IN PENNSYLVANIA: JUSTICE FOR ALL

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which stayed the release of a sweeping secret grand jury investigation into allegations of sexual abuse in Catholic dioceses across the state, said Monday it will withhold the report to give unindicted people named in it a chance to challenge its findings.

In an unsigned opinion that shed light on last week's brief ruling, the justices said “many individuals” named in the grand jury report that examined decades of abuse reports in six dioceses, including Greensburg and Pittsburgh, petitioned the court, saying they were denied due process to defend their reputations.

Noting that reputation is a right under the state constitution and that some petitions have yet to be reviewed, the justices said they will review the temporary stay once those challenges “can be resolved, or an informed and fair determination can be made as to whether a continued stay is warranted.”

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro initially said he would make the report public this week. Although he did not oppose the delay, he is urging the court to act swiftly.

The justices did not put any time limits on their stay.

The grand jury that met in Pittsburgh for 22 months completed its work at the end of April. 

Under grand jury secrecy rules, the names of those challenging its report remain sealed.

Although it has yet to be publicly released, the 800-plus page grand jury report was given to officials in the dioceses of Pittsburgh, Greensburg, Harrisburg, Erie, Allentown and Scranton in May. 

Spokesmen for six dioceses, where officials are believed to be crafting their responses, said Church officials had no objection to its release.

Abuse victims who testified before the investigative panel and attorneys who represented them said they were shocked when the Supreme Court blocked the release of the document.

The high court intervened to block the release of the report last week after Judge Norman A. Krumenacker III, the grand jury supervisor, denied a series of petitions filed by unindicted individuals seeking an opportunity to cross-examine their accusers.

The Justices of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court are to be commended for their judicial discretion and for not being caught up in the mob mentality that often associates itself with investigations such as this.

Equal justice for all.

For victims, justice should their allegations be proven in a court of law.

For those accused, the opportunity to defend themselves and their reputations according to the due process of law.

The Justices are attempting to balance those two goods and the State Attorney General should be supportive and encouraging in that effort.