The family of a deceased man who said he was repeatedly sexually abused as a child by a Bay Area Roman Catholic priest is suing the Diocese of Oakland under the provisions of a new state law that allows such cases to move forward.
The family and estate of Jim Bartko, former athletic director at Fresno State University, filed the suit last week in Alameda County Superior Court.
The suit alleges Bartko suffered repeated sexual abuse from 1972 to 1975 at the hands of Stephen Kiesle, then a priest with the Diocese of Oakland and assigned to St. Joseph’s Parish in Pinole.
It also claims the diocese knew of Kiesle’s “history of sexual conduct with and sexual assaults upon minors” prior to his alleged abuse of Bartko and negligently allowed Kiesle to continue working with children despite that knowledge.
Kiesle was convicted in 2004 of sexually abusing a child, got out of prison in 2009 and lives in Walnut Creek, according to the California Megan’s Law website.
He was also convicted in 1978 of sexually abusing children at Our Lady of the Rosary Parish in Union City but was allowed to return to work while he was on probation, according to Bartko’s attorneys.
Kiesle left the priesthood in 1981, but returned to St. Joseph’s in 1988 as a volunteer youth minister, Bartko’s attorneys said.
He is listed as a “credibly accused clergy” on the diocese website, which says he was removed from the ministry in 1978 and “laicized” in 1987.
Bartko, who wrote a book about his abuse and subsequent struggles titled “Boy in the Mirror,” sued the diocese in 2020 but died at the age of 54, just three days after announcing his lawsuit.
“The cause of death was cirrhosis of the liver, the result of decades of using alcohol to cope with his childhood trauma,” Bartko’s lawyers said in a news release Monday.
“Jim’s first drink came at the age of 7, provided to him by Fr. Stephen Kiesle as a means of making Jim more vulnerable to Fr. Kiesle’s sexual advances,” according to the release.
The new law, SB447, took effect on Jan. 1 and allows the families of deceased victims of childhood sexual abuse and other crimes to sue for non-economic – or “pain and suffering” – damages on their behalf.
Under the previous law, those claims typically died when the victims passed away.
“Now it doesn’t matter what they die of, the case lives on no matter what the cause is,” said Bartko attorney Rick Simons.
“It also means the profit in stalling these cases and keeping it secret until late in life, the profit in making as many motions and delay tactics as possible hoping people will die is taken out of the equation,” Simons said.
A spokesperson for the diocese said Monday they haven’t been served with the suit yet and declined to comment.
An attorney for Kiesle, who is not named as a defendant in the suit, declined to comment, saying he had not yet seen the complaint.
18 comments
There’s only one cure for pedophiles.
Disagree. There is more than one cure. As well as for institutions that actively enable and protect them. All over the planet for as long as anyone can remember. Often even reassigning them to different countries to escape accountability and allowing them to continue their campaigns of horrific abuse of innocent children. Too many cures to list here.
Rolaids, I and most on here probably understand your meaning; however, Mama Bear is 100% correct.
Kiesle was convicted in 2004 of sexually abusing a child, got out of prison in 2009 and lives in Walnut Creek, according to the California Megan’s Law website.
How can a Kiesle afford to live in Walnut Creek?
My guess would be some sort of pension from the church.
That doesn’t sound right to me.
There is a special place in hell for this disgusting poor excuse of a human!
@Cellophane – What do you mean? Half the land in WC is marginal. Vast swaths are assigned to Oak Grove Middle / YVHS or Valley Veiw / College Park. Even the northern and southern ends of the downtown area with passable schools (like Oak / Jones and Creekside/Lancaster) are quite crowded, shabby and barley any more expensive than the crime-ridden and impoverished adjacent communities along 242 and Hwy 4.
@Cellophane – The guy lives in Rossmoor which tends to be a low income area of Walnut Creek. While it takes a bundle of cash to get into Rossmoor most of the residents have fairly low incomes.
I discovered this a while back when looking at a map of the county that was color coded by economic quartiles. They divided the population into four quartiles, from low income to high income and color coded the county’s CDP (Census Designated Place) regions by the average income level in each CDP. As expected, areas such as Richmond, Antioch, and Concord’s Monument corridor were low income but there was a blob of low income next to Walnut Creek. I zoomed in and discovered it’s Rossmoor, Thus, Walnut Creek has a low income area but it’s not quite the ghetto slums you envision.
@Lamorinda Larry – The Oak/Jones area has mostly been redeveloped with the shabby stuff getting replaced by shiny new cracker box three and four story row-homes. I suspect the Palmer School site will see the same fate. I agree that Creekside/Lancaster looks marginal but it has not decayed to the point that I’d bulldoze it.
@Cellophane – Valid point re Rossmoor. Plenty of residents there paid cash their units after downsizing, have a low- to mid-seven figure combination of Roth assets and a muni bonds spinning off tax-free distributions and tax exempt coupons that don’t count as income in the IRS tax return data underlying zip code income estimates. Many of them report social security benefits on their tax return. A widow living in a $1.2 million condo with $2.5 million in tax-free Roth assets and $2.5 million in munis spinning off $30k (tax-exempt) and $25k in social security would only report the taxable portion of her social security.
She’d certainly qualify as “low income” in these parts!
I guess we can disagree on whether the Oak/Jones corridor is shabby. There are plenty of 2-3 BR units that trade for less than half a million. A single parent with two kids earning $60-$90k could easily swing that mortgage.
Kids from many such low income families drag down the test scores at WCI and Los Lomas!
Rossmoor is considered low income because those retirees don’t have any income left after paying their Homeowner’s Fees each month. All those amenities are expensive. They’re supporting a golf course whether or not they use it. Plus pools, tennis, arts and craft classes, entertainment and dining, finess center, etc.
Truly, truly horrible in every way.
Very odd to sue no, especially a family and not the victim.w.
As a retired catholic, my message to the church is to allow the priests to be married! And to all the priests who sexually abused the churchgoers (especially children), I say “forgive me fathers for y’all have sinned! And may you burn eternally in hell”
Teachers are allowed to be married but they still abuse young people in similar numbers. So are gymnastics coaches, team doctors for college sports team, etc.
Anytime someone has access and automatic trust, kids are vulnerable to this. There’s sadly nothing specific to the Catholic Church about the abuse itself (though it does have its own administrative culture that contributed to the coverups, shuffling abusers around, damage control, etc.) If you think this could only happen to those other people’s institutions, you’re wrong.
@Led
I agree that has nothing to do with allowing priests to be married (although I see no reason why they should not be allowed) but sexual abuse by married men is probably as prevalent as by unmarried men.
And I think it’s not only that anytime someone has access to trust, but actually these positions probably attract people who seek to abuse access and trust.
Paul, marriage will not stop pedophiles.
JWB,
Yes, definitely people who want to abuse will seek out a trusted position.
Very unfortunate. This of course was wrong. The church will be the first to admit it was wrong. By practicing constant forgiveness- which is definitely a Christian tenant- it did allow this to happen, but it was not deliberate. The church has done a lot to make sure this never happens again. And has paid dearly past offenses.
I’m sure this latest lawsuit is because of the change in statute of limitations that California imposed which would allow a lot more lawsuits against the church.
I’m sure the constant TV commercials trying to stir up business by hungry lawyers instigated this. But suing for a person who has died??? Why didn’t he sue? There was plenty of opportunity. Maybe he decided not to go that route. Could be. But I think the family sees dollar signs now.
“Why didn’t he sue? ”
Clearly there seems to be a lack of reading comprehension since the article says:
“Bartko, who wrote a book about his abuse and subsequent struggles titled “Boy in the Mirror,” sued the diocese in 2020 but died at the age of 54, just three days after announcing his lawsuit.”
Comments are closed.