Volume 3 – Volume 3 of Part 1 Deposition of Archbishop Robert F. Sanchez January 14, 1994 https://www.abqjournal.com/news/arch/3ARCH.HTM • Volume 1 – January 12, 1994 • Volume 2 – January 13, 1994 • Volume 3 – January 14, 1994 • Volume 4 – January 15, 1994 • Volume 5 – October 3, 1994 • Volume 6 – October 4, 1994 • Volume 7 – October 5, 1994 • Volume 8 – Cctober 6, 1994 Page 337 1 SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF BERNALILLO 2 STATE OF NEW MEXICO 3 4 JOHN DOES I THROUGH III, 5 Plaintiffs, 6 vs. CV-91-11688 7 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 8 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI, 9 Defendants. 10 _________________________________________________________ 11 JOHN DOES IV and V, 12 Plaintiffs, 13 vs. CV-91-11989 14 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 15 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI, 16 Defendants. 17 _________________________________________________________ 18 JOHN DOES VI and VIII, 19 Plaintiffs, 20 vs. CV-91-12302 21 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 22 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI, 23 Defendants. 24 Page 338 1 JOHN DOE VIII, 2 Plaintiff, 3 vs. CV-92-00128 4 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 5 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI, 6 Defendants. 7 ________________________________________________________ 8 JOHN DOES IX and X, 9 Plaintiffs, 10 vs. CV-92-00312 11 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 12 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI, 13 Defendants. 14 _________________________________________________________ 15 JOHN DOE XI through XVII, 16 Plaintiffs, 17 vs. CV-92-09746 18 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 19 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI, 20 Defendants. Page 339 1 JOHN DOE, 2 Plaintiff, 3 vs. CV-93-02879 4 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 5 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE 6 PARACLETE, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, 7 Defendants. ________________________________________________________ 8 JOHN DOE, 9 Plaintiff, 10 vs. CV-93-02881 11 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE 12 OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, 13 BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE PARACLETE, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, 14 Defendants. 15 _________________________________________________________ 16 JOHN DOE, 17 Plaintiff, 18 vs. CV-93-02883 19 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 20 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE 21 PARACLETE, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, 22 Defendants. Page 340 1 JOHN DOE, 2 Plaintiff, 3 vs. CV-93-06343 4 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 5 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE 6 PARACLETE, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, 7 Defendants. ________________________________________________________ 8 JOHN DOE, 9 Plaintiff, 10 vs. CV-93-07186 11 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE 12 OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, 13 BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE PARACLETE, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, 14 Defendants. 15 ________________________________________________________ 16 JOHN DOE, 17 Plaintiff, 18 vs. CV-93-07188 19 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 20 JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER, BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE 21 PARACLETE, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, 22 Defendants. Page 341 1 JOHN DOES I, II and III 2 Plaintiffs. 3 vs. CV-92-06892 4 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE 5 OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF FALL RIVER, 6 MASSACHUSETTS, a corporation sole, THE SERVANTS OF THE PARACLETE, INC., a New Mexico. 7 non-profit corporation, and JAMES R. PORTER, 8 Defendants. ________________________________________________________ 9 JOHN DOE IV, 10 Plaintiff, 11 vs. CV-92-08011 12 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 13 ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF FALL RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS, a corporation sole, THE SERVANTS 14 OF THE PARACLETE, INC, a New Mexico non-profit corporation, and JAMES R. PORTER, 15 Defendants. 16 ________________________________________________________ 17 ELAINE MONTOYA and PAUL MONTOYA, 18 Plaintiffs, 19 vs. CV-92-08933 20 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 21 and FATHER ARTHUR J. PERRAULT, 22 Defendants. Page 342 1 MICHAEL D. HARRIS, DANA KAINZ, PETER D. ST. CYR, CONRAD L. JIRON, 2 and ED TRUJILLO, 3 Plaintiffs, 4 vs. CV-92-10319 5 ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation, 6 and FATHER ARTHUR J. PERRAULT, 7 Defendants. 8 ___________________________________________________________ 9 10 DEPOSITION OF ROBERT F. SANCHEZ 11 VOLUME III January 14, 1994 12 9:22 AM 5625 Isleta Boulevard, SW 13 Albuquerque, NM 14 15 TAKEN BY: BRUCE PASTERNACK, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS 16 17 REPORTED BY: Jenifer L. Russin, RPR-CM, NM CCR #182 Russin Reporting 18 317 Commercial, NE, Suite 200-G Albuquerque, NM 87102 Page 343 1 A P P E A R A N C E S 2 For the Plaintiffs: 3 BRUCE E. PASTERNACK, P.C. Two Woodward Center 4 700 Lomas, NE, Suite 100 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 5 BY: BRUCE E. PASTERNACK and NEIL R. BLAKE 6 STEPHEN E. TINKLER 7 MERIT BENNETT 425 Sandoval 8 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 9 REESE & MATHEY 160 E. Flaming Gorge 10 Green River, Wyoming 82935 BY: ROBERT J. REESE 11 12 For the Witness: 13 STOUT & WINTERBOTTOM 718 Central, SW 14 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 BY: RICHARD A. WINTERBOTTOM 15 16 For the Defendant Archdiocese of Santa Fe: 17 SIMONS, CUDDY & FRIEDMAN 6400 Uptown Blvd, NE, Suite 630E 18 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110 BY: KAREN C. KENNEDY 19 KELEHER & McLEOD, P.A. 20 414 Silver Avenue, SW Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 21 BY: ARTHUR O. BEACH 22 EAVES, BARDACKE & BAUGH, P.A. 6400 Uptown Blvd., NE 23 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110 BY: PAUL BARDACKE 24 Page 344 1 For the Archdiocese of Santa Fe (cont.): 2 SHEEHAN, SHEEHAN & STELZNER 707 Broadway, NE 3 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 BY: LUIS STELZNER 4 5 For the Servants of the Paraclete: 6 MILLER, STRATVERT, TORGERSON & SCHLENKER, P.A. 500 Marquette, NW, Suite 1100 7 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 BY: ALAN KONRAD 8 JILL BURTRAM 9 Also Present: 10 Jerry Goffe 11 12 13 14 I N D E X PAGE   15 EXAMINATION OF ROBERT F. SANCHEZ By Mr. Pasternack (Continued) 346 16 By Mr. Bennett 441 17 Page 349 1 A. That awareness was not primary in my mind, Mr. 2 Pasternack. I know the process that you're using. I 3 believe when an allegation is brought to you, your primary 4 focus is upon that individual and that particular time, 5 and it simply does not occur to you that you should 6 initiate an investigation. 7 The Church is not an institution that initiates 8 investigations. The allegation that was brought to us was 9 done not as a result of an investigation but by the free 10 will of the people. It simply must have appeared to me 11 that if any other people had been so violated, they too 12 would have come forth and have notified us, so that we 13 might be able to respond to their particular need and show 14 that sensitivity. 15 But the need for an investigation, as I mentioned 16 repeatedly yesterday, the Church is simply -- never has 17 made a public announcement to parishes that, "So-and-So 18 has been accused of sexual molestation; and therefore, if 19 anyone is aware of such, let them come forth." And I 20 explained yesterday, and briefly I'll explain again, that 21 the Church has always expressed sensitivity to the privacy 22 of all people, the privacy of individuals, so that no one 23 is being falsely accused or being made objects of 24 suspicion of others within a parish, so that there is no 25 division of that parish. Page 350 1 We have not, then, made general announcements to 2 parishes asking if anyone who may have been molested by 3 Father X, they should come forward. We have not done 4 that. That has not been our tradition. 5 Q. How could you, then, in your own intellectual 6 process, expect children to come forward about sexual 7 conduct when you, yourself, were too ashamed and guilty 8 and hypocritical to come forward about your own sexual 9 conduct? 10 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object, 11 misrepresents the testimony. 12 Q. Go ahead and answer. 13 A. Children are very close to their parents. They 14 are not adults. And I think that children who have felt 15 that something wrong has occurred in their life would feel 16 free enough to be able to share this information either 17 with parents or those individuals who are closest to them, 18 in some cases grandparents. 19 Q. So is it your belief that children without 20 education, without maturity, are more capable of coming 21 forward to reveal sexual misconduct than an Archbishop 22 with a wonderful education and maturity? 23 A. You're assuming that I did not reveal that to 24 anyone. Yesterday you questioned me about did I reveal 25 this to anyone, to a confessor, and I told you that that Page 351 1 is privileged knowledge, because any knowledge between 2 confessor and penitent is privileged knowledge. 3 A child, it seems to me, if they have felt hurt by 4 anyone, as they frequently are hurt, would share that hurt 5 with parents. That has simply been an assumption in my 6 mind. I don't believe it's a question of having more 7 education or greater formation to be able to share a hurt 8 that a person has suffered within themselves. I'm not an 9 expert in that field, nor do I claim to be or ever have 10 claimed to be such an expert. I certainly would listen to 11 psychiatrists or psychologists who are skilled in sexual 12 abuse of children, and they certainly could instruct me. 13 They can instruct us all. 14 Q. Whether or not you acknowledged your own conduct 15 in the context of the confessional, I presume we will 16 never know, but you did not divulge it publicly, 17 obviously? 18 A. No, I did not. 19 Q. But would you have expected, then, a child who 20 did not have your education, maturity, etc., to reveal 21 publicly what you, yourself, couldn't? 22 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and 23 answered. 24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: It's asked and answered. 25 Q. Go ahead and answer. Page 352 1 A. I believe I responded to that question already, 2 Mr. Pasternack. 3 Q. No, you responded by saying you weren't going to 4 tell me what happened in the confessional. And now I'm 5 asking you if you -- since you publicly couldn't reveal 6 your own conduct, why is it that you expect a child would 7 publicly reveal? 8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection. 9 MS. KENNEDY: Asked and answered. 10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Asked and answered, and 11 it misstates the evidence. His prior response did not -- 12 it alluded to the confessional, but it also talked about 13 the distinction between his own position and those of 14 children who have parents and loved ones and grandparents 15 they could go to. 16 Q. Go ahead and answer, Archbishop. 17 A. As I said previously, Mr. Pasternack, it seems 18 to me -- it seemed to me then, that in dealing with a 19 specific allegation, I did not feel a responsibility, I 20 was not aware of such to go back to other parishes or to 21 make public announcements, because I felt that if any 22 child -- or additional child had been violated, that they 23 would come forward. 24 Q. That doesn't answer the question. The question 25 is, if you couldn't publicly reveal what you had done, why Page 353 1 do you expect a child could publicly reveal what had been 2 done to them? 3 MS. KENNEDY: Objection. 4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, it misstates 5 the evidence. And he doesn't expect children to publicly 6 reveal what was done to them. He's just stated that that 7 revelation would be private within the family or to their 8 loved ones. 9 MS. KENNEDY: It misstates the evidence 10 both given earlier today and his testimony yesterday. 11 Q. Go ahead and answer, please, Archbishop. 12 A. Mr. Pasternack, I just would repeat again that I 13 would expect children to share intimately with those who 14 are closest to them, parents, grandparents or siblings, 15 events in their own life. I don't consider that to be a 16 public revelation. I would consider that to be quite 17 private within the walls of the family, within a loving 18 concern of a family, not a public revelation of any event 19 that may have occurred. 20 Q. Does canon law prohibit causing or fomenting 21 scandal in the Church? 22 A. Canon law does not -- in one instance, it refers 23 to something similar. I am not going to say that's 24 particularly causing scandal, but it cautions about it, 25 that in cases in which allegations have been brought Page 354 1 against a priest of any kind, that any type of 2 investigation into that allegation should be done 3 discreetly, so as not to bring a sense of division and a 4 sense of guilt to people and spread scandal to people 5 within that parish community. 6 Q. What canon is that? 7 A. I would have to refer to the Code of Canon Law 8 to find that canon, sir. 9 Q. Do you have any opinions, Archbishop, looking 10 back in retrospect as you see what has happened to the 11 Archidocese of Santa Fe, as you see what's happened to 12 all -- with all the people who have come forward -- 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. -- as to whether you performed adequately by not 15 more diligently investigating when these matters were 16 originally coming up? 17 A. I would say this, in all honesty, I think every 18 one of us, hindsight is 20/20 vision. When you look back, 19 we can always see things much clearer than we could when 20 we first looked at them. We have many Monday-morning 21 quarterbacks who would call a play differently, so that a 22 team might have won on Saturday. I think all of us, then, 23 in one way or another, know that we can improve on our 24 procedures, on our actions, on our programs, whatever it 25 may be. Even parents know that they can improve their Page 355 1 parental guidance of children once they've gained 2 experience. And I would say the same is true about me in 3 these cases. 4 I was inexperienced with pedophiliA. I did not know 5 what allegations entailed. I was unaware of any extensive 6 and continued damage that a child might suffer from that. 7 These were not issues that were public in the 1960s or 8 '70s and perhaps even early '80s. And so I acted -- and 9 this is the bottom line to your question -- I acted 10 according to what I knew and what I thought was best. 11 The information that we have now would lead me to 12 take a different course of action, so as to offer greater 13 protection to our children, because that is the greatest 14 concern of our Church is the common good of the people 15 whom we serve. And we have to continually look out for 16 that common good. 17 And so today, with knowledge that I have, I would 18 want to do things more effectively, more thoroughly, and 19 perhaps with greater continual follow-up, so that all 20 children would be protected. 21 Q. As these allegations of sexual misconduct by 22 your clergy came to your attention and in some cases were 23 confirmed by admissions of the alleged perpetrator -- 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. -- did you ever call up any psychiatrist, any Page 356 1 psychologist and ask, "Do you think there might be other 2 children out there that I should be worried about?" 3 A. No, I didn't ask that specific question, but I 4 would like you to know that I did speak with many 5 psychiatrists and many psychologists in the process of 6 therapy for these priests. These experts, the 7 psychotherapists, who certainly have gone through training 8 and have a far greater knowledge than I have or would have 9 had at that time, did not mention to me or suggest to me 10 that I should take or enter into a procedure of public 11 announcements or investigations. That was never brought 12 to my attention by any of our psychiatrists. 13 Q. You're talking now, aren't you, about cases 14 where individual priests were in counseling, and you would 15 ask for status reports on them? 16 A. Yes, but that did not exclude the opportunity 17 for any expert to be able to share with me any additional 18 concerns or directives or suggestions. 19 Q. The specific question, though, was did you ever 20 ask any psychologist or psychiatrist whether there might 21 be other victims? 22 A. And I replied to that that I did not. 23 Q. When you did have a priest who was in counseling 24 and you got a status report, isn't it the case that on 25 many occasions the status report from the professional was Page 357 1 that there would likely be or could be other victims? 2 A. No, I don't recall occasions of them saying that 3 there may likely have been many other victims. 4 Q. Any other victims? 5 A. Or any other victims. 6 Q. You mentioned in responding to whether you 7 initiated any investigations that basically that's not the 8 way the Church functions. 9 A. True. 10 Q. What is it, if you know, about the philosophy of 11 the Church which causes a lack of investigation under this 12 type of circumstance? 13 A. I don't want to have to continue to repeat, but 14 the Church is concerned about the privacy and the good 15 name of every individual within parishes. She is 16 concerned what would happen with public gossip and public 17 and malicious accusations of one another, how this would 18 result in the perhaps defamation of one family or children 19 or cause children to be hurt because of general 20 allegations and suspicions of others. 21 And so the Church has always cautioned that any type 22 of event that could be scandalous, not just for Church, 23 not thinking of official Church, but scandalous for the 24 people of the Church, where this could hurt them, that 25 these events have to be treated with great caution and Page 358 1 with prudence lest they hurt innocent people. That seems 2 to be the general concern of our Church. 3 Q. Do you have an opinion, now, looking back in 4 retrospect, as to whether that prudence and caution didn't 5 allow a terrible problem to fester secretly? 6 A. What I have learned now in 1994 is that 7 confirmed pedophiles, as we have looked at them, unless it 8 is their first occasion that they have molested a child, 9 that there is a possibility that they have molested 10 others, that is one of the characteristics that seems to 11 accompany pedophiliA. 12 And with that knowledge now, I would be more thorough 13 in any investigation that I would make with any allegation 14 that would be brought to me, so as to make certain that we 15 would cover as much of the field as possible, both for the 16 child that has been hurt and providing for that child and 17 for the family, but also to inquire from the family about 18 any possible other cases, asking also the psychiatrist who 19 might be helping the child to question whether the child 20 would know others, and to try to investigate any other 21 circumstances that could lead to possible victims. I 22 would try to be more thorough. 23 Q. The question was whether you have an opinion as 24 to whether the secrecy that was fomented in the 25 Archidocese of Santa Fe allowed a great scandal to go Page 359 1 undisclosed. 2 A. I don't -- you can call it secrecy. I think 3 that might characterize or mischaracterize the efforts. 4 We were trying to not make a public scandal, it is true. 5 We were trying to protect the good name of the people who 6 had come to us, because they're entitled to that, as well. 7 And it appears that there were other victims that did not 8 come forward immediately or were not known to us who have 9 since then surfaced. And apparently these victims who 10 have come forward have, in fact, been hurt to one degree 11 or another because they did not receive counseling 12 earlier. 13 Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether this policy 14 of the Church of avoiding public scandal ended up 15 resulting in many people being hurt? 16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection. The 17 testimony is -- it mischaracterizes the testimony. 18 Archbishop Sanchez' testimony was not that there was a 19 policy of the Church of avoiding public scandal. His 20 testimony is there was a policy of announcing -- not 21 announcing from the pulpit allegations of abuse to protect 22 individual parishioners within the Archidocese. 23 A. My opinion -- 24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mischaracterizes the 25 evidence. Page 360 1 A. My opinion is that our procedure was a good 2 procedure because it protects individuals, as well. But 3 my opinion would be that our procedure could be more 4 extensive and more private, being private, but still to 5 conduct investigations to search out individuals who may 6 also have been molested by the person accused. 7 Q. I do want to make it clear, Archbishop, that the 8 speaking and coaching objections are going to result in a 9 motion to resume your deposition. I just want to make 10 sure that was on the record so that it could be -- 11 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: You can make that -- 12 MR. PASTERNACK: So that you and your 13 counsel could be aware of that. 14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll make it clear that 15 any effort to resume the Archbishop's deposition will be 16 strenuously contested. 17 Q. Well, Archbishop, let me ask you this: If you 18 have an opinion on this, if a child in a northern New 19 Mexico community, Abiquiu or Canjilon or Coyote, had come 20 forward and gone public with an accusation that a certain 21 priest had sexually molested him or her, would that have 22 been the type of thing that canon law would refer to as a 23 public scandal that should be avoided? 24 A. Oh, no. If they came forward publicly, either 25 to the Church or to any civil authorities, that's simply a Page 361 1 fact that has to take place. That is a scandal, 2 certainly, because the priest has been accused of 3 molesting a child or children. But that is not to be 4 avoided that way. That's a fact. 5 The scandal about which I am referring is that which 6 can hurt people unjustly who are innocent. I spoke to you 7 yesterday about defamation and possible calumny, and I 8 think your interpretation was this was just in reference 9 to the perpetrator, and I was speaking in reference to the 10 people within the Church community. 11 Q. Is there a difference in the scandal level 12 caused by a child who comes forward and publicly announces 13 that, "Father So-and-So has molested me," or the family 14 member of the child who comes to you and says, "My child 15 says that Father So-and-So has molested me"? Is one a 16 bigger scandal than the other? 17 A. I think in terms of -- both of them are serious, 18 but in terms of public knowledge, one becomes more known 19 than the other. 20 Q. Well, once scandal reaches a certain level, is 21 it then the type of scandal that the Church does not want 22 to have become public for the reasons you specified? 23 A. No. I think what you're saying is that the 24 Church is trying to avoid any bad news in that concept for 25 itself. That's not the ideA. The Church is not looked at Page 362 1 at as a separate institution apart from the people of the 2 community. The people of the community are considered the 3 Church. And it's that people, that community, that is the 4 object of concern, when I speak about the Church trying to 5 avoid false allegations, one against the other, which 6 could be created by any public announcements. Private 7 investigations are something else. 8 Q. Then would it be the case, sir, that if the 9 child came forward without coming to the chancery first 10 and said, "Father So-and-So did this to me," that's 11 exactly the type of public scandal that the Church would 12 have wanted to avoid? 13 A. But it's one child accusing one priest. It's 14 not a question of how many out there may also be guilty or 15 not guilty, but be offended by this person and should come 16 forward. That's the difference. 17 Q. So would it be better, then, for the child to 18 conduct his investigation and round up other victims for 19 corroboration, thereby making it less scandalous when they 20 publicly reveal? 21 A. No, the child and the parents, actually, of the 22 child, certainly are free to address the issue however 23 they would choose, whether that was to come to Church 24 authorities or to go directly to any civil authorities. I 25 believe they come to Church authorities because they feel Page 363 1 that this person represents the Church; and therefore, 2 they feel the Church authorities should know this, and 3 this man should be removed from his position. 4 Q. The next question, then, is even if a person had 5 come to you and reported this on behalf of himself, as a 6 small child or through his or her parents, based on what 7 you've already said, isn't it true that you likely 8 wouldn't have investigated the matter anyway, because it 9 wouldn't have occurred to you that there would be other 10 victims? 11 A. I would have taken the concern of the people who 12 brought it to me, but I would not have made a public 13 announcement at the Church whether there would be other 14 victims involved. And I'm talking about 1970s, when 15 knowledge about this was very, very limited. 16 Q. Are you saying that knowledge was limited in 17 the -- on the part of the Church, or are you saying that 18 knowledge of everyone was limited about the injury caused 19 by child abuse? 20 A. My opinion would be that knowledge about child 21 abuse was a limited fact generally in the public. It 22 certainly did not have the high profile position that it 23 has today. 24 Q. All right. 25 A. And the knowledge that accompanies that high Page 364 1 profile position. 2 Q. Can you identify with any type of range when you 3 began to discover that childhood sexual abuse causes 4 injury? 5 A. I did not begin to address the issue of child 6 abuse with any type of focus to be able to gather whatever 7 information I could into the late 1980s. 8 Q. Would you expect that children who were sexually 9 abused in the '70s would know in the '70s a greater level 10 of information about the injury than you as an adult did? 11 A. No, sir, but neither would their parents. 12 Q. Where the priest admits guilt, so there's no 13 question about stirring up false accusations or false 14 rumors, would it still be scandalous to announce his guilt 15 from the pulpit and solicit others who may have been 16 injured to come forward? 17 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, misstates 18 Archbishop Sanchez' testimony. He has not -- where a 19 priest admits guilt does not necessarily exclude false 20 accusations towards other victims in the past. 21 MR. BENNETT: I want to jump in here, too, 22 and also join. I want to object to the coaching 23 objection. The only objection in the deposition, that I 24 understand the rules provide for, is an objection to the 25 form of the question, and I think this is coaching the Page 365 1 witness, and he's putting words in the witness' mouth, and 2 I think it's highly improper. And I'm going to object to 3 that. 4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, the question 5 misstates the evidence. I feel it's incumbent to set the 6 record straight as to what the evidence has been. 7 MR. BENNETT: I think the record speaks for 8 itself, and your testimony is not what we're here for, Mr. 9 Winterbottom. 10 MR. PASTERNACK: Just to be clear, what I'd 11 like to do here is go back and have the court reporter 12 read the question, so that Mr. Winterbottom can be assured 13 that the question didn't repeat testimony. It simply 14 asked a question. Would you please do that. 15 [The record was read by the reporter.] 16 Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) You can ahead and answer. 17 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Same objection, 18 misstates the testimony of the Archbishop Sanchez. 19 A. The question was whether this would be 20 considered scandalous to announce it from the pulpit, that 21 this priest has admitted molesting a child and then 22 publicly to invite all who may have been molested to come 23 forward. It would be offensive to people to hear a public 24 announcement of that nature. They would be told, one, 25 that the priest had been so accused is being removed for Page 366 1 that purpose. 2 The second announcement, that of there being other 3 children who might possibly have been victimized to please 4 come forward, that portion of that announcement could 5 begin to cause the type of questioning within the 6 community to which I had alluded previously over and over 7 again, how one might begin to wonder about this child or 8 that child. 9 Q. Is that a yes, Archbishop? Yes, it would be 10 scandalous to announce the admitted conduct of a child 11 molester? 12 A. It could be scandalous to the people, the second 13 part, not to admit the child molester. That could offend 14 them. It's scandalous -- anything that's done that is 15 sinful or shameful in a church that's public is 16 scandalous. That has a scandalous connotation. So the 17 answer is yes to your question. 18 Q. All right. In the eyes of the Church, is it 19 more important to prevent scandal than to prevent the rape 20 of children? 21 A. No. I think that you're excluding any 22 possibilities of in-betweens. The Church has a great 23 concern for all of its people. Its children are God's 24 gift to us. We have to protect them. We're not going to 25 do something that would endanger the children. That is Page 367 1 not the Church's action. 2 I know that you're saying that if we don't announce 3 something publicly that this is going to endanger the 4 children. The Church's policy has always been not to make 5 public announcements about things that could lead to 6 people being divided one against the other, of this type 7 of public scandal, as you would want to call it. It does 8 not exclude the Church's concern for any other victims who 9 may be present in that community. 10 Q. Is there a middle ground, in your opinion, 11 between avoidance of public scandal and rape of children? 12 A. You're making two comparisons, which you're 13 assuming that if there's no public announcement there's 14 automatically the rape of children. I'm saying that if a 15 rape of a child has occurred, any type of molestation, and 16 it's brought to our attention, that action is taken 17 seriously. The family is received and provided with 18 whatever is necessary for that child. But the need to 19 make a public announcement simply has not been the 20 tradition. 21 Q. Then wouldn't it be the case, sir, that the only 22 way the injuries of the child could be addressed and 23 remediated is if the child has more courage than you? 24 A. No, sir. The courage of the Church is to be 25 able to respond to the needs of that family. And if the Page 368 1 family themselves feel that there possibly could be other 2 victims, and they make any comment, an investigation is 3 begun to try to find any other families, any other 4 children, specifically, who may have been injured. 5 Q. I'm not asking about the courage of the Church. 6 Isn't it true that for the system, as you described the 7 Church's system, to function properly, a child has to have 8 more courage than you, as Archbishop, had? 9 A. No, sir. I don't believe that a child has to 10 have more courage than I had. I had to deal with 11 everything that was brought to my attention and to deal 12 with it immediately. I'm not certain what you are 13 alluding to when you're talking about a child needing more 14 courage to admit that he has been violated. Is this what 15 you're referring to? 16 Q. Yes. Your whole system, doesn't it depend on 17 the child having more courage in disclosing sexual contact 18 than you, yourself, were able to muster? 19 A. I did not initiate an investigation, and I have 20 testified to that. And I testified to the fact that I did 21 not initiate such an investigation for several reasons. 22 One, I was unaware that there could possibly be other 23 victims. That was not my primary focus. 24 But secondly, in response to your question about any 25 public announcements or that it might surface any possible Page 369 1 victims, I have responded that this has not been the 2 tradition of the Church and has not been such because it 3 is always considered the good of the people within that 4 community and would, in fact, depend upon the privacy, the 5 right of the individuals to come forward when they chose 6 to come forward. 7 Q. With all respect, sir, isn't it true that for 8 the traditions of the Church to have worked in the way you 9 described, a little child would have to have more courage 10 than that which you personally showed? 11 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and 12 answered. 13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, I think the 14 Archbishop has answered this question now several times, 15 and he's done the best he could. If you're not satisfied 16 with his answer, Mr. Pasternack, rephrase the question. 17 A. I can't right offhand think of examples that I 18 could share, but I'm wondering -- and this is a question, 19 in my mind -- whether a school in which a child perhaps 20 has revealed a molestation to the principal and the 21 principal is removed, whether public announcements are 22 then made to parents and children. I'm asking that as 23 inquiry. I'm just unaware of having read or heard about 24 such procedures. Because we're talking about the 25 procedure of the Catholic Church in response to such Page 370 1 allegations. 2 Q. That wasn't my question. 3 A. Yes, sir. 4 Q. My question is, in order for your system of the 5 Church to work in the way you described it, doesn't that 6 depend upon a little child having more courage to disclose 7 than you, as an Archbishop, as a trusted and revered 8 authority figure, as an admired representative of God on 9 earth, had the ability to muster yourself? 10 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and 11 answered. 12 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, asked and 13 answered. 14 A. Sir, I believe that a child has to have courage 15 to come forward to reveal any act of molestation against 16 himself, his person. That requires courage to tell any 17 one of his own family members. 18 I have to have the courage to be able to respond and 19 support that child and that family when that allegation is 20 brought to my attention. 21 Q. When Father Wolf now proclaims, on occasion, 22 information about people he believes to have been priests 23 who were molesting children in New Mexico, do you have an 24 opinion on whether that's scandalous on the part of Father 25 Wolf? Page 371 1 A. No, sir. I think that Father Wolf is making 2 statements publicly that, in fact, have been covered in 3 the news media, and I think he is making every effort to 4 assure the general public that the Church's concern for 5 any victim. I know that publicly, we also established an 6 open line so that people anywhere in this state or beyond 7 could call in and make known to us any allegation that 8 they choose. I know that we also set up that independent 9 commission for that purpose, as well. So I don't believe 10 his actions are scandalous. 11 Q. In retrospect, Archbishop, and perhaps engaging 12 in Monday-morning quarterbacking, do you feel you were 13 careless? 14 A. I feel, sir, that I did the best job I could at 15 that time with what I knew and what procedures I was aware 16 of. If you're asking whether I would do things 17 differently today, perhaps I would. 18 Q. Perhaps? Is there any doubt in your mind that 19 you were careless? 20 A. Well -- 21 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, misstates the 22 evidence. He didn't state he was careless. 23 A. I'm saying that perhaps I would -- 24 Q. Excuse me. 25 A. Sorry. Page 372 1 MR. PASTERNACK: When you ask someone, Mr. 2 Winterbottom, if they think they were careless, you are 3 not accusing them of having previously said it. Please 4 refrain from coaching, improper objections which will 5 unquestionably have to inconvenience this man by bringing 6 him back. 7 Q. Now, I will ask you again -- 8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I will make the 9 objections, Mr. Pasternack, as I feel they are necessary. 10 Q. -- in retrospect, is there any doubt in your 11 mind that you were careless? 12 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, misstates the 13 evidence, and it's asked and answered. 14 A. I responded to your question if there was any 15 doubt in my mind if I was careless. I said that I did the 16 job as best I could given the circumstances and the 17 knowledge I had at that time. I added that I felt that 18 perhaps -- I used that word -- I would do things 19 differently today if such a situation arose. 20 You objected to the word "perhaps." By that, I meant 21 if such a situation came to me and the situation were such 22 that I felt investigations were warranted because of the 23 event, I would have an investigation. 24 Q. Do you, as you sit here today, feel that it's 25 possible that you addressed the problem of childhood Page 373 1 sexual abuse while you were Archbishop properly? 2 A. I feel I did the best I could. I wish I had 3 known more about it. I wish that the awareness of 4 pedophilia as we know it today had been known to all of us 5 at that time, certainly to me, so that I could have done a 6 better job and more effective one in helping families, 7 children, and protecting others. 8 Q. When allegations of child molestation by priests 9 first started coming in to you -- 10 A. Yes, sir. 11 Q. -- did you make any effort to learn about it? 12 I've asked if you asked any psychologists or 13 psychiatrists. But did you go to a library, call up a 14 cardinal, call up the Vatican, get a book, read a 15 magazine, do anything to develop an understanding from 16 what literature or information there was about the 17 consequences of childhood sexual abuse? 18 A. No, sir, I did not make that effort. 19 Q. Okay. Let's, if we may, please, Archbishop, 20 turn to Arthur Perrault. When did you first make the 21 acquaintance of Arthur Perrault? 22 A. I made the acquaintance of Arthur Perrault when 23 he was appointed as a teacher at St. Pius X High School, I 24 believe in the year 1967. 25 Q. Were you there at the time as a teacher? Page 374 1 A. I was there at the time as a teacher. In fact, 2 it was my last year at St. Pius. I had been there for 3 seven years, and that was my last year. 4 Q. Was it the '67-'68 school year that was your 5 last year, or '66-'67? 6 A. No, my last school year was '67-'68. 7 Q. And did you come to find out while the two of 8 you were at Pius together where he was from and how he had 9 gotten to New Mexico? 10 A. No, sir, I did not. We were not friends to that 11 extent where we simply shared personal information with 12 one another. He was assigned as one of the professors. 13 There were many others, as you might imagine. And being 14 that I had been there a number of years, I had my own 15 friends, and he was simply another teacher. 16 Q. In the way the Church works, it's my 17 understanding that it is somewhat unusual for a priest who 18 was incardinated somewhere else to come into a different 19 archidocese. Is it somewhat unusual, absent a military 20 assignment or just visiting? 21 A. It might be unusual in some diocese. It was not 22 unusual in this Archidocese. Many priests who had served 23 in this Archidocese for many years were not native to this 24 Archidocese. In fact, the majority, I would say, of the 25 priests who served in this archidocese were from other Page 375 1 areas of the country and had come here to work with this 2 Archidocese. Some were ordained for this Archidocese, 3 coming from other areas. Others had been ordained 4 elsewhere and had come to work here. 5 Q. Are you able to quantify the proportion of those 6 who were ordained elsewhere and came to work here who came 7 here via Servants of the Paraclete? 8 A. No, I couldn't give you an accurate number to 9 that, Mr. Pasternack. 10 Q. Do you recall any range of numbers? 11 A. First of all, I wasn't aware of those who came 12 to the Archidocese via the Paracletes. I just knew that 13 there were a number of priests who were here from outside 14 of the Archidocese, who were not native to the 15 Archidocese. 16 Q. While you were at St. Pius, did anyone from the 17 Archidocese -- realizing that at the time you weren't 18 running it, you were an employee -- did anyone from the 19 Archidocese tell you or anybody at St. Pius, as far as you 20 know, about any sexual allegations or history of Arthur 21 Perrault? 22 A. No, sir, nothing. 23 Q. While you were at St. Pius, did any of the 24 students at St. Pius, even one, come to you and report 25 that Arthur Perrault had in any fashion sexually molested Page 376 1 them? 2 A. No, sir, none came to me. 3 Q. When did you first learn, if you learned, that 4 Arthur Perrault had come to New Mexico via Servants of the 5 Paraclete? 6 MR. KONRAD: I'm going to object to the 7 form of the question, as the phrase "via Servants of the 8 Paraclete" is meaningless. It's ambiguous. 9 Q. Go ahead and answer. 10 A. I'm not accurately sure when I learned it. I'm 11 trying to recall in my memory the years of the '70s or the 12 '80s. 13 Q. Fair enough. Let me ask you this: What is the 14 first situation under which you recall learning that 15 Arthur Perrault was accused of or had a history of being a 16 sex offender? 17 MR. KONRAD: I'm going to object to the 18 form of the question as assuming facts not in evidence. 19 There's been no evidence that at the time he had been 20 accused of or had a history of being a sex offender. 21 Q. Go ahead and answer. 22 A. I was unaware of any history of a sex offense. 23 Probably until I had asked him to enter into therapy, and 24 I don't recall even the -- any knowledge, any specific 25 knowledge, about any specific allegations that may have Page 377 1 been made against him. I may have very well have had a 2 what I would call a general knowledge that there had been 3 allegations against him, but I was unaware of any specific 4 ones. And that would have probably surfaced in -- on 5 occasion of asking him to enter into therapy. 6 Q. Approximately when do you recall asking him to 7 enter into therapy? 8 A. I know that I had him in therapy, and I had 9 spoken with the doctor repeatedly beginning in either late 10 1980, early 1981. I believe that there was another 11 occasion that we spoke -- that's Father Perrault and 12 myself -- about him continuing therapy. I use the word 13 "continuing" because he had indicated that he had seen a 14 therapist named -- a Dr. Hermann, and that he had been 15 seeing him. And I had asked him to continue his therapy 16 that he was undergoing at that time. 17 Q. Was that sometime before you asked him to enter 18 into therapy? 19 A. Before I asked him to enter into therapy with a 20 Dr. VanDenHeuvel, right. 21 Q. Right, okay. Do you recall what specific 22 episode or episodes occurred that caused you to ask Father 23 Perrault to enter into therapy with Dr. VanDenHeuvel? 24 A. Yes. When we had dealt with Father Jason 25 Sigler, the former Father Jason Sigler in 1981, I had Page 378 1 spoken with Dr. VanDenHeuvel, whether he would be able to 2 offer continual therapy to Father Art Perrault, and he 3 said he would be able to receive him. 4 I don't recall whether he had known Father Art 5 Perrault previously, but I asked him at that time that 6 Father Perrault would go there, so that he would have 7 regular contact with a therapist for regular monitoring, I 8 guess you'd use that word. 9 Q. All right. Please explain why it is that 10 whatever happened with Father Jason Sigler in roughly 1981 11 caused you to talk to VanDenHeuvel about Perrault? 12 A. Yes. Father Jason Sigler had been accused of 13 molesting children at St. Therese parish in Albuquerque. 14 His pastor had come to me and brought this to my 15 attention. And upon questioning Father Sigler about it, 16 he had admitted his guilt and was asked then to cease from 17 his assignment immediately and faculties removed, and he 18 was asked to return to Jemez Springs, the Servants of the 19 Paraclete, for treatment, and that he would have no longer 20 any assignment in the Archidocese. 21 Because of this, the allegations of the sexual abuse 22 that had occurred, in conference with my attorney at that 23 time over it, because I had spoken with him about this, we 24 felt that Father Perrault -- we could start a process 25 where anyone who has ever had any problem should have Page 379 1 continual care with a therapist for their well-being. 2 Q. Well, who else was put into the therapy as a 3 result of the Sigler thing? Perrault and who else? 4 A. He was -- Father Jason Sigler and Father 5 Perrault were the only ones that I had in therapy at that 6 time. 7 Q. Well, didn't you just say that it was anyone who 8 had had that kind of problem in the past? 9 A. No, that that would become a process for us that 10 we would follow. This was going to become -- 11 Q. So you didn't go back at that point in 1981 and 12 ask Ed Donnollan to enter into therapy? 13 A. I may have asked Father Donnollan to enter into 14 therapy. I think it was a little later, but it wasn't for 15 any type of sexual molestation, as I mentioned yesterday. 16 It was because of his continued harassment of people and 17 his anger, and so he went into therapy. 18 Q. And would it be equally the case that you didn't 19 ask in 1981 to enter into therapy? 20 A. I can't recall the year when we had Father 21 into therapy. We had him there twice, if I 22 recall correctly, in Jemez Springs for therapy. 23 Q. And by the way, when Jason Sigler admitted to 24 you in 1981 these things happened, would it be accurate to 25 say that you again did not alert the parishioners at St. Page 380 1 Therese, at Fort Sumner, at Abiquiu, at Immaculate 2 Conception in Las Vegas where he had previously served, 3 that he was now an admitted, confessed child molester? 4 A. No, sir, we did not make that general 5 announcement, as we have discussed previously. 6 Q. What was it that caused you to have the opinion 7 or know in 1981 that Perrault needed this therapy for 8 matters relating to sex? 9 A. I don't have a recollection of the event, but I 10 am told that a woman named Mrs. Nowak had approached me in 11 the mid 1970s, '76 or '77, I'm not certain, but -- and had 12 informed me that she felt that Father Perrault who had 13 been a friend of the family, had in fact molested one or 14 two of her boys. And I don't recall what form of 15 molestation that she may have mentioned to me at all. I 16 don't recall that conversation. 17 Q. Let me ask you, then, before you continue. Are 18 you saying that now, in 1994, you do not recall any 19 alleged conversation with Mrs. Nowak in the mid or late 20 '70s? 21 A. That's right. 22 Q. But are you also saying that in 1981, you must 23 have recalled it because it's probably why you put 24 Perrault into therapy? 1981. 25 A. I put Father Arthur Perrault into therapy as a Page 381 1 result of the events, as I said, with Jason Sigler and as 2 a precaution for his own behavior and monitoring, 3 strengthening him continually. 4 Q. Was the motivating factor in 1981 your 5 recollection of, at that point, of the meeting with a 6 lady -- 7 A. It must have been. That's -- I would assume 8 that, even though I don't recall the meeting with her. 9 But it must have been referring back to that event that 10 she had made known to me in whatever year that was. 11 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to why that 12 particular episode in the mid or late 1970s escapes your 13 current memory? 14 A. I wish I did know, sir. But it may very well 15 have been the first occasion that anyone spoke to me about 16 anything. She may not have used what I would call 17 descriptive language as we use today. It may have been 18 shrouded in terms such as, "abusing my sons," "something 19 has happened there," and "I just don't think that Father 20 should continue to be close to us, or perhaps do whatever 21 ministry he was in." 22 I do not recall the specifics in meeting with Father 23 Perrault at any of her requests, but I have a vague 24 recollection in my mind of having confronted Father 25 Perrault about some issue. But I can't recall the Page 382 1 specific issue. 2 Q. Well, would it be accurate to say that this 3 conversation which you think may have happened in the mid 4 to late 1970s was apparently vivid in your mind in 1981, 5 so that when the Sigler thing came up, you instantly got 6 Perrault in touch with VanDenHeuvel? 7 A. I don't know if it was vividly in my mind. Any 8 allegation that would have come up, I would have also 9 passed on to our attorneys and sort of left it in their 10 hands this way. And I believe it was at the attorneys' 11 initiative in speaking with me that the recommendation was 12 made that we would keep Arthur Perrault in therapy, and I 13 was -- I have to imagine that I chose Dr. VanDenHeuvel 14 simply because the man he had seen previously, a Dr. 15 Hermann, was no longer available to him. Perhaps he had 16 retired or whatever. But I asked him to see Dr. 17 VanDenHeuvel. 18 Q. When you learned at some point in the mid to 19 late '70s through this mother of a boy who reported that 20 her son had been abused, did you conduct any investigation 21 of Perrault? 22 A. No, sir. I did not conduct any investigation of 23 Perrault, not that I can recall. As I said, I don't 24 recall the specific conversation with the mother. I don't 25 recall a specific conversation with Father Art Perrault. Page 383 1 Q. Did you continue to allow him to have parish 2 assignments even after the mother had made these 3 accusations? 4 A. In the mid '70s, at that time, Father Perrault 5 was -- his principal assignment was that of director of 6 the liturgy for the Archidocese, and the printing of a 7 liturgical newsletter, as well as of a communication to 8 the Archidocese called the Commentator. He was given 9 half-time assignment so as to enable him to assist on 10 Sundays in the celebration of Mass for parishioners at 11 Anunciation parish. But he was not involved in the full 12 parish program. 13 Q. But isn't it true that throughout the mid and 14 late 1970s, and continuing on into 1980, he was allowed to 15 work in parochial work at Anunciation? 16 A. Sir, he was doing what we call part-time or 17 weekend assignment work, which means that it's basically 18 hearing of confessions on the weekend and of celebration 19 of the Eucharist for the parish. Also to celebrate Mass 20 during the weekdays, whenever the pastor would ask for his 21 assistance, because they would have perhaps a funeral or 22 something else. But he was not the full-time pastor or 23 full-time assistant to Anunciation at that time. 24 Q. No, but he was there and administering Holy 25 Sacraments, wasn't he? Page 384 1 A. Only on the weekends, celebration of the 2 Eucharist and the celebration of the sacrament of 3 confession for them, right. 4 Q. You don't expect, do you, that child abuse is 5 limited to Mondays through Fridays? 6 A. No, sir. 7 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object, 8 argumentative. 9 A. No, sir, child abuse can occur any time. Nor do 10 I recall at this time where Mrs. Nowak may have said the 11 abuse had occurred. I simply don't recall the 12 conversation with her. 13 Q. Why didn't you conduct an investigation when she 14 told you about Arthur Perrault? 15 A. This was my first allegation that had been 16 brought to me as a new Archbishop. I certainly had no 17 experience whether investigations needed to be done or 18 whether I needed simply to confront the priest who was 19 accused, and if such was -- if such was the truth, if he 20 had admitted to that, to see that he would receive proper 21 therapeutic psychotherapy, help for himself, so that this 22 action would not be repeated in the future. 23 Q. Did you have a meeting with him and confront him 24 with Ms. Nowak's allegations? 25 A. As I mentioned a few moments ago, I recall Page 385 1 meeting with Father Perrault. I don't recall whether that 2 was the confrontation with him or not. 3 Q. Do you recall whether he admitted in the meeting 4 that he had molested children? 5 A. I don't recall the content of the meeting with 6 him at all, as I mentioned. I just recall meeting with 7 him. 8 Q. Do you recall pulling his personnel file, 9 looking at it and seeing if there was any history of 10 sexual abuse? 11 A. No, sir, I do not recall that either. 12 Q. Do you recall whether you placed him on any type 13 of supervision, such that when he was around children on 14 weekends at various parishes, he would be supervised? 15 A. I may very well have done that as part of that 16 conversation. I also may very well have asked him to 17 continue to see Dr. Hermann for therapy. 18 Q. Do you recall whether or not you put additional 19 supervision on him, or I think you just said you may have? 20 A. I'm using the word "may" because none of those 21 particulars are in my active memory. 22 Q. Would it be accurate to say, then, that as best 23 as you currently recall today -- 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. -- you can't say that you probably employed Page 386 1 additional supervisory measures on him? 2 A. I could not say with certitude, no. 3 Q. Hadn't there already been allegations a few 4 years before, in 1974, that he had molested a boy at Our 5 Lady of Guadalupe in Albuquerque? 6 A. Not to my knowledge, sir. Not at all. 7 Q. Then can you tell us, anyone who may be watching 8 the tape, what action, if any, you took with regard to 9 Arthur Perrault's alleged sexual misconduct between the 10 time you received the complaint from the lady in the mid 11 1970s and the time you placed him into therapy with 12 VanDenHeuvel as a result of the Sigler situation? 13 A. I've already mentioned that I do not have an 14 active recall of any specific actions with Father Perrault 15 resulting from the conversation with Mrs. Nowak, as she 16 stated it. I don't recall the conversation. I don't 17 recall the confrontation with Father, although I do recall 18 meeting with him for a meeting which would have been of a 19 serious nature. But I don't recall the contents of that. 20 Q. Do you recall meeting with him again in 1981 to 21 tell him that he would be asked to enter into therapy with 22 VanDenHeuvel? 23 A. No, I don't recall that meeting. But I do know 24 that I had sent him to Dr. VanDenHeuvel, and there was a 25 document sent from doctor's office that he reported, as Page 387 1 requested. And then after that, he continued in therapy, 2 then, for the next 10, 11, 12 years on a regular basis. 3 Q. When you sent him to VanDenHeuvel in 1981, did 4 you ask VanDenHeuvel whether there might have been other 5 Perrault victims? 6 A. No, sir, I did not ask him that question, nor 7 did he offer me any information in that regard. 8 Q. Was there an additional triggering event between 9 the conversation that you refer to in the mid 1970s and 10 the time you sent him to VanDenHeuvel in 1981? Had he 11 been accused of molesting anybody else? 12 A. Could you repeat it just one more time, just so 13 I don't -- 14 Q. You've testified about the conversation with the 15 lady in the mid '70s or late '70s. You have testified 16 that after the Sigler revelations in '81, you put Perrault 17 in therapy. And my specific question is: Had there been 18 any allegations against Arthur Perrault of a sexual 19 nature, between the conversation in the mid to late '70s 20 and the time you put him into therapy as a result of the 21 Sigler episode? 22 A. No, sir, no allegations were brought to my 23 attention. In addition to that, in one letter from the 24 therapist, from Dr. VanDenHeuvel, in 1983, he indicated 25 that the therapy with Father Perrault was proceeding very Page 388 1 well. He felt that he was getting himself more in contact 2 with all the reality. He felt better regarding 3 interpersonal relationships, and he indicated that there 4 had been -- as far as he could see, there had been no 5 other incidents in the life of Father Perrault for the 6 past seven years. 7 He also included in that letter, he said, "Given his 8 progress, I can see no reason why you would not want to 9 give him a full-time pastoral assignment." The statement 10 was simply made in the letter. We did not give -- take 11 any action on that statement. But that was part of the 12 testimony of the psychiatrist. 13 Q. You seem to have a very precise recall of that 14 letter. Have you seen it lately? 15 A. I have seen the letter. 16 Q. How recently? 17 A. I saw that as recent as this morning. 18 Q. And prior to this morning, did you have the same 19 recollection of those events as you do now that you saw 20 the letter this morning? 21 A. No, sir, I would not have recalled all those 22 events, but seeing the letter written with the statements, 23 that's what I could refer to. 24 Q. However, isn't it correct, Archbishop, that by 25 the fall of 1984, you were beginning to receive reports Page 389 1 that he was molesting again? 2 A. Fall of 1984? 3 Q. I'll try to be more specific. 4 A. If you could, please. 5 Q. Your chancellor, in September of 1984, was 6 Father Starkey, wasn't it? 7 A. Yes, sir. 8 Q. And didn't Father Starkey come to you in 9 September of 1984, or thereabouts, and say that Elaine and 10 Paul Montoya had come in and said that Perrault had 11 sexually molested them? 12 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object to the 13 form of the question, Mr. Pasternack. You know that that 14 testimony was about allegations occurring in the early 15 '70s, and the form of your question was putting it as he 16 was molesting again. 17 Q. Go ahead and answer, Archbishop. 18 A. I don't recall the names Elaine Montoya -- I 19 don't recall that name nor any visit with Father Starkey 20 regarding any allegation that they had brought to him. 21 Again, I cannot say that it did not happen. 22 Many, many things were brought to my attention about 23 various things that I would have no recall about. But I 24 don't recall that specifically at all. I know that Father 25 Perrault continued in his therapy with Dr. VanDenHeuvel. Page 390 1 He continued for 11 years. And I'm sure that if there had 2 been something that had surfaced that was of a serious 3 nature, the doctor also would have brought that to my 4 attention, and we would have discussed it. 5 Q. Do you know whether Father Starkey ever gave the 6 doctor any information about allegations against Perrault? 7 A. Not that I would know, no. It's possible he may 8 have called the doctor, but I would not be able to testify 9 to that. 10 Q. Did you or any of your representatives, as best 11 you recall, ever refer anyone who identified themselves as 12 a victim of Arthur Perrault to the Archidocese attorney, 13 Charles Reynolds, for representation? 14 A. Any of the victims? 15 Q. That's right. 16 A. Not that I recall, no. 17 Q. In 1984, do you recall what the policy would 18 have been if somebody came in to report that they had been 19 sexually abused by a priest? Would they be immediately 20 given an audience with you or would this have had to work 21 its way up the channels through the chancellor? 22 A. Most of the time people spoke with Father 23 Starkey. He is the one who took most phone calls about 24 everything. And people would call to have a meeting with 25 him, and he would do the meeting with the people. Page 391 1 Sometimes he would say something to me about 2 whatever, but on most occasions, he simply did not confer 3 with me about the things that he felt he was handling, and 4 I would not get that specific information. So I never met -- 5 as far as I can recall, I never met with the Montoyas. 6 Q. Are you saying, sir, that then it's possible 7 that someone who alleged to have been sexually abused by a 8 priest might get only as far as Starkey, and you would 9 never know? 10 A. Not by way of policy, no. 11 Q. But by way of happenstance? 12 A. It could have happened. 13 Q. If that occurred, do you find that acceptable, 14 that child abuse reports stop at the chancellor? 15 A. No, sir. 16 Q. Would you have wanted Starkey to bring such 17 matters to your attention? 18 A. I think anything of a serious nature should have 19 been brought to my attention. 20 Q. By 1984, would you consider Perrault to have 21 been a friend of yours? 22 A. Actually, Father Art Perrault never really 23 became a friend, as you would want to characterize him. 24 He was an acquaintance. He was a priest of the 25 Archidocese. We had frequent contact because of our -- Page 392 1 the ministry that he was involved in and my own 2 responsibilities. But I had similar contact with all of 3 our pastors that way. But he was no friend. We never had 4 a dinner together, other than at his rectory when I was 5 visiting there for confirmation. We never went to any 6 recreational movie or whatever together. 7 Q. Do you recall when the woman in the mid to late 8 '70s met with you, whether she insisted that Perrault be 9 placed into the care of a mental health practitioner? 10 A. No, sir, I don't recall that. I have not seen 11 any documentation in that regard. If you have something 12 to refresh my memory, I'd be happy to look at it, but I 13 simply do not recall meeting with Mrs. Nowak. 14 Q. Well, do you remember whether you participated 15 in the selection of Simon Hermann to be Perrault's 16 psychologist? 17 A. No. What I understood from Art Perrault was 18 that he had been seeing this gentleman and apparently had 19 already known him. I did not know Dr. Hermann. 20 Q. Did you ever direct or facilitate Perrault's 21 mental health care through a Dr. David Rosenstein? 22 A. Never heard of the name. 23 Q. Do you recall whether you told the lady at the 24 time of the meeting in the mid to late '70s, these words 25 or words to this effect, "What do you want from me? They Page 393 1 send these people from all over the country." 2 A. No, I don't recall anything of our conversation. 3 I'm glad you're mentioning these things. Maybe that will 4 help snap. 5 Q. Have you experienced this, that sometimes there 6 are things that you don't recall, and then there's a 7 triggering event that brings it to your current 8 recollection? 9 A. Sometimes it would bring a general concept in my 10 mind. Not specifics, but sometimes a general concept can 11 appear. You know, in any given day, as you might imagine, 12 the office of the Archbishop has just numerous demands 13 upon it, both with phone calls, the amount of mail that 14 arrives daily, and the daily interviews with priests, 15 religious and laity, besides the nighttime obligations of 16 visiting parishes, meeting with parish councils and 17 greeting hundreds of people continually, and I just -- I 18 think sometimes for your own protection, you put out of 19 your mind the activity of the day, so as to try to address 20 yourself to each thing that comes next. So there's just 21 been many things that I could not give you detailed 22 account of. 23 Q. Have there been some things that you've put out 24 of your mind because they were painful? 25 A. That's possible. That's possible. Page 394 1 Q. Is it just possible or do you know that on 2 occasion you have done that? 3 A. I could not swear that I have done that on 4 occasion. That is possible. I think that's been 5 described in whatever I read as a defensive mechanism, 6 that people, in general, like to forget those things that 7 are painful, and they like to remember the things that are 8 joyful. 9 [The witness conferred with his attorney.] 10 Q. Before we get back on Perrault, let me just ask 11 you about this settlement that you now feel is not 12 confidential, the Anthony Fontana-Clive Lynn matter. 13 A. Oh, yes, surely. 14 Q. What do you recall about that settlement? 15 A. Since the settlement was not a confidential 16 settlement, that has been brought to my attention now, I 17 feel free that I can share whatever recollection I have of 18 it. 19 It appears to me -- to the best of my recollection, 20 that the Archidocese was given notice by an attorney, I 21 believe it was directly from Mr. Fontana, who was an 22 attorney in LouisianA. I can't recall the city. 23 In any event, he had put us on notice that he was -- 24 had been notified by another attorney in Albuquerque that 25 a young person in the city of Mora, New Mexico, had Page 395 1 brought to her attention that he had been abused by a 2 Father Clive Lynn a few years earlier. Mr. Fontana 3 brought this to our attention around, I guess, 1988, 1989, 4 in that areA. And that the alleged abuse had occurred 5 when Father Lynn was in Mora, which would have made it 6 around, I suppose, 1984 or so. 7 And he would want us to contact him and to speak to 8 him about it. I brought this to the to the attention of 9 the Archdiocesan attorney, Mr. Chuck Reynolds. Mr. 10 Reynolds contacted Mr. Fontana and the Albuquerque 11 liaison. As a result of that, Mr. Fontana came out to 12 meet with us personally and informed us of the details and 13 mentioned that he would be willing to enter into a 14 settlement for this without going to trial or having to 15 bother with more time, etc., etc. 16 And I was impressed with Mr. FontanA. He had 17 mentioned to me that his brother, I believe, is a Catholic 18 priest, and so we had much in common to talk about. He 19 seemed to be very personal and open. I told him that I 20 appreciated his information. 21 As a result of the meeting, our attorney then 22 contacted the insurance company that was covering us at 23 that time. 24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Excuse me, Archbishop, 25 I'm going to instruct you not to discuss anything within Page 396 1 the attorney-client privilege; that is, you can discuss 2 your conversations with Mr. FontanA. You can discuss what 3 the settlement was. But in terms of discussions between 4 yourself and your attorney or your attorney and other 5 individuals, I'm going to instruct you not to go into 6 those areas. 7 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 8 A. As a result of our effort, then, on behalf of 9 the request of Mr. Fontana representing this person from 10 Mora, whom I never met, incidentally, whom I never 11 interviewed, nor did I meet the family, a settlement was 12 reached and agreed upon, and Mr. Fontana had indicated to 13 me his willingness to provide me with information 14 regarding how to work with priests who may have 15 difficulties and to provide me with information in general 16 regarding pedophilia and what was taking place. Because I 17 simply mentioned to him that I was certainly not as 18 informed at all about this issue as he was, and he seemed 19 quite open to that fact. 20 So after the settlement, I did write him a letter -- 21 no, he sent me a letter, in fact, with information, just 22 some points about establishing a policy for the 23 Archidocese, things of this nature, that he felt would be 24 of assistance to try to have a handle on any issues 25 concerning pedophiliA. I responded with a letter of Page 397 1 appreciation for his interest and his assistance. And 2 that was the gist of our relationship. 3 Q. What was the amount of the settlement? 4 A. I believe -- and I have not seen that figure for 5 about six, seven years. But I believe it was $200,000 to 6 $250,000. I think that was the cap. Yes, it was between 7 $200,000 and $250,000. 8 Q. Now, do you recall approximately when Mr. 9 Fontana first contacted you about this allegation? 10 A. The first contact, I believe, was -- I would say 11 probably 1989. I don't recall what part of the year. But 12 I choose that year because it was after Clive Lynn had 13 left Raton and had returned to his family in Ireland. So 14 it would have to put it at that time, about '88, '89. I 15 think it was probably 1989. 16 Q. And the allegations that Mr. Fontana made which 17 arose in Mora, would those things have chronologically 18 preceded Father Lynn's tenure in Raton? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Now, you've testified yesterday that there was 21 some indication from people in Raton that he had sexually 22 abused. You now had information that he had abused before 23 Raton, in MorA. At that point, then, in 1989, did you 24 contact the people of Raton, the people of Mora or the 25 people at St. Therese to tell them what you had learned Page 398 1 about Father Lynn and to ask if any of them had been 2 similarly treated? 3 A. No, sir, I did not. 4 Q. Did you make any offers to the woman who had 5 complained to you about the molestation of her own son 6 once you settled the case with Mr. Fontana? 7 A. No, sir, we did not. 8 Q. Why? 9 A. I suppose I was responding to the requests of 10 individuals, and it did not occur to me to take the 11 initiative and to contact whoever it was in Raton that had 12 made the allegations to speak with them about any type of 13 settlement. 14 Q. Did you feel it was not incumbent upon you to 15 reveal to the people in Raton that now a financial 16 settlement had been made with regard to a priest whom they 17 alleged had sexually molested them? 18 A. No, sir. 19 Q. Did you kind of hope that the whole situation 20 would blow over, and you wouldn't hear from the people in 21 Raton? 22 A. Well, I think that you are hoping that each case 23 can be settled, and you hope that there's peace in 24 parishes and peace in different families that may have 25 been upset. And I just did not take the initiative to Page 399 1 reopen any of these issues. 2 Q. In your mind, did you think back to the Raton 3 allegations and at least offer prayers for those people? 4 A. Oh, I've offered prayers for our people 5 continually. I suppose one of the biggest things in my 6 mind was Father Lynn and the fact that he was out of the 7 country, and we couldn't even confront him. 8 Incidentally, when he had left the country, we had 9 suspended him from all of his faculties. 10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, this 11 might be a good time to take a break. We've been at it 12 for over an hour. 13 MR. PASTERNACK: Okay. 14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Thank you. 15 MR. GOFFE: The time, as indicated on the 16 screen, is 10:45 AM. We will go off the record. 17 [A recess was taken.] 18 MR. GOFFE: The time is 11:07. We are back 19 on the record. 20 Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) Did there come a time, 21 Archbishop, when you directed Arthur Perrault to go to 22 Southdown? 23 A. Yes, sir. I asked Father Arthur Perrault to go 24 to Southdown in the summer of 1992. 25 Q. Why? Page 400 1 A. It was a result of a meeting with a gentleman 2 named and his wife; their counselor, I believe 3 her name was Dr. Schreiner; their attorney; and a 4 confrontation -- this was held at the office of Dr. 5 Schreiner with Father Art Perrault, his attorney and his 6 therapist. And the confrontation was due to the fact that 7 Mr. had revealed to his therapist in the 8 course of therapy that he, in fact, had been abused by 9 Father Art Perrault in the early 1970s. And all of this 10 came to light in his therapy with her, and they had 11 notified us that the attorney of Mr. had notified 12 the Archidocese of this fact. 13 And we had met with them, and through a series of 14 meetings with the family and with their therapist, we 15 had -- they had asked for a settlement with certain 16 demands, and a part of it was they wanted Father Arthur 17 Perrault to enter into a program of therapeutic care that 18 they felt would be in accord with what they felt was 19 adequate for sexual care. 20 Whether they had required it or not, I felt that 21 Father Perrault should go into a program at that time to 22 have another re-evaluation totally by a center apart from 23 his therapist who had been seeing him for a number of 24 years and to give us a chance to see what that evaluation 25 would result in. So I did send him to Southdown in the Page 401 1 summer of 1992. 2 Q. Would it be accurate to say, then, that you made 3 the determination, not in consultation with VanDenHeuvel, 4 to send him to Southdown? 5 A. VanDenHeuvel was informed that this was my 6 intention. It was not -- I did not consult him seeking 7 his approval. But I did inform the therapist that I was 8 asking his patient to enter into an evaluation setting at 9 Southdown that summer. 10 Q. Had your inexperience or perhaps even naivete 11 about psychological issues enhanced by that point that you 12 felt you were going to make the therapeutic directions 13 rather than listen to VanDenHeuvel? 14 A. Dr. VanDenHeuvel had, in fact, been guiding 15 Father Arthur Perrault for about 12 years by that time. 16 And I thought that it was good for a whole team to have an 17 evaluation of a man such as Father Arthur Perrault who had 18 now been confronted with an allegation. I was present for 19 that. And it was my first time that I had seen such a 20 confrontation with therapists present, attorneys present, 21 and the people, family, present. And I felt that I wanted 22 this type of a follow-up to take place for Arthur 23 Perrault. 24 Q. What was Father Perrault's reaction at the 25 confrontation? Page 402 1 A. He did not say much because his own attorney was 2 was present with him, and she was instructing him not to 3 reply. And in fact, they did not want too much of a 4 reply, if I recall correctly. The confrontation was 5 actually an opportunity, if my memory serves me right, for 6 this gentleman, , to be able to express himself 7 thoroughly and without interruption to all of us and in 8 the presence of the accused about what he felt had 9 happened to him back around 1971. And so he had that 10 opportunity for about an hour and a half to do that 11 without interruption. 12 Q. Did he vividly describe repeated acts of sexual 13 abuse? 14 A. He -- I wouldn't say repeatedly or vividly. 15 There were vivid descriptions, certainly vivid to me. I 16 don't know how it affected others, but it certainly 17 affected me strongly, yes. 18 Q. Did he give numerous examples of abuse? 19 A. He mentioned that it occurred on several 20 occasions. I don't recall the number or whatever. But 21 the vivid description was certainly very shocking. 22 Q. If these events were presented to you in 1992 as 23 having occurred in 1971, why did you care to send him to 24 Southdown? Wasn't it a resolved issue, since it had 25 happened 20 years ago? Page 403 1 A. It was not a resolved issue in my mind, because 2 he's still a priest of the Archidocese. But also because 3 the therapist there -- I respected her comments. She 4 seemed to be well aware of issues of sexuality and 5 molestation of children, and she would explain things very 6 well. I was present not only for that one occasion, but 7 for two additional meetings with her and the others where 8 she had a chance to explain various things about 9 pedophilia, but most especially about someone like 10 . And I came to respect her. And she felt that for 11 Father Art Perrault to really have a general -- 12 comprehensive, rather, understanding of his actions and 13 his own inclinations, that he needed to be in a setting 14 where people had specialized in that type of work and not 15 with simply a general psychiatrist who had been treating 16 him. 17 And I thought that her advice was well given, and I 18 listened to that. And so I felt I would immediately 19 recommend to her -- I spoke with her about Southdown, and 20 I got information, some written documents from Southdown 21 advertising their type of program, and she was pleased 22 with that and felt that that would be a good place for him 23 to go. 24 Q. Hadn't you already sent Sabine Griego to 25 Southdown? Page 404 1 A. I had sent Sabine Griego to Southdown. That's 2 how I came to know about it. 3 Q. And in this conversation with Dr. Schreiner, or 4 these conversations, did she make it clear to you that 5 somebody who had molested a child 20 years ago might still 6 be a risk to be a child molester thereafter? 7 A. I don't recall a specific statement such as you 8 have made, Mr. Pasternack, but the instruction that she 9 was offering to all of us who were there present was 10 enlightening, and I believe it was at that time that I 11 began to understand that pedophilia was not -- I wouldn't 12 call it -- maybe the word is "addictive." I don't know 13 all what "addictive" totally means in psychiatric 14 language. 15 But it is a type of illness where a person has to 16 monitor it always, much like alcoholism; that it's not 17 simply an illness that, once treated, can hopefully be 18 overcome immediately; that it's going to have to be 19 treated and re-treated continually in their life. 20 I was interested in her comments because I realized 21 that in the country there were various opinions about 22 pedophilia, whether or not it is able to be corrected 23 totally or whether it's never able to be totally 24 corrected. And her comments were that it's a type of 25 illness that is addictive and a person has to monitor it Page 405 1 with continual psychotherapy and especially a -- in a 2 setting dealing with psychiatrists who are skilled in 3 sexual abuse, especially of minors. 4 Q. Can you direct me to any professional literature 5 or lay literature that has ever said that pedophilia is 6 curable? 7 A. I would say that literature prior to the 19 -- 8 1985 probably dealt with pedophilia as one of the types of 9 sexual illnesses that could be treated and treated 10 effectively with proper psychotherapy, not calling it 11 addictive or permanent. 12 Q. And were you reading that literature back in 13 1985? 14 A. Not reading that particular literature, sir, but 15 these were comments that were being made. In fact, Dr. 16 Schreiner referred to that type of comments or opinions of 17 psychotherapists as being distinct from the opinion of 18 psychotherapists today. 19 Q. Have you, yourself, sir, ever read an article 20 anywhere that ever said that pedophilia was curable? 21 A. I did not read an article, but I did hear an 22 address on one occasion given to the National Conference 23 of Catholic Bishops where we had a panel of psychiatrists 24 addressing us, and one of them addressed the issue saying 25 that in his opinion, that this was not yet a settled Page 406 1 issue; that in fact, pedophilia is not correctable; that 2 he felt that the final word has not yet been spoken in 3 that regard. 4 Q. When was that conference? 5 A. That conference -- I think that particular one 6 was around 1990. 7 Q. And was that the first time you recall ever 8 hearing anyone say that pedophilia might be curable? 9 A. No. I had assumed, in fact, that pedophilia was 10 like any other illness; it was curable. What I 11 discovered, and especially now in the 1990s, was that more 12 and more the psychotherapy field is holding that it may 13 not be curable. 14 Q. From what sources had you, prior to 1990, 15 derived the assumption that pedophilia might be curable? 16 A. Simply by the fact that in dealing with the 17 psychologists and psychiatrists who had dealt with our 18 priests, they were recommending for them to be able to be 19 placed in another setting, to be -- to act as priestly 20 ministers of people. I had to assume, sir, that they were 21 saying to me that this man has, in fact, reached a stage 22 of a level of cure, that he is functional without being a 23 danger to others. 24 Q. Well, with regard to Perrault, I have in front 25 of you, if you'd like to look at it, his personnel file Page 407 1 and then a series of letters that were delivered to me by 2 counsel for the Archidocese on January 11, 1994, a couple 3 of days after we settled most of the Perrault cases, from 4 VanDenHeuvel, and I don't see in either of those any 5 indication, once you became Archbishop, that Perrault was 6 fit to work with children. Are you aware of any such 7 indication? Let me take that little note off there. 8 That's not part of the -- thanks. 9 MR. KONRAD: Can we have those marked and 10 made an exhibit to the deposition? Could we have Dr. 11 VanDenHeuvel's letters marked as an exhibit and made an 12 exhibit to the deposition? 13 MR. PASTERNACK: Yes. 14 [A discussion was held off the record.] 15 MR. GOFFE: The time is 11:22. We will go 16 off the record. This is the end of tape 6. 17 [A recess was taken.] 18 MR. GOFFE: The time is 11:27. We are back 19 on the record. This is the beginning of tape number 7 in 20 the deposition of Archbishop Sanchez. 21 Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) Archbishop, let me rephrase 22 this question a little bit. I believe you indicated the 23 therapists in some fashion had told you that Perrault was 24 acceptable to return to parish work? 25 A. Yes. Page 408 1 Q. Are you aware of any documents that exist 2 anywhere where any therapist ever expressed that sentiment 3 to you? 4 A. These documents that I have in front of me do 5 indicate that having examined him, that they would find no 6 reason why he should not. And I would like to read from a 7 couple of them, if I may. 8 Q. Let's establish what the first one is. You're 9 referring to a letter of April 26, 1966? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. From Dr. Salazar to James Peter Davis? 12 A. Right. 13 Q. Let me ask you first, did you ever, as 14 Archbishop, ever review Arthur Perrault's personnel file? 15 A. No, I did not, sir. 16 Q. So the letter that you have in front of you here 17 is not something that you ever looked at or relied on? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Then let us forget that, because the question 20 was what information had been given to you. Is there any 21 other information? 22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll object to limiting 23 the Archbishop's perusal of the April 26, 1966, letter 24 from the Salazar Clinic, in that before the break, while 25 we were examining the documents -- and we examined this Page 409 1 document -- you suggested that the Archbishop review 2 portions of the personnel file of Mr. Perrault in which 3 this letter is placed. And you also asked him if he was 4 aware -- the question, as I recall it, after the break, 5 was, "Are you aware of any documents that indicate that 6 Father Perrault was fit for parish work?" 7 To the extent, Archbishop, that the referral to 8 the April 26, 1966, letter helps you answer that, I would 9 ask you to give a full and complete answer with reference 10 to that letter. 11 MR. PASTERNACK: Mr. Winterbottom, if you 12 want to ask questions of your client, you can. You will 13 not rephrase my questions or you will be pretty assured 14 that this deposition will resume in a way that this 15 coaching ceases. 16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I would like you to -- 17 Q. Now, Archbishop I will ask you again. Do you 18 have any documents that you had ever reviewed when you 19 were Archbishop where any mental health practitioner ever 20 told you that Perrault was fit to do parish work? 21 A. Yes, sir. 22 Q. What is that? 23 A. A document from Dr. Joseph VanDenHeuvel, which 24 was addressed to me in 1983. 25 Q. All right, let's take a look at that. What Page 410 1 exactly is the date of that? 2 A. It's January 4th, 1983. 3 MR. PASTERNACK: Let's label the whole 4 package in the order that it was given to me by fax as 5 Exhibit 11. 6 [Exhibit 11 was marked for identification.] 7 Q. And what language in there did you rely on to 8 conclude that he was fit to do parish work? 9 MR. TINKLER: For the record, why don't you 10 number the pages. 11 MR. PASTERNACK: They're numbered at the 12 top on the fax, Bennett. 13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: For the record, Exhibit 14 11 starts with Page 3. 15 A. The statement by the psychologist reads as 16 follows: "Furthermore, indications are that his growth 17 will be further promoted by increased opportunities to 18 interact with adults on a regular ongoing one-to-one 19 basis. Thus I would recommend that full-time parish work 20 would be considered at this time." 21 Q. Now, he had been doing full-time parish work up 22 to that time as well, hadn't he? 23 A. No, sir, not at all. 24 Q. Just part-time parish work? 25 A. In fact, he was out of part-time parish work for Page 411 1 at least four years by this time. 2 Q. And are you saying that you took Dr. 3 VanDenHeuvel's statement that he should be encouraged to 4 work with adults as being permission to do unsupervised 5 work, as well, with children in a parochial setting? 6 A. No, sir. I took his recommendation that we, as 7 an Archidocese, certainly as a personnel board, would be 8 able to listen to the psychologist, his recommendation of 9 Father Perrault, if we ever chose, would, in fact, be 10 qualified to serve in a parish. 11 Q. In fact, by 1983, roughly the same time as that 12 letter, had not you received complaints from an 13 Anunciation nun by the name of Sister Pauline who reported 14 directly to you that Perrault was sexually molesting 15 children in Anunciation? 16 A. No, sir, I have not -- I have no recollection of 17 any Sister Pauline speaking to me. 18 Q. And I want to make it clear. Is that something 19 you absolutely deny or simply don't recall? 20 A. Sir, I cannot recall it. 21 Q. Had Father Kemper ever complained to you that 22 Perrault was sexually molesting children at Anunciation? 23 A. No, sir. 24 [The witness conferred with his attorney.] 25 Q. In approximately November of 1980, did a lady Page 412 1 named meet with you and tell you that Perrault 2 had molested her son ? 3 A. No, sir, I have no recollection of meeting with 4 a . 5 Q. So you don't deny it; you just don't remember? 6 A. I have no recollection of it. 7 Q. Did Ms. subsequently bring to your 8 attention after December of 1981, that had in fact 9 killed himself because he had been molested by Perrault? 10 A. No, sir. 11 Q. Do you know Sister Mary Mortz? 12 A. Yes, sir, yes, I do. 13 Q. Did Sister Mary Mortz ever speak with you about 14 Perrault molesting parish children? 15 A. Sister Mary Mortz spoke with me once about the 16 anger displayed by Father Perrault toward her in their 17 sharing of mutual area for their ministries at the 18 Catholic Center. 19 Q. The question was, did Sister Mortz ever speak to 20 you about Arthur Perrault molesting children? 21 A. No, sir. 22 Q. Do you deny that she did, or you just don't 23 recall? 24 A. I have no recollection of her mentioning 25 anything about sexual molestation. Page 413 1 Q. Isn't it correct, sir, that shortly after Mary 2 Mortz made such a representation to you, she was 3 transferred from the Archidocese of Santa Fe? 4 A. No, sir, she was not transferred by us at all. 5 She had worked with us for several years, specifically in 6 the area of the handicapped, was a very dedicated worker. 7 But her own religious community asked her to serve back -- 8 I don't recall where. I believe it was in California 9 somewhere, because they needed her. She was a very 10 qualified person. 11 Q. Did Sister Mary Mortz ever tell you that once 12 she had disclosed abuse by Arthur Perrault, her car began 13 to be shot at? 14 A. I did not hear that she had been shot at by 15 anyone. 16 Q. Do you know a woman by the name of Della Hall? 17 A. Della Hall was one of the directors of our 18 Catholic Center. In fact, I believe she took over from 19 Father Perrault after he had terminated his work at the 20 pastoral center. 21 Q. That's also known as El Centro Pastoral? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Do you recall Della Hall ever telling you that 24 she had caught Perrault molesting little boys at El Centro 25 Pastoral? Page 414 1 A. No, sir. 2 Q. And is that something, again, you simply don't 3 recall, or do you deny? 4 A. I don't think it would have occurred, because I 5 had occasion to meet with Della Hall and her husband many 6 times, many, many times. And they would have -- if they 7 had ever mentioned one thing to me, I'm certain that they 8 would have repeated, and there was never any repetition of 9 anything. I just don't have any recollection of them ever 10 having mentioned it to me. 11 Q. It's important for us to differentiate, though. 12 Do you deny it, or do you simply not recall it? 13 A. I have no recollection of them ever speaking to 14 me about it. 15 Q. Did Father Biczak ever report to you that Arthur 16 Perrault had been caught molesting children? 17 A. No, sir. 18 Q. Deny or don't recall? 19 A. I don't recall any occasion in which he would 20 have spoken to me about that issue. 21 Q. Did Father Francis Eggert ever report to you 22 that Perrault had been caught molesting children? 23 A. No, sir. 24 Q. Do you deny it or not recall? 25 A. I have no recollection of him ever speaking to Page 415 1 me. You cannot deny something if you don't recall. 2 Q. Did Father Walter Cassidy ever discuss with you 3 complaints that he had caught Perrault molesting children? 4 A. No, sir. 5 Q. Did Noby Hurley, while president of the St. Pius 6 school board, complain to you that Perrault had been 7 caught molesting children? 8 A. No, sir. 9 Q. Why was -- well, was it your direction that kept 10 Perrault in therapy with VanDenHeuvel for the 12 years 11 that you mentioned? 12 A. First of all, I felt that he should be in 13 therapy, as I mentioned, in 1981. I certainly did not 14 have intention that he would continue for 12 years, 15 principally because of the expense involved. But he, 16 himself, volunteered to pay for his own therapy, 17 continuing therapy. As long as he was willing to do that, 18 I felt he should continue that way. And the doctor felt 19 that it was good maintenance for him. 20 Q. Why? 21 A. Simply because he was doing well with the 22 doctor, and the doctor was indicating that he was 23 progressing as a human being and improving in his ability 24 to deal with people, and those were all positive remarks. 25 Q. Other than Exhibit 11 where VanDenHeuvel states Page 416 1 in 1983 that Perrault should be given increased 2 opportunities to interact with adults on a regular, 3 ongoing, one-to-one basis and was recommending that it be 4 full-time parish work, did you receive any other written 5 documentation from any mental health practitioner that 6 said that Perrault was ready to work in a parochial 7 assignment at all? 8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Is that other than Dr. 9 VanDenHeuvel? 10 MR. PASTERNACK: Yes. 11 A. There was a verbal approval extended to me by 12 Dr. VanDenHeuvel, the same doctor, prior to the assignment 13 of Father Perrault as pastor at St. Bernadette parish some 14 three years after this letter was written. Even though he 15 had recommended him for parish work, we continued to allow 16 him to function as a director of the Catholic Center, El 17 Centro Pastoral, and to do the publications that he was 18 doing. 19 When the opening came at St. Bernadette's parish, his 20 name was one of the recommendations, and I asked the 21 therapist, Dr. VanDenHeuvel, if he felt that Father should 22 be considered as a candidate for the parish, and his 23 response was affirmative. 24 Q. If Perrault, though, had needed, at your 25 direction, therapy, which Perrault paid for, with Page 417 1 VanDenHeuvel because of sexual-related issues, did you not 2 feel the need, once it came to your attention in May of 3 '81, and you began specifying that therapy, to go back to 4 the people at Pius, back to the people at El Centro 5 Pastoral, back to the people at Anunciation, back to the 6 people at Assumption and say, "I've got a guy that I put 7 into therapy because of sexual problems. Did he ever hurt 8 you"? 9 A. As I mentioned to you before, the one 10 allegation, which is now public, that I don't have a 11 recollection of it, that we referred to earlier this 12 morning by Mrs. Nowak, was the allegation that led to his 13 continual therapy. I had no further reason to feel that 14 he should be given any special treatment or be kept out of 15 parishes. He was in therapy. His doctor had assured me, 16 in this document of 1983, or '81, that he had no incidents 17 of this nature for some six or seven years. So I had no 18 reason to act differently. 19 Q. Sir, after the meeting with in 19 -- 20 what did you say, 1992? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Did it occur to you then to go back and warn the 23 people from Pius, from our Lady of Guadalupe, from 24 Anunciation, from Assumption, from El Centro Pastoral, 25 from any parish assignment he had had since the time he Page 418 1 had allegedly molested , "Hey, this guy is a sex 2 offender. If he hurt any of your children, please come to 3 us, and we'll help you." Did that occur to you? 4 A. No, sir. The event that they referred to had 5 occurred 20 years before. By the time this became public 6 to me and brought to my attention in 1992, we did have in 7 place, as I have mentioned before, public notice to 8 everyone that if there had ever been any type of sexual 9 molestation by any priest in the Archidocese, they could 10 kindly called the 800 number and speak directly with us, 11 and we would have interviews with them and give special 12 attention to them. So the invitation was open. 13 The papers were carrying a lot of that information at 14 that time, likewise, regarding the special commission. 15 They received apparently many, many letters. They met 16 independent of myself, and people were free to make known 17 to them any type of allegation that they had on their 18 heart. 19 Q. Sir, isn't it true that the settlement with 20 predated by several months lawsuits against Arthur 21 Perrault based on similar conduct? 22 A. The allegation made by -- the settlement with 23 did conclude in the spring of 1992. Further 24 allegations against Father Arthur Perrault did not become 25 public until, I believe, September or October of that same Page 419 1 year. 2 However, the announcement, as far as people are 3 concerned hearing announcement about any priest, to come 4 forward regarding any priest, that was already in place 5 for almost a year. 6 Q. In between the spring of 92, when you settled 7 with , and October of '92 when other Perrault 8 victims started coming forward by filing lawsuits, did you 9 or anyone in the Archidocese undertake any efforts to go 10 back to the people at the parishes and organizations where 11 Perrault had worked and warn them of what Perrault might 12 have done and specifically offer them assistance because 13 of what Perrault might have done? 14 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and answered 15 twice. 16 Q. Go ahead and answer. 17 A. We did not do anything specific as you have 18 indicated. We did not go back to those centers. He had 19 taught at St. Pius in the '60s. Anyone who had attended 20 school in the '60s, Lord knows, they have graduated. 21 They're living all over the country. 22 We used the 800 number to try to reach the greatest 23 number of people possible in this whole area who may have 24 had any knowledge of any priest that they wanted to 25 report. Page 420 1 Q. In fact, sir, after you reached the settlement 2 with in the spring of 1992, you continued to 3 allow Arthur Perrault to serve as pastor at St. 4 Bernadette's for a period of time, didn't you? 5 A. I did, until -- he had gone, of course, to 6 Southdown for his -- what do you call it? Well, all of 7 the testing that they do and evaluation. And he had 8 indicated to me also his desire to enter into a sabbatical 9 which was to begin October 1st of that year, and I had no 10 reason to remove him from the parish, knowing that he was 11 under therapy, that he had gone to Southdown, would be on 12 a sabbatical and would, in fact, continue to go to 13 Southdown upon his return from the sabbatical. 14 Q. What is the canonical statute of limitations on 15 being a child molester? Are you saying that if 20 years 16 or five years or one year goes by without an allegation, 17 that the hands still have the power to administer the Holy 18 Sacraments? 19 A. Sir, ordination, the character of priests never 20 ceases. That does not mean that they have permission to 21 function. But he had been the pastor of this parish and 22 had functioned well. There had been no allegations 23 against him. He was continuing to see his therapist 24 regularly. He went through the full evaluation at 25 Southdown, with specialists, returned, and I saw no reason Page 421 1 to remove him immediately from anything of this nature. 2 His request to have a sabbatical, I thought, was a 3 good one at that time and would remove him, of course, 4 from any type of parish work. And upon his return from 5 the sabbatical, he would then go to Southdown for their 6 program. 7 Q. Isn't it true, sir, that you were allowing the 8 hands of a known child molester to administer the Holy 9 Sacraments of the Church; yes or no? 10 A. Yes, sir. There is also in our Church something 11 that I have referred to before in previous depositions, 12 and that is a concept of sacramental forgiveness, and it 13 is a sacramental forgiveness that we regard as essential 14 for a person to continue to administer the sacraments. 15 The concept of a person having been a child molester 16 with an allegation dating back 20 years would not prevent 17 him from celebrating Holy Mass 20 years later. 18 I had to assume that this event that we had 19 concluded, as shocking as it was, had been shared with 20 him, with his therapist, with his confessor, with his God, 21 and in fact, that he had had worked effectively at St. 22 Bernadette for some six years with high regard from the 23 people just gave me the information that I felt that he 24 could continue for the next two months to complete his 25 stay at St. Bernadette before taking that sabbatical. Page 422 1 Q. If you had come to learn that a priest had 2 murdered someone, would you continue to allow him to 3 administer the Holy Sacraments? 4 A. The concept -- I would have to deal with the 5 individual. I cannot just say yes or no to a question 6 like that. 7 Q. Really? 8 A. Yes. In other words, what were the 9 circumstances? Had he served a term sometime in his life 10 for this? Where is he at in it? 11 Q. So it is possible that a priest could murder 12 someone and go on to serve the Holy Sacraments? 13 MR. KONRAD: Objection, calls for 14 speculation. 15 Q. Is that possible? 16 A. It's possible for a person who has a life that 17 has been marked with sin to have a conversion and 18 ultimately to enter a seminary and to become ordained a 19 priest and to live an outstanding life and an honest life 20 and an integral life as a priest. The fact that he would 21 have sinned at any time in his life before does not 22 destroy that integrity. 23 Q. How about after he's ordained, he then goes to 24 to murder someone without justification. Could he be 25 allowed thereafter, under any circumstances, to administer Page 423 1 the Holy Sacraments? 2 A. Again, it depends on himself. He can celebrate 3 the Holy Mass privately. Investigation would have to be 4 made about what took place, where this happened, who knew 5 about it, has there been any notification. 6 Q. Why would who knew about it be important? God 7 knows about it, doesn't he? 8 A. Yes, but apparently you have one understanding 9 of forgiveness from God, and we have another 10 understanding. 11 12 13 14 A. Sir, I cannot enter into the mind and the heart 15 of God. I have to believe that a person's action, the way 16 they have conducted themselves for many years is evidence 17 to me that the person is contrite and that they have, in 18 fact, requested forgiveness for whatever wrong they have 19 done in their life. 20 Q. Do you know what the parishioners at St. 21 Bernadette's were told about Perrault's departure when he 22 finally departed? 23 A. No, sir. 24 Q. Did you undertake any action to tell the people 25 at St. Bernadette's that he was departing because he was Page 424 1 going off for treatment as a sex offender? 2 A. No, sir. You mean his departure from the parish 3 in October? 4 Q. Yes. 5 A. Sir, he had held -- he had announced to the 6 people that he was, in fact, taking a sabbatical from the 7 parish, and they'd held even a farewell reception in his 8 honor. 9 Q. All right. 10 A. And so that announcement had taken place. 11 Q. How about when he left to go to Southdown; do 12 you know if he announced from the parish that he was 13 leaving to go there because he was a sex offender? 14 A. No, sir, he did not make any announcement of 15 that nature, not to the best of my knowledge. 16 Q. And do you feel that he should have or should 17 not have? 18 A. I don't believe that he should have made that 19 announcement to the people unless he felt that he would 20 want to personally. This event had occurred 20 years 21 prior. He could have told them that he was going off to 22 Southdown for an evaluation. 23 Q. In your mind, did you consider, after speaking 24 with Mr. and his therapist, that there might be 25 other Arthur Perrault victims out there? Page 425 1 A. I don't recall us discussing additional victims, 2 although I know that Mrs. Schreiner alluded to the fact 3 that confirmed pedophiles oftentimes are engaged with more 4 than one person. And that was part of the instruction 5 that she was giving to all of us. 6 Q. Do you recall in your mind reflecting upon 7 whether there might be other Arthur Perrault victims out 8 there? 9 A. I'm sure it was part of my thinking. 10 Q. And was part of your thinking at any time taking 11 active steps to find those victims and offer them the help 12 that you, as Archbishop, could offer? 13 A. We did not take any specific steps, other than 14 to have, again, the public announcement to all the people 15 in our Catholic newspaper and the secular newspapers, on 16 the radio and TV, that an 800 number was available for 17 anyone who may have felt offended at any time. 18 Q. But not specifically by Perrault? 19 A. But not specifically by Perrault. 20 Q. And, in fact, at the time of his sabbatical from 21 St. Bernadette's, wasn't St. Bernadette's the largest 22 parish in terms of population and revenues in the 23 Archidocese of Santa Fe? 24 A. It was the largest in -- well, I don't know if I 25 could call it the largest in numbers. We had about three Page 426 1 others that were very close to that. But it was one of 2 the largest in the Archidocese, yes. 3 Q. And by that time, 1992, Father Perrault had 4 become a rather powerful priest, hadn't he, in the 5 hierarchy of the Church? 6 A. No. He was a pastor, and that was all that he 7 was. 8 Q. Well, he was a pastor. He was a military 9 chaplain in line for promotion to general. He still had 10 editorial responsibility at People of God. He was still 11 the chief liturgist for the Archidocese, wasn't he? 12 A. No, he was not. 13 Q. Who was the chief liturgist by that point? 14 A. We had a commission, and we had a full-time 15 person. The full-time person was Mary Francis Resa, and 16 she headed a full-time liturgical commission under the 17 direction of Father -- he's a pastor of Holy Rosary 18 parish, but his name escapes me at this time. 19 Q. But in any event, he was pastor of one of the 20 largest parishes, if not the largest; he was a military 21 chaplain of high rank in the Archidocese, right? 22 A. Well, he was -- 23 Q. I understand the chaplain -- 24 A. His position with the military really does not 25 affect the Archidocese. He had been a member originally Page 427 1 of the chaplain for the Air National Guard for many years, 2 beginning with my predecessor, as the Archbishop. He had 3 had permission from him to serve as chaplain and then 4 later transferred from the Air Guard to the Air Reserve. 5 And they liked his work, apparently, whatever work he was 6 doing with them, and they promoted him consistently. That 7 did not affect his position with us. 8 His position as editor of the newspaper was more of a 9 burden than it was of a title. I realize that for some 10 people the editor of a newspaper appears to be a very 11 powerful position or a strong financial one. He had no 12 salary for it and was, in fact, simply seeing that the 13 paper was properly put together by a secretary. 14 Q. Did you ever attend or observe a Mass put on by 15 Arthur Perrault at St. Bernadette's? 16 A. I celebrated Mass there myself, but I have not 17 attended a Mass in which he was a celebrant. 18 Q. Were you in St. Bernadette's after the 19 remodeling of it? 20 A. Oh, yes. 21 Q. And would you agree it's a very beautiful and 22 impressive facility? 23 A. Yes, it's a beautiful and impressive facility. 24 He had worked together with his pastoral council planning 25 what restoration of the church should take place. Page 428 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A. Any victim -- any additional victims to which 13 you may refer were adults at this time and certainly were 14 free as adults to be able to testify or to come forward 15 and make known to us that they had been victimized. 16 Q. When you were talking about -- I believe you 17 were talking about how you couldn't know what was in the 18 mind of God in terms of whether Perrault had been forgiven 19 in the mind of God for what he had done 20 years before. 20 In the way that the Church is structured, in order to 21 resume any parochial work or be allowed to continue in 22 parochial work, did he have to at least get your 23 forgiveness, as well? 24 A. The forgiveness of -- it's implicit in any 25 assignment. If a person is given an assignment in a Page 429 1 parish, it shows the support of the bishop, whoever he may 2 be, for that individual, that we would not place him in 3 that assignment if we did not feel that that individual 4 has proven himself to be worthy of that assignment. 5 Q. So you would not have allowed him to remain at 6 St. Bernadette's and serve from spring of '92 until 7 October of '92 unless you, in your own mind, had forgiven 8 him for what he may have done in the past? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And given what Dr. Schreiner had told you about 11 the tendency of pedophilia to be addictive or repetitive, 12 given the complaints from Mr. , given the seminar 13 that you attended where it was discussed that pedophilia 14 may not be curable, may be, given the complaint in the mid 15 1970s that you acknowledge happened, do you feel now, 16 looking at it, that it was reasonable for you to forgive 17 him and allow him to continue in parish service? 18 A. Forgiveness, first of all, is a spiritual 19 quality. Putting in service or continuing in service is 20 something else. A person can be forgiven without being 21 given an opportunity to serve. So I'd like to make that 22 distinction. 23 In my own faith, Our Lord Jesus asks us to forgive 24 one another as He has forgiven us. We pray that in the 25 Lord's Prayer as Christian people repeatedly, because we Page 430 1 recognize that as we ask God to forgive us, so must we be 2 willing to forgive others. So forgiveness is a spiritual 3 act that I have always felt is important to extend to 4 people who have shown their own contrition. 5 I think your question is more precisely regarding 6 whether he should have ever been independently allowed to 7 continue at St. Bernadette after that point or whether he 8 was going to continuing to be a source of possible danger 9 to others. 10 And I am saying that he was under the guidance of a 11 therapist; and therefore, with the assurance of the 12 therapist and the fact that he had gone to Southdown and 13 gone through the evaluation which indicated that they felt 14 that there was no acting out at this time and the fact 15 they'd indicated that there was no urgency for him to 16 enter into the full program, although they would recommend 17 at a future date that that would occur, with that 18 assurance, I allowed him to remain there for the 19 additional month and a half. 20 Q. Are you saying that Southdown informed you 21 verbally it was their opinion that he should enter their 22 full sex offender program? 23 A. No, sir, just the opposite. They informed me 24 that they did not find it necessary for him to enter it at 25 this time. They would recommend that at some future date Page 431 1 that this could be helpful. Their sex offender program is 2 not only for those who have offended at this point, but 3 it's also type of program that enriches and strengthens a 4 person. 5 Q. If they were telling you that he needs to enter 6 the full sex offender program in the future, didn't that 7 make you believe that he might be a danger now? 8 A. No, sir, they were saying that there was no 9 indication of his need for that now, and that was an 10 assurance to me. Their statement was a recommendation 11 that this could be helpful for him in the future. 12 Q. So you did not, in your mind, view Arthur 13 Perrault as a danger despite what you knew by the Spring 14 of '92; is that right? 15 A. I did not consider him a potential danger to 16 anyone in the Spring of '92 because of his presence with 17 his therapist, the continuing therapy that he was 18 receiving, evaluation that he received, the fact that 19 there had been no allegations for several years and years, 20 the fact that the people of St. Bernadette, meeting with 21 them repeatedly, had nothing but affirmative things to say 22 about him. With that in mind, I allowed him to remain 23 there for the additional six weeks. 24 Q. How do you know there were no other complaints? 25 A. Because I had not received them. Page 432 1 Q. But the system breaks down, doesn't it, if 2 Starkey had received complaints and not passed them along 3 to you? 4 A. Father Starkey was no longer part of the 5 organization receiving any type of complaints. Father Ron 6 Wolf was in charge at that time and, in addition to that, 7 was assisted with investigators. And we had, again, as I 8 mentioned that 800 number and other avenues for people to 9 make known to us any possible complaints. 10 Q. I'm not just talking about complaints that might 11 have come in after Wolf came in. If Starkey didn't pass 12 complaints along to you when Starkey was your chancellor -- 13 A. Right. 14 Q. -- then it would be incorrect to say there had 15 been no complaints? 16 A. Well, I would not have been -- I could not be 17 accountable for things that I was unaware of. 18 19 20 21 22 23 Page 434 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. And the question that I don't believe we ever 17 quite got answered was, did VanDenHeuvel tell you after 18 the meeting with that Perrault was fit to 19 continue to work in a parish? 20 A. No, he did not say that, nor did he deny it. 21 Q. And would you agree, sir, that even if God 22 forgives, even if a psychologist says the person is likely 23 not to reoffend, the person still may pose a danger? 24 A. The -- yes. I think, as I have come to 25 understand the concept of pedophilia, that is possible, Page 435 1 more possible than for you or for myself to be sinful in 2 some other way, because of the -- what they call an 3 addictive illness. 4 But I have to say that if that person is properly 5 supervised, such as an alcoholic, that that person can 6 function effectively and without failure. The 7 possibility, perhaps, is always there, but with proper 8 maintenance and support, that person can function 9 effectively, and it appears that he did function 10 effectively at St. Bernadette's. 11 Q. Why was Perrault allowed to go on so many years 12 doing this, Archbishop? 13 A. Doing what, sir? 14 Q. Sexually molesting children. 15 A. Would you mention to me the occasions that 16 you're referring to? 17 Q. All right. Why was he allowed to molest David 18 Bibo, Greg Monen, the Nowak brothers, Elaine Montoya, Paul 19 Montoya, Dana Kainz, Michael Harris, Conrad Jiron, in the 20 chancery offices? Why was he allowed to go on so many 21 years molesting children? 22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, states facts 23 not in evidence. 24 A. You have -- 25 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: And allegations not in Page 436 1 evidence, for that matter. 2 A. You have mentioned names that I have not heard. 3 The allegations that I had dealt with were those that we 4 have discussed here this morning, and it appeared to me 5 that with proper counseling of this man, proper therapy 6 and support, that he could work effectively. There was no 7 indication to the contrary. 8 I believe that if the therapist at any time had 9 indicated to me that Father Perrault constituted a 10 continual danger to children, that I would not have 11 allowed him to function in that way. There was a great 12 period of his priesthood in which he did not function in a 13 parish. He was outside of parish work. We felt that was 14 also proper support for him. 15 Q. Would you agree, sir, that your forgiveness or 16 even God's forgiveness does not necessarily remove the 17 danger that someone poses? 18 A. Excuse me once again? 19 Q. Your forgiveness or, for that matter, God's 20 forgiveness, does not necessarily eliminate the 21 possibility of future danger from that individual, does 22 it? 23 A. No, it does not, sir. That does not guarantee 24 anything. 25 MR. PASTERNACK: I guess we better break Page 437 1 for lunch here, and what we propose to do is Mr. Bennett 2 will begin the examination after lunch. 3 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: So that -- I take it, 4 Mr. Pasternack, then, you're done with your examination? 5 MR. PASTERNACK: No, I'm not. 6 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, the letter that 7 you wrote to me last week -- two weeks ago implied that 8 you were going to finish your portion of the deposition, 9 and then Mr. Bennett would continue or Mr. Tinkler would 10 continue on behalf of their cases. 11 MR. PASTERNACK: Well, I guess we're just 12 going to conduct the deposition the way we want to. 13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Why don't we perhaps, if 14 you're willing, we might discuss that over the lunch hour. 15 I see by your shaking your head, you're not willing to 16 make those discussions. But let me suggest this, since 17 you are obviously in need of some sustenance. I will 18 consider that proposal over the next hour, and I'll let 19 you know when we get back on the record at 1:00, or 10 20 after. 21 MR. PASTERNACK: Oh, no. No, no, no. I am 22 telling you the way this is going to work, since we are 23 now at the point of Sigler, is that Mr. Bennett is going 24 to take over the questioning. Judge Ashby's order 25 specifically provided that there would be no limitation on Page 438 1 the scope of the deposition of the nature you proposed, 2 nor did he put any limitation on the manner in which it 3 would be conducted or the order it would be conducted. 4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'm not about to have a 5 revolving door of people questioning the Archbishop. 6 MR. PASTERNACK: And any efforts on your 7 part to interfere with this deposition in violation of 8 Judge Ashby's order will lead to a motion for contempt. 9 Now -- 10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, I hope you file it 11 then. 12 MR. PASTERNACK: At the end of lunch -- be 13 quiet. At the end of lunch, Mr. Bennett will begin the 14 examination of the Archbishop, and I will pick up 15 thereafter. 16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, while 17 you -- 18 MR. PASTERNACK: We are now -- 19 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: -- visit the salad bar 20 at the Pizza Hut, or wherever you happen to go, consider 21 the fact that I am not inclined to allow a revolving door 22 of people coming in and questioning the Archbishop on 23 matters of extreme sensitivity, and, I might add, not 24 recent history. And I will make the decision about what 25 we're going to do. Page 439 1 If Mr. Bennett is going to take your place to 2 question about Mr. Sigler, I suggest that perhaps our 3 position is going to be that you're not going to do any 4 questioning about Mr. Sigler. But I am not inclined to 5 let everybody here have a potshot, as they feel free, at 6 the Archbishop. 7 You finish your questioning, then Mr. Tinkler or 8 Mr. Bennett or whoever wants to question next can do so. 9 MR. PASTERNACK: Well, I'll tell you what, 10 Mr. Winterbottom, I'm going to call Judge Ashby now, and 11 I'm going to tell him what you have done and the ways in 12 which you have proposed to violate his order, and we'll 13 see whether he says you're in charge or he's in charge. 14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Just make sure I'm a 15 party to that telephone conversation. 16 MR. PASTERNACK: I'm just going to call him 17 myself. 18 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, then, inform him 19 that I'm not a party to the telephone conversation, so he 20 knows that I'm being ex parte'd. 21 MR. GOFFE: The time is 12:11. We will go 22 off the record. 23 [The noon recess was taken.] 24 MR. GOFFE: The time is 1:13 PM. We are 25 back on the record. Page 440 1 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Bennett, before we 2 begin, I'd just like to make a record that Mr. Pasternack 3 is not present for this portion of the deposition. 4 However, his clients' interests are being represented, as 5 I understand it, by Mr. Neil Blake, Mr. Pasternack's law 6 associate, who is here at present to represent all of the 7 Pasternack-Blake clients during the course of this 8 continuation of our deposition. 9 MR. BENNETT: And also, I'd just like to 10 mention that I am interrupting Mr. Pasternack's testimony 11 to take -- or deposition to take the testimony of 12 Archbishop Sanchez in cases in which I represent, along 13 with Mr. Tinkler and Mr. Reese, various Plaintiffs. 14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I understand. 15 MR. KONRAD: And I'd like to say, about the 16 timing of the deposition, this is the third day of 17 examination by Plaintiffs. I represent Servants of the 18 Paraclete, a Defendant, and I would like a full day, so I 19 think it's only fair that I take the examination tomorrow 20 if it is only going to be a four-day examination. 21 MR. BENNETT: Well, we can talk about that 22 later, but I don't see how it can be a four-day 23 examination. 24 MR. BLAKE: Since we're all going around 25 the table, on behalf of the Plaintiffs not represented by Page 441 1 Mr. Tinkler and Mr. Bennett, we're not in any way waiving 2 our rights nor our interests in resuming the deposition as 3 to the Archbishop after Mr. Tinkler and Mr. Bennett have 4 concluded their examination. 5 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: The deposition will 6 continue at 9:00 o'clock Saturday morning. It will end at 7 5:00 o'clock Saturday morning. 8 MR. TINKLER: It will adjourn at 5:00 9 o'clock. 10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: We will not be there 11 after 5:00 o'clock on Saturday, so make the most of the 12 time you've got, let's begin. 13 EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. BENNETT: 15 Q. Good afternoon, Archbishop Sanchez. 16 A. Good afternoon, Mr. Bennett. 17 Q. My name is Merit Bennett; and as you know, I 18 represent several other Plaintiffs in various lawsuits 19 that have been filed against you individually and the 20 Archidocese of Santa Fe. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. I have one preliminary question. You have taken 23 an oath to tell the truth in this deposition? 24 A. Yes, sir. 25 Q. And that is a civil oath required by the courts Page 442 1 of the state of New Mexico? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. Is there any difference between that type of 4 oath and a canonical oath? 5 A. There is no canonical oath, as such. It is a 6 sacred oath that a person takes before God to tell the 7 truth, and I would interpret the civil oath to be the same 8 as the sacred oath. 9 Q. So the oath you've taken in these proceedings is 10 to tell the truth under both civil and canonical law? 11 A. Yes, sir, absolutely. 12 Q. You have testified earlier that you felt that 13 children who had been abused, sexually abused by priests, 14 should feel free to disclose that abuse to their parents; 15 is that a fair statement? 16 A. Yes. In the discussion previously with Mr. 17 Pasternack, as one of the examples, I told him that 18 children who may have been abused -- and God forbid that 19 that happens to them, but it happens -- I would hope that 20 they would share that information with their family 21 members. Oftentimes it's direct parents. Other times, it 22 may be grandparents or other relatives with whom they are 23 living. 24 Q. Now, you have admitted to having committed 25 certain sexual indiscretions while you served as Page 443 1 Archbishop? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 5 6 7 Page 444 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q. When you were a child -- and by "child," I mean 25 under the age of 18 years of age -- had you ever had any Page 445 1 sexual contact with anyone older than you? 2 A. No, sir, not that I can recall. 3 Q. In your deposition testimony, you have referred 4 to certain women that Mr. Pasternack referred to as Ms. A 5 through K, and there are a couple of unanswered questions 6 concerning them. 7 MR. BENNETT: Do you have that list? Could 8 you hand that to the Archbishop, please? 9 MR. KONRAD: Could you read that question 10 [The record was read by the reporter.] 11 back? 12 THE WITNESS: May I open this? 13 MR. BENNETT: Yes, please. 14 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop, with respect to 15 Ms. A, I believe you had indicated that you had had sexual 16 contact with Ms. A? 17 A. Yes, I indicated that there had been an embrace. 18 Q. And what I wanted to ask you is, at the time 19 that that embrace took place, how old was Ms. A? 20 A. I don't recall. I never asked her her age. 21 Q. What would be your best estimate? 22 A. Probably around -- I would say about 20. 23 Q. And how old were you at the time? 24 A. I must have been around 36, 37. 25 Q. With respect to Ms. B, when the first incident Page 446 1 of sexual contact occurred with Ms. B, how old was Ms. B, 2 to the best of your knowledge? 3 A. Probably 23. 4 Q. And how old were you at that time? 5 A. I would have been about 48. 6 Q. And subsequent to that, was there sexual contact 7 between you two? 8 A. You mean later? 9 Q. Yes. 10 A. It occurred within -- any sexual contact that 11 occurred between us occurred within a year's period. 12 Q. With respect to Ms. D, you indicated that there 13 had been embraces; is that correct? 14 A. Not of a sexual nature. 15 Q. What about -- Ms. E was a sexual contact; is 16 that correct? 17 A. It was an embrace with her, also, yes. 18 Q. And a kiss, I believe? 19 A. Yes, excuse me. 20 Q. And at the time that that sexual contact took 21 place, how old was Ms. E, to the best of your knowledge? 22 MR. KONRAD: I'm going to object to the 23 question. I don't know that an embrace and a kiss is 24 sexual contact. 25 MR. TINKLER: I believe he defined it as Page 447 1 sexual. 2 MS. KENNEDY: Well, the testimony, if you 3 want to know was that someone could consider it sexual 4 contact between friends. He did not feel it was sexual. 5 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: It was not for sexual 6 purposes was the Archbishop's statement. 7 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Go ahead and answer, 8 Archbishop. 9 A. To the best of my knowledge and recollection, 10 Ms. E would have been, I suppose, around the same age, I 11 believe, 21, in college, in college. In fact, I recall 12 she was in college. 13 Q. And how old were you at the time? 14 A. About 44. 15 Q. Was there any sexual contact between you and 16 Ms. F? 17 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: It's asked and answered. 18 A. Not sexual contact, as such. 19 Q. There was more than one kiss, I believe you 20 referred to? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. At the time that the kissing occurred, how old 23 was Ms. F? 24 A. I would say approximately 24. 25 Q. And you were -- Page 448 1 A. About 55, I think it was. 2 Q. And the sexual contact with Ms. G, this took 3 place over a period of time, that's my understanding; is 4 that correct? 5 A. No. The friendship was a long friendship, but 6 the sexual contact was not. 7 Q. Over what period of time did the sexual contact 8 occur? 9 MS. KENNEDY: Object, asked and answered. 10 Q. In terms of time span. 11 A. Within -- all within a year's period. 12 Q. And during that time, how old was Ms. G, to the 13 best of your knowledge? 14 A. About 28, 29. 15 Q. And you were -- 16 A. About 55, I guess. 17 Q. And with Ms. I, when did that contact with Ms. I 18 occur, in terms of her age; how old was she? 19 A. She was about 19 or 20. 20 Q. And you were -- 21 A. 41. 22 Q. And Ms. J, how old was Ms. J when that contact 23 occurred? 24 A. Just about the same age. 25 Q. 19 or 20? Page 449 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. And you were -- 3 A. Same age, about 41. 4 Q. And with Ms. K, was that contact over a period 5 of time? 6 A. Within a year's time. 7 Q. And how old would Ms. K have been? 8 A. At that time, I suppose about 20, 21. 9 Q. And you? 10 A. About 41, 42. 11 Q. Thank you. You can return that to the reporter. 12 How old are you now, Archbishop? 13 A. I'm 59. 14 Q. Archbishop Sanchez, why did you decide to become 15 a priest? 16 A. I decided to become a priest because I was 17 impressed with the priests who had served in my home 18 community. They were dedicated men. They seemed to 19 always be ready to help others. They were at their 20 service. 21 In my own home environment, religion and the practice 22 of our religion was very essential. I felt very close to 23 the Lord, as well as to my Church. And after -- as I was 24 approaching the end of my high school career, I was able 25 to reflect on it with a parish priest, and he recommended Page 450 1 that I would try the seminary and to see whether or not I 2 really had a vocation to the priesthood or not. It's a 3 proving ground, as it were, gives you a chance to test 4 whether you're going to be submitting to the routine of 5 the school, the training and the spiritual development. 6 Q. And who was that priest? 7 A. That was Monsignor Majeski, John J. Majeski. 8 Q. Was your decision to enter the seminary based, 9 in part, upon the example that Monsignor Majeski had set 10 for you as a priest? 11 A. Himself and others before him. I had known 12 other priests before Monsignor Majeski was part of our 13 parish, and they had certainly influenced me. 14 Q. And when you -- had you made up your mind to 15 become a priest prior to entering the seminary? 16 A. You don't really make up your mind to become a 17 priest because the training and the formation program goes 18 on for a large number of years. In my case, it was for 10 19 years. And your decision is to give yourself an 20 opportunity to test out your vocation, whether or not God 21 is calling you to a life as a priest or not. 22 Many of the men during the course of their training 23 will choose to leave the seminary. They decide that this 24 is not what they would like to make a life of. They feel 25 that perhaps they're called to another vocation, and Page 451 1 several leave the seminary at any point of their seminary 2 training. 3 Q. When did you decide that you wanted to remain 4 and become a priest? 5 A. Each year I would have to renew that commitment 6 toward the priesthood. And the ultimate commitment came 7 before my ordination to the subdeaconate, because with 8 that ordination comes the obligation of celibacy, as well 9 as a daily -- certain daily prayers that you're obliged to 10 pray as a deacon and then later as a priest. 11 Q. And when would that have been? 12 A. That occurred, sir, in 1959. 13 Q. Was that in Rome? 14 A. I was at the North American College in Rome, 15 yes. 16 Q. And at the time you made that decision and 17 commitment in 1959, did you feel that you could keep your 18 promise of chastity and celibacy? 19 A. I did, sir. The Church and its structure at the 20 time was very strong. I had been in the seminarian 21 formation for a number of years, as I have indicated, and 22 I had no reason to believe that I would not be able to be 23 a good priest. I also knew that coming back to America 24 would pose many challenges, because the temple of America 25 simply was not the temple of Europe that I had lived in Page 452 1 for six years. 2 Q. So you would have been about 25 years old at the 3 time? 4 A. I was ordained when I was 25, yes. 5 Q. Did you feel that you were old enough to make a 6 mature decision as to whether or not to commit to the vows 7 of chastity and celibacy? 8 MR. KONRAD: Object to the form of the 9 question. I don't think there is a vow of chastity. 10 A. It's a speculative question, whether I thought I 11 was old enough or not. I don't know if there's any 12 particular point in your life when you feel absolutely 13 certain. I felt an awe regarding the priesthood. I felt 14 I would never really be worthy of this sacred office, but 15 I felt that this is what I had been called for and for 16 which I had trained for; and according to my own spiritual 17 director and those who advised me, they felt that I, in 18 fact, was mature enough to make that decision and could go 19 ahead with ordination. 20 So with their advice and my own feeling and trust in 21 God -- I suppose it's much like a young couple who make 22 promises to get married. They're very excited about their 23 love for one another on their marriage day, but they know 24 that the road for marriage is long, and it's fraught with 25 all kinds of dangers and temptations. They hope that they Page 453 1 will remain as husband and wife for the rest of their 2 life. And I know on the day of their marriage, they feel 3 that they will, even though they know it could be very 4 difficult. 5 Q. And you were prepared to make that commitment at 6 that time? 7 A. To the best of my knowledge, I was prepared. 8 Q. How did you come to be incardinated in Rome? 9 A. I wasn't incardinated in Rome. I was sent there 10 as a seminarian to study. There is a seminary called the 11 North American College. It is a residence for young 12 seminarians from our country who are given the opportunity 13 to study at one of the major universities in Rome, 14 preparing themselves for the priesthood. 15 There were approximately 300 students from the United 16 States there at that time. The majority of us attended 17 school at the Gregorian University in Rome. That's 18 situated in downtown Rome. It was operated by the Jesuit 19 Fathers and had been so operated since the 1600s. 20 Q. How did you come to be sent there or to go 21 there? 22 A. I was asked to go there by the Archbishop of 23 Santa Fe at that time. His name was Archbishop Edwin 24 Vincent Byrne. He, in conference, I presume, with the 25 rector and the staff from the Immaculate Heart of Mary Page 454 1 seminary in Santa Fe had decided where each of the 2 seminarians would continue their theological studies; and 3 in my case, they indicated that they would like me to 4 continue my studies at the North American College in Rome. 5 Q. Was that an honor? 6 A. Yes, it was. It was an honor and, at the same 7 time, a difficult task, because you would be away from 8 your family and your own home for a six-year period. The 9 honor was because you would have an opportunity to study 10 with other men from throughout the world. At the 11 Gregorian University there were representatives from some 12 80 different countries in attendance in classes there. 13 Being in Rome itself was certainly an honor to be able to 14 see the various ceremonies and events that would take 15 place in that historic city. 16 Q. Was anyone else from the Archidocese of Santa Fe 17 sent to Rome to conduct seminarian studies? 18 A. Yes, there were other seminarians and priests 19 who had been ordained for this Archidocese. To the best 20 of my recollection, Monsignor George Rieffer, who is now 21 deceased, was ordained in Rome in the 1930s. 22 Q. Let me interrupt so I'm clear. During the time 23 that you were there, was anyone else sent from the 24 Archidocese of Santa Fe? 25 A. Yes. I had been there for a three-year period, Page 455 1 three or four years, when another seminarian was sent from 2 the Archidocese of Santa Fe. His name was Gene Guerin, 3 G-u-e-r-i-n. He was also ordained for the Archidocese of 4 Santa Fe. 5 When I arrived in Rome, my first year, there was 6 another seminarian for the Archidocese of Santa Fe who was 7 in his last year, and that was Monsignor Francis Tournier. 8 He died in Santa Fe some 15 years or so after his 9 ordination. 10 Q. Did an assignment or a seminary assignment in 11 Rome indicate that you may in the future be a candidate to 12 advance in the hierarchy of the Church? 13 A. No. It was not like West Point where they would 14 expect them to be the military officers. That was not it. 15 It was an opportunity for young men to, in a sense, be 16 exposed to the practices of the Vatican and the ceremonies 17 at St. Peter's, to become acquainted with the history and 18 the tradition of our Catholic Church, which was so strong 19 in the Eternal City. 20 It is true that many of the students who were 21 ordained there eventually were made bishops, but there was 22 no guarantee. 23 Let me give you an example. In my class, there were 24 51 of us who were ordained together. Of that 51, three 25 have been made bishops. So the other 48 have been serving Page 456 1 in various capacities in their different diocese but have 2 not been made bishops. 3 Q. Nevertheless, was that a path to becoming a 4 bishop? 5 A. Any seminary is a path. A selection of a bishop 6 does not depend upon the seminary where he studies. It 7 depends upon the individual. 8 Q. When did you return to the Archidocese of 9 Santa Fe? 10 A. After my ordination in Rome, which was in 11 December 1959, I completed, then, my studies which ended 12 in July or late June of 1960, and I returned to the 13 Archidocese in early July. 14 Q. And what was your first assignment at that time? 15 A. My first assignment was as the assistant pastor 16 at Our Lady of the Anunciation parish in Albuquerque. I 17 was asked, also, at that time to be on the staff of 18 teachers at St. Pius X High School. 19 Q. And who asked you to do that? 20 A. The Archbishop of Santa Fe. He gave me that 21 assignment. 22 Q. Was that Archbishop Byrne at the time? 23 A. Archbishop Byrne, yes. 24 Q. And what was your -- what had been your 25 relationship with Archbishop Byrne? Had you known him in Page 457 1 any other context outside of the priesthood? 2 A. No, none. I had -- I would see him when I was a 3 seminarian at the Immaculate Heart of Mary seminary. I 4 would see him like all of us did. We were asked to be 5 altar servers for several of the ceremonies at the 6 Cathedral in Santa Fe. Then when I was assigned to Rome, 7 I didn't see him for six years. So when I came back, my 8 assignment was already completed. I did not meet with him 9 prior to the assignment. 10 Q. Did you have any duties, outside of parish 11 duties or teaching duties, connected with the chancery at 12 all? 13 A. No, not at that time. 14 Q. Did you at any time after that? 15 A. Yes. After I had taught at St. Pius and 16 assisted at Anunciation parish for one year, I was then 17 asked by the Archbishop to go to Catholic University in 18 Washington, D.C., to do studies in canon law. I attended 19 the university, then, in the school year of '61-'62. It 20 was to be a two-year program, but after the first year, it 21 was completed. And it was a successful school year, 22 incidentally. Apparently his own need for priests in the 23 Archidocese was such that he asked me to remain in the 24 Archidocese and to assume a position, again, at the 25 St. Pius X High School in Albuquerque. Page 458 1 Q. And were you teaching again? 2 A. So I went back again to teaching. The principal 3 of the school at that time asked if I would also take some 4 classes, because of certification that is necessary in the 5 state of New Mexico. I had not taken classes specifically 6 for teaching when I was in Rome, and so I then took 7 classes at the University of New Mexico during the summer. 8 Q. Did you have any other duties within the 9 Archidocese, other than participating as a student and 10 teaching? 11 A. Not duties. I would volunteer to assist a 12 priest who might need help on weekends, because I could be 13 free to help them either Saturday night, on occasions, as 14 well as Sunday morning, since I was not at that time 15 assigned to a parish. So I helped a priest, the pastor at 16 Holy Ghost parish, whenever he would ask my assistance, 17 and also the chaplain at the military base. 18 Q. Which military base? 19 A. It was Sandia, Sandia Base. 20 Q. And after that, where were you assigned? 21 A. I stayed at St. Pius X High School as a staff 22 member until 1968, at which time the then Archbishop, 23 James Peter Davis, asked me to accept a new assignment, 24 and that was to be as pastor of two combined parishes in 25 northeastern New Mexico located in Roy and Mosquero, St. Page 459 1 Joseph's parish in Mosquero and Holy Family parish in Roy. 2 Q. Did you have any duties within the Archidocese 3 outside of that parish assignment? 4 A. The only additional obligation that I recall was 5 the Archbishop asked if I would belong to a committee that 6 was trying to prepare some guidelines for pastoral 7 councils, parish councils, which were becoming a new 8 entity at that time. 9 Prior to the 1960s, there was no such thing as parish 10 councils for our Roman Catholic Church, but with the 11 Second Vatican Council that was taking place, that was 12 permitted. And so the Archbishop wanted to have some 13 guidelines and asked me to belong to a committee to 14 achieve that goal. That was the only additional duty that 15 I had. 16 Q. When did you complete that parish assignment in 17 Roy and Mosquero? 18 A. It was in 1971. 19 Q. And then where were you reassigned? 20 A. I was asked by the Archbishop, then, to leave 21 Roy and Mosquero, to surrender that parish, so as to 22 assume a new parish assignment in Albuquerque at San 23 Felipe parish in Old Town, Albuquerque. 24 Q. And your assignment was to be the pastor of that 25 parish? Page 460 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Did you have any duties within the Archidocese 3 outside of that assignment? 4 A. I believe I was elected to two things: One was 5 to represent -- to belong to the priest council. It was 6 called the -- I don't recall the formal name, but the 7 priests of the Archidocese were able to have a council of 8 priests which would meet perhaps every two months for the 9 sake of discussing our pastoral ministry and making 10 recommendations to the Archbishop for the well-being of 11 the Archidocese. 12 I recall, as a member of that body, I was also chosen 13 by them to represent them, myself and one other priest, to 14 represent them at a national convention of priest councils 15 that took place. 16 Q. Was that a new group at that time? 17 A. It was. That was again an outgrowth, one of the 18 fruit of the Second Vatican Council that had completed its 19 work in late 1960s. 20 Q. And what was the purpose of a priest council? 21 A. The purpose was to look at two areas of priestly 22 interest: One was called priestly life, and the second 23 priestly ministry. The issues of priestly life concerned 24 such basics as our salary, was this adequate for us? At 25 that time, we were receiving $50 a month salary, and it Page 461 1 was pretty tough to even make any car payments for 2 ourselves. So issues like that had to be addressed. 3 There was no retirement program for priests at that 4 time, and the priest council addressed itself to an issue 5 such as that, issues for priestly life. 6 For priestly ministry, they would address such issues 7 as language preparation for seminarians, preparing to 8 serve, that they would be prepared bilingually, how to 9 best prepare themselves for liturgical celebrations, 10 different types of enrichment programs for the laiety, 11 such as Cursillo, which is a program of assistance for lay 12 members to become involved in. So it involved itself in 13 both the priestly life and priestly ministry concepts. 14 Q. How many priests were on that council when you 15 served in those years, approximately? 16 A. I don't recall. I would say approximately 17 perhaps 15. 18 Q. And were they elected by the priests in the 19 Archidocese to serve? 20 A. Yes. They had a formula -- I don't recall 21 exactly, but it was like each -- it divided the priests 22 into age groups, like 10-years groups. So there was four 23 or five different groupings, and each age group could 24 elect, I think, two members from their age group to 25 represent the age group, and then the entire body of Page 462 1 priests would elect another six members or so to represent 2 them. 3 Q. Did the entire body of priests meet to do that, 4 or was that done by mail? 5 A. It was done by ballot, yes. They mailed ballots 6 to them. 7 Q. Was that the only organization at that time that 8 represented the priests and gave the priests a voice in 9 the Archidocese with the Archbishop? 10 A. Yes, that was the organization for that purpose. 11 Q. As a part of that organization, were issues, 12 other issues concerning problems that might arise in 13 parishes that were common or unique to more than one 14 priest, were those also discussed and brought to the 15 Archbishop's attention? 16 A. You mean such as personnel problems, things of 17 this nature? 18 Q. Any type of personnel problems. By "personnel," 19 I assume you mean priest staff? 20 A. That was my question to you, what you meant by 21 that. 22 Q. Personnel problems, either with the parishes, 23 complaints from the parishes about the way priests were 24 performing their duties. 25 A. No, those -- that would -- I don't recall them Page 463 1 discussing that in that particular forum. I think that 2 particular forum was more for evaluation of what I call 3 diocesan programs and then planning for diocesan programs 4 or planning for the seminary or seminarians' vocations and 5 so forth, retirement. 6 Any type of discussion about Father X doing his duty 7 here, doing his duty there, might come up in what we 8 called deanery meetings. This was an occasional gathering 9 of priests from a particular areA. 10 The geographic area of the Archidocese is divided 11 into eight parts, and each part is called a deanery. And 12 those priests will meet from time to time to discuss 13 anything either that has come down from the Archbishop or 14 of mutual interest among themselves or simply to meet for 15 mutual support. A lot of times it's just for social 16 gathering to support themselves. 17 Q. Would the Archbishop use the parish council to 18 disseminate information to the priests at large? 19 A. You mean the priest council? 20 Q. Excuse me, the priest council? 21 A. It was possible he could use that, since they 22 represented the priests, but I would say most of the time, 23 the Archbishop would have used a direct communication by 24 letter to them. He could ask the priest council to 25 discuss an issue or to plan a certain program. But I Page 464 1 think that to make certain that all priests would receive 2 the communication, he would do that by letter. 3 Q. What about the deanery council; would he use 4 those to disseminate information, or again, if he wanted 5 to get information to all priests, he would usually do 6 that by letter? 7 A. By letter, right, yes. 8 Q. Were there any other forums for discussion of 9 issues that may arise either in the parishes or in the 10 particular conduct by any specific priests? Was there any 11 other forum in which those issues might arise in those 12 days? 13 A. Well, as far as laiety is concerned, many of the 14 parishes did have parish councils. I don't know if they 15 would have brought personal problems to the parish 16 council. It was possible. But I think most of the time 17 the parish council really served as an administrative 18 advisory group, not so much for personal needs as for 19 administration of the parish. 20 There was another body that might have received, I 21 think, what you're talking about, and that would have been 22 the Archdiocesan personnel board. This board was 23 established by the Archbishop to assist him in assigning 24 priests to different parishes, to make recommendations to 25 him as to who might best serve as a pastor of this parish Page 465 1 or associate at that parish. 2 Q. And was that the procedure, as far as you knew 3 it, in the late '60s, early '70s, the personnel board 4 would make recommendations to the Archbishop concerning 5 assignments? 6 A. The personnel board would meet and make 7 recommendations. We weren't always assured that he would 8 follow those recommendations. And only because Archbishop 9 Davis was, in a sense, his own man, I guess. He would 10 make decisions whether you advised in that direction or 11 not. He just felt that he was the Archbishop, and we were 12 advisory, so, you know, it wasn't binding upon him. But 13 nonetheless, the board did exist to make recommendations. 14 Q. Were you on the personnel board during that 15 period of time? 16 A. I served on the personnel board for a year, yes. 17 Q. What year was that? 18 A. I would say -- it could very well have been like 19 1972, I think 1972. 20 Q. And as far as your understanding of the 21 personnel board's procedures in, let's say, the late '60s 22 through 1972, what steps did the personnel board undertake 23 in making a recommendation to the Archbishop concerning 24 placement of a priest? 25 A. The priests on the personnel board by and large Page 466 1 were familiar with the parishes of the Archidocese and 2 could all address, then, the -- what I would call the 3 profile of a parish and their needs. They knew how large 4 the parish was. They knew whether it was a bilingual 5 parish or not. They knew if it had a Catholic school 6 attached to it or not. They were familiar with the entire 7 parish structures. And they were also familiar fairly 8 much with the talents of each priest and the experience of 9 the priests, and they would make recommendations based on 10 that knowledge. 11 Oftentimes, if a pastorship was open, it would be 12 informed -- in a sense, advertised to the general body of 13 priests. If somebody had a particular interest in that, 14 he would submit his name for consideration. But the 15 priest personnel board ultimately would make a 16 recommendation to the Archbishop that they would recommend 17 so-and-so for this parish. Sometimes they might have two 18 names on the recommended list, feeling that either one 19 would be a very fine candidate for it. 20 Q. What type of investigation was undertaken by the 21 personnel board of the priest to determine whether or not 22 he was suitable for assignment to a particular parish? 23 A. It wasn't a formal investigation as to himself. 24 They knew his work in a particular parish. It seemed to 25 be very effective work. The parish seemed to be Page 467 1 functioning smoothly. As far as the board knew, there 2 were no particular problems that they were -- that the 3 pastor had personally or that any parishioners had brought 4 against the parish. But they would make that 5 recommendation to the Archbishop. 6 Q. My question is, how would they acquire that 7 information, by word of mouth or talking among themselves? 8 Would they pull out the priest personnel file? 9 A. It would be talking among themselves. They do 10 not have access to the priest personnel files. That 11 belonged to the Archbishop. 12 Q. So the personnel board, in making a 13 recommendation to the Archbishop for placement of a parish 14 priest in the late '60s and early '70s would not have 15 access to that priest's personnel file? 16 A. That's right. 17 Q. But the Archbishop would? 18 A. Oh, yes. 19 Q. You said Archbishop Davis was pretty much his 20 own man. Do you know what process he went through to 21 determine how priests should be assigned within the 22 various parishes? 23 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, calls for 24 speculation on the part of this witness. 25 Q. I'm asking your knowledge, Archbishop. Page 468 1 A. I don't know what process he would go through at 2 all. 3 Q. Do you know what process was undertaken in your 4 case to make your assignments to parishes? 5 A. I was -- since I had been on the personnel 6 board, and I had served as a priest in the Archidocese, 7 when I became the Archbishop, I assured the priests that I 8 would be listening to the recommendations of the personnel 9 board, and in fact followed those recommendations, right 10 offhand, off the top of my head, I would say at least 99 11 percent of the time. Their recommendations seemed to be 12 very fine, very fair. 13 Q. And when you were Archbishop, did the personnel 14 board have access to the priest-in-question's personnel 15 file? 16 A. No. Personnel files, as such, were considered 17 confidential. But if they chose, if they wished to 18 interview the priest, they could, or if they wished to 19 contact the parish council of the parish, that was 20 possible, too. 21 Q. But during the time that you were Archbishop, 22 there was no access to the personnel file? 23 A. Not by general access, no. They were 24 considered -- the individual priest's own file was 25 considered confidential and private for that priest, not Page 469 1 that it would necessarily have anything of a confidential 2 nature, but it did have his curriculum vitae, where he was 3 born, and so forth, and any change of assignment. But it 4 was his file, and that priest could have access to the 5 file whenever he chose to see it. But it was really the 6 file of the Archbishop on behalf of that priest. 7 Q. You don't feel that it would have been 8 reasonable or prudent for the personnel board to have 9 access to that in making recommendations for assignments 10 to the Archbishop? 11 A. Not really. I think that the knowledge of the 12 personnel board, in most instances, was as much as the 13 Archbishop knew, myself, and perhaps more so, because they 14 were in touch with their brother priests more frequently 15 than I myself. 16 Q. Prior to becoming Archbishop, when you were 17 assigned to particular parishes, do you know what 18 procedures or process was undertaken to determine your 19 being fit for assignment? 20 A. No, I don't. Only the Lord knows. I have no 21 ideA. 22 Q. No one advised you of what the process was? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Was Archbishop Davis ill in the latter part of 25 his service as Archbishop? Page 470 1 A. It appeared to many of us that -- well, he did 2 have a heart condition that would not allow him oftentimes 3 to -- he could not venture to the high altitudes for a 4 long period of time. So he would spend a great period of 5 time in the Albuquerque area or lower areA. I know that 6 he tried to limit the numbers of times he'd have to go to 7 Santa Fe because of its particular altitude. 8 He also suffered from gout, and what became more and 9 more obvious was that perhaps the beginnings of what is 10 known now as Alzheimer's disease was beginning to afflict 11 him, because his memory was beginning to have problems. 12 And as I look at myself, I'm wondering if that's not an 13 affliction that hits all archbishops. 14 Q. Only when they're sued. 15 A. No, unfortunately it happens on other occasions, 16 as well, many occasions. But he seemed to be having 17 difficulty that way. 18 Q. When did he first appear to be having that 19 difficulty concerning his memory? 20 A. I don't know. I could not give you a definite 21 year, but certainly by his last year in office, I would 22 say that it seemed anyway -- I don't want to say that he 23 was at that time suffering from Alzheimer's, but it seemed 24 to us from some of his decisions and perhaps failures to 25 remember other things, that he was contradicting a prior Page 471 1 decision that he may have forgotten about. 2 Q. Do you recall any specific decisions? 3 A. I just don't remember any specific ones. They 4 weren't major things, but it just seemed that that was 5 happening, and so we just wondered if he wasn't. 6 Ultimately he did go into severe Alzheimer's disease and 7 died that way himself. 8 Q. Can you recall approximately the year that you 9 would have first began to recognize, yourself, that that 10 was a problem with Archbishop Davis? 11 A. I suppose 1973. I'd say immediately -- shortly 12 before his retirement. 13 Q. Is when you first noticed it? 14 A. I would say yes. 15 Q. Had you heard that that was a problem with 16 Archbishop Davis prior to 1973? 17 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'm going to object to 18 the use of the word "problem," unless you're more specific 19 as to how it has been a problem. The Archbishop testified 20 as to some memory loss but didn't indicate that it was a 21 major problem. 22 A. I did not hear of other -- it wasn't scuttlebutt 23 or anything like that. When we would have a decision made 24 that seemed to be contradictory to what we thought had 25 been made prior, we wondered whether he changed his mind Page 472 1 or whether he simply forgot. 2 Q. Did that first begin to occur in '73, or did 3 that start to happen before? 4 A. I did not have close contact with the 5 Archbishop, in fact, not even much in '73. He simply 6 stayed in his office. And I think I had visited his 7 office only twice in the previous -- in the 10 years of 8 his tenure. 9 Q. When you were admitted to the priesthood, do you 10 know what type of screening or evaluation process was done 11 into your background? 12 A. I don't know what the officials may have done, 13 I'm sure that they depended a lot upon the local pastor to 14 recommend seminarians, because the local pastor was 15 familiar with the family, with the candidate or potential 16 candidate, his talents, indications that he would show 17 regarding his desire for a spiritual life, oftentimes if 18 he was attending Mass daily or infrequently, his 19 interests, whatever they were, in music or in sports, or 20 whether he worked in a job here or there. They, I would 21 say, by and large, depended upon the recommendation of the 22 local pastor for that. 23 Q. Do you know if that was done in your case? 24 A. I would assume it was because my pastor knew me 25 very well, and I would say the seminary officials would Page 473 1 have called or contacted him for recommend -- they would 2 not allow anyone in the seminary without a recommendation 3 from their pastor. 4 Q. After you became a priest, did you become aware 5 of the Archidocese of Santa Fe's procedures for screening 6 priest applicants? 7 A. I was not associated with the seminary. I was 8 neither a professor at the seminary or an official, and so 9 I really had no occasion to find out what their procedure 10 was. 11 Q. Have you ever found out? 12 A. When I was the Archbishop in my own years, I was 13 able to ask them, you know, the procedures that are 14 recommended for seminary admission. And somewhere along 15 the line -- I don't recall exactly what years, but we 16 began to include, I guess, a testing, a psychological 17 testing of the individual, also required recommendations 18 from beyond the pastor. It would include other 19 individuals who had known him or former employers, 20 teachers, so that there was a greater and a broader body 21 of knowledge that was brought to the admissions board for 22 the seminary. 23 Q. And that process was instituted after you became 24 Archbishop? 25 A. Yes. Page 474 1 Q. Did you institute that process? 2 A. Not so much myself. That was the rector of the 3 seminary and the staff. They were familiar with the 4 guidelines for seminary admissions. 5 I might add that the National Council of Catholic 6 Bishops do have a commission or a committee that looks at 7 seminaries and has recommendations for seminaries for 8 everything from the curriculum to spirituality practices, 9 structures, admissions, this sort of guideline for 10 seminaries. 11 Q. Do you know under which rector that admissions 12 policy was instituted? 13 A. Well, there were various admissions policies, 14 I'm sure, under every rector, except that they would 15 become more demanding as years went on. I don't know -- 16 if I recall correctly, things began to take on different 17 tones, I think, probably under the rectorship of Father 18 Johnny Lee Chavez. 19 Q. Which would have been what years, approximately? 20 A. Oh, probably the early '80s to mid '80s. 21 Q. So prior to that time, the early to mid '80s, 22 when these procedures were instituted, there was no 23 requirement that a seminarian priest undergo a 24 psychological evaluation? 25 A. Not that I can recall, or at least not that I Page 475 1 was aware of. Now, this is our seminary at Santa Fe, 2 which deals with college-level students. When they leave 3 there, they have four more years of study, and they have 4 to go to what we call a House of Theology. And the House 5 of Theology has their own requirements for admission and 6 acceptance and procedures. So they would have an 7 additional structure of admission categories that the 8 candidate would have to go through. 9 Q. Did the Archidocese of Santa Fe have its own 10 screening process for priests, after they completed 11 seminary or other theological studies? 12 A. Not really a separate process, screening 13 process, for the priests. We depended upon the seminary 14 where they had been in school for at least four years and 15 under the guidance of professional formation staff. They 16 had gone through testing, through their studies, through 17 spirituality, spiritual direction, and they would give you 18 reports on these seminarians, and finally they would 19 recommend a seminarian for ordination to you only if he 20 passed their requirements. If there was any doubt about 21 him, they would not recommend him for ordination. 22 Q. If a seminarian was recommended for ordination 23 to you as Archbishop, would you generally accept that 24 recommendation? 25 A. Yes, I would. Page 476 1 Q. Without performing any additional investigation? 2 A. I would have a letter of recommendation from his 3 home pastor or parish. I would have a letter of consent 4 or at least testimony of consent from the parish council 5 of his parish, from his parents, and the personnel board 6 would also have to vote affirmative for his ordination. 7 Q. Did you examine -- in that process, did you 8 examine any of the application records that were required 9 by the seminary to include any psychological evaluation 10 testing, if one was conducted, or did you just rely on the 11 seminary's recommendation? 12 A. I relied on their interpretations since they had 13 administered their testing. If, in fact, there were any 14 concern in an area about a candidate, that would be 15 brought to my attention. If they would say that, "This 16 person seems to exhibit a high degree of irascibility. He 17 gets angry very quickly. He flies off the handle at the 18 drop of a hat, and we're concerned about that quality. We 19 recommend that he have counseling until he can learn to 20 control that temper." And with that notification, the man 21 would then be asked to go into counseling for that 22 purpose. 23 Q. Did that particular situation ever occur? 24 A. Yes, it did. 25 Q. When? Page 477 1 A. It occurred with one example I can recall off 2 the top of my head, with a priest who had been a 3 seminarian in St. Meinard's in Indiana, and he was held 4 back from ordination to the deaconate because of it, and 5 they requested that he would go through therapy there at 6 their own school, and I agreed with their request. The 7 candidate felt very hurt by it, but he did comply with the 8 request, and so his ordination was delayed for another 9 year. 10 Q. What year was that? 11 A. I suppose around 1976, '77. 12 Q. What about priests who came to the Archidocese 13 from other Archidocese? 14 A. Priests who would come to us from another 15 Archidocese would have to bring with them or would have 16 sent ahead of them letters of recommendation from their 17 own bishop, and he would explain to the local bishop, to 18 myself or to my predecessor that, "Father X desires to 19 work in the Archidocese of Santa Fe. He's a priest of our 20 diocese. We recommend him. If you would like to receive 21 full information about him, please contact us, and we'll 22 send it." 23 If, in fact, after interviewing the individual, the 24 Archidocese felt that they would have an interest in him, 25 they would then write to the chancery office of his former Page 478 1 diocese or of his diocese, asking for a full curriculum 2 vitae on that priest. 3 Q. And that was the procedure in effect when you 4 were Archbishop? 5 A. Yes, for a priest that wanted to come to work in 6 the Archidocese, that would be the procedure I would go 7 through. In fact, I could not allow any priest to even 8 function on a weekend without first clearing that with his 9 own bishop or superior in his former diocese. That would 10 normally be done with a phone call. 11 Q. So it was your policy as Archbishop to make a 12 personal contact with the Archbishop of the diocese from 13 which the priest came to assure that that priest was 14 qualified to serve in your Archidocese? 15 A. Yes. If the priest has presented himself to us 16 as a total stranger, and he's presented himself to us for 17 the first time, we have no idea who he is. We have to 18 verify, first, that he's a priest; and secondly, what kind 19 and why he's there and what does his bishop have to say 20 about it. So that is pro formA. That communication or 21 letters are sent regularly. 22 Q. All right. And I assume that you feel that that 23 is a prudent practice to undertake to assure the 24 well-being of parishioners with whom this priest may come 25 in contact? Page 479 1 A. Yes, as well as to assure that he is validly 2 ordained a priest and has the right to function as such, 3 so that he's not pretending to be such. 4 Q. Well, not only that concern, but you're also 5 concerned about anything in this priest's past -- 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. -- or past behavior that may adversely affect 8 the health of the parishioners in the Archidocese of 9 Santa Fe? 10 A. Yes, sir. 11 Q. When you were at St. Pius High School in 12 Albuquerque, you said that you taught; is that correct? 13 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q. And did you do anything else, other than teach? 15 A. I was also activities director and, for one 16 year, athletic director. Then I was asked to assume the 17 additional responsibility of academic advisor to our 18 seniors so as to get them placed in colleges or in 19 whatever career they may choose to go. 20 Q. Did you have any contact with the chancery? 21 A. No, sir. There was no need to contact the 22 chancery, unless they asked me to come in for some 23 purpose. 24 Q. At what point in time did you know that you were 25 on a path to becoming Archbishop or have any indication Page 480 1 that that was a possibility? 2 A. Sir, the most surprised individual in this world 3 was myself when I was told by my predecessor that I was 4 selected by the Holy Father to be the next Archbishop of 5 Santa Fe. I had no indication. I was simply a parish 6 priest. I had not been given any special positions or 7 titles. 8 In past years, at that time, it had been the -- 9 almost a tradition of the Church that any candidate for 10 the episcopacy had to be a chancellor of the diocese for 11 many years, so as to become familiar with administration. 12 I had not been chancellor nor had I been in the chancery 13 except twice in a 10-year period. So I was far removed 14 from that. I was simply involved in parish work, and I 15 was fairly resigned that I would be a pastor for the rest 16 of my life. 17 Q. When did you learn of that appointment? 18 A. I learned of my appointment from the Archbishop 19 in late May of 1974. 20 Q. And when did you take office? 21 A. Well, the appointment formally was made then 22 public on the 4th of June, just about a week later, in 23 1974. There was a break between that and the time that I 24 was ordained and assumed office, which took place on July 25 25th, 1974. Page 481 1 Q. And is that when you moved to the chancery in 2 Albuquerque? 3 A. And that's when I moved to the chancery in 4 Albuquerque, yes, sir. 5 Q. Was that the first time that you had begun to 6 understand the administration of the Archidocese? 7 A. I can't really say I began to understand it 8 then, but I was exposed to it then. And it took -- as you 9 might imagine, it would take a few years to really feel 10 comfortable with positions such as that, because it 11 involved such a new area of concern. I had no idea about 12 land and titles and all -- what lands were ours and the 13 titles that we had, some going back, you know, several 14 hundred years, and the parishes that existed, the number 15 of buildings that were on them, insurance policies. I had 16 no idea about financing all of this, and where the 17 financing came from, how we had to struggle to make it 18 work. I had no idea about the retirement program for the 19 priests and how that was functioning. Our cemeteries, 20 which are also public entities that are governed by state 21 law. I had no idea about the hospitals that were in 22 existence and what medical malpractice could be brought 23 against the hospitals, what insurances were required, how 24 they operated. I had no idea about Catholic charities 25 that dealt with the multiple needs of humanity and what Page 482 1 exposure was there. I had to learn about the number of 2 parishes we had, their programs. The Catholic school 3 program had 27 schools. I suddenly became an 4 administrator of 27 schools. Liaison with colleges, and 5 on and on. 6 It just -- it's an awesome awakening when you 7 suddenly sit down in that position and realize that you 8 are now faced with a responsibility which is much greater 9 than you had ever been involved in previously, and you had 10 to begin to familiarize yourself with all of those 11 responsibilities. 12 Q. And did you undertake to educate yourself 13 concerning those responsibilities? 14 A. I had no other choice but to do so. 15 Q. And so you did that? 16 A. It's called on-the-job training. 17 Q. And as a part of that on-the-job training and 18 educating yourself concerning the affairs of the 19 Archidocese, did you review the personnel files of all of 20 your priests? 21 A. No, sir, I did not. It just occurred to me, as 22 I took it over, I took over the responsibility, that each 23 of the priests who had assignments, who were assigned at 24 that time, had been given the proper clearance and had 25 been approved by my predecessor, and we began immediately Page 483 1 to continue to function where they were at. So I did not 2 go to personnel files to start with any review of one, two 3 three. I did not do that. 4 Q. Did you think at that time to check the 5 personnel files of priests that had been given assignments 6 within the Archidocese within at least a year prior to 7 your taking over because of Archbishop Davis' infirmity? 8 A. No, sir, it did not occur to me. I felt that 9 the Archbishop had a chancellor, was familiar with the 10 Archdiocese, a very capable man; and that whatever was 11 necessary for priests to be able to work in the 12 Archidocese had been done properly. And I did not try to 13 double-check Archbishop Davis at all. 14 Q. Well, I'm not talking about double-checking. 15 I'm talking about you becoming familiar with the priests 16 assigned to parishes in your Archidocese to ensure the 17 safety of your parishioners. Did you think to do that at 18 all? 19 MS. KENNEDY: I object. Could you read 20 back the question? 21 [The record was read by the reporter.] 22 MS. KENNEDY: Well, I'm going to object to 23 the question as vague. And if the question is, did you 24 look through the personnel files, then I object. It's 25 already asked and answered. Page 484 1 Q. Go ahead. 2 A. I did not feel I had to go through those 3 personnel files. The majority of the priests who were 4 working in the Archidocese had been there for several 5 years, and so I knew them. There were some admittedly 6 that I did not know, simply because I had not been part of 7 their area or association with them. But I assume that 8 the other priests who also served in various capacities 9 were familiar with them and would be able to advise me 10 about them. I did not make that a personal goal. You 11 might say I was -- I had enough on my plate and felt that 12 what was already in place had been well proven and would 13 continue that way. 14 Q. So you didn't undertake any affirmative action 15 to update yourself on the background of the priests that 16 you didn't know? 17 A. That's right, sir, I did not. 18 Q. At the time you became Archbishop, did you know 19 Jason Sigler? 20 A. I did not know Jason Sigler. I believe I met 21 him, if I met him, probably at the ordination ceremony, 22 because I greeted each priest personally at one point of 23 the ceremony, and I have to assume that he was there and 24 that I greeted him, but I had not met him as such. 25 MR. GOFFE: The time is 2:24. We will go Page 485 1 off the record to change tapes. This is the end of 2 tape 7. 3 [A recess was taken.] 4 MR. GOFFE: The time is 2:44. We are back 5 on the record. This is the beginning of tape number 8 in 6 the deposition of Archbishop Sanchez. The date today is 7 January 14th, 1944 -- 1994. 8 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop Sanchez, you 9 mentioned the Cursillo. 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. What is the Cursillo? 12 A. The Cursillo is a movement for spiritual 13 enrichment for the laity, Catholic laity. The full name 14 is Cursillo de Cristianedad. It means a small course or a 15 short course of Christianity, a brief experience in 16 Christianity. It involves a long weekend with a 17 determined number of laiety. Normally, the program begins 18 on Thursday evening, continues all day Friday, Saturday, 19 until Sunday afternoon. It consists of lectures that are 20 delivered principally by laymen and laywomen. A priest, a 21 spiritual director of the Cursillo, delivers one of the 22 lectures. And the purpose of it is to both inform that 23 particular group of laiety about their own faith, but more 24 importantly, to help create a little more fire within them 25 to build up that enthusiasm within their own Christian Page 486 1 life. 2 And it has proven to be a very effective movement for 3 the laiety in this particular Archidocese. There have 4 been thousands of men and women who have made the 5 Cursillo. 6 They are separate, a Cursillo for men, and then 7 perhaps the following week, a Cursillo for women. We do 8 want to have husbands and wives be able to attend the 9 Cursillo, but they are done separately so they can be 10 addressed as men or as women. 11 Q. Now, how often do these take place within the 12 Archidocese? 13 A. Well, it has differed over the years. Sometimes 14 they're as often as one a month. Other times it would be 15 less often, perhaps eight times a year. There is a 16 preparation for the Cursillo that is necessary, so that 17 the team that is presenting the Cursillo is well prepared 18 for that weekend. 19 Q. And would the Cursillo take place at various 20 locations throughout the Archidocese, or would it be a 21 central location? 22 A. Normally it would be a central location, because 23 we didn't always have the facilities, since it includes 24 overnight accommodations for those making the Cursillo. 25 So it would normally be one, perhaps two places, but that Page 487 1 would be the extent. We don't have that type of multiple 2 facilities. 3 Q. Now, would a priest be assigned to Cursillo 4 duty, if you will? 5 A. Sometimes a priest would be assigned as the 6 chaplain. It wouldn't be a full-time job. It would mean 7 that he should meet with the leadership, because it's a 8 lay organization principally, and the laiety themselves 9 have their board of directors, you might call -- it's 10 called the secretariate, and they have their president, 11 and they elect officers on a regular basis. 12 But the priest chaplain then meets with them when 13 they do meet as officers, but it's not a full-time 14 position for them. It's something that he is -- feels 15 that he can afford the time to be with them in this way. 16 Q. At any given time would more than one priest be 17 assigned to Cursillo duties? 18 A. Normally you have one chaplain, spiritual 19 director, spiritual chaplain, for them. But for each 20 Cursillo that is held for that weekend, a different priest 21 might be assigned for that, so that burden doesn't fall on 22 one man, since it takes the whole weekend. And most of 23 our priests are involved in parishes where the weekend 24 becomes quite busy for them. So they can't always free 25 themselves to be with a Cursillo. So you have different Page 488 1 men who are familiar -- who have made the Cursillo 2 themselves and are willing to serve as the chaplain of 3 that particular Cursillo. 4 Q. When were you directly involved with the 5 Cursillo? 6 A. I made a Cursillo personally, I believe it was 7 about 1979, as an Archbishop, is when I made my Cursillo. 8 And it was held in Santa Fe at the seminary. Prior to 9 that, I knew of the Cursillo, although I had not made it, 10 and would be able to recommend candidates, our lay 11 candidates, to make the Cursillo. 12 Q. Would you have done that when you were a pastor 13 in a parish prior to becoming Archbishop? 14 A. Yes, as a parish priest, because your candidates 15 come out of your parishes. So I would recommend them. 16 Q. And what is the Search? 17 A. Search Program? 18 Q. Search Program. 19 A. The Search Program is also a weekend of 20 spiritual enrichment for laiety, but it's particularly 21 designated for young adults, young adults being anyone 22 from, say, 17 to about 30, in that age category. So the 23 young adults are then -- they make application to their 24 pastor, and the pastor makes application to the Search 25 committee. And whenever they feel they can accommodate Page 489 1 this particular individual, then they have a Search 2 weekend. 3 The weekends are similar to the Cursillo weekend. 4 It's the same format except it's designated for young 5 adults, single adults. It's been a very effective program 6 to get enthusiasm, again, religious enthusiasm, alive in 7 the young adults of our various parishes. 8 Q. With respect to the Search Program, are a group 9 of priests assigned to administer this program, or is 10 it -- is there a board of directors or a council that -- 11 A. What I recall is they had their own board; some 12 adults on the board decides, the young adults, and a 13 spiritual chaplain or a spiritual director, much like the 14 Cursillo. 15 Q. Were you ever involved in the Search Program? 16 A. I was asked to be a chaplain on one occasion of 17 a Search Program. 18 Q. When was that? 19 A. I think it was the year -- perhaps in the winter 20 of 1972, January, February or March of that year, I 21 believe it was. 22 Q. During the -- when you came back from seminary, 23 were incardinated and installed in a parish in the 24 Archidocese of Santa Fe and at St. Pius, did you -- you've 25 indicated that by the time you got to be Archbishop, you Page 490 1 knew a good number of the priests; is that a fair 2 statement? 3 A. Yes, we had been serving together for 14 years. 4 Some were very close friends, others were coworkers 5 together, and others were more acquaintances, because they 6 may have been older men that I simply did not -- you know, 7 you don't hang around -- you hang around your own group, 8 but you get to know them, but you're not close friends 9 with them. 10 Q. Prior to becoming Archbishop, did you know or 11 become familiar with Father Bob Kirsch? 12 A. I had heard of Father Bob Kirsch, but I had not 13 had opportunities to meet or to share with him at any 14 particular time. I can recall hearing one lecture that he 15 gave to a group of Sisters at the Immaculate Conception 16 parish in Albuquerque on one occasion, and I think that 17 was the first time that I saw him functioning that way. 18 Q. When would that have been? 19 A. That would have been around '73. 20 Q. You had not seen him prior to that time? 21 A. I cannot swear that I had not seen him, because 22 there are gatherings for ceremonies at the Cathedral when 23 all the priests will come together for our Chrism Mass on 24 Holy Thursday, but I had not spoken with him or had a 25 chance to hear him. Page 491 1 Q. Were you ever aware, prior to becoming 2 Archbishop, that Father Bob Kirsch was accused of having 3 physically assaulted a woman, physically assaulting a 4 woman at St. Thomas Parish? 5 A. No, I wasn't aware of that. 6 Q. Have you ever become aware of that? 7 A. After I was made the Archbishop, I had heard 8 talk about it. I didn't know when that occurred, and I 9 never questioned Father Bob specifically about the 10 incident that I had heard about. But it must have 11 occurred or at least come to my attention, oh, a number of 12 years after I was the Archbishop. It simply wasn't talked 13 about. It must have been maybe around 19 -- I don't know, 14 late '70s, early '80s, when I heard about this. 15 16 17 18 19 Page 492 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. Father Ed Donnollan, did you know him prior to 7 becoming Archbishop? 8 A. Yes, I had heard of Father Ed Donnollan prior to 9 becoming Archbishop and in fact had met him on one 10 occasion. I was pastor at Mosquero at the time, and I 11 knew that he was operating a boys' ranch or a ranch for 12 boys, I should say, and the event happened. I had just -- 13 I had gone deer hunting that morning and was fortunate 14 enough to shoot my deer. And after hauling him back to 15 the car for a mile and a half, I was just drained. I 16 drove back to the rectory, and I was covered with some 17 blood and drinking some water, and he walked in and asked 18 why I was full of blood, and I told him I had shot a deer. 19 He wanted to see it. And then he said "Gee, the boys at 20 the Ranch would sure enjoy a deer like that." So I gave 21 it to him. That was the occasion that I met him. 22 Q. When was that? 23 A. About 1970. 24 Q. Did you ever go to the Boys' Ranch? 25 A. No, sir. Page 493 1 Q. In 1970, did you know the function of the Boys' 2 Ranch or what was -- what Father Bob's -- excuse me, 3 Father Ed's role was at the Boys' Ranch? 4 A. I really didn't know the particulars. I think 5 the general comment was that it was a ranch for juveniles, 6 because Father Ed had served as chaplain at the boys' 7 school in Springer and had become familiar with the 8 officials. 9 And then at one point, Archbishop Davis apparently 10 granted permission to him to open a ranch, to put 11 facilities at the disposal of boys and to apply to the 12 State of New Mexico for a license to operate such a 13 facility, and apparently he was granted that. 14 I didn't know those particulars at that time. All I 15 knew was that he had a ranch for boys that seemed to have 16 been for delinquents. 17 Q. But you later found that out -- 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Was it your understanding, then, that Father Ed 20 Donnollan was the director of the Boys' Ranch at the 21 request of the then Archbishop Davis? 22 A. Yes. He had to receive that permission from his 23 superior before he could assume that position. 24 Q. And you, in fact, closed the Boys' Ranch? 25 A. When I was the Archbishop, I had that duty. Page 494 1 Q. And can I assume, then, that Father Ed Donnollan 2 was at all times while he was operating the Boys' Ranch 3 under the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of the 4 Archidocese of Santa Fe? 5 A. Well, there's a distinction that has to be made 6 there. As the director of the Boys' Ranch, he was really 7 under the supervision of the New Mexico Health and Social 8 Services, because that was a program sponsored by the New 9 Mexico Health and Social Services, and they would send 10 their team to evaluate that Ranch, as they did to other 11 centers for their boys. 12 So he had to give accountability to them for his 13 operations. As a priest, he was still a priest of the 14 Archidocese of Santa Fe. But he was functioning in a 15 position of an administration or administrator of the 16 Ranch rather than functioning as a parish priest. 17 Q. But with respect to his conduct as a priest of 18 the Archidocese of Santa Fe, he was under the jurisdiction 19 and supervision of the Archbishop of the Archidocese? 20 A. Oh, yes. 21 [The witness conferred with his attorney.] 22 Q. Archbishop, do you know how Father Ed Donnollan 23 was getting paid? 24 A. I would assume -- and I don't know this for a 25 fact, but I assume that if the Health and Social Services Page 495 1 approves any institution to exist, and they then license 2 them as a center for care of their boys, then the State 3 probably pays that center so much per capita for the 4 number of boys that are there. That's what I would 5 assume. Much like I would think that they subsidize 6 schools with textbooks; it's based on the number of 7 children who are in the school. Depending on how many you 8 have, that's what you get per child for textbooks. 9 Q. While Father Ed Donnollan was the director of 10 that Boys' Ranch, do you know if he was receiving any 11 funds from the Archidocese? 12 A. No, there was no funding at all from the 13 Archidocese. 14 Q. When you became Archbishop in 1974, did you 15 undertake any review of either the background or 16 qualifications of Father Ed Donnollan or the status or 17 state of the program at the Boys' Ranch? 18 A. No, sir, I did not take any -- did not make a 19 review of his qualifications for that position. The man 20 had been working as its director for several years 21 already. I guess I simply presumed that the State of New 22 Mexico was content or happy with what was taking place at 23 that Ranch and with his directorship. 24 Q. You subsequently did conduct an investigation 25 upon receiving complaints about Father Donnollan, correct? Page 496 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. So you made no efforts to investigate what was 3 happening at the Boys' Ranch until you received 4 complaints; is that a fair statement? 5 A. That's right. 6 Q. At the time that you had received information 7 concerning allegations of sexual misconduct by Father 8 Donnollan at the Boys' Ranch, did you instruct Father 9 Griego, or did you instruct anyone, to obtain a list of 10 the names and home addresses of the boys who were then in 11 residence at the Ranch? 12 A. No, sir. That was not my responsibility or duty 13 at all. 14 Q. Why not? 15 A. I'm not Health and Social Services. Those boys 16 belonged to Health and Social Services. 17 Q. You were Archbishop, though? 18 A. But the boys were not under my charge. 19 Q. Father Donnollan was, correct? 20 A. As a priest, but not as a director of the 21 institute or the Ranch. 22 Q. Well, let me ask you this: If Father Donnollan 23 sexually abused any of the boys at that Ranch, do you 24 think you, as Archbishop of Santa Fe, had any obligation 25 to those boys? Page 497 1 A. I had an obligation to make this known to the 2 Health and Social Services and, with them, to work 3 together to see that whatever abuse had occurred, the 4 actions that were necessary to be taken would be taken. 5 Q. Did you feel that you had any obligation to 6 those boys? 7 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: A legal obligation or 8 social obligation? 9 Q. Any obligation. Moral, legal, whatever 10 obligation you felt. 11 A. I did not know of any specific incident of any 12 accusation against Father Ed Donnollan that he had, in 13 fact, abused this boy X, and I did not take up any 14 investigation to discover who that might be. 15 The allegations that I had principally centered 16 around poor management and possessiveness on his part for 17 control and authority, and this seemed to come to me 18 repeatedly from both the staff and others around there. 19 I encouraged them also to make that known to the 20 authorities in Santa Fe or, at that time, in Raton, since 21 they had an area office, because this was the office that 22 they had to report to. 23 The incidents that you're referring to, or any 24 allegations about possible sexual misconduct, was simply a 25 reference that they thought there might be other more Page 498 1 serious things going on at the Ranch. And I think this 2 was the subject of our conversation, then, with the Health 3 and Social Services so that a proper investigation would 4 be made. 5 6 7 8 9 10 Page 500 1 2 3 Q. Was Father Donnollan, at the time he was 4 director of the Boys' Ranch, receiving a priest's salary? 5 A. No, sir, he wasn't. To the best of my 6 knowledge, he received no salary from the Archidocese of 7 Santa Fe because, in fact, he wasn't working in any 8 priestly assignment for the Archidocese of Santa Fe. 9 Q. Even though Archbishop Davis was the one that 10 directed him to establish the Ranch? 11 A. Archbishop Davis, as far as I know, did not 12 direct him to establish the Ranch. I believe that Father 13 asked permission to work in that specific ministry as a 14 result of his work at Springer boys' home. 15 Q. So the Ranch was a ministry? 16 A. Not from the Archidocese of Santa Fe. It was a 17 group home approved by the New Mexico Health and Social 18 Services for the sake of helping young boys who had a 19 delinquent problem or had problems in their homes. 20 [Exhibit 12 was marked for identification.] 21 Q. Archbishop, I'm going to mark, or I have marked 22 what I have been told to believe is your -- or led to 23 believe is the Archdiocese of Santa Fe's personnel file of 24 Jason Sigler. And I marked that as Exhibit 12. I'd like 25 for you to review that with your lawyer to confirm the Page 501 1 fact that it is his personnel file. 2 MS. KENNEDY: Let me just state for the 3 record, Mr. Bennett, I don't have with me that file as I 4 produced it, so I am unable to confirm that that is the 5 complete production from my office. 6 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Why don't we go off for 7 a minute. 8 MR. GOFFE: The time is 3:18. We will go 9 off the record. 10 [A recess was taken.] 11 MR. GOFFE: The time is 2:24. We are back 12 on the record. Pardon me, 3:24. 13 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop, I had showed you 14 Exhibit 12, which has been represented to me to be the 15 personnel file of the Archidocese of Santa Fe of Jason 16 Sigler. Have you had an opportunity to review that 17 exhibit? 18 A. I did at this moment, and it appears to be his 19 file. 20 Q. Now, we were talking a little while ago about 21 your policy at the Archidocese while you were Archbishop -- 22 A. Yes, sir. 23 Q. -- concerning review of the qualifications and 24 an evaluation of a priest from outside of the diocese who 25 desires to be in residence inside of the diocese? Page 502 1 A. Yes, sir. 2 Q. And you indicated to me that there were certain 3 steps that you felt were reasonable and prudent to go 4 through and that, in fact, you went through in evaluating 5 these types of priests. I would like just briefly, before 6 we talk about Mr. Sigler's file, to review those steps. 7 As I understand it, one of the steps is to make a 8 direct contact with the Archidocese of origin or of 9 incardination of this particular priest before faculties 10 are granted; is that correct? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. And another would be to conduct an interview of 13 this particular priest before he is installed; is that 14 accurate? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Who would generally conduct that interview? 17 A. It normally would be the chancellor who would 18 meet with the priest. Occasionally it might be myself. 19 Q. And other than interviewing the priest, 20 requesting faculties, even before a supply ministry were 21 authorized, or contacting the archidocese of 22 incardination, were there any other steps that you felt 23 reasonable and prudent to undertake? 24 A. No, the first step would be the contact of the 25 diocese of origin to verify who he is and that he is Page 503 1 legitimately a priest of that diocese in good standing, so 2 that he is accurately representing himself, and inform 3 them what, in fact, the priest is asking of us and see if 4 they agree to that. 5 The priest may very well be asking for faculties for 6 one year because he's attending the University of New 7 Mexico, and he'd like to be able to help on a weekend 8 while he's here, faculties such as that, or he might be 9 asking for us to consider him for an assignment in the 10 Archidocese; and for that, we would need not only the 11 verbal approval of a bishop or the chancellor, but we 12 would then ask for a written statement from them that, in 13 fact, he has served effectively, etc., and that they would 14 recommend him for assignment in our Archidocese. 15 Those are the initial steps that we would take 16 besides the interview of the individual personally. 17 Q. And I assume these steps would be undertaken to 18 determine whether or not the priest making application for 19 faculties would pose any health risk to the parishioners 20 of the Archidocese of Santa Fe? 21 A. Yes, I think it's all part of the package, that, 22 in fact, if he is a priest in good standing, we have to 23 assume that he is not a risk to anyone and that his own 24 health is not at risk. He's not suffering from a poor 25 heart or a bad liver or something of this nature. So all Page 504 1 of this information is to guarantee or at least to assure 2 the diocese, the receiving diocese, that the man who is 3 seeking a position with you can, in fact -- is, in fact, a 4 priest in good standing and can, in fact, do the work that 5 is being asked of him. 6 Q. I assume that in making those types of 7 inquiries, you would also want to know whether or not the 8 priest had committed any acts of moral turpitude on boys 9 at previous parishes where he may have served? 10 A. Either that or any other kind of actions which 11 would reflect negatively upon his character. He might be 12 given to drink. He might be a very poor driver or -- 13 there's a lot of things that can come across in a letter 14 from a diocese. 15 So the letter of inquiry is specifically to receive 16 any facts that we should know about the individual before 17 accepting him, especially toward incardination. 18 Q. Has there been a circumstance while you have 19 been Archbishop that a priest came to the Archidocese of 20 Santa Fe from another archidocese and was placed or 21 reported to the Servants of the Paraclete prior to making 22 a request for faculties in the Archidocese of Santa Fe? 23 A. There are priests who had been at the Servants 24 of the Paraclete for treatment; and at the request of the 25 Servants of the Paraclete, we were asked if, in fact, we Page 505 1 could provide a place for ministry for them, usually on a 2 temporary basis, that being for weekend ministry, for 3 three, four weekends. Or in some instances they may 4 request, "Is it possible to have him remain in your 5 diocese for about six months?" Those would require 6 special meetings with the staff or representative from the 7 Servants of the Paraclete to receive from them what the 8 situation may be regarding that individual priest and what 9 assurances we might have that he is functioning well and 10 effectively at this time. 11 Q. And would that be in addition to your normal 12 process of inquiry with the archidocese of incardination? 13 A. The Servants of the Paraclete would be asking us 14 to assume responsibility in their name. In other words, I 15 will have contact with the -- in fact, the Servants of the 16 Paraclete normally then write to the diocese of origin 17 because the man really is under the responsibility, as it 18 were, of the Servants of the Paraclete until he returns to 19 his home diocese. 20 By asking us to accommodate them for a weekend, we, 21 in effect, become part of the healing ministry, giving 22 them an opportunity sort of as a halfway position before 23 returning to their diocese. 24 The assurances are received both from the Servants of 25 the Paraclete and permission granted from their original Page 506 1 bishop for that to take place. 2 Q. Well, my question is, when you have a priest who 3 comes to your attention or at least makes application for 4 temporary faculties while or after being treated at the 5 Servants of the Paraclete, do you make contact, as you do 6 with other priests from other diocese coming into your 7 Archidocese, do you make contact with the archidocese of 8 origin -- 9 A. Yes, sir. 10 Q. -- of incardination to determine whether or not 11 there might be anything in this priest's background that 12 may adversely impair the interests of your parishioners? 13 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q. Just so I'm clear, you not only rely upon the 15 information given to you by the Servants of the Paraclete 16 concerning this individual, you would also contact the 17 archidocese of incardination to obtain whatever 18 information that archidocese might have? 19 A. And their permission, actually, because the 20 priest is not under my authority, but rather under the 21 authority of his own archbishop or bishop. 22 Q. And do you feel that that process, when a priest 23 in residence at the Servants of the Paraclete is involved, 24 is also a reasonable and prudent thing to do to protect 25 the interests of your parishioners? Page 507 1 A. To receive them for ministry in the Archidocese 2 directly? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. Are you asking my opinion now or opinion before 5 or -- 6 Q. Your opinion now. I mean, is that a reasonable 7 and prudent thing to undertake prior to installing a 8 priest or allowing a priest to have faculties to minister 9 in your parishes? 10 A. You have to be prudent and take as many 11 precautions as you can, especially today. Knowing as we 12 do know today, that there are many problems in different 13 people's lives, thorough letters of recommendation need to 14 be received before opportunities are offered to any priest 15 who requests that permission to work with us. 16 Q. And this has been your practice since you have 17 been Archbishop? 18 A. I've tried to maintain that, yes. 19 Q. Did you know whether or not the procedure that 20 you've described was the practice of Archbishop Davis 21 before you? 22 A. I would have to assume that it was, because that 23 is normal procedure for any diocese to receive priests for 24 them. They would have to make contact with the bishop of 25 origin to see that they have a man in good standing before Page 508 1 they can grant him faculties. It's pro forma type of 2 work. 3 Q. All right. Now, I'm going to refer to certain 4 documents in Exhibit 12, and first I'll show you a letter 5 dated August 17th, 1970. 6 MS. KENNEDY: May I ask, first, Mr. 7 Bennett, are those individual pages numbered, of Exhibit -- 8 MR. BENNETT: No, they're not. 9 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Why don't we just number 10 them. 11 MS. KENNEDY: I would just like to indicate 12 for the record when I produced the personnel file of Jason 13 Sigler in other pending Sigler litigation, they all had a 14 document number computerized on the bottom of them. If 15 your copies do not have that document number, then there 16 is no way I could ever verify, without an individual 17 page-by-page review, as to whether that's a complete copy 18 of the personnel file, just so the record is clear. 19 MR. TINKLER: Mr. Beach produced them, not 20 you. 21 MR. BENNETT: These documents were produced 22 by Mr. Beach. 23 MR. BEACH: I got them from Karen. The 24 numbers are right down here, if you'll look down here. 25 Maybe in the photocopying, it didn't get every page, but Page 509 1 there should be a number at least on some of the pages. 2 MR. BENNETT: What I'm going to do is 3 number in the upper right-hand corner by number -- or 4 actually I'll do it by letter, marking from first to last 5 alphabetically. 6 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) I've now, Archbishop, marked 7 these exhibits, letters AA through OO -- excuse me, A 8 through OO respectively. I'm going to refer to document B 9 of Exhibit 12, which is a letter dated August 17th, 1970, 10 addressed to Father Tobin on letterhead of Our Mother of 11 Mary Church, Wellington, Texas. The signature is missing. 12 I understand the signature to be that of Jason Sigler. 13 But your counsel can correct me if I'm wrong. 14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Your counsel doesn't 15 know Jason Sigler's signature, so I'm not sure he can 16 correct you. 17 Q. Let me show you this letter. And my question 18 is, after reading that letter, if you can tell me whether 19 or not that letter indicates that -- well, first, let me 20 ask you this: Who was Father Tobin? 21 A. I presume he was a member of the Servants of the 22 Paraclete. I'm not certain what position he held. He may 23 have been director of the house at Jemez Springs, but I'm 24 not certain. 25 Q. In reading this letter, does it indicate to you Page 510 1 that Jason Sigler was residing or at least undergoing some 2 type of contact with the Servants of the Paraclete in 3 August of 1970? 4 MR. KONRAD: Are you asking for his opinion 5 from reading the letter? 6 MR. BENNETT: That's correct. 7 MR. KONRAD: I'm going to object to the 8 question as ambiguous, residing or having contact with. 9 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: The document speaks for 10 itself. This is a document, as I understand, from Exhibit 11 12-B. The letter is not written to the Archbishop. 12 There's no reason to believe that the Archbishop ever 13 received the letter or has ever seen the letter before. 14 I guess I'm -- Mr. Bennett, the question is a 15 bit vague. It's a bit difficult to see how this witness 16 can be of any help to you in this regard. 17 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Well, when I read that letter, 18 Archbishop, I get the impression that Jason Sigler is 19 writing to Father Tobin concerning the fact that he was 20 serving or had recently served in Abiquiu. Do you get the 21 same impression? 22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll object. It's 23 asking for speculation by its very nature, and this 24 witness similarly is not competent to answer this 25 question, as the letter is not addressed to him, and it Page 511 1 has nothing to do with him, at least on its face. 2 MR. BENNETT: It's part of the personnel 3 file of the Archidocese. 4 Q. So I'm not -- I just want to get your 5 impression, if you shared the same impresstion that I do. 6 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Calls for speculation. 7 I'll object. 8 A. It appears to me that what he is saying is that 9 he's thanking Father Tobin for a check of $35, or a check 10 that was directed to the Parish of Abiquiu, and he said, 11 "Thank you, this could help me, because I receive only 10 12 cents per mile traveling to and from Via Coeli, plus the 13 Mass and the baptismal stipends." 14 So he's thanking Father Tobin for whatever donation 15 he made. It appears that he is in residence at Via Coeli 16 but has celebrated Mass at Abiquiu apparently on a Sunday 17 or so. 18 Q. And that was the same impression I had, 19 Archbishop. So it appears, at least from looking at this 20 letter, that Jason Sigler is serving in the Archidocese of 21 Santa Fe in the fall of 1970? 22 MR. KONRAD: Objection, calls for 23 speculation and interpretation of the document he didn't 24 write, didn't receive. 25 Q. Is that what it appears to you? Page 512 1 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Same objection, and the 2 question is vague, by -- what do you mean by "serving"? 3 He's clearly not incardinated. 4 A. He had no priestly assignment. I think what he 5 was doing was with the permission of his own superiors 6 apparently in Via Coeli. He had volunteered to help at 7 Abiquiu on weekends, and that was taking place. But there 8 was no assignment to him to any particular areA. 9 Q. No, I understand that. But he was performing a 10 supply ministry, if you will? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. From Via Coeli to the parish in Abiquiu? 13 MR. KONRAD: Objection, calls for 14 speculation. This witness has already testified he has no 15 personal knowledge of any of this. 16 Q. Is that what it appears to you from that 17 document? 18 A. From reading it. 19 Q. And let me show you Exhibit 12-C, which is a 20 letter dated December 7, 1970, addressed to James Peter 21 Davis, Archbishop of Santa Fe, from Reverend William F. 22 Tobin, Superior, and ask you if that letter also seems to 23 indicate that Father Jason Sigler is a resident at the 24 Servants of the Paraclete in late 1970? 25 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Object to the form of Page 513 1 the question. It calls for speculation on the part of the 2 witness and a matter about which he has no personal 3 knowledge. This letter has not been sent to him, nor is 4 there any evidence he's ever seen it before today. 5 A. The only thing that I would point out is that he 6 uses the expression "a guest here," and he writes it as a 7 Superior. I don't see a letterhead on it, but I would 8 assume it may be a Superior of Jemez Springs. 9 MR. KONRAD: Object. I would object to the 10 form of the question and move to strike the answer as it 11 was plainly a guess. 12 Q. Now, let me show you Exhibit 12-D, which is a 13 letter dated June 20, 1973, written on St. Thomas Apostle 14 parish letterhead, addressed to Lucien C. Hendren, 15 Chancellor, Archidocese of Santa Fe, signed Father 16 Jason E. Sigler. And could you please tell me what you 17 believe that letter to refer to? 18 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll object to the 19 question. It again calls for speculation on the part of 20 this witness. It calls for a matter upon which he has no 21 personal knowledge. This letter is not addressed to him 22 nor is it written by him, and the witness is asked to 23 speculate as to the meaning of the letter for which he has 24 no -- of which he is not a party. 25 Q. Well, Archbishop, I hope you understand my Page 514 1 question here. These letters appear in the personnel file 2 of the Archidocese of Santa Fe, and you being the former 3 Archbishop, I'm asking for your impression of what appears 4 in the Archidocese files. So could you please tell me 5 what that letter appears to represent? 6 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Same objection. 7 A. Again, since this letter was not addressed to 8 me, and it was signed by Jason Sigler, just from what I am 9 reading, it appears that Jason Sigler is writing to the 10 chancellor of the Archidocese -- and that's the address -- 11 to express his own feelings about the Archidocese of 12 Santa Fe, that he feels that the weather in this area of 13 the country is good for his health and that he might be 14 thinking of applying at some time for possible 15 incardination. 16 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, I'm going to show 17 you document 12-E and ask if you can please tell me what 18 that appears to be? 19 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Same objection as to the 20 question regarding Exhibit 12-E -- 21 Q. Let me just go ahead and describe this a little 22 better. It's a letter indicated June 22nd, 1973, to the 23 Reverend Monsignor N.J. Chartrand, Chancellor, Archidocese 24 of Winnipeg, from James P. Davis, Archbishop of Santa Fe. 25 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Calls for speculation, Page 515 1 beyond the competence of this witness, and asks for an 2 opinion about matters of which he has no personal 3 knowledge. 4 A. Once again, my reply is that the letter was 5 written by my predecessor, not by myself, before I ever 6 became the Archbishop, and addressed to apparently the 7 chancellor of the Archidocese of Winnipeg in Canada, 8 saying that Father Jason Sigler is a priest of that 9 Archidocese in Winnipeg, has expressed a desire to be 10 incardinated, and the Archbishop is asking him to send his 11 curriculum vitae and any information that would be of 12 assistance to look at his request, a courtesy letter. 13 Q. Well, it's more than that, isn't it? It's a 14 request -- 15 A. It's a courtesy to Father Sigler. 16 Q. Correct, but it's a request for information? 17 A. Oh, yes. As I had said, it's a request for 18 information, but a courtesy to Father Sigler. 19 Q. All right. Well, let's talk about this. Isn't 20 this a request to the Archidocese of Winnipeg for 21 information concerning Father Sigler similar to the policy 22 that you've described before when a priest applies for 23 faculties? 24 A. Yes, sir, it is. It's part of that. 25 Q. And let me show you document 12-G, which is a Page 516 1 letter dated June 22nd, 1973, to the Reverend James A. 2 Murray, Chancellor, Diocese of Lansing, from James P. 3 Davis, Archbishop of Santa Fe, and let me ask you what you 4 believe that to be. 5 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for 6 speculation on the part of this witness, calls for an 7 opinion for which he has no personal knowledge, and it's 8 speculative. 9 MR. KONRAD: I join in the objection. I'd 10 like to clarify something. I mean, do we have the gang-up 11 objection where if one person objects, everybody else 12 automatically can argue it, or do you want everybody to 13 pipe up? 14 MR. TINKLER: Frankly, all you can do is 15 object to the form of the question. It's a deposition. 16 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) Archbishop, let me ask you 17 this: Have you reviewed this personnel file of Jason 18 Sigler before today? 19 A. I saw part of a file when I was deposed by Mr. 20 Pasternack about, I suppose, nearly two years ago, a year 21 and a half ago. I had not seen the file prior to that 22 time. 23 Q. Are you saying you'd never reviewed the 24 personnel file of Jason Sigler prior to a deposition taken 25 of you by Mr. Pasternack? Page 517 1 A. That's right, sir. 2 Q. All right, go ahead. What does that letter 3 represent to you? 4 A. This letter is similar to the last letter, a 5 letter from -- yes, Archbishop Davis to the Chancellor of 6 the Diocese of Lansing informing him that Father Jason 7 Sigler, who had spent time in that diocese, is interested 8 in possible incardination. He's asking for any 9 information of service record while he served there. 10 Q. Again, does that appear to be part of the 11 process that you've described in inquiring into the 12 background of a priest asking to have faculties in the 13 Archidocese? 14 A. Yes, sir. 15 Q. Did you know, or do you know, that Jason Sigler 16 was ministering or in residence at the St. Thomas Parish 17 in Abiquiu from some time in 1970 until some time in 1974? 18 A. No, sir. I was not aware of where he was 19 ministering. Like many priests in the Archidocese, 20 they're assigned to different parishes. I had never met 21 him before, and I wasn't certain of his presence or where 22 he was actually assigned. 23 I was working at this time in the northeastern part 24 of New Mexico, in Mosquero, far removed from any other 25 priests, and it simply was not my personal interest to Page 518 1 know who Jason Sigler was. 2 Q. At any time since that time, has it come to your 3 attention that Jason Sigler was in St. Thomas parish in 4 Abiquiu between 1970 and 1974? 5 A. When we had the deposition to which I've 6 referred previously, this information was provided. 7 Q. Do you have any reason to dispute that Jason 8 Sigler was serving in the parish, at St. Thomas parish, in 9 Abiquiu during those time periods? 10 A. I am not certain about the time periods that you 11 have mentioned. I have no idea under what category he was 12 serving, whether it was for supply ministry or as an 13 associate pastor. But I was informed that he had served 14 in St. Thomas parish. 15 Q. During that time period? 16 A. I'm not certain about the whole time period, but 17 he had served in St. Thomas parish about that time, but I 18 wasn't aware of the years that you have just stated. 19 Q. But now having looked at his personnel file, 20 does it appear that he was serving in St. Thomas parish 21 during that time? 22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: If he can tell from the 23 personnel file, or if he knows from his own personal 24 knowledge? Which is it, Mr. Bennett? 25 Q. Does it appear from what you've seen here in the Page 519 1 personnel file that that was the case? 2 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll object. It asks 3 for speculation and obviously is a matter about which the 4 witness has no personal knowledge. 5 A. I could not state for certain, but reading the 6 letters which you asked us to read, it appears that he was 7 referring to supply ministry at one time in 1970. A 8 second letter contained the letterhead of St. Thomas 9 parish. I don't recall the date on that second letter. 10 And that's all that we have at this moment to go by. 11 12 13 Page 522 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. Nor do you know from this file whether or not a 15 call was placed to the Archidocese of Lansing, Michigan? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. In fact, all you know from looking at this file 18 is that the first communication of record is in 1973 with 19 the Archidocese of Winnipeg and the Archidocese of 20 Lansing; isn't that correct? 21 MR. KONRAD: Well, objection. That assumes 22 that in the past 20 years, there have been no documents 23 lost or misplaced. 24 MR. TINKLER: Or destroyed. 25 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: And that assumes that Page 523 1 all communication has been written. 2 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) My question is, Archbishop 3 Sanchez, from looking at this file, there's nothing to 4 indicate to you that any contact was made with those two 5 archidocese prior to 1973; isn't that correct? 6 A. The documentation that you have shown here 7 appears to be a limited documentation, because it begins, 8 as you say, in 1973. I would have to assume that before 9 the Archbishop would have allowed any person to serve in 10 any of the parishes, that contact would have been made 11 with his diocese of origin. 12 Q. You would hope that that would be the case, 13 right? 14 A. That's my assumption. 15 Q. But you don't know that that was the case with 16 Father Sigler, do you? 17 A. I don't know that it was, and I don't know that 18 it was not. 19 Q. You certainly can't tell from the personnel 20 file, can you? 21 A. No, we cannot. 22 Q. In fact, what you can tell from the personnel 23 file was that there was inquiry made in 1973? 24 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object, asked 25 and answered. Page 524 1 Q. Is that a fair statement? 2 A. Because Father Jason Sigler had requested a 3 process towards possible incardination. 4 Q. Let me show you Exhibit 12 or document 12-K, 5 which is a letter on the Diocese of Lansing chancery 6 stationery dated June 28, 1973, addressed to Reverend 7 James P. Davis, Archbishop of Santa Fe, signed by Reverend 8 James A. Murray, Chancellor. 9 First, let me ask if you've ever seen that letter 10 before today. 11 A. This was brought to my attention in a previous 12 deposition. 13 Q. And you had not seen that letter prior to that 14 deposition? 15 A. That's right. 16 Q. In this letter, Chancellor Murray informs 17 Archbishop Davis that Father Sigler allegedly became 18 involved "in re turpi" with some boys in the parish. Let 19 me repeat that, that Father Sigler allegedly became 20 involved "in re turpi" with some boys in the parish in the 21 Archidocese of Lansing. What does "in re turpi" mean? 22 A. Much like what it sounds, in things of 23 turpitude, things that are not proper, improper actions. 24 Q. What does this sentence mean to you? What type 25 of action does this sentence refer to when it references Page 525 1 Father Sigler and some boys? 2 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection. It's 3 speculative and requests information from beyond this 4 witness' knowledge. 5 MR. TINKLER: What it means to him is 6 beyond his knowledge? 7 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: With regard to Father 8 Sigler was the question. 9 Q. (By Mr. Bennett) When you read this sentence, 10 what does that mean to you? 11 A. Sir, that there was some kind of contact with 12 boys which was considered wrong. 13 Q. Probably sexual contact? 14 A. Possibly. 15 Q. Because we're talking about moral turpitude, 16 aren't we? 17 A. Moral turpitude, yes. 18 Q. If you had made inquiry to an archidocese where 19 a priest applying for faculties in your archdiocese had 20 been, and you received information that that priest had 21 been involved "in re turpi" with some boys in that prior 22 archidocese, would you grant him faculties to serve in 23 your parishes? 24 MR. KONRAD: Objection, calls for 25 speculation. Page 526 1 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection. 2 A. I would have followed it up for more information 3 as to what that meant and circumstances surrounding the 4 allegations and what, if any, consequences there were. I 5 would need more information. That's a very brief 6 expression that could involve anything or very little. 7 Q. Would that alert you to -- 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Would that alert you to a concern that you might 10 have for your own parishioners? 11 A. I would -- it would be a moment to reflect on 12 this person who was applying for incardination, and I 13 would have to ask them for more information. 14 Q. And if that further information revealed that 15 Father Sigler had sexually molested the boys, would you 16 then grant him faculties to serve in your parishes? 17 A. I cannot answer it yes or no, because a person 18 who has been guilty of any type of molestation, depending 19 on what kind it was, especially at the age that we're 20 speaking of in those years, if that person had gone 21 through what we might consider to be a program of 22 rehabilitation that was considered to be solid and with 23 professionals; and if they, in turn, had recommended that 24 this man gave every evidence that he has overcome his own 25 weakness and would serve, under supervision, effectively; Page 527 1 and they would recommend that he be given an opportunity, 2 then with that type of assurance, it would cause, I think, 3 myself to reflect upon that situation. It would not be 4 the same as though there were no recommendation. That's 5 why I said I could not reply yes or no, because there is 6 that possibility. 7 Q. With the assurances you've described, would you 8 grant that priest faculties? 9 A. In the 1970s? In the 1970s? 10 Q. 1974, 1973. 11 A. No -- 12 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for 13 speculation. 14 Q. One year prior to becoming Archbishop. 15 A. From what I would have known then, which was not 16 very much, about any type of sexual molestation of 17 children, with the assurances from professionals, I would 18 have been inclined to give him an opportunity at least for 19 weekend coverage to see how he would, in fact, act. He 20 would have to be monitored. I would have hesitated to 21 give him a full-time assignment. 22 Q. So you would have granted faculties, but they 23 would have been limited in nature; is that correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Limited to weekends? Page 528 1 A. Well, it depends on what the need happened to 2 be. It's hard to -- you're asking for speculation and to 3 try to set up an imaginary setting. I think the term 4 "limited" is perhaps the best expression. 5 Q. Weekend ministries and supervised would be 6 limited? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Or, as you said, monitored? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Monitored by whom? 11 A. Monitored by the priest with whom he would be 12 working. 13 Q. And if you wanted the priest with whom he would 14 be working to monitor him, would you advise that 15 supervisor priest of the situation, the problem? 16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for 17 speculation, facts not in evidence, and about which this 18 witness has no personal knowledge. 19 Q. If this situation had come up the minute you'd 20 walked into office as Archbishop in 1974, would you have 21 made those recommendations? 22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for 23 speculation. 24 A. When you come into a brand new situation, Mr. 25 Bennett, you have to get information, and that's what I Page 529 1 would have sought at that time. I would have had to speak 2 with the Servants of the Paraclete. I would have had to 3 speak with the others who are listed in these 4 correspondences. 5 Q. And then after having spoken with them, you 6 would -- you may grant faculties; is that correct? 7 A. I may have on a limited basis. 8 Q. That you've described? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And that limited basis would entail perhaps, at 11 least at the outset, weekend ministries? 12 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, asked and 13 answered. 14 Q. That were supervised, correct? 15 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Asked and answered. 16 A. That's what I would have wanted. 17 Q. And that would have been the prudent thing to do 18 at that point in time; is that right? 19 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for 20 speculation. 21 A. I would say yes, it would be prudent. 22 Q. And the reason you would have applied those 23 limitations, if you did, in fact, decide to grant 24 faculties, would be to protect your parishioners; isn't 25 that right? Page 530 1 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Speculation, objection. 2 A. Yes, because of the allegation that was included 3 in one of the letters. But I have to insist, again -- and 4 I think you're minimizing it and not commenting on that -- 5 and that is that if, in fact, the man had gone through a 6 long period, over several months and perhaps longer, 7 perhaps extending beyond a year, of in-house therapy under 8 the guidance and supervision of professionals, that that 9 man would have been helped to a point that the risk 10 becomes less or minimized in the exposure, at least that 11 was the understanding, I believe, of most of us in the 12 1970s. 13 Q. But you still would have been careful? 14 A. I think we always have to be careful. 15 [The witness conferred with his attorney.] 16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Bennett, may I 17 propose a 10-minute break, and then go to 5:00? 18 MR. BENNETT: Proposal accepted. 19 MR. GOFFE: The time is 4:11. We will go 20 off the record. 21 [A recess was taken.] 22 MR. GOFFE: The time is 4:29. We are back 23 on the record. 24 25 Page 531 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. What is the purpose of keeping a personnel file 24 on a priest? 25 A. To keep the information that is necessary to Page 532 1 follow his priestly ministry. It provides the bishop with 2 just an outline of who the man is, where he was born, 3 where he attended his school, what center he took his 4 theological studies in, any special degrees that he may 5 have received for special ministry and expertise. It 6 provides the dates of his ordination and the churches or 7 schools or whatever assignments that he may have received 8 throughout his priestly life. 9 It contains, in other words, a curriculum vitae for 10 him, not only in one sheet, but with letters and 11 references, ordination certificates, scholarship or 12 reviews of his accomplishments while in the seminary, any 13 special awards that he has received or recognitions 14 received, anniversaries celebrated, permissions requested 15 to return to see family because of illnesses or someone 16 who has died. It contains, in other words, just a general 17 outline and history of important things that need to be 18 recalled in the journey of that priest throughout his 19 priestly life. 20 Q. Would one of those important things that might 21 need to be recalled incidents of alleged sexual abuse? 22 A. It could be placed in a general file, the 23 personnel file of the priest. The Code of Canon Law of 24 the Church requires that items of sensitive nature should 25 not be placed in the general file but should be kept in a Page 533 1 special file for the sake of the reputation of the 2 individual involved. So that it's not kept with ordinary 3 file papers of the curriculum vitae of the priest. 4 The Archidocese of Santa Fe, at least while I was the 5 Archbishop, we did not make an effort to place those type 6 of documents, whenever they would arise, separately from 7 the regular file. And so whatever we had or kept in the 8 regular file of the priest were the documents that would 9 outline his work in the parish. 10 Q. Why would it be important to keep documents 11 concerning allegations of sexual abuse in the priest's 12 file, regular or special file? 13 A. I think any allegation that was made and any 14 allegation that was disproved, those allegations are kept 15 there because this is part of a serious action on the part 16 of that priest. And if the action is going to have to be 17 taken on his behalf, for instance, that he will be sent to 18 a center for therapies, psychotherapy, for his healing, 19 then it's noted that this has taken place for him. 20 Q. Why is it important to keep a record of that? 21 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and 22 answered. 23 A. Because we have deaths of archbishops, and we 24 have deaths of chancellors, and we have transfers of 25 archbishops and transfers of chancelors; and unless you Page 534 1 have a document like that, a person won't always see that. 2 When you have a record of a priest that we try to 3 keep, it is normally looked forward that this is a record 4 that the man will always have with him. Documents, as I 5 said, that are of a highly sensitive nature may or may not 6 be placed there, according to the individual bishop, 7 because the Code of Canon Law actually recommends that 8 they do not be kept there. If another bishop decides that 9 he will, he might include that. 10 Q. But in your case, you made the decision not to 11 keep such documents in a special place, but to place them 12 in the general personnel file? 13 A. I felt that documents that I had received 14 regarding priests could be placed there, in their file. 15 There are other documents that aren't of a personal nature 16 that are normally placed in what we call the file of the 17 parish where he is serving. And those documents pertain 18 more to his ministry in that parish: Assigned as pastor 19 to that parish on this date; that that parish, under his 20 leadership, built and dedicated a parish hall; any 21 activity that deals with the parish. We have a parish 22 file, as well. 23 Q. You wouldn't keep any documents relating to 24 allegations of sexual abuse in a parish file, would you? 25 A. No, not intentionally, no. Page 535 1 Q. Those types of documents would be placed, under 2 your reign as Archbishop, in the personnel file of the 3 priest? 4 A. Under my tenure as Archbishop, thank you. 5 Right. 6 Q. And my question is, why is it important to have 7 a document concerning an allegation of sexual abuse in a 8 priest's personnel file? Why is it important to keep it? 9 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and 10 answered. 11 Q. What's the reason for keeping that type of 12 document? 13 A. It documents the individual's failure and will 14 serve to follow him as he goes along his ministry. So 15 that if the bishop who has dealt with him and has provided 16 for therapy or for whatever healing was necessary and has 17 taken action with him, he can refer to that at any later 18 date that he chooses to. 19 Q. Wouldn't a reason to refer to that allegation of 20 sexual misconduct at a later date be to see whether or 21 not -- if he'd had another or subsequent allegation of 22 sexual misconduct, to be able to see whether or not he'd 23 done it before? 24 A. That, like I say, so at least that there is a 25 continuum of information on the given priest. Page 536 1 Q. Why would it be important if you had an 2 allegation, a pending allegation of sexual misconduct 3 against a priest, why would it be important to have 4 available to you any prior allegation of sexual 5 misconduct? 6 A. I think you answered that question yourself. So 7 that if there has been a second fall, that can be referred 8 to. 9 Q. Why would you want to know if there had been a 10 second fall, and it wasn't just a first fall or third or 11 fourth? 12 A. I used that as simply a speculative answer to 13 your speculative question. I didn't mean to limit it to 14 just two. It could be whatever number. 15 Q. Let me ask it this way: If it were brought to 16 your attention that a priest had engaged in sexual 17 misconduct or sexually molested one of the children of his 18 parish, would it be important for you to know whether or 19 not he had done that before? 20 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, calls for 21 speculation. 22 A. I think in any case it's important to know what 23 that person has done, what his life has been. 24 Q. Why? 25 A. I think that there's a difference between a Page 537 1 person who has engaged or has fallen once into a 2 particular area of mistake, different from another who has 3 fallen a second time. 4 Q. What's the difference? 5 A. He has repeated. 6 Q. What significance does that have? 7 A. It indicates that the therapy that he has 8 received -- and I have to presume that therapy was given, 9 since we're dealing with speculative cases -- that therapy 10 assisted him, but for whatever reason, this man has 11 committed a second fault and is going to have to be 12 treated more seriously and be monitored more severely. 13 Q. I understand from prior testimony -- please 14 correct me if I'm wrong -- that there were certain 15 documents you got from the therapists of priests who had 16 sexually molested children that you destroyed? 17 A. Yes, sir. And I'd like to explain why. Because 18 if therapists who would send documents to me would so 19 indicate that these were confidential, even if they 20 contained no -- what I would call serious matter, but they 21 felt that all documentation that was sent to me was, in 22 fact, confidential and should be destroyed by myself or 23 else returned to them for destruction. 24 Q. Well, my question is, as Archbishop of Santa Fe, 25 why did you comply with that request? Page 538 1 A. I have to understand that that is a -- not only 2 a request on the part of the psychotherapist, but perhaps 3 there is a state law guaranteeing the privacy of 4 individuals, and a psychotherapist does not have the 5 permission to release any confidential information from 6 his patient without the specific approval of that patient 7 and limit it only to one person. 8 It would be as though someone would ask you to 9 release information from a client who has come to you, an 10 attorney/client privilege. You do not have the right to 11 release that, I don't believe, unless your client so 12 grants permission. And if he grants permission only to 13 one person, then I believe that you would be obliged to 14 follow that directive. I'm not certain if there's a law 15 governing that, but I presume there probably is. 16 Q. Well, at the time you destroyed these types of 17 documents from therapists concerning priests who had 18 sexually molested children -- 19 A. They weren't -- excuse me. 20 Q. -- did you know that there was a law requiring 21 you to destroy to those documents? 22 MR. KONRAD: Objection. That assumes that 23 he ever did destroy the documents pertaining to priests 24 who had sexually abused children, and there's never been 25 any evidence of that. Page 539 1 A. Documents that I would receive would pertain to 2 many different needs of the priests. They were not just 3 sexual misconduct. They had been referred to therapy for 4 a variety of reasons. And when the therapeutic counselor 5 or psychiatrist would send a report, he would feel that 6 this information should be kept confidential and was 7 allowed to be released only for me to see and requested me 8 to destroy that. 9 Q. You have -- excuse me, go ahead. 10 A. This, to me, was in keeping with the 11 confidential nature of the therapist/patient privilege. 12 Q. You had, in fact, seen therapists' reports 13 relating to priests who had sexually molested children; 14 isn't that correct? 15 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object as 16 ambiguous if we don't have a date on it. 17 Q. Any time during your tenure as Archbishop. 18 A. I would not be able to answer that question 19 automatically without reflecting, because not in every 20 case did I receive reports from therapists, and that 21 question that you've asked is presuming that in every 22 case, especially in sexual molestation, was I given 23 written reports. 24 Q. No, it's not. The question is asking you, isn't 25 it true that during your tenure as Archbishop, you did, in Page 540 1 fact, receive some reports from some therapists of 2 priests? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Of priests who had sexually molested children 5 concerning their therapy? 6 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Tinkler, are you 7 talking about the original report? 8 MR. BENNETT: I'm not Mr. Tinkler. 9 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'm sorry, Mr. Bennett. 10 Are you talking about the original report or the copy of 11 reports? Or perhaps when you use "reports," it's not 12 particularly clear to me, and I'm sure it's not to the 13 Archbishop, whether these are copies or the originals. 14 Q. It doesn't make any difference to me. You can 15 answer the question, Archbishop. 16 A. Yes, I have received reports from centers of 17 therapy regarding a priest who had been accused of sexual 18 molestation, and it was a report, a general report, of his 19 presence, and they again made their request that this 20 report be destroyed. 21 Q. And you did that? You destroyed them? 22 A. And I destroyed them. 23 Q. And so if you die, and the next Archbishop comes 24 along, and this priest has another allegation of sexual 25 misconduct, can the new Archbishop, then, look at the Page 541 1 priest's personnel file and find those reports? 2 A. Not the reports from the psychotherapists. I am 3 presuming -- and that has to be an assumption -- that the 4 center of treatment or the psychiatrist in question has 5 preserved copies in their own files. That's why they felt 6 free to send me a copy. 7 Q. But you can't find it in the priest personnel 8 file in accordance with your policy; isn't that right? 9 A. Not the reports on the therapeutic treatment of 10 the priest, no. 11 Q. In hindsight, with respect to all of these cases 12 involving sexual molestation of children, do you wish you 13 had kept some of those reports? 14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, speculation. 15 Q. Well, let me ask you this: Would it have been 16 prudent to keep copies of those reports? 17 A. I don't think in every instance it would have 18 been prudent to keep a copy of what I would call ordinary 19 reports, because sometimes they were just nothing. And 20 that just multiplies a person's file. 21 Perhaps on hindsight, as you say, it might have been 22 prudent to keep at least the dates when the person was 23 first evaluated and that type of an evaluation, if they 24 would have granted us permission to do that. I think that 25 would help us recall details for that individual. Page 542 1 Q. Did you ever request permission of either the 2 priest or the therapist to keep copies of those reports on 3 file in the Archidocese office? 4 A. No, sir. I complied with the request as 5 directed. 6 Q. You complied with the stamped request on the 7 document itself; isn't that right? 8 A. That's right. 9 Q. You never called anybody and said, "What about 10 this stamped request on this document. Do you really mean 11 that?" 12 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and 13 answered. 14 Q. Did you? 15 A. No, I didn't. That's not my nature. It may be 16 the nature of lawyers to contest things of that nature, 17 but it was not my nature in receiving a report from a 18 therapist, a therapist that I have respect for. He's 19 treating a priest professionally. He's giving me an 20 update report on what the man has been going through, his 21 improvement, etc. And whenever that had a stamp on it 22 that indicated that, I felt that it was my responsibility 23 to follow that directive and not contest it. I did not 24 think of contesting it. 25 Q. So that was something that didn't occur to you? Page 543 1 A. No, sir, it did not. 2 Q. And did you think about the interests of your 3 parishioners at the time you destroyed those reports? 4 A. I think I had thought about the interests of the 5 parishioners when I had the man in therapy. That was the 6 important thing. That's more important than a report, to 7 me, that's simply updating what the man is doing. 8 I think that the therapist is working professionally. 9 He's the expert. He's working with the man trying to help 10 him, and all he's doing is informing me of his progress. 11 Q. So when you destroyed those reports, did you 12 think about the interests of your parishioners or not? 13 A. Absolutely, absolutely. That is precisely why I 14 had the man go to therapy in the first place. 15 Q. Well, my question is: Was it in the interests 16 of your parishioners to destroy his therapists' reports 17 and not put them in his priest personnel file? 18 A. That's a speculative question, and I think 19 you're assuming that no matter what is put or not put into 20 a file is going to result in harm to people. And that's 21 an assumption that I could not accept. 22 You asked me to give an example, to cite whether or 23 not I had received at least a single report, in general, 24 and I can recall receiving that regarding a priest who was 25 accused of sexual misconduct. Page 544 1 You asked if I had destroyed that document, the 2 report from the psychotherapist, and I said yes. And 3 that, to me, is following the directions of those who are 4 treating a man and hopefully helping him to improve his 5 life in the future. It's not like it's a blank approval 6 or an attempt to hide what this man is doing or not doing. 7 The therapist would be able to explain or provide copies 8 because they keep copies. I have to assume they keep 9 copies. 10 Q. You don't know that? 11 A. I know that what they've sent me is not an 12 original. I'm sure -- they're giving me a report. They 13 have to keep a report because they're treating the man 14 from day to day to day, and I would assume they have to 15 have some follow-up on their day-to-day reporting. 16 Q. When you sent Father Sigler to the Servants of 17 the Paraclete in 1978, did you review his priest personnel 18 file? 19 A. No, sir, I did not. 20 Q. And at that time, I believe you testified that 21 there were no allegations of sexual misconduct? 22 A. It was not at that time. It was about two years 23 ago, a year and a half ago, when we had a deposition with 24 Mr. Pasternack, and the question was asked, and I told him 25 that the allegations that had been brought to my attention Page 545 1 and had been brought to my attention repeatedly concerned 2 his personal lack of self control, his anger problems, his 3 voice, the use of bad language, insulting towards people 4 and that repeatedly. And when people asked to meet and 5 discuss the shortcomings of Father, I sent my Vicar 6 General to meet with him for that purpose. 7 Q. So you didn't feel that it was prudent to review 8 his personnel file to see if he had exhibited a lack of 9 self-control at any time in the past? 10 A. I did not think about reviewing his personnel 11 file. It wasn't a matter that I didn't think it was 12 prudent. I simply didn't reflect upon that. I was 13 concerned about what the concerns of the people would be 14 and whatever they were going to say about Father Jason 15 Sigler. 16 Q. Would it have been prudent to review his 17 personnel file at that time when considering those 18 complaints? 19 A. It certainly seems like it would be a prudent 20 thing. 21 Q. And when you sent Father Sigler to the Servants 22 of the Paraclete, had you at least confronted -- had him 23 confronted for molesting children at St. Therese? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. In 1981? Page 546 1 A. Right. 2 Q. Did you review his personnel file to see if he 3 had been involved in any similar activity in the past? 4 A. No, sir. I did not review the file there. I 5 was very hurt, very disappointed, and I had terminated his 6 faculties and his stay in the Archidocese immediately. 7 Q. Would it have been prudent to review that file 8 at that time? 9 A. I am not certain how prudent -- I'm not certain 10 what it would have served, because I made it clear to him 11 that he would have no further assignment and that he was 12 to return to Jemez Springs until his own bishop would 13 decide what to do with him. But as far as I was 14 concerned, he was done in the Archidocese. And that was 15 the reason I was more concerned about that than I was 16 about any files. It just didn't occur to me to review 17 files. 18 Q. All right. Did you request of Father Sigler, 19 either yourself or through your agent, that he provide a 20 list of the boys that he had molested at St. Therese 21 Parish? 22 A. Together, Father Hunt and I, who -- Father Hunt 23 was the pastor who brought the incident to my attention. 24 We confronted Father Sigler. And after Father Sigler's 25 admission, Father Hunt and I discussed the issue. Father Page 547 1 Hunt being the pastor and also having taken special 2 training, studies in counseling, must have indicated the 3 need to see if there were additional victims. And so I 4 instructed him to meet with Father Sigler, before he would 5 leave, to get any names of anyone else and to discreetly 6 try to find out from among parishioners if, in fact, there 7 were other victims that needed assistance. 8 Q. Did Father Hunt get the list? 9 A. Father Hunt indicated under testimony that he, 10 in fact, did get a list of about -- I can't recall, four 11 or five others, and that he made it a point, since it was 12 my request of him, to meet with the child and the family 13 in each of the instances. 14 Q. Was the list in writing? 15 A. I never saw a list myself. He did not turn that 16 list over to me. I'm certain that I don't have a list at 17 all. But he indicated that -- he had reported to me that 18 he had met with all of the people and had told them 19 exactly what had taken place, transpired, and that the 20 Archidocese had removed Father Sigler from St. Therese 21 parish immediately. He would not return. And it seemed 22 to me that the situation apparently ended there. 23 Q. So at that time, how many boys did you know were 24 molested by Father Sigler at St. Therese parish? 25 A. I believe the testimony that Father Hunt gave Page 548 1 indicated a list of four or five. I don't, in fact, know 2 how many were, in fact, molested or when they interviewed 3 the boy, together with the parents, what their response 4 was. 5 Q. But Father Sigler had told Father Hunt that he 6 had molested four or five? 7 A. Father Sigler gave him a list of boys that he 8 felt that he had been close to, and I imagine that was a 9 molestation. 10 Q. And was that four or five boys? 11 A. Four or five boys. 12 Q. So at that time, when you realized that Father 13 Sigler had molested four or five boys at St. Therese 14 parish in 1981, why did you not go back to his personnel 15 file to see if he had molested boys in the past and in 16 order to determine whether or not you should contact the 17 families at previous parish assignments to advise them 18 that he was a pedophile? 19 A. Your question has -- it's twofold. One, why did 20 I not go back to the file. And I repeat, that the concept 21 of reviewing a file was not uppermost in my mind in that 22 incident. I was concerned about the person and what had 23 taken place. 24 But secondly, I was not aware of any the other 25 specific incidents having been brought to my attention Page 549 1 while Father Sigler served in the diocese, and Archbishop 2 Davis had not mentioned any incidents while he was the 3 Archbishop, either. 4 So that it was my assumption that this was the first 5 occasion that it's been brought to our attention that, in 6 fact, Jason Sigler had victimized children and that it had 7 entailed more than one victim. 8 Q. But if you'd have looked at the personnel file, 9 you would have immediately come upon the June 1973 letter 10 from Father -- or Chancellor Murray in the Archidocese of 11 Lansing indicating that he had molested boys in Lansing, 12 Michigan? 13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection. That 14 misstates the evidence. The evidence is that the letter 15 states "in re turpi" with young boys. The testimony from 16 the Archbishop is that "in re turpi" can mean a number of 17 things, not necessarily molestation, as you have 18 indicated. 19 Q. What would "in re turpi" -- 20 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: But rather acts of moral 21 turpitude. 22 Q. What would "in re turpi" have meant to you in 23 1981 with respect to Father Sigler? 24 A. It would have meant to me, if I'd have read that 25 letter, that he had engaged with boys in things that were Page 550 1 wrong, perhaps fondling. That's exactly what I would have 2 thought. 3 Q. Wrongful sexual contact? 4 A. That's a good legal expression, wrongful sexual 5 contact. 6 Q. That's a good accurate expression, isn't it? 7 A. I think it covers a broad field. 8 Q. Of which, if you would have read "in re turpi" 9 in 1981, a letter concerning Father Sigler, it would have 10 covered the field of wrongful sexual contact; is that 11 correct? 12 A. It would have -- that type of word would have 13 expressed everything. 14 Q. And therefore, if you would have read that 15 letter from Father Murray, you would have known that this 16 was not the first time Father Sigler had molested boys and 17 that there may be other boys in his wake in the parishes 18 in which he had served; isn't that right? 19 A. Possibly. 20 Q. So would it have been prudent to review Father 21 Sigler's personnel file in order to determine whether or 22 not such information was there when he was caught 23 molesting boys in 1981? 24 A. I think, as I mentioned this morning, hindsight 25 is always 20/20 vision. A person doesn't always think of Page 551 1 every action to take that might assist in dealing with a 2 situation or dealing with other possible situations. 3 Sometimes you're confronted with an issue, and you're 4 surrounded with other responsibilities and obligations 5 that you do not think of every possible thing that you 6 could do. That may have been one thing I could have done. 7 There may have been other things that I could have done, 8 as well. 9 Q. Would that have been a prudent thing to do? 10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Bennett, it's 5:00 11 o'clock. 12 A. I will respond for this. On hindsight, it would 13 have been helpful to know more about Father Jason Sigler 14 by reviewing his file. 15 Q. Not only helpful, it would have been the prudent 16 thing to do; is that correct? 17 A. Prudent. It seems to be a prudent action. 18 MR. BENNETT: Thank you. 19 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 20 MR. GOFFE: The time is 5:01. This 21 concludes today's deposition. We are at the end of tape 8 22 in the deposition of Archbishop Sanchez. We are off the 23 record. 24 [The deposition recessed at 5:01 PM] 25 Page 552

.