Where is the due process? Bishop Edgar da Cunha of the Diocese of Fall River (Massachusetts) and Fr. Thomas Kocik
Imagine dedicating your life to the priesthood. Six years alone of seminary training. The formation. The sacrifice. The study. The love. But then comes a tap on the shoulder one day in the form of a phone call from your bishop's office. Your livelihood is shattered.
Welcome to the story of Fr. Thomas Kocik, a priest of the Diocese of Fall River (Massachusetts), ordained in 1997.
The diocese – headed by Bishop Edgar da Cunha – just placed Kocik on its list of "credibly accused" priests, jeopardizing Fr. Kocik's entire priesthood. But the diocese's announcement of the news gives almost no indication why he was placed on the list. Law enforcement has never charged Fr. Kocik with any sort of crime, nor is Kocik the subject of any civil lawsuit. No accuser has come forward publicly, either anonymously or named.
TheMediaReport.com has learned that the allegation against Kocik does not even involve sexual contact of any kind, attempted sexual contact, or even indecent exposure. Rather, the accusation involves exposing pornography to a minor or minors a quarter century ago in the late 1990s. But what exactly does that mean? Whom did he expose to pornography, when exactly did he do so, and what were the precise circumstances? Without these details, it is impossible to defend against a gauzy but nevertheless career-ending accusation such as the one the diocese made against him. The whole process Fr. Kocik was put through is not befitting a Church long devoted to truth and rational inquiry but is instead a Kafkaesque procedure which wholly ignores the rights of the accused priest.
M.I.A.: Due process
There has not been any canonical trial of any kind, nor has Fr. Kocik or his canon lawyer been shown any report of an investigation by anyone. In other words, the diocese has removed Fr. Kocik from public ministry and placed on a public "credibly accused" list without any due process whatsoever. And, needless to say, Fr. Kocik was deprived his right to confront his accuser, assuming that the accuser is indeed not anonymous.
The diocese has also stated that the "determination of credibility does not mean that Father Kocik has been found guilty in a court of law [but only that] it is a reflection that the allegation itself is credible or believable." Again: What does that mean exactly? So the diocese has stolen Fr. Kocik's entire livelihood from him based on a 25-year-old accusation that has been determined to be merely "believable"? In what other world would such an egregiously unfair and one-sided system of justice be permitted to rob the accused of all of their rights to due process and justice?
In addition, the bishop sent an email to fellow priests about Fr. Kocik and oddly said he was "saddened by the outcome of the case," as if Fr. Kocik has been tried and found guilty, when in fact that is not the case at all.
A need for change
In the story of Fr. Kocik, one cannot blame a publicity-seeking district attorney bringing criminal charges against a deceased priest from 60 years ago in order to get a career promotion. And nor can you blame a money-hungry contingency lawyer or left-wing hate group like SNAP looking to score big money on a spurious civil claim brought by a mentally challenged client.
Rather, the problem here is the Church's own broken system of justice in which the rights of the accused are wholly ignored and their careers stolen from them based on nothing other than an accusation being merely "believable," no matter how long ago. This entire notion of canonical "justice" has to change and change soon if the Church is going to be fair, as it must, to the many good men that have given themselves to her and to Christ.
————————————
Want to learn about the rampancy of false accusations against priests?:
- "The Great Shakedown Keeps A-Rollin': Phony Claims Continue at Epic Pace, Here Are The Facts" (January 2024)
- The Greatest Fraud Never Told: False Accusations, Phony Grand Jury Reports, and the Assault on the Catholic Church (Amazon.com)
Furthermore, have YOU contacted the Fall River Diocese, Bishop DaCunha, or the review board that decided to remove Fr. Kocik from ministry? Again, I'd like to hear BOTH sides of a story. It is irresponsible to make the statements you've made without documentation.
I'd like to know why you identify SNAP as a "left-wing hate group". You speak boldly about the rights of people to defend themselves. Fair enough. But where is your proof or validation to make such spurious accusations? I hope we are all Christian people. Can we not make a case without calling names, throwing stones, and making accusations without adequate evidence or justification.
“I’d like to know why you identify SNAP as a ‘left-wing hate group’.”
Sure thing:
- https://www.themediareport.com/2013/07/26/eleanor-smeal-snap-conference-2013/
- https://www.themediareport.com/2016/08/25/rev-joseph-jiang-victory-over-snap/
- https://www.themediareport.com/2017/01/25/david-clohessy-snap-resignation/
- https://www.themediareport.com/2013/12/09/david-clohessy-snap-barbara-dorris-priests-email-phone/
- Full listing: https://www.themediareport.com/hot-topics/snap-survivors-network-of-those-abused-by-priests/
Unfortunately, these Bishops screw up and say too much too soon and they won't ever find the humility to say they were wrong.
we are dealing with the same nonsense and it is beyond me how they can have so much power. No love for their sons in Christ. It's sickening.
Such a scenario is what destroys the morale of sincere priests and hinders those who are discerning a vocation to the priesthood.
Seems Father likes the Latin Mass. What a surprise. Father, go SSPX.
"If all he did was show a 13 year old boy a Playboy Magazine, we can let it go….."
SMH The RCC still doesn't get it.
Ummm. No one is saying that. And that’s not what is alleged.
But thanks for playing.