boston.com
15 June 2011
The first time the Rev. Charles Murphy was cleared of accusations that he improperly touched a minor, a girl 25 years earlier, everyone who ever met him said they had never doubted his innocence.
It was 2006 and priests were all over the news for every awful reason, most of them deservedly so. But Father Murphy swore his innocence, the archdiocese ruled the allegations lacked substance, and the woman dropped her suit on the eve of trial.
When Murphy triumphantly returned to the pulpit of his sun-splashed church in South Weymouth, the applause could be heard across the South Shore. Father Charlie, as he was known, was back — back cracking cornball jokes from the altar, back as a fanatical hockey fan, back as the mad plow driver clearing the parking lot at the hint of snow. He was also back ministering in prisons and helping the deaf, a man of the cloth to his core.
“He was just the same guy as before the accusation, a bubbly guy, fun, a little bit of a jokester, but a diligent priest,’’ said Joe Corcoran, the developer who befriended Murphy decades earlier at St. Agatha in Milton.
Amid so much joy, it would have been impossible to imagine the turn that Murphy’s life would eventually take.
That turn came in April 2010, when lawyer Mitchell Garabedian, who had lodged the first unfounded complaint, brought another. This one involved a man, not a woman. It went back 40 years rather than 25. It centered on accusations of fondling at the old Paragon Park in Hull and on a ski trip up north.
When the charges hit, Murphy canceled a long-planned party celebrating his 50th anniversary as a priest. He cleaned out his room in the church rectory and went to live with his brother. Two accusations in four years, he knew, did not look good.
But it didn’t matter to the prominent friends and everyday parishioners who refused to give up their faith. They hired a lawyer, who in turn brought in a private investigator, who discovered that the alleged victim was mired in financial problems, had a long list of liens placed against him, and faced massive credibility issues even within his own family.
It took nearly six months — about five months longer than it should have — before an archdiocesan review board cleared Murphy of the allegations in September and Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley restored him as a senior priest. But this time, there was no triumphant return to the pulpit. In fact, when Murphy reappeared at St. Francis Xavier in South Weymouth to say Mass, he couldn’t summon the strength to deliver a sermon.
“He would say to me, ‘I just can’t preach. I just don’t have it in me,’ ’’ said Jack Pender, his longtime confidant. “It was so frustrating for him.’’
His spirit was evaporating. His antidepression medicine kept him up at night. He moved to Regina Cleri, a North End residence for retired priests, where he continued his tortured descent.
Garabedian is a talented lawyer who has done vital work on behalf of hundreds of victims of abusive priests, but in terms of Murphy, what he did is a disgrace. Garabedian told me this week his Milton client was “credible.’’ He wasn’t. He lashed out at what he described as a “kangaroo court,’’ the respected, independent archdiocesan panel that cleared Murphy. He didn’t utter the only words worth hearing: I made a mistake.
They brought Murphy to a hospice in Haverhill a couple of weeks ago after doctors determined there was nothing left to be done. There was no cancer, no apparent physical disease, just a broken 77-year-old heart that refused to mend.
And that’s where he died Saturday evening, a wisp of the man he once was. Garabedian lost his compass on this case, and thousands of people all over Massachusetts lost a truly wonderful priest.
Brian McGrory is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at mcgrory@globe.com. 
I don’t know the facts here, but I do know that I have seen victims wrongly painted as liars by over-zealous lawyers who seem to believe that the end justifies the means.
Did Father Murphy molest the boy? I really don’t know. I see nothing here which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did not.
Nor do you see that he did. Where is the balance of Justice? In the eyes of the reader, or in the facts of a case.
It is still wrong to judge someone on opinion, jaded by experience, as it is to judge someone wrong based on conjecture..
I seem to remember that GOD appointed Judges.
In this instance it was not a judge in a court of law, but a Diocesan Review Board.
No matter. The conclusion apparenlty was that, based on the evidence collected by a private detective, the complainant was not credible.
My “jaded” experince tells me that it’s a tough road for victims who, as is often the case with clerical sex abuse, got into drugs and/or alcohol post abuse and consequently developed strained relationships with their families. These people have the cards stacked against them on the stand. The very behaviours which are so often symptomatic of their abuse are used by defence lawyers to discredit them. It makes no sense. How on one hand can it be reocognized that certain behaviour is stereotypical of male victims of clerical childhood sex abuse, and on the other that very behaviour can be used to discredit their allegations?
That said, I am a firm believer those who wrongfully accuse anyone of sex abuse should be charged. If indeed this man is lying, he should be charged and held accountable.
One sure has to ask why such an “innocent” heart wind up so broken over something that never really happened?
It’s no secret that money and surrounding themselves with the “right” people all to often make these child preditors and their “holy” enablers look innocent! But if one thinks that they are’nt forming judgments simply because they declare a preditor innocent until proven guilty- think again-because either the suspected molester is guilty of molesting and lying or his accusers are guilty of lying. Even in a court of law the standard for burden of proof is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt which means a defendant can be found guilty even if there is reasonable doubt, only if the doubt is “BEYOND” reasonable should he/she found not guilty.
Following these lines of reasoning, if I was to say Ihear that S m, and L G were involved in a sex ring where all kinds of weird things were going on and that I also heard jg went to the police about these things, someone could be suspected up to some level of guilty by those with a mind to do so.
If this is yhe pinion of Justice an tis country, then something happened while I slept, and they changed both the law and the idea of fair play, and Judge not lest ye yourself be judged.
You may skew the arguments but the facts remain- and they do not change because someone does not like or agree with them.
All of the new detectives have written their own laws it would seem.
1 abandoned sheep: Do you really and truly believe that any boy who had difficulties growing up and, who, as a adult may have financial difficulties is automatically lying if he alleges he was sexually abused by a priest? Do such problems automotically exclude him from the ranks of the molested and mark him as a liar for life?
I don’t think that you beleieve that, but that’s in essence the argument you are supporting and the argument used by defence lawyers.
Not at all ! Nor do I automatically believe everyone who claims to have been sexually abused! I have sat in on therapy sessions at the Queensway-Carleton hospital where I heard a girl of
17 claim she was assaulted by every one but the postman, It went on for more than 10 minutes before the moderator cut her off.
But, in the case of this Priest, did you note that EVEN the accuser’s family have trouble with him because of his untruthfullness? And yet, a Priest BY ALL ACCOUNTS HERE, who was a good and Holy man, ministered to those in prison and the deaf, was falsely accuse twice- with, coincidentally, the same lawyer representing in both cases? And do lawyers take most of these case on a percentage of what the accuser might get?
And it was not Church money that hired the detective, it was good parishioners who loved their Pastor. Where I come from we call that loyalty, and honourable- not something heinous.
Oh my goodness folks, in all honesty it does not matter…..HE’S DEAD……there will never be resolution one way or the other. The story is full of tilts, biases and personal opinions. IF, IF, IF, IF, and IF.
John
Apparently the alleged victims are not DEAD and it would seem to that to them it does matter if they are believed or not.It matters to me if they are believed or not because I know how important as a victim it is to be believed. Whether a molester escapes justice by suicide or dies from a broken heart heart or overwhelmed by guilt does not mean that the injustices DONT MATTER , unless all the victims are DEAD as well. I want every victim to come forward regardless of the age or fragility of the pedophile above ground or not. Seek justice because it matters and even though the oppressor escaped justice, it remains possible for those who were violated to receive a form of just treatment only if it MATTERS to at least some of us.
Larry…….I knew that what I said had the chance to be misconstrued. I was commenting on the story ONLY, not on the comments to the story. Believe me when I say that I am one that wants justice for each and every victim of clerical sexual abuse.
I was one of many victims in Cornwall who have been investigated by a private investigator hired by the church. I have been investigated by police for a fire at a local church. I have gone through a grilling on the witness stand for days on end. I have said from the start…….If this is a popularity contest, the priests win!!!
For the last 16 years I have been fighting the battle for justice and supporting those that have been going through the process.
So my response was more to 1 abandoned sheep, because it is the likes of him/her that things are still the way they are. I just wanted to stick with principles over personalities. The truth of the matter through reading the story is that in all honesty we know nothing. As I said the story is full of tilts and biases. I was not speaking in general, I was addressing the story, and the truth is we don’t know the victims, we don’t know the priest, in reality we know nothing except what the reporter wrote, and he wrote what people told him or his own interpretation of what he knows.
John
What isn’t clear here is if criminal charges were laid in either case. I recognize that the statute of limitations varies from state to state, province to province, but since there is no financial gain for the victim in supporting a criminal conviction, it makes it easier for outsiders to see their integrity! I know personally how difficult it was to move through the court system, when every step of the way there are obstacles that make you reconsider going through to the end! Obviously in this case we’ll never know as we don’t know the histories of the claimants!
If I now am some kind of perpetrator in the eyes of the two above, then this really is off the rails.
Is it not possible for you to say ALLEGED victims, and ALLEGED accused? Are you so far gone down the path of instant GUILTY verdicts, that you do not have the decency to use the truth in your postings?
I know about real victims, and I know about real abusers, at a personal level,- but they were shown to be so by the EVIDENCE- a word which seems foreign in these postings.
The days of vigilante justice are still alive in the hearts of many.
Abandoned Sheep………Put no words in my mouth and I will put none in yours. What I said about you is this…..”It is the likes of him/her (meaning you) that things are still the way that they are.”
Here is my reason for saying that. Below in quotes is what you wote in a previous post on this thread.
“But, in the case of this Priest, did you note that EVEN the accuser’s family have trouble with him because of his untruthfullness? And yet, a Priest BY ALL ACCOUNTS HERE, who was a good and Holy man, ministered to those in prison and the deaf, was falsely accuse twice”
Immediately YOU put this on a scale…..Since the ALLEGED victim has credibility issues with his family, then he must be untruthful in his claim. Since the priest is loved by some parishoners, then he must be innocent. PRIEST WINS in your eyes. All of that judgement on your part from reading the story written by what MAY be a biased reporter.
I would rather wait for the facts, but in this case they will not be coming through the justice system, the ALLEGED perpatrator is dead.
John
So, in your eyes, I am wrong to go on the ONLY facts we know?
Are the only matters to be judged by you, the ones we do not know?
Are the family of the accused not valid commentors? Is the Priest less than I described him because somone made accusations?
Are the only people to be believed those who accuse?
I know more about some of these things than you might guess at, but, I am not the center of attention.
It is the profusion of sex abuse by Priests and others that are the great evil here, and truth does not need to suffer in getting out the information, when putting the spotlight on the issue! Callous jumping to conclusions are worthy of the KKK, but, surely not those who say they seek justice.
What FACTS do we know? NONE, except that the priest is dead, and that there were accusations against him. THOSE are the ONLY facts.
No family member is quoted, no parishioners are quoted (with the exception of a second hand quote from the dead priest), no private investigator is quoted.
With that little bit of information, it is impossible for a conclusion to be reached.
John
In my world the benifit of doubt goes toward the victim when it comes to child sexual assault and I make no apologies for that at all . I refuse to paint all those who come forward and cannot “PROVE” the reality of their experience as liars. “Alleged” gives the benifit of doubt to the molester and far to often as far as I am concerened. “Alleged” is required in the courts but not in the real world at all.
I dont know 1 ab sheep how many victims you believe, with all this evidence you speak of because after 25, 30 , 40 years where does one come up with all this factual evidence you claim to require before you can assent to a belief that what they say is true to the best of their recollection. It is unlike any other crime when it comes to”showing proof” and thats why so many victims continue to suffer in silence.
It is a skeptical attitude such as the one you convey that keep victims silent and perpetuate an atmosphere which enable tyrant preditors to prey on the most vulnerable members of our societies.
If your self pitty is due to a percieved personal attack on you by any comments I have made you will have to wallow in it because my comments are made in defence of the oppressed, that isn,t going to change and I do not apologize for that.
John I am aware that you are a victim/survivor and it is for the sake of victims that I refuse ever to be muted when it comes demanding justice in whatever form or degree it can possibly be achieved even if as simple as saying ” I Believe You!”
Larry, watch that white horse your riding does not leave something for you to step in
Very intelligent refutation there sheep!!! Your method of logical discource conveys the personality of a very mature individual.
And, John, is it not nice that you are NOT asked to render a conclusion.
I don’t know if that is an insult, a compliment or a question. Either one of the 3 choices my answer would still be the same…….I would never draw a conclusion with so few facts on hand!!!
John
P.S. Sheep , I know what your previous name was on this site before you became the abandoned “one!”
I am crushed
Children don’t lie to get in trouble and adults either.. the chaos a disclosure perpetuates is enough for any human being to feel they must remain silent. Bravo to the women and men who stood up despite knowing how their disclosure would be received. It would be a lot better for the church to accept their responsibility in harbouring and protecting these criminals rather than to spend money on private investigators and trying to find ways to sully survivors who have had difficulty dealing with the consequences of other peoples criminal choices. Stop blaming the victims the trouble with the church rests with the church and it’s self perceptions and the company they keep.
Pulled off the pulpit by an ear and brought to justice is he very best they deserve and nothing more.. They definety do not deserve to be called father.. defrock and caste them off into a pit of moral inequity where they belong with their true masters.. Hinder not the children indeed.
McGrory’s attempt to buy sympathy for Murphy misses the mark completely for me. When he says:
“Father Charlie, as he was known, was back — back cracking cornball jokes from the altar, back as a fanatical hockey fan, back as the mad plow driver clearing the parking lot at the hint of snow. He was also back ministering in prisons and helping the deaf, a man of the cloth to his core.
“He was just the same guy as before the accusation, a bubbly guy, fun, a little bit of a jokester, but a diligent priest,’’ said Joe Corcoran, the developer who befriended Murphy decades earlier at St. Agatha in Milton.”
This sounds all too like the words I heard over and over again describing Jack McCann. 20 years after this man was charged and convicted of sexual assault of two minor girls, there were still people saying the following:
“Steve from Ottawa
I woke up this morning to this news. Father McCann was highly respected at the now closed St. Brigid’s Church here in Ottawa. He raised everyone’s spirits with his very touching sermon’s, his great piano playing and singing old songs. We all loved (still love) him, though this is the final nail in the coffin for me as far as faith in the Roman Church and their priests is concerned.”
“I really did like Father Jack. Until today, I thought he was the only honest priest I ever met.” (quotes taken from comment section of ctv news website).
I am not saying that I believe Murphy was an offender, but just saying “he was a man of cloth to the core,” does nothing to persuade me.
Proudsurvivor, what could or should be said to persuade you either way?
Is a priest now presumed to be guilty of something simply because he is a Priest and has human characteristics?
Is a Priest now guilty by association because he asociates with other priests daily through carrying out his duties as a Priest?
Am I guilty of something nefarious because I say some Priests are abusers, but notEVERY Priest is automatically an abuser when he is accused?
Has darkness suddenly become light?
I am sorry you went through what you did because of J McCann. I know him and do NOT like him. But, he is NOT representative of the almost 100 Priests I know. He is just a bad one on his owm.
1 abandoned sheep, I’d have to say that at this point in my life, absolutely nothing could persuade me. I have little trust of my own judgement. That unfortunately is the cost to me of the betrayal of sexual abuse perpetrated against me by McCann. Oh, how at times I wish I could go back to that time of innocence where the world was black and white, but it’s all pretty grey now, and that’s not a bad thing. At present, I am struggling to discover why I feel once again pulled into this issue and am compelled to speak out. Back around 1993, I was interviewed by the Vancouver Sun. At that time (when I believed my actions had made a difference), I naively thought that when the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops published the document Breach of Faith, Breach of Trust, that they really envisioned having support groups for all parishes, bringing in speakers to speak about sexual abuse to bring the issue into the light, and root out this evil. I even phoned up several parishes and offered my services at a speaker to help begin the healing. The document only served to collect dust on rectory shelves everywhere. Do you or anyone else that reads this site know of any priest who bravely spoke about the issue from the pulpit asking if anyone knew of anyone was hurting from the pain of sexual abuse to come forward? To discover that in 2011, the church is still working to silence the victims, burying their heads in the sand and recycling priests does nothing to instill my trust in them or any priest for that matter.
While you personally don’t like McCann there are many people who do, just as I’m sure Murphy had his own detractors, that’s just life.
Proudsurvivor, I am not in anyway trying to interfere with your recovery from a terrible series of abuse. You are in my daily prayers.
I would like to caution thatlashing out at people we do not know does not help the healing process- it keeps it more in the front of our minds.
by the prayers of many of us, and by the MERCY of Jesus Christ, you will one day rejoin us in the Catholic Church, your true home, and that I firmly believe.
1 Abandoned Sheep. Just wondering, does the fact that you “do NOT like” McCann make him a more likely abuser in your mind?
Could you please explain to me what you mean by “lashing out”?
I have observed J McCann playing ragtime and other pop music on a keyboard located in the Sanctuary at Mt. Carmel Church between masses. I have endured a few of his homilies which were little more tha random recalls of his youth, and some strange episodes from his days with a Native community. He is not in favour of Adoration during the week, and has been rude to Priests I know.
On the matter of lashing out, I think we all do that in many ways.
I do it at times by holding a grudge against someone who does not even know I am of that bent.I have lashed out at my own parish by going to a different one for 18 months. They did not miss me.
I have lashed out at some one who slighted me on the job, and later found out it was someone else who had told some lies about me.
We lash out when we dismiss,hate,curse,wish ill against,blame, or condemn others, no matter the reason we do so.
The Commandment is to love one another. If we pray only for those we like, we are no different than Pagans. Jesus died because HE loved and loves ALL OF US ! The winds of Mercy and forgiveness fall on the guilty and the innocent equally.
There is only one entity which gains by our hating and that is SATAN, the master liar and hater. He gains by our becoming alieniated from GOD through our hating.
I pray for you along with other victims so that your Soul not be lost, and that Satan be denied his hope of gain.
I understand why we lash out at times. We are human. and imperfect- but, that need not stop us coming back to Out Dear Lord and saying-Forgive Me Lord for I have sinned.
I did this in Thunder Bay in 1978, after having been absent from Confession and Mass for quite awhile. The load that lifted from my shoulders was an incredible relief, and the effects of that cleansing have remained with me since.
If you would like to take this out of the public domain, I would be happy to share more with you in private. Just ask Sylvia for my email address- she has my permission to give it to you. MAY GOD, in HIS abundant Mercy, hold you in HIS Arms tonight.
An abandoned sheep with wings?
Too funny! I suppose that if nothing else, my alerting people to the fact that McCann had been recycled to Ottawa, has saved a congregation for listening to his poor choice of music after church. I know my sister used to complain about that when he did the same thing at St. Peter’s. Did you have any suspicions of his past? If he was in favour of Adoration during the week would you like him more? Funny, but it’s because of his daily 5:00 masses that he started at St. Peter’s that he became affiliated with my family. Can we tell whether a priest is an abuser or not based on their attachment or detachment to Catholic doctrine?
I trust in God’s love for me and don’t doubt that I haven’t always been held in his abundant mercy. Thank you for your concern!
I would not have liked him more, but, he had the nerve to say that it was not proper! Not proper to Worship the LORD? That caused me concern.
There were mannerisms that caused my skin to bunch up, but that might just be me.
There is more but I would rather not go into it in this forum.
Hold closely to the Blessed Virgin Mary- ask her to help, and please pray just 1 Hail Mary a day. It will be of great benefit to you. GOD Bless !
FYI proudsurvivor: A few days ago my husband was challenged by a woman: “Why are you persecuting Father Jack McCann?”
All I can say to that is that I can not for the life of me understand Catholics who willingly harbour and defend known clerical child molesters. Nor do I understand why anyone – clergy or lay – would take the chance of wilfully placing children at risk .
For that matter, I just don’t understand why a ‘repentant’ priest who has so abused his collar, betrayed God and Church, and left a trail of human destruction in his wake would WANT to further sully the priesthood and create further scandal by staying in the priesthood. Where is the humility? Why do these disgraced men still WANT to serve as priests? Why, if they are truly repentant, do they not want to do the right thing and get out of the priesthood to seek their own salvation in prayer and fasting, both for themselves and for their victims?
Sylvia,
Thanks for sharing that info. I’d be interested in your husband’s response. Does he know if the woman who confronted him has taken the time to discover McCann’s past? I wonder if she were able to look at the evidence if she’d think differently, or would her judgement be so clouded by her beliefs, that she couldn’t see it? Human nature is a curious thing, when you mix it with religious beliefs, it seems to become more so.
I liked your question on why they’d want to serve as priests, but a bigger question for me is Why does the Church want them to serve as priests? Knowing what I know about McCann and his sociopathic behaviour, you’d think the church would want to distance themselves as far from him as possible.
I think my husband’s intial response was “He’s a criminal.” The woman also said ‘He’s served his time’ and to that husband told her that McCann’s victims are still serving theirs, and will be to the grave. The rest of the exchange was an attempt to educate. I believe it ended with a degree of understanding on the part of the woman which she did not have when she confronted my husband, but, one never knows.
As for the Church wanting these men to serve as priests, I couldn’t agree more. I am stymied both as to why these molesters want to serve, and why our bishops not only tolerate their presence but actually allow them to serve in sanctuaries, hospitals, schools, universities and/or diocesan centres.
From whence came/comes this remarkable and unconscionalbe tolerance for sexual perversion in the priesthood? Why sacrfice the lost sheep (victims) for men who have thumbed their nose at God, sullied the sanctity of the priesthood, brought scandal to the Church and betrayed the faithful?
There’s no logic to it, is there? I see not an ounce.
I could not agree more. But, we must not lose our chance at Heaven by holding malice, hate, or bitterness towards them. Again I will say, a sin is a sin is a sin. GOD does the judging
A crime is a crime is a crime and justice seen to be done here on earth by judicial officials is only a tiny and small consolation for the pain, suffering and the undue shame cast upon survivors of the abuse over long long periods of time. As far as defroking a priest for heavens sake no other organization tolerates this from it’s officers.. I like your posting Sylvia by the american bishop advocating for criminal priest to be cast out period.. I wonder what would happen if every time a criminal priest tried to stand at the pulpit the whole congregation got up and left the building . Nothing Godly about criminals who target children for their own selfish wants. I guess the church is sorta saying that their priest members are above the the paupers in the pews and must be defended at their own peril and up until their credibility as a faith is nil. I have no malice towards these men, I just would like them to behave morally above reproach and not spew off stupid comments like “if we only knew, or in Belgium sex with children is ok… The Catholic Church is burning in every country because they surround themselves with criminals and all we hear everywhere with them is akin to Ma and Pa Kettle coming out of a root cellar after a hurricane with no house left saying” nothing wrong here Ma” Some of you might remember movie nights in the church basement and sadly some of you may remember it as a trajic event ! Not your fault! If we smite these idiots we will not be cast into catholic hell.. I think Christ would behave as he did in the temple of money changers if he walked into this fiasco.. and in the end is it not the same.. the poor poor church having to use it’s economic wealth ahhhhh. For Christ’s sake smarten up !