When a veteran middle-school teacher in nearby Santa Monica pleaded
guilty last month to "multiple counts of illegal sex acts" and molesting
nine young girls, the
Los Angeles Times didn't feel the story warranted their newspaper.
Although the Times had reported the teacher's original arrest and some
follow-up last May and June, the news of teacher's guilty plea only went
as far as the
paper's blog.
Last November, a coordinator for the Los Angeles Unified School
District (LAUSD) filed a discrimination lawsuit against his employer.
The suit included the astonishing charge that the district assigned a
principal to a middle school even though it knew the guy had
recently faced a molestation-related investigation. Within months of his
new assignment, the principal was
arrested and charged with molesting four students. Again,
although the paper had reported other episodes of this particular
narrative, the Times jettisoned the news of this stunning lawsuit to the
paper's blog and never reported it in their actual paper.
Cut to the front page of Thursday's Los Angeles Times (1/29/09).
Above the fold, with an accompanying color photo, is the headline,
"Mahony investigated over abusive priests." It's a serious and
eye-opening headline, indeed. The article begins, "The U.S. attorney in
Los Angeles has launched a federal grand jury investigation into
Cardinal Roger M. Mahony in connection with his response to the
molestation of children by priests in the Los Angeles Archdiocese,
according to two law enforcement sources familiar with the case." But a
deeper look into the article reveals there may be a lot less than
meets the eye:
... "[Los Angeles Archdiocese lawyer J. Michael] Hennigan said
he has been informed that Mahony is not a target of the inquiry."
(Uhhh ... Doesn't that pretty much contradict the headline?!?)
... "[Los Angeles District attorney spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons]
said that charges against Mahony are 'highly doubtful'."
... "Laurie Levenson, a Loyola Law School professor and former
federal prosecutor [said], 'I'd put [the gov't's reported theory
for the case] in the category of creative lawyering'."
... "[U.S. Atty. Thomas P.] O'Brien declined to comment,
refusing to even confirm the existence of the investigation."
Upon close inspection, the Times' piece appears pretty flimsy for an
above-the-fold, front-page story. In addition, the article is based on
unnamed sources, contains no new information about any abuse cases, and
regurgitates information that's been reported ad nauseum over the
past several years.
Needless to say, local TV outlets and talk show hosts have been
having a field day in the last 24 hours in gleefully reporting what the
Times has published. (Maybe that was the goal all along?)
Who knows what will transpire next in this story. But if no federal
charges are ever brought against the Cardinal, can we expect an apology
from the Times?
A double standard between the Los Angeles Archdiocese and the Los
Angeles Unified School District? It sure seems like it.
+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+
Previous (partial list):
Not the Catholic Church? (Part III): LAT Misses Further Sex Abuse
Charges Against School Aide (NB, 10/26/08)
Not the Catholic Church? (Part II): L.A. School Sex Abuse Scandal
Continues To Grow; Where's the MSM? (NB, 9/22/08)
Not the Catholic Church? MSM Mum About Huge L.A. School Sex Abuse
Scandal (NB, 5/19/08)
LA Times Admits To False
Reporting On Cardinal Mahony (NB, 6/15/07)
After Bogus Attack,
Catholic Charities Debunks LA Times Columnist (NB, 2/25/07)
LA Times Slammed For Two
Faulty Articles, 'Insulting To All Catholics' (NB, 4/1/07)
In This Case, Headline In
LA Times Unfair To Cardinal Mahony (NB, 12/2/06)