Insurance company says Bathurst diocese knew of abuse by priests

Share Button

Bathurst diocese suing former insurer for millions it paid out to sexual assault victims

CBC News

Posted: Dec 07, 2015 4:23 PM AT

Last Updated: Dec 07, 2015 4:23 PM AT

Former priest Levi Noel was sentenced to eight years related to sex abuse charges. Money from Bathurst diocese trust funds was used to compensate some of Noel's victims.

Former priest Levi Noel was sentenced to eight years related to sex abuse charges. Money from Bathurst diocese trust funds was used to compensate some of Noel’s victims.

Lawyers for Aviva Insurance are arguing its policies do not cover sexual abuse by priests within the Catholic Diocese of Bathurst.

The diocese has filed a civil lawsuit against the insurer to help it recoup more than $7-million it paid out to victims of sexual abuse.

“Clearly there is no coverage,” said Aviva’s lawyer Charles LeBlond in his opening statement Monday in a Moncton courtroom. “There is no coverage for criminal activity.”

hi-charles-leblond

Aviva Insurance defense lawyer Charles LeBlond says the issue is what the diocese knew and when. (Ian Bonnell/CBC)

In his statement, LeBlond also said “there is a fair bit of documented evidence that the diocese and the bishops of the day were aware.”

Father Levi Noel and Father Charles Picot, both former priests in the diocese, have been criminally charged with numerous counts of sexual abuse, some dating back to the 1950s.

The Bathurst diocese had an insurance policy with Aviva from 1957 to 1983.

Last week, the court heard from former Supreme Court justice Michel Bastarache. He explained he interviewed 90 sexual assault victims as part of a compensation process.

Those victims named a total of 26 priests, including Noel and Picot, as abusers in the diocese.

LeBlond told the court there is documentation that Noel had been shipped from parish to parish, including one letter, “where the bishop sent him north where nobody knew his past,” said LeBlond. “A bishop accommodating a priest, knowing he would reoffend.”

LeBlond went on to say that a reasonable bishop would have at least removed the priest from contact with children.

Chris Blom, one of the lawyers representing the diocese, acknowledges the church had knowledge some priests were molesting children.

But, Blom argued that in the 1950s and several decades that followed, the diocese did not know abuse was an insurance risk. And he said the insurer never asked the diocese whether there was abuse within the church.

4 Responses to Insurance company says Bathurst diocese knew of abuse by priests

  1. Sylvia says:

    “Chris Blom, one of the lawyers representing the diocese, acknowledges the church had knowledge some priests were molesting children.

    “But, Blom argued that in the 1950s and several decades that followed, the diocese did not know abuse was an insurance risk. And he said the insurer never asked the diocese whether there was abuse within the church.”

    Can you believe it?

    Really??? Can you believe your eyes?

    “…the diocese did not know abuse was insurance risk”?

    I read that as implying that if indeed the diocese HAD known that sexual abuse was an insurance risk it would NOT have recycles predatory priests, do you?

    The bishop and Church officials in the diocese would NOT of their own volition – out of love for God, Church and salvation of souls – ensure that children were not willfully placed at risk, and that predatory priests were kicked out of the priesthood? but, that IF they had known that their insuring agent would not fund ‘cover-ups’ and tolerance of these horrific crimes they might have taken action?

    What a pathetic , disgusting defence.

  2. john says:

    Thank you Sylvia.
    Your words reflect the true understanding for the deserved condemnation of the Catholic Church.
    I think SPOTLIGHT, the movie, has done more to acknowledge the putrid nature of what I call ‘ugly catholicism’ than maybe even the court cases themselves. I think for example that Cardinal Law must know, that now all know, what a despicable and incompetent member of the hierarchy he was/is. What a true sentence for his crime of negligence – notoriety in the secular cinema. I hope that truth and the efforts to portray that truth, receive nominations for awards within the Academy. How may of us have had our faith reduced to the limits of being incapable of even the simplest belief. God forgive me but I accept in my heart that I need the mercy of a saviour, but my head simply won’t follow.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *