While scandal erupted in Boston because Cardinal Bernard Law failed to dismiss pedophile priests after making payments to victims, Pittsburgh Bishop Donald Wuerl has long appeared to have done the opposite.

		Related story W. Mifflin case to test church conspiracy allegation

In known cases, he ousted priests who were "credibly accused." But, although the diocese offered to pay for counseling, Wuerl is not known to have paid settlements apart from three cases where victims were able to sue within the statute of limitation for child sexual abuse.

That two-year limit underpins a sweeping lawsuit claiming that Wuerl engaged in a huge cover-up. At a hearing tomorrow, the diocese will ask that the suit be dismissed.

Only Wuerl and his predecessor, Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, are named in the suit. But the cases stretch at least to the tenures of deceased Bishops Vincent Leonard (1969-1983), John Wright (1959-1969) and John Dearden (1950-1958).

"What did they do for the victims?" asked Richard Serbin, an attorney suing several Pennsylvania dioceses. "I bet you'll find they spent a lot more money helping these child-molesting priests get assistance with their emotional problems."

Serbin and Alan Perer brought the suit on behalf of 25 people who say they were sexually abused as minors by 14 men who were then priests.

The allegations date to at least 1953. Several of the priests have died. Only two were in good standing when the suits were filed: the Rev. Ralph Esposito, who transferred to the Diocese of Little Rock in 1978 and was retired; and the Rev. George Wilt, 72, who retired in 2003 after 35 years as a priest and pastor at St. Bernard parish, Mt. Lebanon.

Common Pleas Judge R. Stanton Wettick told the accusers' attorneys to pick one case to test their argument. They chose the case of the former Rev. John W. Wellinger, whose alleged 1989 molestation of an 11-year-old boy at Holy Spirit parish in West Mifflin appears to be the most recent allegation. The suit claims that Wuerl broke a promise to the victim's parents to oust Wellinger after they reported the abuse in 1995.

The diocese says Wellinger has not been allowed to work, dress or identify himself as a priest since then. What's more, the diocese says in a brief, Wuerl is a national leader in removing priests found to have sexual contact with minors.

The statute of limitations for child sexual abuse has expired on all the claims. So the suit is directed not at the accused molesters but at the diocese for conspiring to cover up the abuse.

Serbin says his clients did not know of the conspiracy until 2002, when Bishop Wilton Gregory of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a sweeping apology for bishops who had failed to remove offenders, and Wuerl announced that he had removed several priests who were the targets of past allegation that were "credible" but "not substantiated." Wuerl said he didn't know if those priests were guilty but, if a case boiled down to the word of a credible accuser against the denial of a credible priest, he would err on the side of possible victims.

The suit was triggered by Wuerl's accounting of action he had taken, which Serbin argued showed the diocese knew of abuse.

Some attorneys are skeptical of this effort to circumvent the statute of limitations, but Serbin has had preliminary successes. Last month a Lehigh County court rejected the Diocese of Allentown's efforts to have an identical lawsuit dismissed due to the statute of limitations. It said Serbin should have the opportunity to prove a conspiracy.

Faced with similar Serbin suits, the Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown agreed in May to pay $3.71 million to settle claims by 21 people. Bishop Joseph Adamec said he would rather pay to help victims than to fight suits.

There is no sign of settlement in Pittsburgh. Wuerl removed offending priests and offered counseling to accusers, said the Rev. Ronald Lengwin, diocesan spokesman. "We believe we acted responsibly," he said.

The diocesan assertion that Wuerl made only three child molestation settlements in 16 years is consistent with calls the Post-Gazette has received from victims. None of the accused molesters were still in ministry, but many victims complained they were not given cash. Some said they had insurance for counseling but that abuse-related problems -- such as divorce -- had left them strapped.

Compensation should be about moral, not legal, obligation, said the Rev. Thomas Doyle, a priest and canon lawyer who advises victims.

"This has ruined their lives. The perpetrator may be old and he may have disappeared or died, but the victim is still alive and the pain and destruction gets worse, not better," he said. "Wuerl may have done his best and done it in good faith, but as far as the victims go, he hasn't done it right."

Wuerl met with victims months after becoming bishop in 1988. He then told his priests that anyone who sexually abused a minor would be permanently removed from ministry. In 1993, when the Vatican's highest court ordered him to reinstate an accused priest, Wuerl won an almost unheard-of appeal, which upheld the priest's removal.

Serbin dismisses that case and others where Wuerl was known to take decisive action as flukes. The suit says diocesan officials covered up complaints; transferred predator clerics to new parishes; promoted offending clerics; made secret payments to victims in exchange for their silence and employed a closed secret system of internal reporting of the ongoing sexual abuse by priests.

The diocese says those charges are based on headlines about other dioceses. It says the suit contains no specific allegations that the Pittsburgh diocese took such actions regarding any priest.

Victims have criticized Wuerl for not announcing when a priest is removed due to allegations of child sexual abuse. Only a handful of 195 dioceses nationwide have named accused priests in cases that did not become public through the courts.

Suzanne DiNubile, a San Francisco attorney with the Klaas Kids Foundation, works on behalf of Megan's Law, which requires public notice when a convicted child molester is living in a given area. As much as she's for warning about predators, DiNubile suspects that former priests who have never been convicted could sue and win.

Courts have never ruled on the issue. Megan's Law prevailed because those it affected had received due process and their convictions were public record. "A private employer could get in a lot of trouble for disclosing information like that," DiNubile said.

Bishops should do so anyway, said David Clohessy, executive director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. "I think most Catholics would welcome and applaud a bishop who would be sued for protecting kids over a child molester."

Because of the church scandals, courts are now open to circumventing the statute of limitations, he said. Time limits on when a victim can file charges or sue are intended to ensure evidence is available. Traditionally, only murder had no statute, but a few states have added child sexual abuse. Most states don't start the clock until the victim turns 18. Many date it from when victims realize they were injured, which may be well into adulthood.

The conspiracy argument has long been used to overcome the statute in cases against corporations, such as those that covered up miners' risk of black lung disease, said Marvin Fein, a University of Pittsburgh law professor. Fein believes that argument can be applied to a church, but it could be a challenge.

"If the diocese can prove that it took the complaint seriously, acted quickly, did something about it, and notified the people that it was doing something about it -- that's a great defense to any kind of conspiracy," he said.

Nicholas Cafardi, a former diocesan attorney and a member of the Lay Review Board overseeing the U.S. bishops' response to child sexual abuse, doesn't believe the conspiracy charge will stand.

"In 1993 the bishop of Pittsburgh went public with guidelines, which said specifically that the diocese encouraged victims of abuse to contact the civil authorities," he said. "So I really don't accept that there was a conspiracy."

Lengwin said diocesan officials were not legally required to report the Wellinger allegation to civil authorities. And they didn't think it was necessary because "the victim's father was a policeman," he said.

According to Elizabeth Lawson, an attorney for the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape, clergy became mandatory reporters in July 1995, three months before the allegation. But the state reporting law is so narrow that it's unclear whether this case falls under it, she said.

She is eyeing the conspiracy suits because the state's courts have long resisted circumventing the statute of limitations for sexual abuse, Lawson said. The statute has been modified several times and is now 12 years past the accuser's 18th birthday. But that applies only to victims who were minors when the change took effect in 2002.

Serbin must show that the diocese actively prevented the victim from suing within the statute of limitations, Lawson said. If the victim's father was a police officer, it will be hard to argue that the family did not know its rights, she said.

Whatever happens, publicity over the church scandals has helped her cause.

"It certainly helped in getting our [12-year] statue of limitations passed. Until this came to light in the church, the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape had fought for several years to get that legislation, and no one was going for it," Lawson said.

"It also allowed people to talk more about the issue and to understand that it happens everywhere. We try to tell people that it isn't just the Catholic Church."