This will be the only statement that will be issued regarding this matter since the inconsistencies and poor handling of this case are being reviewed by the Defense for future action. No further information will be provided so as not to jeopardize that review process or its outcome.
A few facts about this case:
1) wi-fi was not password protected; 2) irrefutable evidence of a previously confirmed hacking was presented; 3) the computer was not in a secured location, leaving it susceptible to unauthorized access and use.
Forensics Psychological Exam
After an extensive interview and examination by forensic psychologist Dr. Geoffrey R. McKee, on November 13, 2019, Dr. McKee reported: “…his sexual history indicated that he does not meet the diagnostic criteria for Pedophilia or Pedophilic Disorder.” Dr. McKee further stated: “…his risk of harm to anyone, including children, is very low and thus he does not meet the DSM-5 [Diagnostic & Statistical Manual, 5th Edition, pg. 686] criteria for Pedophilic Disorder or any other diagnosis of sexual deviancy (e.g. Exhibitionistic Disorder, Sexual Sadism Disorder, etc.) which might put anyone at risk of harm.”
Dr. McKee concluded his report with the following two points:
“It is my opinion -- based on 35+ years of research, evaluation, and treatment of sex offenders and 13 years of service on SC’s Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) Multidisciplinary Team reviewing over 6,000 cases of SVP-eligible juvenile and adult inmate sex offenders -- that Mr. Amicarelli is not an SVP as defined by the SC Code of Laws.”
“It is my opinion that given his very low risk scores on the sexual recidivism scales and NJ-RRAS described above, there are no empirical or quantitative grounds for Mr. Amicarelli to be placed on South Carolina’s Sex Offender Registry.”
Geoffrey R. McKee, PhD, ABPP
Board Certified in Forensic Psychology
Dept. of Neuropsychiatry & Behavioral Sciences
University of South Carolina School of Medicine
Dept. of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences
Medical University of South Carolina
Some facts pertaining to the plea:
On January 10, 2020, the court accepted an Alford plea, through which I asserted and maintained my innocence, yet accepted guilt. This decision was based on many factors, a few of which include: 1) this offense happened “on my watch.” One of the marks of a true leader is accepting responsibility for what has transpired while they were “in charge,” even when the consequences are severe; 2) a jury trial had greater chances of a conviction by emotions - especially a case involving a priest - rather than an exoneration by facts; 3) it is no secret that government entities have far greater financial resources with which to pursue litigation against the average person, consequently, the average person is automatically on the losing end: if you can’t afford a winner, you have no choice but to settle for a negotiator.