|
CUP became aware a complaint was lodged against the Lafayette Diocese and Fr. Theodore Dudzinski (Vicar General) in the circuit court in Boone County, Indiana on Friday, March 8, 2024. In addition, Fr. DeOreo has enlisted a canon lawyer to seek canonical solutions for his termination.
Currently, there are two concurrent proceedings related to Fr. DeOreo. If the diocese indeed decides to proceed with the canonical process, which they publicly committed to in 2021 but promptly suspended, it will be a significant development.
Fr. DeOreo’s Legal Battle: Seeking Justice, Truth Amidst the Persecution
When Fr. DeOreo’s attorney was asked for a comment relating to the case, he expressed his disappointment that litigation has become necessary, as it was not their preferred course of action. However, this decision rests with the bishop. Despite offering a tolling agreement to safeguard Fr. DeOreo’s claims while the diocese took additional steps to restore his reputation, the bishop declined. This outcome is regrettable, as the diocese has opted for this path.
The bishop, vested with power and authority, is expected to guide the Church away from scandal. Unfortunately, it appears reconciliation, mercy, truth, and justice are not the preferred route.
What does a tolling agreement entail? It postpones the filing of a case beyond the statute of limitations deadline, allowing parties to pursue an amicable resolution. Regrettably, this proposal was turned down.
The rejection of the tolling agreement prompts the question: Why is there a reluctance from the bishop and diocese to engage in goodwill for a mutually beneficial resolution?
If you wish to support Fr. DeOreo go to the page he has established to help him with his legal fees:
Your generous contributions would be greatly appreciated to assist Fr. DeOreo in defending his reputation and upholding justice and truth within the Lafayette Diocese.
Background Information
(Note that the original case Fr. DeOreo filed against Sam Berendes follows this summary)
March 8, 2024 Complaint Details
Fr. James DeOreo vs. Fr. Theodore Dudzinski and The Roman Catholic Diocese of Lafayette Indiana
In the recent Complaint filed by Fr. DeOreo against the Lafayette Diocese and Fr. Theodore Dudzinski (referred to as “Fr. Dudzinski” hereafter), it is noted that the investigation conducted by the Diocese concluded that the allegation of anorexia (Allegation1) was found to be unsubstantiated. Following the investigation, Fr. DeOreo returned to his ministry. Despite the unsubstantiated nature of the allegations, the Diocese covered the expenses for Complainer’s ongoing therapy. In case of any new accusations, the Diocese suggested reopening the investigation. During therapy sessions, Fr. Dudzinski attended the therapy session with the Complainer. The complaint suggests that Fr. Dudzinski may have influenced the Complainer to bring up a second set of allegations (sexual harassment). Yet, the Complainer specifically denied any “sexual contact” by Fr. DeOreo. Fr. Dudzinski proceeded to suspend Fr. DeOreo, not for the second allegation, but for allegedly violating the November 2021 Decree regarding his interaction with minors.
Two key takeaways from the detailed reading of the March 8 Complaint filed (see link to the Complaint above):
- The March 8, 2024 Complaint against Fr. Dudzinski alleges that he misled the Complainer during therapy sessions to falsely implicate Fr. DeOreo.
- The March 8, 2024 Complaint indicates the Diocese falsely suggested the presence of Canon 1722 measures, implying a thorough investigation for the second “allegation” when in reality, it had not been conducted. Additionally, Fr. DeOreo’s complaint against the Diocese states that the Diocese made false and misleading statements about Fr. DeOreo in its March 2021, showing reckless disregard.
Salient Points in the March 8 Complaint:
- An investigation into an allegation of anorexia involving Fr. DeOreo found it baseless. The Diocese covered therapy costs for the complainant. Fr. Dudzinski attended the Complainer’s therapy sessions between February and September 2021 under the pretext of paying for therapy. This is when Allegation 2 of sexual harassment emerged, leading to an internal investigation.
- The Diocesan Review Board found the new allegations not credible due to lack of evidence of sexual abuse.
- In November 2021, the Complainer, relying on Fr. Dudzinski’s claims that Fr. DeOreo breached a restriction against being around minors, expressed concern to the Diocese about Fr. DeOreo’s presence at a service with children. The Complainer criticized the Diocese for enabling Fr. DeOreo. Fr. Dudzinski, without revealing his efforts to encourage new allegations, distorted the Review Board’s findings, misleading Diocesan leadership. Following the Complainer’s email, the Diocese issued a Decree (The November Decree) indicating potential violations involving a cleric and a minor. A ‘preliminary investigation’ was launched by independent investigators, but investigators did not actually commence the investigation. Fr. DeOreo was restricted from public ministry with youth, but no restrictions applied to non-ministry interactions with minors.
- During the period from November 19, 2021, to March 7, 2022, the Diocese engaged in negotiations with the Complainer and their legal representatives regarding a potential settlement and compensation. However, no further efforts were made to verify the accuracy of the new allegations. Fr. Dudzinski allegedly misrepresented the content of the November Decree to the Complainer, their family, and the Victim’s Assistance Counselor, suggesting that Fr. DeOreo was restricted from interacting with all minors or entirely suspended. Based on Fr. Dudzinski’s misrepresentations, the Complainer’s mother expressed concern about Fr. DeOreo’s presence at a Carmel High School swim meet. Despite Fr. DeOreo’s compliance during the meet, the Diocese suspended him, allegedly influenced by Fr. Dudzinski. This created a false impression within Diocesan leadership, leading to Fr. DeOreo’s suspension on March 11, 2022. Following the suspension, Fr. DeOreo faced several restrictions, including eviction from the rectory and prohibition from wearing clerical garb. Bishop Doherty testified that the sole reason for Fr. DeOreo’s suspension was his perceived violation of the November Decree, despite no new evidence.
- The March Statement: On or about March 13, 2022, the Diocese issued a statement to parishioners, members of the Diocese in Indiana, and news agencies. The statement implied that Fr. DeOreo was suspended due to “allegations of inappropriate conduct with a minor.” It further suggested that this conduct was sexually abusive and urged reporting to Child Protective Services, but there had not been a complete investigation done of this second allegation in connection with Canon 1722.
- Inaccuracy of the March Statement: Because Fr. DeOreo’s suspension was based on violating the November Decree (as confirmed by Bishop Doherty), the Diocese knew the March Statement was inaccurate when published.
For a more detailed summary of the Complaint filed – click here.
In Conclusion
The Complaint indicates there was a false impression from Canon 1722. The Diocese falsely implied that Canon 1722 measures were in place, which indirectly represented that an investigation had occurred, and substantial evidence pointed to Fr. DeOreo’s guilt. However, the complaint says this was untrue based on the investigation by Loftus and Wolf and inconsistencies in the Complainer’s claims.
The other major claim is that there were misleading public statements. The Diocese published Fr. DeOreo’s name and suggested “inappropriate conduct with a minor” in the March Statement not just within diocese but to the news media. This implied either criminal charges or substantial evidence from an independent investigation. However, the Diocese knew neither of these to be true or likely.
The Counts Made Against Diocese of Lafayette, Indiana and Fr. Theodore Dudzinski
Against the Diocese
According to the complaint, Fr. DeOreo claims the March Statement issued by the Diocese was defamatory, implying criminal conduct, misconduct in Fr. DeOreo’s role as a priest, and sexual misconduct. The complaint further claims the Diocese made this statement with knowledge or reckless disregard of its falsity, publishing it to parishioners and news agencies, which damaged Fr. DeOreo’s reputation. Despite lacking qualified privilege, the Diocese falsely intimated that Canon Law measures were in place. Fr. DeOreo seeks compensation for the damage to his reputation, estimated at least $10 million, without seeking court intervention in internal matters of punishment or his relation with the Diocese, respecting the protections and separation of the First Amendment.
Against Fr. Theodore Dudzinski
According to the complaint, Fr. DeOreo claims Fr. Dudzinski, with the intent to cause Complainer to obtain property, knowingly or intentionally made false or misleading statements to Complainer and the Diocese. These actions created a false impression and led to a claim containing misleading information. Furthermore, the complaint claims Fr. Dudzinski’s misrepresentations harmed Fr. DeOreo and that his actions constitute fraud under Indiana’s criminal statute and common law. Fr. DeOreo seeks damages, including three times the suffered damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees.
|
