The San Franciso Chronicle
Updated 11:40 am, Wednesday, June 19, 2013
By DYLAN LOVAN, Associated Press
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — An attorney says a terminally ill Catholic priest is so sick and incapacitated his upcoming trial on sodomy charges would be a “mockery.”
The Rev. James Schook is scheduled for trial Monday in Louisville on seven counts, but prosecutors acknowledged that it would likely be postponed. He is accused of abusing two boys in the 1970s at St. Thomas More Church in Louisville, where Schook was an assistant pastor.
The 65-year-old has been diagnosed with terminal skin cancer. Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry said a letter from a doctor who examined Schook presented in court Wednesday indicated that the priest has late-stage cancer and his death is “imminent.”
“I think it’s futile to try to resolve it, or try it,” said Schook’s attorney, David Lambertus. “If the defendant is physically and mentally incapable of meaningfully participating, I don’t think any of us want to have a trial that is just a mockery.”
Schook is living in an assisted living facility in Louisville, and was not in the courtroom for Wednesday’s hearing.
Prosecutors who visited with him recently said they believe the priest is competent to be tried.
“In a lot of ways he was spry and using his mental facilities. My impression was that he is doing fine and is fine for trial,” said Commonwealth’s Attorney John Balliet.
The advanced age of clergy members accused of committing decades-old abuses has been a factor in several criminal cases.
In 2007, 82-year-old defrocked priest Anthony Laurano died in Massachusetts just days before a judge was expected to set his trial on a rape charge. Last year, an 84-year-old priest who was extradited from the U.S. to Ireland died while awaiting a rape trial.
The prospect of another delay in Schook’s criminal trial upset one of the men who accused the priest of molesting him. Schook was indicted on the charges in 2011.
“It very much bothers me, as a matter of fact it outrages me,” said Michael Stansbury, who was in the courtroom. He says he was molested by Schook as a member of a youth group at St. Thomas More. “At this stage, here we are four or five days before the trial starts and now we’re going to screw this up again. If he’s that sick and dying of cancer, it should be known.”
Stansbury said he hesitated for decades to reveal the abuse because Schook knew his family and even officiated at Stansbury’s second wedding. Stansbury came forward with the allegations in 2008.
In court on Wednesday, Perry asked Lambertus to enter a motion to have Schook’s competency for trial evaluated by state officials. Balliet said if that motion is entered, the judge would likely postpone the trial to make time for the evaluation.
Schook was permanently removed from ministry in 2010, but he has been allowed to retain the title of priest.
_________________________________
Priest James Schook incompetent to stand trial in sex abuse case, lawyer says
Attorney David Lambertus addresses Judge Mitch Perry about his client, Roman Catholic priest James Schook, during a pretrial hearing at the Judicial Center in Louisville, Kentucky. June 19, 2013
James Schook was indicted in 2011 on seven felony sodomy counts based on allegations that he sexually abused two boys between 1971 and 1975. He has pleaded not guilty to all the charges.
Just days before a long-scheduled trial on sexual abuse charges, a lawyer for James Schook claimed in court Wednesday morning that the ailing priest is mentally incompetent to aid in his own defense.
Schook — a Roman Catholic priest in the Archdiocese of Louisville accused of sexually abusing two boys in the 1970s — has been diagnosed with late-stage cancer and, according to his lawyer, David Lambertus, has lost mental capacity as well.
Judge Mitch Perry said he was planning to go ahead with Monday’s scheduled trial unless Lambertus filed a formal written motion asking for a competency hearing — which Lambertus said he would do this week.
“It’s futile to try (the case) if the defendant is physically or mentally incapable of meaningfully participating,” Lambertus said. “I don’t think any of us want to have a trial that is just a mockery.”
Processing the motion would likely add months of time for state corrections psychiatric staff to evaluate Schook — currently out on bond and staying at a senior citizens home, according to Assistant Jefferson Commonwealth’s Attorney John Balliet, who had questioned why Lambertus hadn’t filed the formal legal motion sooner.
Dr. George R. Nichols II, the former longtime chief medical examiner for Kentucky, examined Schook’s medical records on behalf of the prosecution and concluded Schook was in late-stage cancer resulting from melanoma and should be in hospice care, or care given when a cure is no longer feasible for a terminal illness.
But while Nichols cited diminished mental capability, Balliet said he has met with the priest and wasn’t convinced by Lambertus’ claim.
“My impression was he was doing fine and probably would do fine at trial,” Balliet said. But assuming Lambertus files the formal motion, the next step would be an evaluation by staff at the Kentucky Correctional Psychiatric Center, which Balliet said would take three to four months.
Schook was indicted in 2011 on seven felony sodomy counts based on allegations that he sexually abused the boys between 1971 and 1975. He has pleaded not guilty to all the charges.
The Archdiocese of Louisville temporarily removed Schook from ministry in 2009 when it received an allegation of sexual abuse. The archdiocese permanently removed Schook from ministry in early 2010 when it concluded the allegations against him were credible, although he has retained the status of priest.
Prosecutors in August 2011 released hundreds of pages of the Archdiocese of Louisville’s personnel file on Schook. They indicated that Schook had been treated for a sex addiction in the 1980s but that church officials believed at the time that he had been sexually involved with male adults, not minors.
In June 2012, prosecutors agreed to delay the trial based on a belief that Schook only had months to live. But on further review late last year, they sought a trial date, concluding that he might live for years and should face justice.
Michael Stansbury, one of two people identified as victims of sexual assault by Schook in the indictment, said after Wednesday’s hearing that the latest delay is “outrageous.”
“Here we are, four days, five days before the trial starts,” he said. “… How long are we going to keep rescheduling this?”
Stansbury said he began the process of informing church and law-enforcement authorities about his allegations against Schook in 2009.
“It seems like other individuals, like the (Jerry) Sandusky trial, sure go a lot faster than this one,” he said, alluding to the former Pennsylvania State University assistant football coach and serial molester.
Colleen Powell of the local chapter of the group Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests questioned why Lambertus hadn’t filed the formal motion months ago. “Here we are at the 11th hour,” she said.
Last evening I spent hours poring through this sort of stall tactic with our Monsignor Boucher.
Here’s the question which I can not get out of my mind: Why would an innocent man facing charges of sex abuse of a child not fight tooth and nail for his day in court to prove his innocence? – even if he has to be wheeled in a wheelchair? or, for that matter, on a stretcher?
How much of this is stall tactic to get these predators off the hook – and then denigrate those who dare to accuse with the admonition “Innocent until proven guilty”? True the man may be suffering from skin cancer, but is he really incapable of showing up in court to defend his ‘good’ name and ‘good’ honour? Really???
If this is all a ruse to avoid a conviction, – how I wonder can that lawyer look himself in the mirror? ditto all those who participate in such a ruse (and that includes all in the diocesan centre who know better)
Keep the complainants in your prayers – it looks like a battle ahead!
“I don’t think any of us want to have a trial that is just a mockery.”
Why not??
It is a perfect fit for the system…Usually we hear of a trial within a trial.
This would only be a mockery within a mockery!
jg
As I’ve said in the past, that church will defend, deny, and denigrate to save it’s own collars and riches. The ploy by the defense is typical of the slime…too sick. ““In a lot of ways he was spry and using his mental facilities. My impression was that he is doing fine and is fine for trial,” said Commonwealth’s Attorney John Balliet.” But the judge will default in favour of the pervert collar to spare him a trial. Screw the victims, nobody cares about them anyway. Well, enough is enough. Let’s continue our battles to be heard and believed. And someday when the tables have turned and that church and collars are begging for mercy, we’ll do to them what they’ve done to us. Karma!!