The Rhode Island Attorney General's Diocese Report, Explained

What the investigation involved

The investigation followed a 2019 Memorandum of Understanding between the Attorney General and the Diocese. Investigators reviewed more than 250,000 pages of diocesan documents dating back to 1950 and contacted nearly 150 survivors of clergy child sexual abuse. The main report runs 284 pages, with a separate 371-page appendix of clergy summaries.

A plain-English map of the report

The main report runs nine chapters plus appendices. A letter from Attorney General Peter F. Neronha opens it, followed by an executive summary (from p.17) and a legal-framework chapter explaining Rhode Island’s sexual-assault and child-molestation statutes and their limitations periods (from p.35). The investigative findings chapter (from p.57) presents the survivors, the abuse, the accused clergy, and the Diocese’s historical response. The next chapter (from p.99) documents the Diocese’s approaches from 1950 to 2000 — secrecy, transfers, retreats and treatment centers, advocacy for charged priests, misleading public statements, and euphemistic language — followed by chapters on the failure to refer complaints to law enforcement (from p.151), the reforms from 1990 to the present (from p.169), and the Attorney General’s concerns with the Diocese’s modern responses (from p.199). The closing chapters set out recommendations — including an independent survivor compensation program (p.256) — and the statute-of-limitations reforms that became the revival window (p.269–272). Appendix A (371 pages) contains the clergy summaries; Appendices B through D collect supporting materials, including the religious-order listings (Appendix C) and the 2019 Memorandum of Understanding (Appendix D).

What the report found

The investigation identified over 300 documented victims and 75 credibly accused clergy. The report found that the Diocese’s historical response to abuse allegations was driven, whenever possible, by concealment. It documented that at least 315 minors were abused between 1950 and 2011.

Of the 75 credibly accused, the report described 61 diocesan priests and deacons, 13 religious-order members, and one extern priest. When the investigation began, the Diocese had publicly listed 51 accused clergy; the report identified additional individuals the Diocese had not publicly named.

The 72 summaries and what “credibly accused” actually means

Appendix A opens by stating exactly what it is: “summaries of 72 clergy determined by the Attorney General to have been credibly accused of child sexual misconduct in the Diocese of Providence, based on the totality of information in this Office’s possession” (Appendix A, p.2). In making those determinations, the Attorney General relied on records the Diocese itself produced under the 2019 Memorandum of Understanding, plus “law enforcement records, records of criminal and civil proceedings, victim and witness interviews, and publicly available information” (Appendix A, p.2).

The standard has a precise definition. A “credible allegation,” under the MOU the report applies, is “[a]n allegation of Sexual Misconduct Perpetrated Against a Child where there is a reasonable basis to believe that the alleged conduct more likely than not occurred, as determined by the Attorney General” (Appendix A, p.2). That is an investigative, more-likely-than-not judgment — not a criminal-court finding beyond a reasonable doubt. The Appendix itself is careful on this point: unless otherwise noted, its details “are only allegations, not facts proven in a courtroom or otherwise admitted by the accused individuals,” and the named subjects “are generally entitled to a presumption of innocence” (Appendix A, p.2). The Appendix also notes the reverse: a name’s absence “should not necessarily be taken as an indication that the Attorney General deemed allegations against him or her to be untrue” — it may simply reflect insufficient information (Appendix A, p.2).

What an Appendix A entry contains

Each entry describes, to the extent the information was available, the “assignment history” of the priest or deacon, “the known child sexual misconduct allegations against him, and the Diocese’s responses to those allegations” (Appendix A, p.2). Survivors’ names are omitted throughout, except where a survivor expressly agreed to be named. Of the four criminal prosecutions that resulted from the investigation, one defendant — Father Edward Kelley, who “died while his case was pending” — is included among the 72; the three individuals still awaiting trial are not summarized, and they are presumed innocent (Appendix A, p.2).

What these findings are — and are not

This is the most important section on the page.

The report is the result of an investigation, not a court proceeding. Its findings are not determinations of civil or criminal liability by a court.

“Credibly accused” is the Attorney General’s investigative standard — it means the investigation found an allegation credible. It is not a criminal conviction. Of the 75 credibly accused, the investigation led to criminal charges against four current and former priests, and any individual who has been charged is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

We state this plainly because accuracy matters, and because fairness to everyone — survivors and the accused — depends on describing these findings precisely.

How the report connects to the new law

The report recommended several reforms, including legislation to allow survivors whose claims had previously expired to sue the institutions and supervisors involved, during a revival window. Rhode Island’s 2026 revival-window law — which opened July 1, 2026 and closes June 30, 2028 — is the enactment of that kind of reform.

Publicly accused vs. credibly accused: two lists, two standards

For two deceased priests, the Diocese’s list and the Attorney General’s determination diverge. As the report records, “[t]he Diocese lists Father Tedeschi, and one other priest, Monsignor Anthony DeAngelis, as ‘publicly accused,’ as opposed to ‘credibly accused,’ clergy” (RI AG Report, p.62). The Diocese’s published explanation, reproduced in the report, is that each “retired in good standing,” that allegations “were made against them dating back 37 and 54 years, respectively” only after their deaths, that “[e]ach priest is the subject of a single allegation,” and that the claims “could not be verified or substantiated without any corroborating witnesses or facts” (RI AG Report, p.62).

The Attorney General, applying the credible-allegation standard above, reached a different classification: both men are among the 72 clergy summarized in Appendix A. Our pages on Monsignor Anthony DeAngelis and Father Peter Tedeschi state both official classifications side by side. Each man died before any allegation was received, the allegations are not findings proven in court, and nothing in either classification is a judicial determination.

How a survivor actually uses the report in a claim

The report is not itself a verdict, and it does not decide any lawsuit. But for a survivor considering a claim, it is a working roadmap. An Appendix A entry’s assignment history can confirm that a particular priest served at your parish or school during the years you remember. The documented Diocese responses — when a complaint was received, what was done, where the priest went next — bear directly on the institutional theories the revival window reopens: negligent supervision, retention, failure to report, concealment. And because the summaries are built substantially on records the Diocese produced under the 2019 MOU, they point attorneys toward the underlying documents to pursue in discovery. In practice, evaluating a clergy claim starts with matching the survivor’s memory against the official record — the same reason we maintain and continuously verify an individual page for every listed name in our companion database.

If you are a survivor

The Rhode Island Attorney General’s office maintains a resources page for survivors of clergy abuse. If you are considering whether the revival window applies to your situation, a Rhode Island attorney can help you understand your options. There is no cost to ask.

For how the report’s findings relate to civil claims, see can you sue the Diocese of Providence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the Rhode Island Attorney General’s Diocese report find? The 2026 report identified 75 clergy as credibly accused and documented more than 300 victims (at least 315) between 1950 and 2011, describing a decades-long pattern of concealment by the Diocese.

Does “credibly accused” mean convicted? No. “Credibly accused” is the Attorney General’s investigative finding, not a criminal conviction. The investigation led to criminal charges against four priests, three of whom were presumed innocent at publication.

How does the report connect to the new law? The report’s findings and its recommendation to revive civil claims against institutions helped drive the 2026 revival-window law.

What information is in an Appendix A entry? Each of the 72 summaries describes, where the information was available, the clergy member’s assignment history, the known child sexual misconduct allegations against him, and the Diocese’s responses to those allegations. Survivors’ names are omitted unless a survivor expressly agreed to be named.

Why does the Diocese list two priests as “publicly accused” rather than “credibly accused”? The Diocese classifies Monsignor Anthony DeAngelis and Father Peter Tedeschi separately because, in its explanation, each retired in good standing and each is the subject of a single allegation made after his death that it could not corroborate. The Attorney General’s Appendix A nonetheless includes both among the 72 credibly accused. Both classifications are official; neither is a court finding, and each man died before any allegation was received.

Where can I read the report itself? The full main report and Appendix A are linked throughout this page’s citations — we host copies so readers can open the exact cited page — and the Attorney General’s office publishes the report and survivor resources on its own website.

How these timing rules work is covered in our explainer on the statute of limitations.

The Diocese has signaled it may seek bankruptcy in response to these claims.

Related: all 75 names in the report and on the Diocese’s list — statuses verbatim, with sources — are on the credibly accused list, explained.

About This Information

About this information: This page is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Whether any individual has a claim depends on the specific facts and must be evaluated by a licensed Rhode Island attorney.

About the Attorney General’s report: The findings of the Rhode Island Attorney General’s 2026 report are the results of an investigation, not determinations of civil or criminal liability by a court. “Credibly accused” is the Attorney General’s investigative standard; it is not a criminal conviction. Individuals who have been charged are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

About the law’s status: Rhode Island’s revival-window law (effective July 1, 2026) is new. As of the date of publication, no court has ruled on whether the revival of previously time-barred claims against institutions is constitutional. We make no representation about how any court will rule.

Support resources: If you are a survivor seeking support, the Rhode Island Attorney General’s office maintains a resources page for survivors of clergy abuse, at riag.ri.gov/diocese-report/resources.