New York Archdiocese responds to priest embezzlement claims [CNA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CNA_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CNA_News

Guest
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/i...ne_via_wwwshutterstockcom_CNA_12_16_15.jpgNew York City, N.Y., Dec 17, 2015 / 06:56 am (CNA).- The Archdiocese of New York says that it takes seriously accusations in a recent lawsuit claiming that a New York priest embezzled money and maintained scandalous personal habits, while also saying that a diocesan investigation has found nothing to substantiate the allegations.

“The Archdiocese has been investigating these allegations for many months, and has repeatedly requested any information or documentation that might substantiate the allegations that have been made,” Joseph Zwilling, communications director for the Archdiocese of New York, told CNA in a statement.

“Thus far, no evidence has been offered, and our forensic audit has thus far failed to uncover evidence of embezzlement,” he said. “We have been in touch with the District Attorney since the summer, and have promised to turn over anything that might be criminal in nature. We urge anyone with such evidence to do the same.”

The suit alleges that the Fr. Peter Miqueli, former pastor of St. Frances Xavier Cabrini Church on Roosevelt Island and St. Frances De Chantal Church in the Bronx, was engaged in a “million dollar embezzlement scheme,” taking funds from his former parishes’ collections over the course of a decade.

In addition, the suit alleges, Fr. Miqueli “used the donations to grow his personal wealth, purchase a house in New Jersey, take dozens of international vacations, purchase and use illegal drugs,” and pay for the sexual services of a male escort.

The suit further claims that the Archdiocese of New York, including Cardinal Timothy Dolan, were made aware of the situation, and that the archdiocese confirmed its knowledge in Nov. 2014.

Fr. Miqueli resigned as pastor of St. Frances de Chantal on Dec. 11, after publication of the allegations in the New York Post.

Zwilling responded to the situation in a Dec. 11 e-letter to the parishioners of St. Frances de Chantal.

He declined to comment on the specific legal matter of the suit, saying the legal matters would best be addressed in court.

Speaking more generally, Zwilling said that the “archdiocese has, from the beginning, taken these allegations seriously, and has been investigating them, including conducting a forensic audit of the parish, which is still on-going.”

“To date we have found nothing to substantiate the allegations that have been raised, and, in fact, with regard to the parish finances, we know that the allegation that Father Miqueli stole $1 million from each parish, as was alleged by the plaintiffs’ attorney, is completely false,” Zwilling stated.

However, he noted, the archdiocese did find Fr. Miqueli “had deficient management and administrative practices,” and that the archdiocese placed forward directives to address those practices.

Zwilling, also noted that auxiliary bishop, Bishop John Jenik, has met with parishioners “in an effort to try to hear their concerns and reach a resolution.”

Continuing, Zwilling stated that the archdiocese has asked that those making claims “please provide us with documentation, but they have thus far failed to do so.” He reiterated his request that anyone with information or documentation contact the Archdiocese or the District Attorney.

“If, in the course of our ongoing investigation, we find additional information, we will, of course, take appropriate action in response,” the communications director concluded.

Full article…
 
This is very sad. The Archdiocese spokesman is trying to shift blame to the complaining parishioners. An independent investigation is needed. Cardinal Dolan is 75 and so will be forced to retire soon in any case.
 
Cardinal Dolan is 65.

It isn’t an internal investigation, the DA is involved.

Father Miqueli stepped down. If he stole that much money, he should be convicted.

If he is guilty of the gay sex allegations, he should not be in public ministry.

BUT, the embezzlement part is a crime, and it probably should have been made public.

As sordid and lurid as the gay sex allegations are, those should have only been disclosed after the investigation and without all the yucky details. ESPECIALLY if Father is innocent. Father isn’t accused of rape, or molestation to my knowledge.

I know, when I go to confession, the New York Post isn’t outside listening to the details, not that my confessions are all that interesting.

Also, the civil lawsuit is peppered with the terminology,

“Upon information and belief” which in legal terms means:
information and belief
n. a phrase often used in legal pleadings (complaints and answers in a lawsuit), declarations under penalty of perjury, and affidavits under oath, in which the person making the statement or allegation qualifies it. In effect, he/she says: “I am only stating what I have been told, and I believe it.” This makes clear about which statements he/she does not have sure-fire, personal knowledge (perhaps it is just hearsay or surmise) and protects the maker of the statement from claims of outright falsehood or perjury. The typical phraseology is: “Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon such information and belief, alleges that defendant diverted the funds to his own use.”
See also: complaint declaration perjury affidavit answer
 
This matter should be relatively easy to determine. The amounts of money we are talking about are huge compared to the budget of a parish.
  1. Why are controls so lax that a single person can write out checks and sign them alone?
  2. Why are controls so poor that a single person is alone with the cash collected at Masses?
  3. Who owns the property noted in the lawsuit? When was it purchased? Real estate records are public matter, you can search for it online.
You can walk into virtually any parish and get a list of checks written, to whom, and more info within a few minutes. Any decent audit should be able to uncover the truth in this matter in a few days. Why hasn’t it been done?
 
I have read some of the reports on this, and I fear it may get much uglier.

The embezzlement charges do seem weak, which doesn’t mean they may not turn out to be valid. But…

Suppose you were convinced a person in a position of authority was doing something immoral and inappropriate, but not clearly unlawful. And suppose you report that to the person’s superiors and are unsatisfied with the response. One possible tactic would be to accuse the person of something that is unlawful, knowing that although he will be exonerated of that charge, the other immoral and inappropriate behavior will come to light and the proper folks will have to deal with it. Just a thought…
 
Parishioners have already raised their concerns several times to the Archdiocese, but were dismissed.

🤷
 
It’s cover up time, it’s cover up time,
He didn’t do nothin’, didn’t steal a dime.
He’s pure and true as the sky is blue,
So you leave off this buddy o’ mine.
 
Persona non gratia Voris has been rolling out highly disturbing copies of $14K check written to the Priest from a fund that he shouldn’t have access to and other letters from Dolan to the parishioners that are less than inspiring. Again, we need to wait for this to play out to determine the truth. Right now, spin doctors on both sides are in high gear, and the fog is getting thicker.

The outcome of this is not going to end well. An incident similar to this hit our parish a decade back. Half the congregation supported the Priest, while the other half wanted the Bishop to defrock him, run him out of town, whatever. The Parish was tore apart. Bad vibes for a few years. It just never ends well.

Pray folks. Pray.
 
Personally, I have a bad feeling that Cardinal Dolan and Fr Miqueli are going to get away with this. The only reason the clerical child abuse cases created such a stink and bankrupted so many dioceses is that having sex with underage children is one of the few sexual misdeeds that is still illegal. Miqueli, as a practising homosexual, is very much in the groove of contemporary sexual ethics. For Joe Public he is titillating but not horrifying.

I would put some money on it (not too much, but some) that after a couple of years of psychological counselling and comfortable, diocesan-funded ‘reflection’, Fr Miqueli will back on active duty again, either in a parish or in some other capacity.

Cardinal Dolan, of course, will remain exactly where he is.
 
Getting away with something implies that they both did something to get away with. 😦 I’m not at all comfortable with convicting both a Priest and a cardinal in the court of public opinion.

The DA is involved. 2 mil is still an incredible amount of money, if Father did steal that he should be convicted. But, why would the Archdiocese look the other way while Father was stealing from THEM? What interst would a Cardinal have on protecting a priest in a deviant lifestyle?

I’ll wait to see what happens with the investigation, but Father Miquelis reputation has been ruined, even if he’s innocent.😦
 
The DA is involved. 2 mil is still an incredible amount of money, if Father did steal that he should be convicted.
From what I understand, the internal investigation is happening BEFORE the DA is involved.
But, why would the Archdiocese look the other way while Father was stealing from THEM? What interst would a Cardinal have on protecting a priest in a deviant lifestyle?
Apparently the priest had openly bragged that he is immune because he caught another priest molesting an underage boy, and the cardinal covered up.

But as was mentioned elsewhere, Cardinal Dolan will get away with this, even if he’s guilty. The liberals running NYC, including the mayor and the DA, aren’t about to bring down a big religious leader who is never critical of homosexuality and even says “bravo” about it.

I’ve never heard him say he supports gay marriage explicitly, but he definitely seems more of an ally than a critic of their cause-- and the cause of gay marriage is far far far more important to the NYC politicians than a few million dollars of some middle class people in the BX.
 
  1. The New York Archdiocese does not equal New York City. In Fact only three boroughs are part of the New York Archdiocese. Brooklyn and Queens are part of the Dioceses of Brooklyn. The New York Archdiocese reaches up into Westchester county.
  2. There is not one DA, each county has their own DA. New York County is Manhattan, Bronx County is the Bronx, Richmond County is Staten Island, Queens County is Queens, and King’s county is Brooklyn.
  3. The DA’s are elected, and not appointed by the mayor, The Bronx district attorney has been serving since 1989. Which means he has served through various administrations both Republican and Democrat.
  4. A civil suit was filed by some parishioners in December. The DA’s office has been involved since August 2015.
  5. The Civil Suit is peppered with terminology, “Upon information and belief” which I explained the meaning of the phrase.
Again, I’d like to see the results before A Prince of the Church and an ordained priest are convicted in the court of public opinion.

I remember hearing someone saying often on a canceled TV program on a religious network, “All I know are these are the hands that bring me Jesus”.

I don’t think that priest and Cardinal are beyond approach, or are not capble of sin, or crime. I do think that respect and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty are important.
 
did the priest step down or resign?

this parish must be suffering terribly while the investigation goes on.

I don’t understand how they have not turned anything up yet. I know people will make false accusations, but why would someone want to smear this priest? if this is true, how long did this priest think he could get away with his secrets?
 
The DA is involved. 2 mil is still an incredible amount of money, if Father did steal that he should be convicted. But, why would the Archdiocese look the other way while Father was stealing from THEM? What interst would a Cardinal have on protecting a priest in a deviant lifestyle?

.😦
Why would they look the other way? Seriously?? They would look the other way for the same reasons they looked the other way for so many years in the pedophile cases. To save image and perception. That is why many decisions are made. If they chose to look away and not stand up and defend innocent children getting raped in their facilities by their own clergy, why would they shine a light on something like embezzlement and solicitation?
As far as stealing from the diocese, God only knows of the corruption going of which we are unaware. Maybe the diocese is trying to keep something covered up. Maybe the priest has plenty on the diocese and figured he would use it to his advantage. Maybe the money embezzled is his “payment” for not outing the diocese on something even bigger. Maybe the priest has the diocese over a barrel, and so he is going to take full advantage… Maybe he is sharing his goods with people who are now in charge of investigating him…

Or maybe it is just a big misunderstanding. Maybe it is just much ado about nothing…

Image and perception. Some say it is “reality.” At any rate it really is the only goal of many in churches, including the catholic church.
 
Why would they look the other way? Seriously?? They would look the other way for the same reasons they looked the other way for so many years in the pedophile cases. To save image and perception. That is why many decisions are made. If they chose to look away and not stand up and defend innocent children getting raped in their facilities by their own clergy, why would they shine a light on something like embezzlement and solicitation?
As far as stealing from the diocese, God only knows of the corruption going of which we are unaware. Maybe the diocese is trying to keep something covered up. Maybe the priest has plenty on the diocese and figured he would use it to his advantage. Maybe the money embezzled is his “payment” for not outing the diocese on something even bigger. Maybe the priest has the diocese over a barrel, and so he is going to take full advantage… Maybe he is sharing his goods with people who are now in charge of investigating him…

Or maybe it is just a big misunderstanding. Maybe it is just much ado about nothing…

Image and perception. Some say it is “reality.” At any rate it really is the only goal of many in churches, including the catholic church.
So not only can you not trust the church but you can’t trust the DA either. Everyone is in cahoots…🤷
 
did the priest step down or resign?

this parish must be suffering terribly while the investigation goes on.

I don’t understand how they have not turned anything up yet. I know people will make false accusations, but why would someone want to smear this priest? if this is true, how long did this priest think he could get away with his secrets?
Yeah, so far no accounting errors linking this priest to a couple million in embezzlement. Why would someone want to smear a priest??? are you serious? Priests reputations are smeared for the unbelievable crime of only allowing boys as altar servers. Who knows what nefarious deeds this priest has been up too!

Has there been any credible evidence of the accusations of sexual deviancy…? I pray this is not true.:mad:
 
Yeah, so far no accounting errors linking this priest to a couple million in embezzlement. Why would someone want to smear a priest??? are you serious? Priests reputations are smeared for the unbelievable crime of only allowing boys as altar servers. Who knows what nefarious deeds this priest has been up too!

Has there been any credible evidence of the accusations of sexual deviancy…? I pray this is not true.:mad:
me too! really gross!:eek:
 
Yeah, so far no accounting errors linking this priest to a couple million in embezzlement. Why would someone want to smear a priest??? are you serious? Priests reputations are smeared for the unbelievable crime of only allowing boys as altar servers. Who knows what nefarious deeds this priest has been up too!

Has there been any credible evidence of the accusations of sexual deviancy…? I pray this is not true.:mad:
The longer this goes, the worse it looks.

The archdiocese should be already conducting a thorough audit of the funds to determine if any were stolen. It wouldn’t take much time at all, since you could focus the search first on the large $ checks. (he’s not going to be able to steal $1 million by writing out 10,000 $100 checks, it would require some large transactions)

If he has skimmed cash from the collection plate or parish stores, then simple statistical analysis should show the discrepancy for such a large amount.

There has been no statement at all about the house in question that is claimed he purchased. Real estate records are public information. So it should be very easy to see who owns the house in question and determine if the priest did buy it, and how it was purchased (HUD settlement statements list the lender, and lenders file mortgages as well, so if he purchased for cash, it would show). The longer this goes unanswered, the more clear it becomes that this accusation is true.

The final claim is that the priest was having an ongoing and disgusting sex relationship with this man. No statement that I know of has been issued from either the priest, the boyfriend, or the diocese. Again, the longer this charge is left unanswered, the more likely it is true. If the priest never had such a relationship with him, I can’t see how he wouldn’t make a statement that it was untrue.
 
The longer this goes, the worse it looks.

The archdiocese should be already conducting a thorough audit of the funds to determine if any were stolen. It wouldn’t take much time at all, since you could focus the search first on the large $ checks. (he’s not going to be able to steal $1 million by writing out 10,000 $100 checks, it would require some large transactions)

.
Did you miss
Speaking more generally, Zwilling said that the “archdiocese has, from the beginning, taken these allegations seriously, and has been investigating them, including conducting a forensic audit of the parish, which is still on-going.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top