Controversial Attorney Vows to Continue his Fight to Humiliate and Embarrass the Catholic Church
Attorney John Aretakis’ tactics of exploiting sex abuse victims as a means of inflicting damage to the Church has been fined $10,000 by a federal judge for what was deemed a frivolous lawsuit, using the case to advance his own agenda. Aretakis was representing a woman in a pro bono lawsuit against the Church when he was found guilty for misconduct, an act for which he’s been previously sanctioned, for having no basis for any of the causes of action that are alleged in his false complaints. His common practice (eerily similar to those of SNAP) between the filing of a complaint and publicized press conferences support the inference that Mr. Aretakis’s intention is to injure.
The judge said that Aretakis’ complaint was “sloppy and filled with mistakes, for example, it names a dead man as a defendant”.
That intent is confirmed by Mr. Aretakis’s statements in which he describes himself as an activist for clergy sexual abuse victims and is quoted as intending to “continue to humiliate and embarrass the Church” by bringing incidents of sexual abuse to light, even if he cannot bring them in court.
This intent to humiliate and embarrass is further manifested in the amended complaint which is littered with wholly irrelevant, inflammatory, and embarrassing facts concerning defendants and non-defendants alike that have no bearing on the actions brought, such as ‘it was widely known that he [one of the defendants] was an alcoholic.’ Accordingly, the Court finds that sanctions are necessary in this case”. The $8,000 fine represents $2,000 to be paid to each of the four law firms representing the defendants.
Sadly, this circus which surrounds the sex abuse crisis is merely a mirage of justice and has allowed those with the likes of Aretakis to steal from individuals in the Church who are no more culpable of the crimes than the victims themselves as well as providing a public forum on which to inflict unjust harm to the Church. To think that this is an isolated incident among Catholic antagonists is naive and unfortunately will continue to occur until someone in the position of authority stands up to the bullies and says no more.
.jpg)
1. “To think that this is an isolated incident among Catholic antagonists is naive and unfortunately will continue to occur until someone in the position of authority stand up to the bullies and say no more.”
2. One priest is a pedophile. Clear evidence that most are.
The first statement is no more logical than the second.
Comment by Unapologetic Catholic — September 20, 2007 @ 12:19 pm
Unapologetic catholic wrote “The first statement is no more logical than the second.
Through the eyes of the Unapologetic catholic, I’m sure it isn’t. In my world, they’re not even close. Thanks for your comment.
Comment by shelray — September 20, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
Shelray, I think your point to Unapologetic Catholic might be better supported by evidence… as it stands in the post, it seems you are using this one incident to define a group (or majority) as a whole. If this is just a feeling you get from what you have observed, then so be it - that still doesn’t mean that one would be naive to think otherwise.
This is not really meant to be accusatory, but I still don’t think that you adequately demonstrated any evidence that this was not “…an isolated incident among Catholic antagonists.”
Comment by bink — September 20, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
What goes around, comes around. Aretakis–confirms that he wants to humilate and embarass the Catholic Church. When he stands before Jesus how will he justify his behavior of ruining peoples lives and reputations for his evil intentions and a few bucks? But not everyone will go along with these evil folk–thankfully the judge saw his evil intent (naming a dead man as a defendant??) and a small justice will have to be paid.
Comment by tara — September 20, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
“it seems you are using this one incident to define a group (or majority) as a whole”
what group am I defining? I am making a statement that there are others who use the opportunity of sex abuse to attack the church.
Comment by shelray — September 20, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
Well, ok, fair point there. There are others, and I suppose I wasn’t reading too closely to what you said initially. It’s not like there are many though… just a few “high-profile” incidents that really are not going to have an effect on the future of the Church. I just don’t look too much into it all. There has always been at least a low-level of open, hostile, and judgemental opposition to the Church. These sex abuse accusations are just one of the many and they will eventually die out in favor of some other accusations that reflect on general opposition to Church policy on other moral issues. Today it’s sex-related… tomorrow it’s… any guesses?
Comment by bink — September 21, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
Bink,
“I just don’t look too much into it all.”
Sometimes that’s a problem of mine, I have a tendency to perseverete on issues like this.
Comment by shelray — September 21, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
Wouldn’t want to stand in his shoes..i can feel them getting very warm!
Comment by Mrs Jackie Parkes — September 22, 2007 @ 9:46 am
Hey Tara,
The problem is most of the sick-o’s what did this are dead, like the one who they moved around in Syracuse to about 2 dozen parishes. He molested over 50 before he died and went to visit the devil. Its hard not to name a dead defendent when all they did was cover it up and let them keep doing it until they died. What about the victims, just because they are dead means it didn’t happen?
Comment by Matt — November 5, 2007 @ 8:43 pm