Professional Documents
Culture Documents
alleged she eventually complained to her mother, who went with her to St. John School and
confronted the same school principal about the abuse. The womans mother testified the
principal responded by telling her that Siddons was just being friendly.
Another former St. John student testified that an unwritten rule at the school was that
students were not allowed to go into Siddons office alone, and another student claimed that
Siddons had pornography in his school desk.
In her lawsuit, A.W. alleged the Archdiocese was liable for the rape she suffered because it
failed to take reasonable steps to protect her from Siddons, despite knowing that he posed a
danger to her and other children. When the Archdiocese tried to have her case dismissed,
A.W. described the testimony of the schools former vice principal and teachers, and
pointed-out the same witnesses testified the Archdiocese had no policies or procedures for
protecting children from sexual abuse. A.W. asserted the Archdioceses effort to dismiss
her case was particularly appalling given the fact that its teachers and administrators have
been mandatory reporters of child abuse since the early 1970s, yet the Archdiocese
produced no evidence that they received any training on their responsibilities as mandatory
reporters. The trial court denied the motion to dismiss.
Although A.W. reached a settlement with the Archdiocese weeks ago, she decided to speakup about her case after she read a message sent to St. John Parish and School by the
Archdiocese that she felt was misleading.
In the message, parishioners and school families were told about the settlement and were
told that Siddons was immediately terminated after A.W. reported the incident. The
message further stated that [t]here is nothing in personnel records that indicates
information was available at the time of his hiring suggesting that he was a potential thread
to children. But the message failed to disclose the testimony of the vice principal and
others that suggests the school knew for years that Siddons posed a danger to children.
A.W. believes the message directly contradicts the Archdioceses claim that it wants to be
transparent: The Archdiocese has claimed it wants to be transparent about why so many
Catholic children were abused in its schools and parishes, but then a message is sent out
that makes it sound like my claim had no merit. How can you claim to be transparent if
you keep hiding the truth about what happened? And more importantly, how can we make
sure future children are protected if people are misled and lulled into thinking the Church
didnt know anything.
A.W. was represented by Michael T. Pfau and Jason P. Amala of the Seattle law firm of
Pfau Cochran Vertetis Amala PLLC, who have settled claims on behalf of dozens of people
who alleged they were abused as children within the Seattle Archdiocese. Like A.W.,
Amala takes issue with the message sent to parishioners and school families: The Seattle
Archdiocese should have acknowledged mistakes were made and used this settlement as an
opportunity to explain why it is so important that people report suspected abuse. By failing
to acknowledge complaints were made and warning signs were ignored, the Archdiocese is
perpetuating a false sense of safety and undermining the policies and procedures that are
now in place to prevent abuse.
Pfau, who started representing abuse survivors in Seattle shortly after the Catholic abuse
scandal broke in Boston, hopes news of the settlement will help A.W. and other abuse
survivors: A.W. wanted answers and I think we helped her find those answers. We know
Siddons abused other people and we hope A.W. coming forward will help those abuse
survivors begin to find their own closure.