IN RE GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION
918 F.2d 374 (3rd Cir. 1990)
NATURE OF THE CASE: The United States (P) appealed from a ruling denying its motion to
compel the federal grand jury testimony of a Lutheran clergyman.
FACTS: This is an appeal by P from an order denying its motion to compel the federal
grand jury testimony of a Lutheran clergyman concerning subjects discussed during a family
counseling session. On November 28, 1985, a fire occurred at a house, located in an
all-white neighborhood in the Forest Hills section of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, that had
recently been purchased by a black family. The police and fire departments determined that
the fire was the likely result of arson. Within several days of the fire, Mr. and Mrs.
George Kampich, Mrs. Kampich's adult son, George Shaw (who is not related legally or by
blood to Mr. Kampich), and Patty DiLucente, Shaw's fiance, sought counseling from the
Reverend Ernest Knoche ('Pastor Knoche'), a Lutheran clergyman. All four persons lived in
the home next door to the site of the fire. Mr. and Mrs. Kampich are members of Pastor
Knoche's church. Although Shaw has occasionally attended services at the church, Shaw and
DiLucente are not members. In June of 1989, Shaw and DiLucente were married. In November of
1989, some four years after the counseling session, a grand jury convened by the district
court for the Western District of Pennsylvania commenced an investigation of the suspected
arson. The grand jury was investigating, in particular, possible violations of 42 U.S.C.
3631, prohibiting racially motivated housing discrimination, and of 18 U.S.C. 241,
prohibiting conspiracies to violate civil rights. P subpoenaed Pastor Knoche to testify
before the grand jury about the 1985 counseling session. Pastor Knoche informed the
government that he intended to assert the clergy-communicant privilege and would refuse to
answer any questions regarding the counseling session. That day, the government filed a
motion in the district court to compel Pastor Knoche to testify before the grand jury. The
district court held a hearing and Pastor Knoche stated that family counseling, in contrast
to individual counseling, constituted a typical and important part of his ministry. The
Pastor responded, further, that forthrightness and truthfulness on the part of participants,
such as Mr. and Mrs. Kampich, Shaw, and DiLucente, are essential to proper counseling and,
ultimately, to redemption. He concluded that those whom he spiritually counsels expect that
he will keep any communications made to him in strict confidence. The district court
sustained Pastor Knoche's right to assert a clergy-communicant privilege and denied the
government's motion to compel his testimony. This appeal followed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment