It is with great sorrow that we come together today with the departure of our president and dear friend, Fr. Julio Giulietti, S.J. We have all come here to seek the truth, and to know and understand what has happened within the university walls and what has become of the reputation of WJU. In this light, please invite anyone to read the blog and feel free to comment as you wish.

Any posts with profanity are not welcome, otherwise, please speak your mind. You are a part of this university and we want to hear your voice!

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

WJU Board Member in Trouble Again

CLICK HERE to see details on St. Joseph's University Student Newspaper.


  1. Too bad WJU does not have an Internet student newspaper like St. Joe's. Thanks to the editors of "The Hawk" for continuing to expose credibly accused homosexual predator Tommy Gleeson, S.J. Wheeling's Protestant President keeps Tommy Gleeson as a trustee because the homosexual lawsuit for $1,000,000 against Gleeson was settled, but it was settled only because the Jesuits paid off the complaining witness. It is a disgrace to have WJU represented by that despicable Jesuit trustee.

  2. Gleeson has never been accused of molesting or abusing any child. A legal allegation of sexual harassment was made against him by one ADULT (25 year- old) seminarian approximately 14 years ago, and the lawsuit was settled out of court. 90% of all civil lawsuits get settled out of court, and virtually every settlement involves someone getting "paid off." So, what does the settlement prove?

    In further response to the preceding post, the WJU university president has no authority to appoint or dismiss a university trustee; he president's religious beliefs are irrelevant to this issue; and the sexual orientation of Fr. Gleeson is also irrelevant to the issue.

  3. Alumnus in Comment #2 asks, "What does the settlement prove?" The Jesuit pay off to the complaining witness proves that the Jesuits thought Gleeson would lose the $1,000,000 homosexual lawsuit.

    Comment #2 pushes the straw-man argument that Gleeson was not accused of victimizing a child. Gleeson was accused of victimizing a college age student (not legally a child).

    Comment #2 says WJU's Protestant President "has no authority to appoint or dismiss a university trustee." Of course he does! Who did you think appointed the trustees?

    Comment #2's ultimate folderol is that the WJU President's religious beliefs and Gleeson's sexual orientation are irrelevant. Not hardly irrelevant at all! Wheeling's Protestant President and credibly-accused-homosexual-predator Trustee are essentially adverse to a Catholic school charged with promoting the propagation of Catholicism.

    The bottom line is that WJU and St. Joe's must choose between: (a) jeopardizing students, and (b) protecting students.

  4. Response to Different Dormie:

    1. The student settled out of court, too; does that prove he thought he would lose? No. Does it prove Rev. Gleeson was innocent? No. Over 90 percent of all civil lawsuits settle out of court. This does not mean 90% of people in lawsuits believe they will lose.

    2. It's not a "straw man" to point out that verbally propositioning a mature 25 year-old man to have sex is not equivalent to molesting a child. It's far different both morally and legally. Thus a person who has been accused of asking a 25 year-old man to have sex need not be vilified or treated as if he were a proven child moldester. To do so is irrational and unjust.

    3. The university president does not appoint or dismiss the university trustees. Clearly you don't understand university governance.

  5. to WJU alumnus:

    Did you forget that the Jesuits have a vow of CHASTITY? Does that not matter?