Decision in Storheim Trial Goes Badly for Syosset

______________________________

A Manitoba judge ruled Tuesday that two brothers who say that an Orthodox priest sexually abused them would have their testimony considered jointly. The decision by Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Christopher Mainella at the trial of Seraphim Storheim isn’t what the defence had hoped to hear. It means that the court could use each brother’s testimony about separate alleged sexual encounters with Storheim in considering the other’s allegations. Mainella said, “The probative value of the evidence … outweighs its potential prejudice”.

The two complainants were preteens in the summer of 1985 when they were sent, on separate occasions, to live and work as altar boys with Storheim in Winnipeg. A publication ban mandates that the brothers, now in their 30s, must remain anonymous. The men have already told the trial Storheim walked around naked and asked them to touch him sexually. One brother’s memory was vague and sometimes contradictory. He testified he suffers from mental illness and is on several medications. The other brother’s testimony was much clearer. He told the trial that Storheim would sometimes lie on the floor and touch himself. He also testified Storheim once combed through his pelvic area, searching for pubic hairs, as he sat naked on a bed.

Normally, testimony about separate alleged incidents remains separate, so as not to prejudice a judge or jury. However, the judge granted a similar-fact evidence application from the Crown to have each brother’s testimony used in the other’s case. Mainella ruled that the court needs the move because the complaints stem from the same time and bear similar characteristics about Storheim’s alleged actions. The judge alone is trying the case. Earlier, defence lawyer Jeff Gindin hinted that he’d consider moving that the court dismiss one of the charges… the one involving the brother with the vague memory. Tuesday’s ruling makes that unlikely.

The next step is to set dates for the defence to present its case. Outside court, Gindin said it is “quite likely” that he’d call witnesses, but he wouldn’t say whether Storheim would testify. Storheim, now in his 60s, worked as an OCA priest in Alberta, North Carolina, London ON, and other areas. He became the church’s top cleric in Canada in 2007. The OCA has 700 churches and other facilities across North America and is separate from other Orthodox religions such as the Greek Orthodox Church and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

18 June 2013

Steve Lambert

The Canadian Press

As quoted in Brandon Sun

http://www.brandonsun.com/national/breaking-news/testimony-from-two-brothers-will-be-considered-jointly-in-archbishop-sex-trial-212040501.html

Corroborating articles are here and here

Editor’s Note:

One of the Cabinet observed:

The Crown Court made a ruling. It’s getting bad for Storheim; I’ll bet they’re burning files in Syosset.

Quite. This will shred not only the OCA’s cred, but also that of Jillions and Lyonyo. Will Lyonyo throw Jillions under the bus? After all, he has more stones than Mollard does. However, even if Lyonyo deep-sixes Jillions, his failure to contain the fire still stains him. After all, he had the duty to see to it that Mollard did SOMETHING… and Lyonyo sat stunned in the headlights whilst Mollard drooled away merrily (as per usual). Lyonyo has too many enemies… Jillions has too few friends. Someone will pay for this mess… and Lyonyo will do his best to see that it isn’t him.

Perspirin’ minds wanna know… what’ll happen to Pihach? Is he suddenly going to receive a hankering to remain in the Rodina? Will he get the itch to get a canonical release to become a clergyman of the Mother Church? Interesting, no?

Oh… one last thing… there’s NOTHING on oca.org on this matter. What did you expect from Lil’ Mizz Ginny anyway? She’s a PR flack, not a true journalist. That’s clear even to the feebleminded…

BMD

16 June 2013. Sergei Yolkin’s World. The Price of Resistance

The Price of Resistance

Sergei Yolkin

2013

******

St Petersburg has reintroduced the Soviet-era practise of дружинники (druzhinniki). That’s a tough word to “English”. Literally, it’s “companions”… they’re ordinary sorts who patrol the streets to supplement beat cops. I guess that the only way to say it would be “civilian street patrols”, but it loses a great deal of the flavour of the Russian original, which implies that the druzhinniki are a group of mates familiar with one another, who’re patrolling their neighbourhood to ensure its safety.

By the way, these aren’t huge fines… 500 Roubles is 16.75 USD (11.75 Euros. 10 UK Pounds), and 300 Roubles is 9.50 USD (7 Euros. 6 UK Pounds). I can see why Yolkin doubts whether they’ll be effective at all.

BMD

______________________________

The St Petersburg Municipal Duma introduced fines for resisting civilian street patrols. Sergei Yolkin wonders how that’ll scare off those who’d resist them.

6 June 2013

Sergei Yolkin

RIA-Novosti

http://ria.ru/caricature/20130606/941794180.html

Testimony in Storheim Case Questioned

______________________________

The defence lawyer for an Orthodox archbishop accused of sexually assaulting two young brothers 28 years ago said that court shouldn’t allow the separate testimony of the alleged victims to support each other’s allegations. Lawyer Jeff Gindin said the testimony offered by the two brothers is prejudicial to Seraphim Storheim and the court can only admit it in exceptional circumstances, adding this case isn’t exceptional. Storheim faces charges of two counts of sexual assault against two 11-year-old boys at his home in Winnipeg during the summer of 1985. He pleaded not guilty to the charges. Storheim was the parish priest at Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral on Manitoba Avenue at the time. Storheim had befriended the boys’ family while he served at another parish in another community and the boys visited him separately that summer. Today, Storheim is an OCA archbishop, which has historical ties to the Russian Orthodox Church. He was the most senior cleric of his church in Canada when the charges were laid in the fall of 2011, holding the title of Archbishop of Ottawa and all Canada, but was subsequently suspended from that post pending the outcome of the criminal charges and an internal church investigation.

In legal terms, the testimony of the two brothers is called similar-fact evidence… similar testimony about two separate incidents… and isn’t normally admissible in court. This kind of evidence isn’t allowed because rather than judging the accused based on the evidence, it essentially states an accused did this type of behaviour on another occasion, so he more than likely repeated that type of behaviour being considered. Gindin said, “It’s not enough to say it sounds similar, so, we should allow it”, adding combining the testimony of the two brothers does more harm to Storheim than it would help prove the case against him. Crown Attorney Breta Passler made an application that court admit the testimony of the two brothers and consider it in support of their allegations. The brothers, who are now 39, testified this week, but Justice Chris Mainella must determine whether the court can use their testimony in support of both charges. He’ll announce his decision early next week.

Passler said there are strong similarities between the alleged incidents described by each brother… they both came to Winnipeg at Storheim’s invitation and at his own expense, though at separate times. Each brother said Storheim routinely walked around the house naked and invited each boy to touch his genitals. Passler said there was no indication the two brothers had colluded to make up the allegations or one brother had influenced the other. Gindin argued the testimony of the two brothers was extremely different… the first brother to testify was confused about much of the events, his recollection was poor, and he admitted he suffered a range of mental illnesses. Gindin said it was difficult to understand what he was saying, let alone believe he had been the victim of a sexual assault. Gindin said while the second brother was clear and more detailed about his encounter with Storheim, he said that doesn’t mean his testimony should be used to bolster the testimony of the other brother. Gindin said while the two brothers testified they didn’t speak to each other about the alleged assaults after they happened, its unlikely two young brothers who grew up together and even lived together for a number of years as adults wouldn’t have shared details about the incidents with each other before reporting them to police.

15 June 2013

Aldo Santin

Winnipeg Free Press

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/testimony-in-archbishop-case-questioned-211664671.html

Editor’s Note:

Gindin is using a most stupid move in trying to get Storheim off the hook. He’s invoking a legal technicality… that is, Storheim did do questionable things around minors, but you have to let him go because of a technicality. That’s the worst-possible outcome for the OCA. The best-possible outcome would be Storheim copping a plea before any trial. That didn’t happen, so, the next-best-possible outcome would be a “confidential settlement”, but the plaintiffs ruled that out. Actually, the next-best outcome would be the court finding Storheim guilty. The Holy Synod would then defrock him… there’d be damage, not slight, but it’d close the matter for good. The shit would take a long time to sink to the bottom, but it would, and the Holy Synod (and MC) might actually learn a lesson and do some real housecleaning to avoid a similar tits-up in future. The worst-possible outcome is Storheim getting sprung on a technicality. There’d be no closure… none at all. The controversy would continue to simmer away, and Mollard’s passivity wouldn’t improve matters.

In short, this is still a gigantic shit sandwich. The Holy Synod (and MC) have been avoiding it for years… all that’s happened is that it’s gotten juicier and more noxious. If the Holy Synod doesn’t defrock Storheim, it’ll shred the last threads of the OCA’s cred. Will they? We SHALL see…

BMD  

 

15 June 2013. What the Storheim Trial is Doing to Us…

______________________________

One of the Cabinet said:

That Storheim trial is just sickening… creepy… I wonder who knew what and when? Why can’t JP just go away? Far, far, away…

That’s why the GOAA was wise in making the perv priest in the Midwest cop a plea. It’s over… it’s done… it’s doing no more damage to the credibility of the GOAA. What the OCA needed was for Storheim to cop a plea at the outset. A Canadian friend told me that SOP in such cases is that there’s no prison time… but there’s a guilty plea on record to a lesser offence, making it impossible for a former employer to use them in a position of public trust. Actually, it’s the best for all concerned. There’s no long public legal wrangle… besides being inordinately expensive, such affairs always lead to all sorts of sordid detail leaking out. The OCA’s cred is tarnished… no matter what outcome there is of the actual trial.

Here’s the problem. So far, Syosset has dodged all bullets, either through “confidential settlements” (“We admit no wrongdoing”) or through circumstantial luck (convincing a judge that priests aren’t agents of the OCA (even though all parishes must collect and forward funds to the Syosset mafia and its apparat) or a plaintiff dropping dead). To put it bluntly, the OCA’s cred was marginal to begin with… the details emerging of Storheim’s proclivities are now moving faster than the speed of light. Even if the OCA wins on a technicality (its only slim hope), the testimony is “out there”, and there’s no confidential settlement to cover them.

Tikhon Mollard had the responsibility to force Storheim to walk the plank for the good of the Church. Had he done so, there would’ve been a hell-of-a-smell for a little while; some would’ve vilified Mollard as a bully, some would’ve accused him of blackening Storheim’s name. Nevertheless, none of the testimony that came forth in the trial would’ve seen the light of day. That particular Pandora’s Box would’ve been shut. Tikhon Mollard has inherited the worst of all possible worlds by allowing Storheim’s trial to go public. Firstly, much money has been wasted on lawyers. The OCA is flat-busted to begin with, and Storheim’s legal bills don’t help that situation. Secondly, even if Storheim “wins”, Mollard “loses”, for it appears that Mollard didn’t have the grit to force an inconvenient subordinate to “man up”. Thirdly, the fact that two OCA priests were willing to testify in open court against Storheim shows that the rank n’ file clergy are, at least, not willing followers of Syosset (and Mollard hasn’t reined in Lyonyo, Tosi, Jillions, or Hatfield). In short, Mollard’s facing a gigantic shit sandwich, and he’s gonna have to eat it all in the presence of all comers.

One of the priests that I talked to at St T’s was very clear. He felt that Mollard was going to mess up badly in re Storheim… but that was the best outcome that was on offer. No one expects Mollard to do anything inspiring or visionary. However, he’s not a Peterson, who has a “past”, nor is he a Dahulich, who’s probably the most quasi-papist of all the bishops (he did get his PhD from a papist school, after all). As several clergy have made it very clear to me, since Mel Pleska’s too ill for the white hat, it was Mollard, or it was the two previously-named gents. No one has high expectations of him… which is good, since all that Mollard has to do is not fuck up too egregiously.

However, he had a chance to have kept the genie in the bottle, and he didn’t. Yet, one clerical source told me that Mollard’s passivity was one of the things that convinced many to vote for him. “You see, he won’t go off on wild goose chases or crusades”. There’ll be all too much damage from the present legal imbroglio in Canada, but, at least, Mollard won’t follow it with a moralistic crusade or chase political chimeras. He’ll smile at the babas and spout inoffensive pap at the proper time… and that’s all that’s available. All other options are WORSE… do reflect on that…

God do help us…

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Saturday 15 June 2013

Albany NY    

Priest Walked Around House Naked, Trial Hears

______________________________

A man who alleges he was sexually abused by an Orthodox priest almost 30 years ago said the man would regularly walk around his house naked and usually spent breakfast time lying on the floor holding his genitals. The man, who can’t be named because of a publication ban, told the trial of Seraphim Storheim he was shocked to see the priest naked. The man, who was 11-years-old at the time, testified today, “Seeing a naked man (for the first time) was quite disturbing”. Storheim is charged with two counts of sexual assault involving two brothers during the summer of 1985. He pleaded not guilty to the charges when the trial began Monday morning. Today, Storheim is an OCA archbishop, which has historical ties to the Russian Orthodox Church. He was the most senior cleric of his church in Canada when the charges were laid in the fall of 2011, holding the title of Archbishop of Ottawa and all Canada, but was subsequently suspended from that post pending the outcome of the criminal charges and an internal church investigation.

The man said he and his brother… who testified Monday… separately visited with Storheim in the summer of 1985 and stayed at his home. The man said he was surprised when Storheim came into his bedroom at night and wanted to inspect his pyjamas for semen stains and also examined his genital area for pubic hair. The man said Storheim told him he was conducting sexual-education sessions for the young boy, who was being raised by a single mother. The man said, “At this point, I didn’t know what was wrong or what was right”. The man said that he never told his mother about the incidents and tried to block them out of his mind. However, he said that he confided to his mother what happened when his brother hysterically called home on a daily basis during his visit to Storheim, suspecting his brother was being subjected to the same sexual abuse. The man said that he never again talked about the incident and never discussed it with anyone until almost 20 years later. The sight of another priest in 2004 who bore a striking resemblance to Storheim prompted him to see a counsellor and to write about what happened to him. He said that another OCA priest contacted him in 2009 to apologise for not taking his concerns seriously when he was a child. The man credited that priest with encouraging him to contact police. The man said, “If it wasn’t for (the second priest), we wouldn’t be here today”. When questioned by defence counsel Jeff Gindin, the man conceded his recollection of many of the events from 28 years ago is hazy, but he insisted he was clear on what Storheim did to him in 1985. The second priest is expected to testify Wednesday morning.

11 June 2013

Aldo Santin

Winnipeg Free Press

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/Priest-walked-around-house-naked-trial-hears-211122601.html

 

Storheim Kiddie Abuse Trial: Priest Tells Court He Kept Silent about Accusations against Storheim

The Last Judgement

Unknown Artist

Church of the Mother of God ‘of Kazan’

2001

Tolyatti (Samara Oblast. Volga Federal District) RF

______________________________

A priest of the Orthodox Church in America told a Winnipeg court this morning that he kept quiet about allegations that another priest abused two young boys for more than 20 years. Fr Steven Kostoff said that the mother of the alleged victims of sexual assault by Seraphim Storheim told him in 1987 that Storheim had wronged her boys two years earlier, but he did nothing about her concerns. He noted, “I was quite stunned, quite dumbfounded” by the allegations, but added that he decided to stay quiet about the matter. Storheim faces two counts of sexual assault involving two 11-year-old brothers in his home in Winnipeg during the summer of 1985. He pleaded not guilty to the charges when the trial began Monday. Storheim was the parish priest at Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral on Manitoba Avenue at the time. Storheim befriended the boys’ family whilst he served at another parish in another community and the boys visited him separately that summer. Today, Storheim is an OCA archbishop, which has historical ties to the Russian Orthodox Church. He was the most senior cleric of his church in Canada when the charges were laid in the fall of 2011, holding the title of Archbishop of Ottawa and Canada, but was subsequently suspended from that post pending the outcome of the criminal charges and an internal church investigation.

Kostoff said the boys’ mother showed her a handwritten letter allegedly written by Storheim, who didn’t admit to any sexual impropriety with her sons. Kostoff said that he read the letter, adding it had an apologetic defensive tone. At the conclusion of the letter, Kostoff said that Storheim wrote that he overstepped some boundaries with the boys by teaching them about adult things. Kostoff said that when the boys’ mother contacted him in 1987, sexual abuse was still a taboo subject and his church didn’t have a policy on it, saying, “I didn’t know quite what to do”, adding that he decided to keep quiet, “much to my deep regret”. Kostoff said that he began to feel guilty about his silence as news reports surfaced in the late 1990s about sexual abuse by priests. In October 2008, Kostoff said that he felt compelled to reach out to that family to apologise for his inactions, telling us, “Over the years, I felt very conflicted about (my silence). I realised I owed this family. I had to call the family. I had to apologise to them”. Kostoff said he reached out to the mother’s sons, now grown men, in 2008 and 2009, calling them by phone several times to talk about the incident with Storheim.

Crown Counsel Breta Passler wrapped up her case this morning. Before the trial proceeds further, Justice Chris Mainella must decide whether the court can use the evidence given by each brother during the trial this week in support of both charges against Storheim. There’s also a possibility that defence counsel Jeff Gindin will make a motion that the court should hear the two charges in separate trials. The trial resumes Friday morning.

12 June 2013

Aldo Santin

Winnipeg Free Press

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Priest-kept-silent-about-accusations-against-Storheim-court-hears-211245681.html

Editor’s Note:

This is why the OCA had to have pressured Storheim to cop a plea. No good is going to come of this trial… it smells like a cheesy replay of the Rembert Weakland saga in Milwaukee. Tikhon Mollard had an obligation to have held the lumber over Storheim for the good of the Church. He didn’t… and the Church will pay a very dear price because of his inaction. The OCA is very weak after the tumultuous and juvenile misrule of James Paffhausen. This case has the possibility of weakening its already-shaky cred;  it can shred it into nothingness.

This isn’t pleasant… this isn’t “nice”. However, it’s reality, and if we don’t deal with it on the up-and-square, it’ll deal with us in short order. Yet… it could’ve been WORSE (could you imagine it being mishandled by Peterson or Dahulich? That chills the blood). What will happen, will happen… Mollard’s supine inactivity is an effectual confession of Kismet. God do help us…

BMD