‘Announcements’ Section

For Immediate Release
June 12, 2009

For More Information:
Kristian Roggendorf, attorney for the plaintiff
(503) 274-1168 or ksr@oandc.com

Gregory Tressel v. David Reeves, David Frasher, and City of Grants Pass

PORTLAND, ORE–Former Grants Pass Budget Committee member Greg Tressel filed suit in federal court today, alleging that the Grants Pass City Manager and Chief Financial officer illegally conspired to intimidate Tressel into leaving his appointed position through an intrusive and unlawful investigation into his private life.

Tressel is suing under federal civil rights law, Oregon’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization law (ORICO), and state tort law for the City’s investigation into his private life that included a visit to his house from Grants Pass CFO David Reeves demanding that he be allowed to look through Tressel’s personal effects.Kristian Roggendorf, Tressel’s attorney, said of the filing, “The attempts at bullying and intimidation by City Manager David Frasher’s administration will no longer be tolerated in Grants Pass.”

The complaint alleges that after Tressel was appointed to the City’s Budget Committee following the election of a new majority on the City Council, the City’s Chief Financial Officer David Reeves conducted an investigation into Tressel’s residency without any authority to do so under Oregon law or the Grant’s Pass Charter or Code.Not only did Reeves do things like look at Mr. Tressel’s personal checks, he also demanded that Tressel’s wife allow him to search Tressel’s residence after Tressel left for work one morning.Roggendorf noted that before the attempted search, “David Reeves already had all the information he needed to show that Mr. Tressel was qualified to sit on the budget committee.This was political intimidation, pure and simple.”Tressel intends to donate any proceeds form the suit to local charities.

###

View the Official Complaint.

www.OregonLive.com

by Paul Mones, guest opinion
Tuesday June 02, 2009, 8:30 AM

Our state legislators are in the midst of dealing with one of the worst fiscal crises in recent memory. No doubt they will have to make many tough, unpopular decisions this year. However there is one legislative decision they need not fret over because it is a no-brainer. House Bill 2827 is a simple piece of legislation that gives an extra measure of justice to victims of child abuse.

In the words of one of the bill’s co-sponsors Chris Garrett (D-Lake Oswego ) – the other sponsor is Rep. Andy Olson (R-Albany) – this bill "will ensure an effective civil remedy for victims of child abuse."

The bill extends the present statute of limitations by giving victims until the age of 40 to file an action against their abuser, requiring that claims be initiated by the time the victim turns 40 years old or within five years of when the injury or the connection between the abuse and the injury is discovered. The bill has unanimously passed the house but curiously has not received the same overwhelmingly positive reception in the Senate.

The extension of the statute of limitations makes common sense because it recognizes that most child victims of sexual abuse cannot confront their debilitating problems until they are mature adults. Moreover, most victims can’t even make the connection between the abuse and their psychological problems until they have some real distance from the time period of their abuse.

Child abuse is the perfect crime because its victims are too powerless, too confused to help themselves when they are actually being abused. These children travel quietly through their days interacting with teachers and passing police officers, friends and neighbors, never revealing the anguish of their existences. And if by chance someone asks them how they are being treated at home their responses will be uniformly the same: OK.

As adults we expect all human beings to escape or at least want to escape when someone injures them, but for victims of abuse, the reverse occurs. And that is in fact perhaps one of the most insidious aspects of child abuse: It binds the child closer to the abuser. The abuser’s threats and intimidation engender in the child not only fear but self-blame and embarrassment – all of which turns a child’s survival mechanisms topsy-turvy. Emotional attachment and sexual violence become so inextricably confused that even when the abuse is reported, the child will often kick and scream as they are being removed from their draconian environment by a social worker.

The other aspect that makes child abuse a perfect crime is that most adults continue to believe that child-rearing is a private matter. They don’t want a relative, friend or neighbor telling them how to raise their child so they won’t intervene in someone else’s family. While we all cherish our right to privacy, our devotion to this cornerstone of democracy is strangling the lives of thousands of children every year. Abusive parents and caretakers thrive on isolation and that is exactly what their relatives, friends and neighbors give them.

Daily, people turn a blind eye to the screams, bruises and frightened eyes of battered and molested children. Their reaction actively reinforces the offender’s omnipotence and tells the child you’re on your own, no one is going to help you. By powerful social training we are more likely to intervene on behalf of a dog being kicked by its owner than a child being mistreated by a parent. As Americans we routinely gawk at the suffering of car accident victims but we avert our eyes and ears when we see a child being backhanded in a supermarket.

It is often only when a child becomes a mature adult that he or she has the strength and emotional resources to confront the scourge of their past.

We have done much in Oregon over the past few years to protect victims of abuse, the most recent example being the passage of HB 2062, which will prevent schools from silently moving sexually abusive teachers one district to another. If the Senate saw fit just several weeks ago to join the House in ending the scandalous practice of allowing sexually abusive teachers from negotiating sweetheart deals with their school districts, then it surely should see the wisdom in HB 2062.

Paul Mones is an attorney and a children’s rights advocate.

While church and state are separate in the United States, Oregon’s government may be more interested in the welfare of churches than victims.

By Tim King
Salem-News.com
May 28, 2009

(SALEM, Ore.) – Oregon sex abuse survivors joined Portland Attorney Kelly Clark at the capitol in Salem today, to attend a hearing for a bill that would extend the window of time sex abuse survivors have to take action against the person or people who abused them.

Clark is known for taking sex abuse suspects to task and rallying endlessly for victims.

At this time, the cut off age for sex abuse victims to come forward, is 24.

Many of the cases originate from churches in Oregon and experts say it often takes several decades for a person to comprehend the magnitude of their experience and come forward.

The Portland Archdiocese of the Catholic Church in Oregon, much like in other locations including Boston, have worked hard to avoid responsibility and liability for pedophiles who currently or formerly exist as elevated members of the various churches.

Victims and their advocates, including the group SNAP, (Survivors Network of people Abused by Priests) along with Private Investigator Dawn Krantz-Watts of All Things Legal Investigations in Portland, say they are unhappy with the way the bill is progressing and they believe it may fail due to the relationships that exist between the Oregon Senate and various church groups.

In denying, delaying or killing this legislation, Oregon becomes extremely hypocritical as a government that strongly condemns the sexual abuse and exploitation of children, while struggling with basic common sense answers for the people lucky enough to survive the abuse in the first place.

I interviewed Clark and Krantz-Watts and three people who are survivors today after the first round of hearings at the capitol.

Watch the video news report:

CHILD SEX ABUSE VICTIMS GROUP SPEAKS OUT FOR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS BILL

For Immediate Release
May 27, 2009

For More Information
Matt Nees: (503) 780 – 1965
mattn@wintreswishes.org

Beaverton, Ore—Wintre’s Wishes Foundation, an Oregon non-profit dedicated to support of child abuse survivors, today announced its support for House Bill 2827, a measure which would extend the civil statute of limitations for child abuse survivors to sue their abusers.

The bill passed the House of Representatives 60-0 in April, but has bogged down in the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Floyd Prozanski (D – Eugene). 

The bill is set for a public hearing and vote on Thursday, May 28^th at 8:00am in Senate Hearing Room 343.

Said Matthew Nees, the father of a seven-year-old sexual abuse victim, and the founder of Wintre’s Wishes Foundation, “We believe this is a common sense bill that will both help survivors of child abuse and will help prevent future child abuse.  We thank Representative Andy Olson for his sponsorship of this bill, and we call on members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, led by Senator Prozanski, to pass this bill.”

Under current Oregon law, victims of child abuse have until age 24 to file a civil law suit, or, until three years from the date they understand that their abuse has caused them injury.  House Bill 2827 extends those periods of time to age 40 with a five year discovery window after that.  “We know that most child abuse survivors never mention their abuse until much later in life, well into their 30′s, 40′s, or 50′s,” said Nees, “and this bill merely recognizes that reality.”

The measure has reportedly bogged down in the Senate because of political pressure from religious groups, including the Catholic Church and Mormon Church, on Senate President Peter Courtney or Chairman Prozanski.  “We call on all senators, especially Senators Courtney and Prozanski, to side with children who have been sexually abused, and not with powerful institutions that would cover up abuse,” said Nees.

###

Contact these Legislators and ask them to support passing this bill:

Chairman Floyd Prozanski (D – Eugene)
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1704
Email:sen.floydprozanski@state.or.us

Senate Pres. Peter Courtney (D – Salem)
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1600
Email: sen.petercourtney@state.or.us

 Additional Sex Abuse Documents on Catholic Priests Made Available on Abuse Website

For More Information:
Kelly Clark, Esq.
503-306-0224
kellyc@oandc.com

Portland, Ore—Fr William McLeod, one of the most prolific abusers of children in the history of the Archdiocese of Portland, is the subject today of the latest post on the public service website www.archpdxpriestfiles.com, a site maintained by lawyers representing abuse victims.

The documents from the Archdiocese of Portland files, plus additional material gathered in litigation, were posted today, according to Kelly Clark, one of the lawyers responsible for the site. "Though he received far less attention than some of the other priests such as Fr Thomas Laughlin, Fr Maurice Grammond or Fr Aldo Orso Manzonetta, Fr William McLeod had nearly a dozen victims just that we know about, and he was responsible for incalculable damage to Catholic children," said Clark.

The website was initiated after the Archdiocese of Portland was ordered by an arbitrator, US District Judge Michael Hogan, to release files on abusive priests as part of the conclusion of the Archdiocese of Portland bankruptcy. The website so far has posted documents on three priests, namely Fr Rocco Perone, Fr Aldo Orso Manzonetta and Fr William McLeod.

More files on these and other priests will be posted in the future, according to Clark

###

KTVZ.com
Associated Press
April 10, 2009

Reference:
Multnomah County Circuit Court Case No: 0904-04942

For More Information:
Kelly Clark
O: (503) 306-0224
C:(503) 407-7381
Kellyc@oandc.com

 April 9, 2009

Portland, ORE—A new childhood sexual abuse lawsuit was filed today in Multnomah County Circuit Court against the Western Oregon Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists and the East Salem Seventh Day Adventist Church.  The suit alleges that a then-teenage boy, referred to in the lawsuit only as “S.H.,” acting under the direction and authority of the church, sexually abused two children, siblings, in connection with his role as a childcare provider.  The suit alleges that the church knew or should have known that the young man was dangerous to children, as a result of a prior incident several years earlier in Washington State.  The suit alleges both negligence against the East Salem Church and vicarious liability against the Conference.  The man was later, in 1995, multiply convicted of child abuse in his role as an employee at the Oregon School for the Blind.

This is at least the second lawsuit filed against the Adventist Church for the Conduct of S.H., according to Kelly Clark, an attorney with the Portland firm of O’Donnell Clark & Crew LLP who frequently handles childhood sexual abuse claims, and is the attorney for the Plaintiffs in this case.  Clark previously filed a case in August, 2007, against the East Salem Church and the Adventist Conference on behalf of a 23 year-old woman who was abused by this same perpetrator.  That case was settled in late 2008, just days before trial.

The plaintiffs in this case are two siblings, now 18 and 20 years of age, who were, at the time of this abuse, very young.  According to Clark, the little boy was just a year or two, and the girl was about five.  “We would not even know about the abuse of the little boy,” said Clark, “unless it were for the confession that the perpetrator made at the time of his conviction.  Going back and piecing it together, witnesses now recall the young boy screaming and yelling whenever he was alone with the perpetrator, who had a propensity for physical cruelty at the same time as he was engaged in sexual abuse,” said Clark. The lawsuit seeks in excess of $3 million on behalf of each plaintiff, and the defendants in the case include the Western Oregon Conference Association of Seventh-Day Adventists, and the East Salem Seventh-Day Adventist Church, an Oregon corporation. 

The suit contends that both plaintiffs have experienced permanent psychological damage as the result of the abuse. Clark contends that the teen’s background either was, or could have easily been, fully discovered by a reasonable investigation by Church authorities.  The suit contends that the perpetrator had a history of sexual misconduct involving children in Washington State, and was under restrictions, either legal or family, to have no contact with children. Clark has filed two other cases against the Oregon Adventists in the last six months as well, both arising out of Roseburg, one from the Milo Academy, and one involving the Roseburg Junior Academy.  Those cases are still pending. 

###

 View the Official Complaint.

March 27th, 2009

In Native America Discovered and Conquered, law professor Robert J. Miller examines how the international law concept now referred to as the “Doctrine of Discovery” applied to America’s westward expansion. Miller explains how the principles of the doctrine – developed by Spanish and Portuguese explorers in the 1400s and formally adopted in America in the 1823 Supreme Court case of Johnson v. M’Intosh – influenced Thomas Jefferson’s expansionist plans, delineated Lewis and Clark’s duties, and grew into the policy of Manifest Destiny.

This book offers a fresh look at these common chapters in American history by viewing them through the lens of the Doctrine of Discovery, which Miller describes “in a nutshell” as the idea that when a European, Christian nation “discovered” new lands, the European – later American – nation automatically acquired sovereign and property rights in the new land, subject only to the native peoples’ right to occupy and use the land. When the natives stopped using or wanted to sell the land, they had to sell it to the European or American “conquering” nation and to no other.

Miller sticks to his theme well, tying many loose threads of history into his theory. He clearly outlines ten elements of the Doctrine of Discovery: first discovery; actual occupancy; the right of preemption (the exclusive right to buy the land from the natives); Indian title (their right to occupy and use the land); limited tribal sovereign and commercial rights; contiguity; terra nullis; Christianity; civilization; and conquest (virtual, even if not military). He then refers to these elements as he explains that the Doctrine of Discovery was understood in American politics even before the Supreme Court put a name to it in 1823, and that the Doctrine evolved into the popular concept of Manifest Destiny.

The goal of the book is to “shed new light on the conduct of Thomas Jefferson and Lewis and Clark and on many other events in American history and law” in order to “perceive more clearly how tribal governments and individual Indians lost many of their property and human rights, and their sovereign, self-governing powers.” As Miller argues, American Indians lost these rights and powers without their knowledge or consent, by confiscation based only on the “ethnocentric assumption of the ‘superior genius’ of Europeans.”

Miller poses this as his “ultimate question”:

[W]hether this relic of colonialism and feudalism, and racial, religious, and cultural domination should be relegated to the dustbin of history. Must Americans and American Indians tolerate the Doctrine of Discovery in our present and our future; is it unchangeable, immutable? Is there anything that can be done to erase a “legal doctrine” that has been enshrined in American culture and law for four hundred years?

In answering his own question, Miller takes the “middle ground” between doing nothing and abolishing the Doctrine altogether and letting the chips fall where they may. His proposal is modest indeed, suggesting only that “Congress could consider after lengthy deliberation and with ample tribal input and direction viable ways to make concrete changes in federal Indian law that could begin to rectify some of the damage Discovery has inflicted on tribal and Indian rights.” Clearly, what to do with the deeper understanding gained from Miller’s examination of the Doctrine of Discovery is beyond the scope of his book.

But the fact that Miller does not solve the problems he describes does not limit the value of this book. Native America Discovered and Conquered provides a necessary foundation for understanding the laws and actions that created the modern legal system controlling American Indians today.

Read more of Gilion’s reviews at the Rose City Reader.

Dear Friends and Colleagues, 

It is with great enthusiasm and pride that we announce that we have formed an affiliation with one of the finest personal injury lawyers in Portland, Randall J. Wolfe.  Now, thanks to that association, we are able to offer our clients, as well as your friends, families, and business associates, the same top-notch legal service in the area of personal injury as we do in the other areas we handle. Read more about Randy and his practice here.

We’ve known Randy for nearly 10 years and have co-counseled with him on numerous occasions.  Randy is an outstanding trial lawyer, and, equally as important in the personal injury field, he knows the world of insurance law, insurance adjustors, and insurance bureaucracies as well as anyone.  He knows how and when to push the right buttons, and how and when simply to ask for a jury trial.  Randy is a man of extraordinary integrity and energy and is highly compassionate and supportive in his work with his clients as well.

As you know, we at O’Donnell Clark & Crew take great pride in the quality of our legal work and in the quality of our relationships with our clients.  We would not affiliate with another lawyer unless he shared those same principals.  We are pleased to be able to join hands with Randy to make sure we can provide an even broader range of legal services for you and those you care about.  Please keep us in mind, and please keep Randy in mind, next time someone asks you for the name of a good injury lawyer.

As always, we appreciate your business, your friendship, and, especially in these uncertain economic times, your referrals.

Thank you,
O’Donnell Clark & Crew LLP