Professional Misconduct? Lawyer Garabedian Descends to Hate Speech on TV Show

Mitchell Garabedian

Absolutely unhinged: lawyer Mitchell Garabedian

The ethical rules governing lawyers in Massachusetts are crystal clear: Rule 8.4 of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct states that it is professional misconduct for an attorney to:
engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; [and/or]
engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on his or her fitness
   to practice law.

The American Bar Association (ABA) adds that it is professional misconduct should a lawyer "engage in conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is harassment or discrimination" on the basis of religion.

Thus, if the bar in Massachusetts actually gives a rip about upholding the remaining reputation and dignity of the legal profession in its state, it should do something about contingency lawyer Mitchell Garabedian, who appeared on Boston's WGBH Greater Boston program last week.

Morally and factually wrong

In yet another segment by the program on the issue of the many-decades-old cases of abuse in the Catholic Church – a segment that neither advanced the discussion in any way nor provided any new perspective – Garabedian made obscene statements that again revealed his deep-seated bigotry against the Catholic Church:

  • Addressing the legal status of the Church as a charity, Garabedian thundered: "How is sexually molesting children a charitable purpose?"
  • About Catholic bishops: "They're already portraying themselves as victims. That's their new line … The victims are not really clergy sexual abuse victims, according to them. The victims are the bishops. We're dealing with a corrupt criminal entity."
  • "They're rotten to the core … You take away their religious garb, you take away their religion, they're a bunch of criminals who sexually abuse children or allowed children to be sexually abused."
  • "They don't care about helping victims."

Keep in mind this was only a few months after Garabedian said on the very same program "they've been raping kids at a wholesale pace for centuries."

The bottom line is if such words had been said about any other group – whether it be Jewish people, Muslims, black people, or anyone else – the sanctions would be fast and furious. Garabedian's law license would already have been yanked.

It is high time that officials in Massachusetts finally hold Garabedian accountable for his public statements against the Catholic Church, which are not only false but also foment religious bigotry.

If holding a law license in Massachusetts means anything, it means that an individual should be held fully accountable for their public statements – especially those which are directed at religious groups and which manifest a clear religious bigotry and bias.

Here is the segment, if you can stomach it:


  1. Otto says:

    What a biased panel. I wish they would have had JoAnn Wypijewski there to give a less biased take. It is ridiculous to say that this is a specifically Catholic problem but that is how it is framed when they state that priests are dangerous. You could say the same about coaches, teachers, even relatives as most sexual violence occurs within families. This is not “whataboutism” but a significant point when you take into account the long history of vicious anti-Catholicism in the United States.

    Also, contrary to the panel the Church has seen a big drop in abuse claims in recent years hence the need to go back many decades to find accusations that are really impossible to properly investigate at this late date, hence why we have a statute of limitations. As far as investigating other religious institutions, good luck with that since most other religious organizations don’t even bother to keep records like the Catholic Church does hence their cases of abuse fly under the radar or are impossible to investigate even if you tried. But the Catholic Church is attacked for lack of transparency!

    • Greg says:

      They never ever tire of bashing the church.  They try to silence her by the now decades long scandal mongering.  This hasn't been "news" since 2002.

  2. Aloysius says:

    Jim Braude is left wing extremist promoter of WGBH’s one-sided programming.  This 

  3. malcolm harris says:


    Perhaps somebody on the panel should have asked Mitchell Garabedian how much money he has made from suing the Catholic Church. An honest answer to that question would have explained his real motivation.  It's all about the money…. creating a witch-hunt is a prerequisite to shaking that giant pinata.  So that all he has to do is wait and the goodies just fall into his  greedy hands. The guy is "strictly from hunger".

  4. Glenna Kerker says:

    Mr. Garabedian has been making his living for years by developing a victim's story and then suing any institution with deep pockets, collecting a large percentage of the settlement.  He helped a fake victim, formerly a convict, collect money from Penn State University with no evidence other than his dubious story of harm by Sandusky.  He gets paid because large institutions would rather pay settlements than fight them.  This strategy has only encouraged more false allegations instead of calming the situation.  

  5. Baptized In Water says:

    They’re really throwing it all at the Catholic faith lately. I think we’re definitely witnessing a coordinated attack on multiple fronts. Has anyone heard of this new horror movie that just came out called The Nun. It essentially portrays Catholicism as demonic and perfectly fits in with a point made in the article, that it’s perfectly acceptable to slander Catholicism in ways that are considered off limits for other groups, especially other religions. The timing of its release is too coincidental, given the recent attack by the media.

  6. Gordon Thomson says:

    File a formal complaint, better yet, get as many people as possible to file complaints with both the state and national Bars, citing the statutes, allegations (include a copy of the video) and a brief summary of the consequential harm he has created by his foul statements. Date, sign and include a return address and email along with a reasonable date by which you expect a written reply.

  7. Jim Robertson says:

    You act as if us victims were'nt Catholics when we were abused.

    You act as if we weren't loyal devote Catholics.

    How do you know?

    You act as if the church and their insurors have just folded up and rolled over to any lawyer and any claiment. Where's your proof?

    We provided enough proof to be aken seriously as truthfull by  the church and its lawyers and by the  insurors and their lawyers.

    We victims were tested by our own lawyers as well because they didn't want to invest time and money for false claims.

    You act as if lawyers on the whole are immoral people. Proof?

    Yet the church's lawyers are working for you. So Catholic lawyers are good and all the victims lawyers are immoral? Proof?


  8. Jim Robertson says:

    And do you actually think your Bishops and Popes would apologize again and again if the vast majority of victims claims weren't judged by those church leaders as true?

    Your imaginary "attacks" are as stupid as you are.

    The reasons the church settles cases is they know they have no defense against the truth and that juries would give more compensation to victims than settlements would and that's why you see nothing going to trial. It's your side doing that; not us victims.

    • malcolm harris says:

      JR, on the 20th, is trying to tell us that an expression of sympathy must  mean an admission of guilt. The Church is founded on values of compassion and mercy, so the Bishops and the Pope must respond with concern and sympathy. Just in case the alleged victim is actually telling the truth.  Besides… the lawyers and insurers would have advised them that the public have a curious mindset. That all self-identified victims are genuine. This due to a huge brain-washing job by the media. JR knows perfectly well that most personal injury settlements are related to car accidents and also numerous medical negligence claims. But at no point do they admit guilt or fault. The cash settlements are described as "ex gratia"…. or out of the goodness of their hearts. Meaning not due to anything that they, or their clients, have done. However the law has become twisted to the point that this legal protection is denied Catholics…. because of all that entrenched bigotry.

    • Dan says:

      Malcolm, Did "The Church .. founded on values of compassion and mercy", which must "respond with concern and sympathy", display any of those "values" as they raped and molested innocent children, and covered-up and secretly paid off victims so the public wouldn't know they possessed none of these "values'. It's way too late for the church to show their phony concern or sympathy. Admit to all the guilt, come clean and compensate all the cult's victims. And you demonstrate no compassion, concern or sympathy for victims, insinuating they are only "self-identified" and not necessarily "genuine" and possibly received "cash settlements" … "out of the goodness of [your Church's] hearts" and "not due to anything that they, or their clients, have done". I think it's time you stop with your witch-hunt, anti-Catholic "bigotry" accusations. If any "legal protection is denied Catholics" it would be what was denied victims, while the hierarchy kept pedophile perverts from receiving the justice they deserved and left them free to rape and molest children, all to protect the good name of the Church. The good name of the Church has now become soiled beyond repair, all because of some very poor judgment and decisions by bishops, concealing the truth from the world and their legal systems. And now you ask for "due process". Ridiculous!

  9. Sean Coleman says:

    My first post here. We have a similar anticlerical witch hunt going on in Ireland, as some here are surely aware. In fact, it is probably even more surreal. And the reference to the absurd Me Too campaign in the interview is further evidence of delusion.


    Great site David, and I recently read your Sins of the Press.

    • says:

      Thank you, Sean! We appreciate the encouragement and kind words very much!

    • Dan says:

      Sean, When you ran into that there witch-hunt, did you happen to see any of them there leprechauns, Laddie? Our Donald has run into several leprechauns when he's in the Russian Forest on one of his witch-hunts, lookin' for some of that fake news. Got alota fake news over there in Ireland, too, do ya?   signed Danny Boy

    • "peoples" clown says:

      Danny boy! Guess the pipes are callin'. I think its you that are reaching constantly for the "lucky charms" from your bathroom mirror! Stop just pickin' out the marshmallows, and eat the cereal as well!

    • Sean Coleman says:

      'Dan', do you know the origin of the term 'fake news'? Sharyl Attkisson explains in her excellent book The Smear and it appeared only shortly before the November 2016 election in a desperate attempt to smear The Donald. I haven't finished it yet but I understand it was the parent company of Google who thought up the cunning plan. The irony is that the media themselves are the fakers and witch hunts are media creations. Check out the late Richard Webster's Sceptical Essays website for a wider perspective or the Irish Salem one for the astonishing tall tales people have been swallowing over here. But it is the same old story wherever you look: liars, fantasists and credulous journalists.

    • Sean Coleman says:

      Forgot to add: … and the crazed chorus of manic depressive posters on the internet.

  10. malcolm harris says:

    On the 21st made a comment that the general public have developed a curious mindset. Namely that all self-identified alleged victims are  actually genuine?. So most people now think…"believe the victim".   Anyway….. this is now having surprising consequences. Read recently that medical specialists have become afraid of false accusations. (of sexual abuse). So they insist on a chaperone being present when examining female patients. Usually the chaperone is the clinic's nurse. Dare I suggest that other professions might now be regretting their silence when priests became the first targets of lying opportunists.