be far more vulnerable in monetary damages. "The financial exposure in these suits is great and worrisome," says Terrence Tilley, chair and professor of Religious Studies at Ohio's University of Dayton, a Catholic university. "Because the normal mode of incorporation vests all diocesan property, the church's parochial schools, some high schools, and central office property could all be at risk. That is why the church hierarchy is really worried."

• Removing the statute of limitations could put scrutiny on church documents - both personnel and financial records - that go back decades. It could draw out cases where some of the accused clergy have died.

• A third factor is how Hispanics will respond. Because they are more culturally and socially tied to the Catholic Church, many have long refused to formally acknowledge abuse for fear of being seen by peers as attacking God. "To Hispanics, the priest is everything, and the church is God," says Carlos Carillo, a Hispanic Catholic who was molested 20 years ago and recently settled out of court. "There is also the tradition of the machismo male ego - guys who won't tell anyone, wife, friend, father, or mother."

• Another question mark may be the public's sustained sense of outrage. Though many polls say overwhelming numbers of both Catholics and the general public want systemic change within the church concerning tolerance of abusive priests, some observers say the most sensational part of the story may have already played out.

Still, many observers say that Cardinal Roger Mahony and his system of church governance are likely to be in the hot seat. At a 1999 trial in Stockton, Calif., Cardinal Mahony testified that while bishop there from 1980 to 1985, he had no idea that the defendant, the Rev. Oliver O'Grady, was a pedophile. But Mahony was later directly contradicted by three subordinates. Several jurors later said they found the diocese guilty of "malicious intent" because they felt Mahony had not told the truth.

"If this verdict had come out this year instead of then, Cardinal Mahony would be in the same place Law is today," says Jeff Anderson, a St. Paul, Minn., lawyer who has handled more than 700 sex-abuse cases against the Catholic Church over 20 years. "The climate was different then, and the case didn't get widely covered. But such behavior will be coming to light now."

Page: 1 | 2