Connect with us

News

Reports: Emails reveal extent of Saints’ aid in Catholic church scandal response

Published

on

Reports: Emails reveal extent of Saints’ aid in Catholic church scandal response
play

A 2020 lawsuit first revealed the New Orleans Saints’ involvement in the New Orleans Archdiocese’s crisis management response to a sex-abuse scandal. At the time, the team stated its collaboration was “minimal” and that the archdiocese had reached out to request PR assistance.

New emails revealed that the Saints were not only more involved than what was previously believed, but that people in the organization were the initiators of the correspondence and resulting collaboration.

Advertisement

Investigations by the New York Times and Associated Press uncovered more than 300 emails related to the Saints’ involvement in the church’s response to sexual abuse accusations against the New Orleans Archdiocese. The emails, which were revealed in a 2019 subpoena, and their contents had remained private until now.

Saints’ emails reveal different story than their initial claims

Among the first of those emails, according to the Times, was from Saints senior vice president of communications Greg Bensel to team owner Gayle Benson.

Bensel had seen a story in local New Orleans newspaper The Advocate that revealed that a “disgraced” former deacon, who had been accused of sexual abuse multiple times and removed from the ministry in 1988, was still involved with a different New Orleans church.

In the story, Archbishop Gregory Aymond was quoted as saying he was “utterly surprised and embarrassed” to hear the news.

Advertisement

Bensel reached out to Benson, who is a close friend of Aymond’s, after reading the story. After a back-and-forth exchange, Bensel suggested he reach out to the New Orleans Archdiocese to offer his aid in “crisis communications” as the number of similar accusations of sexual abuse against the archdiocese continued to grow.

“I like … (Aymond’s) PR person a lot,” Bensel wrote to Benson, “but if he ever wants to chat crisis communications … we have been through enough at Saints to be a help or sounding board- but I don’t want to overstep!”

So began the Saints’ involvement in the Catholic church’s management and response to the growing scandal.

Bensel went on to leverage his connections with the local papers: The Advocate, as well as The Times-Picayune (the two merged in May 2019). He implored the local papers to stay positive in their coverage of Aymond’s public response.

“I am asking that YOU as the most influential newspaper in our state, please get behind him and work with him,” he wrote.

Advertisement

Saints were involved with release of list of accused clergymen

One of the biggest bombshells from the newly revealed emails is that executives within the Saints’ organization were privy to – and may have helped put together – a list of names the archdiocese was set to release in November 2018 that included names of dozens of accused sexual abusers within the church.

“Had a cc w (then-New Orleans District Attorney) Leon Cannizzaro last night that allowed us to take certain people off the list,” Bensel wrote in an email to team president Dennis Lauscha.

The New York Times reported that it’s unclear whether any names were actually removed. What is certain is that the list, which generally was intended to be a “transparent public accounting that could help victims find closure and seek justice,” according to the New York Times, was criticized after its release for its lack of completeness.

Initially, the list included 57 names. It has since expanded to include 79, though an August 2023 report from The Guardian said that there have been 310 clergymen credibly accused of sexual abuse in New Orleans.

What is also clear from the emails is that Bensel played a huge hand in preparing the archbishop in his public response to the list’s release. The New York Times reported that the emails reveal Bensel’s personal consultation with Aymond included specific talking points for media appearances, help editing a letter to parishioners the archbishop planned to send upon the list’s release and pre-written questions for the Saints’ flagship radio station to ask Aymond in an interview.

Advertisement

According to the New York Times’ investigation, Bensel also “accompanied Archbishop Aymond on local media interviews” the day the list was first released.

NFL did not initially investigate Saints in 2020

When the team’s involvement with the church’s response to the scandal first became public in 2020, the NFL declined to pursue its own investigation even though the bulk of the emails came from an nfl.com address.

At the time, a league source told the New York Times that the NFL would not investigate the Saints until the emails, which were kept private at the time, were publicly disclosed.

The NFL did not immediately respond to USA TODAY Sports’ request for comment.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is set to speak to the media in New Orleans on Monday at 4 p.m. ET ahead of Super Bowl 59, which is set to take place in New Orleans on Sunday.

Advertisement

(This story was updated to add a video.)

News

Multiple people shot near Brown University, police say

Published

on

Multiple people shot near Brown University, police say

In this image from video, law enforcement officials gather outside the Brown University campus in Providence, R.I., on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2025.

Kimberlee Kruesi/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kimberlee Kruesi/AP

Multiple people have been shot near Brown University in Providence, R.I., on Saturday, police said.

The Providence Police Department said it is actively investigating the situation and is encouraging the public to shelter in place until further notice.

There is no suspect in custody, the university said on X, adding that it’s coordinating with multiple law enforcement agencies to search for a suspect.

Advertisement

The university  issued an alert Saturday afternoon that the shooter was spotted near the Barus and Holley building, which houses the School of Engineering and Physics Department.

“Continue to shelter in place. Remain away from Barus & Holley area. Police do not have a suspect in custody and continue to search for suspect(s). Brown coordinating with multiple law enforcement agencies on site,” the university said.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Continue Reading

News

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

Published

on

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

BALTIMORE — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation helped galvanize opposition to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, was released from immigration detention on Thursday, and a judge has temporarily blocked any further efforts to detain him.

Abrego Garcia currently can’t be deported to his home country of El Salvador thanks to a 2019 immigration court order that found he had a “well founded fear” of danger there. However, the Trump administration has said he cannot stay in the U.S. Over the past few months, government officials have said they would deport him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia.

Abrego Garcia is fighting his deportation in federal court in Maryland, where his attorneys claim the administration is manipulating the immigration system to punish him for successfully challenging his earlier deportation.

Here’s what to know about the latest developments in the case:

Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen with an American wife and child who has lived in Maryland for years. He immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager to join his brother, who had become a U.S. citizen. In 2019, an immigration judge granted him protection from being deported back to his home country.

Advertisement

While he was allowed to live and work in the U.S. under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision, he was not given residency status. Earlier this year, he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, despite the earlier court ruling.

When Abrego Garcia was deported in March, he was held in a notoriously brutal Salvadoran prison despite having no criminal record.

The Trump administration initially fought efforts to bring him back to the U.S. but eventually complied after the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in. He returned to the U.S. in June, only to face an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia was held in a Tennessee jail for more than two months before he was released on Friday, Aug. 22, to await trial in Maryland under home detention.

His freedom lasted a weekend. On the following Monday, he reported to the Baltimore immigration office for a check-in and was immediately taken into immigration custody. Officials announced plans to deport him to a series of African countries, but they were blocked by an order from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland.

On Thursday, after months of legal filings and hearings, Xinis ruled that Abrego Garcia should be released immediately. Her ruling hinged on what was likely a procedural error by the immigration judge who heard his case in 2019.

Advertisement

Normally, in a case like this, an immigration judge will first issue an order of removal. Then the judge will essentially freeze that order by issuing a “withholding of removal” order, according to Memphis immigration attorney Andrew Rankin.

In Abrego Garcia’s case, the judge granted withholding of removal to El Salvador because he found Abrego Garcia’s life could be in danger there. However, the judge never took the first step of issuing the order of removal. The government argued in Xinis’ court that the order of removal could be inferred, but the judge disagreed.

Without a final order of removal, Abrego Garcia can’t be deported, Xinis ruled.

The only way to get an order of removal is to go back to immigration court and ask for one, Rankin said. But reopening the immigration case is a gamble because Abrego Garcia’s attorneys would likely seek protection from deportation in the form of asylum or some other type of relief.

One wrinkle is that immigration courts are officially part of the executive branch, and the judges there are not generally viewed as being as independent as federal judges.

Advertisement

“There might be independence in some areas, but if the administration wants a certain result, by all accounts it seems they’re going to exert the pressure on the individuals to get that result,” Rankin said. “I hope he gets a fair shake, and two lawyers make arguments — somebody wins, somebody loses — instead of giving it to an immigration judge with a 95% denial rate, where everybody in the world knows how it’s gonna go down.”

Alternatively, the government could appeal Xinis’ order to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and try to get her ruling overturned, Rankin said. If the appeals court agreed with the government that the final order of removal was implied, there could be no need to reopen the immigration case.

In compliance with Xinis’ order, Abrego Garcia was released from immigration detention in Pennsylvania on Thursday evening and allowed to return home for the first time in months. However, he was also told to report to an immigration officer in Baltimore early the next morning.

Fearing that he would be detained again, his attorneys asked Xinis for a temporary restraining order. Xinis filed that order early Friday morning. It prohibits immigration officials from taking Abrego Garcia back into custody, at least for the time being. A hearing on the issue could happen as early as next week.

Meanwhile, in Tennessee, Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty in the criminal case where he is charged with human smuggling and conspiracy to commit human smuggling.

Advertisement

Prosecutors claim he accepted money to transport, within the United States, people who were in the country illegally. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee for speeding. Body camera footage from a Tennessee Highway Patrol officer shows a calm exchange with Abrego Garcia. There were nine passengers in the car, and the officers discussed among themselves their suspicions of smuggling. However, Abrego Garcia was eventually allowed to continue driving with only a warning.

Abrego Garcia has asked U.S. District Court Judge Waverly Crenshaw to dismiss the smuggling charges on the grounds of “selective or vindictive prosecution.”

Crenshaw earlier found “some evidence that the prosecution against him may be vindictive” and said many statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.” Crenshaw specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on a Fox News Channel program that seemed to suggest the Justice Department charged Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful-deportation case.

The two sides have been sparring over whether senior Justice Department officials, including Blanche, can be required to testify in the case.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR

Published

on

Afghan CIA fighters face stark reality in the U.S. : Consider This from NPR

A makeshift memorial stands outside the Farragut West Metro station on December 01, 2025 in Washington, DC. Two West Virginia National Guard troops were shot blocks from the White House on November 26.

Heather Diehl/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

They survived some of the Afghanistan War’s most grueling and treacherous missions. 

But once they evacuated to the U.S., many Afghan fighters who served in “Zero Units” found themselves spiraling. 

Among their ranks was Rahmanullah Lakanwal, the man charged with killing one National Guard member and seriously injuring a second after opening fire on them in Washington, D.C. on Thanksgiving Eve.

Advertisement

NPR’s Brian Mann spoke to people involved in Zero Units and learned some have struggled with mental health since coming to the U.S. At least four soldiers have died by suicide. 

For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

This episode was produced by Erika Ryan and Karen Zamora. It was edited by Alina Hartounian and Courtney Dorning.

Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending