Profile Facts
- Name
- Timothy J. Szott
- Role
- Priest
- Diocese
- Archdiocese of Detroit
- Ordained
- 1973
- Status
- Convicted
- Records
- Diocesan and public records
Survivors who were harmed by Father Timothy J. Szott can turn to the clergy sexual abuse lawyers at White Law PLLC. This page outlines the accusations that have been publicly reported against him.
We have organized this page around Father Szott’s assignments, the reported misconduct, and the remedies Michigan law provides. With no reported date of death, the possibility of criminal charges remains, as does the right to file a civil case for damages.
Sexual Abuse in the Archdiocese of Detroit
Records place Father Timothy J. Szott in the Archdiocese of Detroit, one of the seven dioceses that serve Michigan Catholics. Those seven dioceses, Detroit, Gaylord, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Lansing, Marquette, Saginaw, have each faced scrutiny over their handling of abuse reports, including reports like those against Father Szott.
Michigan’s Attorney General began investigating clergy sexual abuse in 2018, a probe that reached into each of the seven dioceses and helped expose patterns like those in Father Szott’s record. Patterns of abuse and institutional cover-ups emerged from that review, and a Michigan clergy sexual abuse lawyer can help survivors of Father Szott understand whether the Archdiocese of Detroit failed in its duties.
The Allegations Against Father Timothy J. Szott
Where He Served
Father Timothy J. Szott, ordained in 1973, served in the Archdiocese of Detroit until he was placed on leave in February 2003. He was permanently removed from ministry in 2005 and died in August 2008 in Arizona.
Conviction and Lawsuits
Published records indicate that Szott was placed on leave after a church volunteer found child abuse images on his computer. He was arraigned in June 2003, posted bail, and entered treatment at St. Luke’s. In September 2003 he was sentenced to 18 months of probation after pleading no contest to possession of child pornography. He was sued in April 2008 over alleged abuse of a youth in 1999, the victim had just turned 18, and sued again in November 2008; other complaints were too old to prosecute. He was included on the archdiocese’s list of credibly accused clergy on June 10, 2019.
Criminal vs. Civil Sexual Abuse Cases
A single report of abuse can set two kinds of cases in motion, and they do not depend on one another, including where Father Szott is concerned. One process punishes the wrongdoer, the other compensates the person who was harmed, and a survivor of Father Szott can pursue the civil path regardless of what prosecutors decide.
The Criminal Process
Because the burden of proof is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ criminal cases are difficult, and in matters involving Father Szott, as in all such cases, they are controlled by prosecutors, not the survivor.
Civil Lawsuits
Civil cases put the survivor in charge: those harmed by Father Szott decide whether to file, and a successful claim yields compensation rather than a prison sentence.
Statute of Limitations on Clergy Sexual Abuse Cases in Michigan
Michigan legislators set the civil filing deadline at MCL §600.5805: generally ten years, extending to the survivor’s 28th birthday, for claims like those against Father Szott.
First-degree criminal sexual conduct carries no limitations period in Michigan. And because many survivors of Father Szott may need decades to confront what happened, a lawyer should review the deadlines rather than the survivor guessing.
View All Accused Clergy in Michigan
Pursue Justice With Help From White Law PLLC
Accountability does not stop with the individual cleric. If the Archdiocese of Detroit was aware, or should have been aware, of Father Szott’s behavior and failed to prevent it, covered up complaints, or neglected proper screening and supervision, the institution itself can be sued.
A successful claim against Father Szott can provide for medical and therapy expenses, pain and suffering, and emotional distress. Contact White Law PLLC at (517) 316-1195.
Profiles summarize published records and allegations. Inclusion does not constitute a legal finding.