Spokane7
44°
January 20, 2010 in News
Pedophile priest involvement at Morning Star detailed in court
Patrick O’Donnell – whose infamy as the abuser of as many as 66 children was inextricably linked to the scandal that bankrupted the Catholic Diocese of Spokane – also insinuated himself into Morning Star Boys Ranch, a Superior Court jury was told on Wednesday.
The former director and a former resident of the nonprofit home for troubled boys both testified in the case of Kenneth Putnam vs. Morning Star Boys Ranch about their acquaintance with the defrocked priest O’Donnell, an admitted pedophile.
Putnam accuses Fr. Jospeh Weitensteiner, 77, who retired as ranch director in 2006, and a now-deceased ranch counselor, Doyle Gillum, of sexually molesting him while he was a resident of the ranch in about 1986.
Putnam’s is one of 19 separate lawsuits claiming sexual or physical abuse at Morning Star. The plaintiffs say ranch administrators knew or should have known about ongoing acts of child abuse and did nothing to stop it.
Under questioning by Putnam’s Seattle attorney, Tim Kosnoff, Weitensteiner testified that he has known O’Donnell for decades and that O’Donnell was a Boy Scout in his troop when Weitensteiner was a Scout leader in the early 1950s.
Their acquaintance was renewed in the 1960s after Weitensteiner became a ranch counselor and later – after being ordained a Catholic priest in 1966 – director of Morning Star.
Weitensteiner testified that in the late 1970s or early 1980s, O’Donnell, a child psychologist who frequented the ranch, was preparing to conduct psychological evaluations of some of the boys. However, a woman called Morning Star to complain that O’Donnell was a pedophile who had undergone sexual deviancy treatment in Seattle from 1976 to 1978.
“We decided we better not use him,” Weitensteiner said, adding that he did not believe O’Donnell returned to the ranch after that.
Weitensteiner said he did not notify the bishop or law enforcement about O’Donnell’s relationship with Morning Star.
Also testifying on Wednesday was Paul Baggett, 48, who lived at Morning Star for about three years in the early 1970s. Baggett said that he was repeatedly sexually abused by O’Donnell on ranch property and on trips with the priest away from the ranch.
Baggett testified that he informed the ranch nurse and Weitensteiner of the abuse. Weitensteiner told Baggett he would speak to O’Donnell about it, but neither state child protective workers nor law enforcement were informed of the allegation, Baggett said.
Abuse of Baggett by O’Donnell and older boys at the ranch continued, he said.
Under questioning by Kosnoff and cross-examination by Morning Star’s attorney, Jim King, Baggett acknowledged that he was a recovering drug addict who hallucinated that he heard voices and spoke with Satan while taking prescribed anti-psychotic medication.
Baggett also admitted to King that during a mental health evaluation in the 1990s he had denied having been molested. Baggett told King that he had lied about not having been abused.
“I’m ashamed of it, absolutely,” said.
Weitensteiner is expected to continue testifying today.
Recent stories by Kevin Graman
Recent stories in News
Sexual predator conviction overturned on appeal May 22, 2012 8- Man arrested for Spokane Valley homicide May 22, 2012
- Tiny Rockford hit with thousands of dollars in vandalism May 22, 2012 4
- Grizzly sow and cub found dead in North Idaho May 22, 2012 13
- Prosecutors intend to try Brian Moore again May 22, 2012 3
PhiltheBibliophil on January 20 at 9:32 p.m.
These men belong in Hell!
Liberty_Bell on January 20 at 10:03 p.m.
Tough for a few Priests, knocking on the wrong front door!
The standards of the law are standards of general application. The law takes no account of the infinite varieties of temperament, intellect, and education which make the internal character of a given act so different in different men. It does not attempt to see men as God sees them, for more than one sufficient reason. In the first place, the impossibility of nicely measuring a man’s powers and limitations is far clearer than that of ascertaining his knowledge of law, which has been thought to account for what is called the presumption that every man knows the law. But a more satisfactory explanation is, that, when men live in society, a certain average of conduct, a sacrifice of individual peculiarities going beyond a certain point, is necessary to the general welfare. If, for instance, a man is born hasty and awkward, is always having accidents and hurting himself or his neighbors, no doubt his congenital defects will be allowed for in the courts of Heaven, but his slips are no less troublesome to his neighbors than if they sprang from guilty neglect. His neighbors accordingly require him, at his proper peril, to come up to their standard, and the courts which they establish decline to take his personal equation into account.
The rule that the law does, in general, determine liability by blameworthiness, is subject to the limitation that minute differences of character are not allowed for. The law considers, in other words, what would be blameworthy in the average man, the man of ordinary intelligence and prudence, and determines liability by that. If we fall below the level in those gifts, it is our misfortune; so much as that we must have at our peril, for the reasons just given. But he who is intelligent and prudent does not act at his peril, in theory of law. On the contrary, it is only when he fails to exercise the foresight of which he is capable, or exercises it with evil intent, that he is answerable for the consequences.
twoandthree on January 21 at 1:18 a.m.
Its too bad that these young boys were so scared of the authoritiy figures above them. If any of them had tried it with me, I would have cut their pee pee off.. and then they would have a fine time explaining how come it was out in the open.
This should make for some great watching, too bad its not being televised for the public good.
Dazzeetrader11 on January 21 at 1:58 a.m.
Let’s not be convicting the ranch and the priests just yet Phil. Many settlements to be had if the Ranch and the priests are convicted. Seems there’s more to story…keep your powder dry…
It surprises me how many people convict on rumors…not facts..
D
Orange on January 21 at 7:42 a.m.
OK, new law. A no-contact order given to all Catholic Priests regarding people under the age of 18. Geezzz, it’ll never stop.
skeugster on January 21 at 7:48 a.m.
More about the trial, the purpose of the testimony of certain witnesses (and the limitations of such testimony) and more about the witnesses and testimony during Day 2 of the trial can be found at http://www.washcourts.com/.
Truthbtold on January 21 at 7:59 a.m.
IS this trail open to the public??