Deposition of Cardinal Roger Mahony (continued)
November 23, 2004

[Note: This is Part 2 of a two-part HTML version of the Mahony deposition [see also Part 1] that created from a Word document included with Cardinal Untruths: Mahony's Testimony in Sex Scandal Clashes with Earlier Statements and Reality, by Jeffrey Anderson, LA Weekly (12/15/04). See also Mahony in '80s Banned Two Priests: Deposition Reveals He Ousted Pair Accused of Molestation from U.S. While He Was Stockton Bishop, by Jean Guccione, LA Times (12/10/04); and Cardinal Mahony Accused of Perjury in Sex Abuse Case, by Don Lattin, San Francisco Chronicle (12/11/04). In his article, Anderson also provided four of the deposition exhibits: 2, 3, 4, and 8. For easier reading, we have formatted the list of exhibits and the list of questions that Mahony was instructed by his lawyer not to answer. We've displayed the page numbers in blue and adjusted the spacing, but otherwise this is the text of the deposition that accompanied Anderson's article.]

  1            THE WITNESS: I'm not sure if the victims ever
  2   did go to the police. So I'm not sure whether our
  3   diocese attorney or myself was the first one who
  4   actually made that initial contact.
  5   BY MR. MANLY:
  6       Q. Was it your policy or practice or custom or
  7   or view that the appropriate thing to do if you found a
  8   priest violated the law in in the manner of sexually
  9   molesting a child, that the appropriate thing to do as
10   a first step is to report him to the police, prior to
11   1985?
12            MR. WOODS: First of all, I object that the
13   question is compound and that it asks custom and
14   practice, right thing to do, and half a dozen other
15   adjectives, all of which are separate issues.
16            MR. MANLY: All for let me try it again.
17       Q. Did you have a policy, a personal policy, that
18   employees in your diocese who molested children would
19   be reported to the police as a first step if you
20   believe the allegations to be true?
21       A. I don't think at that time we had a specific
22   policy.
23       Q. Was that your view prior to 1985?
24            MR. WOODS: Under any circumstances?
25            MR. MANLY: No.

  1       Q. When you believed that priests had molested a
  2   child?
  3            MR. WOODS: Okay. That's more specific.
  4            THE WITNESS: If I recall, it was in 1984 that
  5   the mandated reporting laws of California began. And
  6   it was from that point on that a number of people
  7   became mandated reporters. So we were all more
  8   sensitive to that.
  9   BY MR. MANLY:
10       Q. Okay. Well, my question's a little different.
11   I'm not I'm really not asking a legal question.
12            What I'm asking you is I'm trying to find
13   you, Roger Mahony's, view as a supervisor of people who
14   had regular contact with people, educators, teachers,
15   kindergarten teachers, priests who taught CCD, if you
16   found out one of your employees, lay, religious, or
17   priest, had molested a child, and you believed they
18   molested a child, was it your view prior to 1985 that
19   the first thing you should do is call the police?
20            MR. WOODS: Object to the form of the question
21   asking for a policy. He hasn't established you
22   haven't established that he had a set policy to do
23   anything. So since your question assumes a policy,
24   which to me means a preestablished course of action as
25   opposed to a case by case approach, I object.

  1            MR. MANLY: Are you going to object or are you
  2   just going to talk?
  3            MR. WOODS: I object. And I'll instruct him
  4   not to answer.
  5   BY MR. MANLY:
  6       Q. Do you think you should have if you found
  7   out, Eminence, that a priest had molested a child, and
  8   you believed it, you thought the right thing to do was
  9   to call the cops, right, prior to 1985?
10       A. That somebody should report this matter to the
11   police, correct.
12       Q. You you directed your staff and they
13   understood, because you wanted to protect kids, that
14   what they should do if that person molested a child is
15   you do exactly what you did with Father Munoz, which is
16   to call the police; right?
17       A. Yes.
18       Q. Okay. At any point prior to 1985 had, that
19   strike that. Move on.
20            Did you ever learn that there was any policy,
21   instruction, or document issued by the Vatican that
22   required you to keep sexual misconduct of priests
23   secret?
24       A. No.
25       Q. Have you ever seen such a document?

  1       A. Not specifically, no.
  2       Q. How about generally, have you seen such a
  3   document?
  4       A. No.
  5       Q. Eminence, when did the California Catholic
  6   Conference come into existence?
  7       A. I'm sorry. I don't remember exactly when.
  8       Q. Do you remember what decade?
  9       A. I know it was in existence in the 1970s, but
10   exactly when it began, I just can't recall.
11       Q. Since the 1970s, have there been annual
12   meetings of the Bishops of California?
13       A. Up until '70 to '75, I don't know, because I
14   wasn't a Bishop. So I don't know whether they met or
15   didn't meet.
16       Q. After 1975, did you go to annual meetings of
17   California Bishops?
18       A. I believe by 1975 we were meeting annually.
19       Q. When is the first time you recall California
20   Bishops discussing the issue of the sexual abuse or
21   molestation of children by priests or religious?
22       A. Well, during our time frame here, which is
23   Fresno and Stockton, I do not recall that topic being
24   discussed.
25       Q. Did somebody keep minutes of those meetings?

  1       A. In the early days, I'm simply not certain.
  2   Later on, when there was a full time executive
  3   director, minutes were kept.
  4       Q. Was there any policy or procedure or rule
  5   against priests molesting children while you were a
  6   priest of the Diocese of Monterey Fresno?
  7       A. Yes. It's called the Law of God.
  8       Q. Was there any specific policy in canon law or
  9   otherwise that you knew about that that existed
10   during those years?
11            MR. WOODS: You mean other than, like, the Ten
12   Commandments, stuff like that?
13            MR. MANLY: You know, if we'd follow the
14   ten Commandments in this case, we'd probably be a lot
15   better off. But no, I don't mean the Ten Commandments.
16            MR. WOODS: Are you talking about a
17   specific it's so vague.
18   BY MR. MANLY:
19       Q. I'm talking about a policy, procedure,
20   anything like that, that you knew existed while you
21   were a priest in the Diocese of Fresno Monterey.
22       A. Between 1962 and 1967?
23       Q. Yes, Eminence.
24       A. Other than we discussed this morning, that is
25   what it says in canon law.

  1       Q. Okay. So the policy between those year was
  2   canon law; is that right?
  3       A. Yes.
  4       Q. Okay. Is there all right.
  5            When you became a priest of the Diocese of
  6   Fresno up until the time you left, what was the policy
  7   and procedure with regard to the sexual abuse of
  8   children, if any, for the Diocese of Fresno?
  9       A. If you recall this morning, I testified that
10   we did not have any actual specific written policies or
11   procedures.
12       Q. Okay. Were there any rules, regulations,
13   instructions, canon law, or otherwise that dealt with
14   the sexual molestation of children by priests during
15   the years you were at Fresno?
16       A. I'm sorry. Could you give me the list again?
17   He was moving things behind you there.
18            MR. MANLY: Sure. Why don't you read it back.
19            THE WITNESS: I got distracted.
20            (The record was read as follows:
21            "Were there any rules, regulations,
22            instructions, canon law, or otherwise
23            that dealt with the sexual molestation
24            of children by priests during the years
25            you were at Fresno?")

  1            THE WITNESS: If I understand the four nouns
  2   you used, I think canon law would probably be the
  3   the accurate one.
  4   BY MR. MANLY:
  5       Q. So canon law was the only thing you had?
  6       A. To the best of my recollection, yes.
  7       Q. And in Fresno, who was in charge of enforcing
  8   the canonical law on that issue?
  9            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object to the
10   question as assumes there's some prosecutor or
11   enforcement agent
12            MR. MANLY: Yeah, it's called the Promoter of
13   Justice.
14   BY MR. MANLY:
15       Q. There is; right?
16            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object and instruct
17   him not answer.
18   BY MR. MANLY:
19       Q. Is the Promoter of Justice in charge of
20   enforcing the canon law?
21       A. Yes.
22       Q. Okay. Thank you.
23            All right. Who was the Promoter of Justice
24   when you were there, do you remember, Eminence, sir, or
25   do we have to go to the Catholic Directory?

  1       A. I simply don't know.
  2       Q. Who was the Promoter of Justice in Stockton
  3   when you were there, Eminence?
  4       A. I don't recall, because we had several
  5   canonist priests, and I honestly don't remember which
  6   one was Promoter of Justice.
  7       Q. If the office of Promoter of Justice was
  8   vacant, who was in charge of enforcing the canon law as
  9   to priests violating children?
10            MR. WOODS: Is this an expert opinion on his
11   understanding of the canon law or how it was actually
12   done when he was the Bishop?
13            MR. MANLY: I want to know, actually, how it
14   was done when he was the Bishop.
15            MR. WOODS: Okay.
16   BY MR. MANLY:
17       Q. You can answer the question, Your Eminence.
18       A. Well, if there was not an incumbent Promoter
19   of Justice and there was a case that needed the
20   appointment, then the Bishop could simply appoint
21   someone ad hoc for that case to be the Promoter of
22   Justice.
23       Q. Did the policies you enforced in Stockton
24   prior to the Collegeville meeting differ in any way 25   let me let me strike that.

  1            Did the way you handled or were supposed to
  2   handle strike that.
  3            When you handled the Munoz case and the
  4   Camacho case, did you use canon law in any way in those
  5   cases?
  6       A. Yes.
  7       Q. Okay. How did you use it?
  8       A. I exercised my prerogative as the Bishop to
  9   terminate their faculties and their assignment.
10       Q. Okay. And you had that absolute right;
11   correct?
12       A. Yes.
13       Q. And you had the right you have the right to
14   suspend the faculties of any priest serving in your
15   diocese; correct?
16       A. Yes.
17       Q. And you have the right, prior to 1985, as the
18   Bishop of Stockton, to remove any priest serving in
19   your diocese, whether they're religious, diocesan,
20   extern, or otherwise from ministry; correct?
21       A. Well, with cause.
22       Q. Well, molesting kids is cause; fair?
23            MR. WOODS: And "from ministry," you mean from
24   ministry in his diocese?
25            MR. MANLY: That's right. Okay.

  1       Q. Right?
  2       A. Yes, from ministry in the diocese of Stockton,
  3   correct.
  4       Q. Okay. Can you could you have removed
  5   Father O'Grady because he had urges towards young
  6   people, if that had come to your attention?
  7       A. No, that was not the the course of action
  8   that would have been taken at that time.
  9       Q. My question's a little different than that.
10            If if it had come to your attention that
11   Father O'Grady told a your Vicar General that he had
12   sexual urges towards a 9 year old or a 10 year old or
13   an 11 year old, is that cause to remove him from
14   ministry?
15       A. No.
16       Q. Okay.
17            MR. MANLY: Why don't we take a break.
18            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off the record. Time
19   is 1:22.
20               (A brief recess was taken.)
21            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record.
22   The time is 1:36.
23   BY MR. MANLY:
24       Q. Eminence, do you remember testifying in a
25   civil trial in 1998, involving Father O'Grady?

  1       A. Yes.
  2       Q. Did you testify truthfully in that case?
  3       A. Yes.
  4       Q. Let me show you a document that's two pages.
  5   I'm going to represent it's from your trial testimony,
  6   page 792 and 793. And I'd like you to begin at line
  7   22, and then continuing.
  8            MR. MANLY: If you want me, Counsel, I'll mark
  9   where I want him to start.
10            MR. WOODS: Yeah, but we're going to have the
11   context before and after that in order to have an
12   understanding.
13            MS. SOLTAN: We brought the entire deposition
14   transcript if you'd like to look at it.
15            MR. WOODS: Yeah, I'd like to see it.
16            MR. HENNIGAN: I'm sorry. Is this trial
17   transcript that he said?
18            MR. MANLY: Trial transcript.
19            MS. SOLTAN: I'm sorry. That's what I meant
20   to say. I misspoke.
21            MR. WOODS: I'd like an opportunity to read a
22   little bit of before and after, just to make sure we're
23   in context.
24            MS. SOLTAN: We would never misrepresent the
25   status.

  1   BY MR. MANLY:
  2       Q. Would you look at 792 and 793, beginning at
  3   line 22.
  4            MR. HENNIGAN: Do you have a copy for us?
  5            MR. MANLY: I just gave you one.
  6            MR. HENNIGAN: You did?
  7            MR. WOODS: So this is his full testimony?
  8            MS. SOLTAN: That is his full testimony. And
  9   we're referring with to page 792 and 793 is that
10   correct, John?
11            MR. MANLY: Yes.
12            MS. SOLTAN: of the transcript.
13            MR. WOODS: Do you have an extra copy of this?
14            MS. SOLTAN: Of the two pages?
15            MR. WOODS: Yeah.
16            MS. SOLTAN: Yes, I'm sure I can get that for
17   you.
18            MR. WOODS: I'm going to read it first, and
19   then I'll give it to you.
20            MS. SOLTAN: I'm sorry. Mr. Hennigan, were
21   you the person who asked me for another couple of pages
22   or...
23            MR. WOODS: I I need them.
24            MS. SOLTAN: That was you?
25            MR. WOODS: We'll I'll give this one to the

  1   witness so he can read it. I'm reading it
  2            MS. SOLTAN: Oh, all right. Tell me when
  3   you're ready, so you have one.
  4            MR. WOODS: Well, give it to me. I'll give
  5   him he can start reading.
  6            MS. SOLTAN: That's a good idea.
  7            MR. WOODS: Just trying to save time.
  8            MS. SOLTAN: I'm so glad you're here.
  9            MR. WOODS: Start up here (indicating) and
10   read down and get the flow.
11             Okay. Do you want to mark these pages as an
12   exhibit?
13            MR. MANLY: Yeah, next in order.
14               (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 7 and 8 were
15                marked for identification.)
16   BY MR. MANLY:
17       Q. Cardinal, beginning at line 22 on page 792,
18   can you read the testimony into the record, please?
19            MR. WOODS: The highlighted testimony?
20            MR. MANLY: Well, I don't think it's I

21   don't know if it's
22            I can't see if it's highlighted on his page,
23   but it begins at line 22, beginning, question, "Was
24   during a period of time."
25            THE WITNESS: Who is Q?

  1   BY MR. MANLY:
  2       Q. That's Mr. Diepenbrock, the diocese attorney.
  3       A. Question
  4       Q. He's also a character in James Bond, but we'll
  5   save you the go ahead.
  6       A. "Was during a period of time you
  7            were the Bishop of Stockton, were there
  8            any other priests that were involved in
  9            any kind of sexual misconduct with children?
10                "Mr. Drivon: Your honor, that calls
11            for speculation.
12                "The Court: If the witness has
13            personal knowledge, he can answer. But
14            I will ask you not to speculate, Cardinal.
15                "The Witness: Again, during my
16            period of time, I cannot recall another
17            Case.
18                "Mr. Diepenbrock: Question: Well,
19            if there had been any other cases
20            when you were the Bishop of Stockton,
21            you certainly would have heard about it,
22          wouldn't you?
23                "Answer: "Oh, yes. But I can't
24            recall another case.
25                "Question: "Were there any other

  1            cases.
  2                "Answer: Not that I know of.
  3                "Question: This was the only one?
  4                "Answer: Yes."
  5   BY MR. MANLY:
  6       Q. Okay. And you gave that testimony on June
  7   12th, '98, Your Eminence?
  8       A. Yes.
  9       Q. Okay. And is that testimony truthful?
10       A. Yes.
11       Q. You don't mention Father Camacho or
12   Father Munoz, do you?
13       A. I do not.
14       Q. But Father Camacho and Father Munoz molested
15   children while you were the Bishop of Stockton;
16   correct?
17       A. Yes.
18       Q. Do you have an explanation for that?
19       A. This trial was some 13 years after I had left
20   the Diocese of Stockton. We had many events in the
21   Archdiocese of Los Angeles, and I was very preoccupied.
22   We had the visit of the Holy Father. We had the
23   earthquakes. We had riots. We had everything. And I
24   simply did not remember everything that happened many
25   years ago in Stockton.

  1       Q. So your testimony is you forgot that
  2   Father Camacho and Father Munoz molested children while
  3   you were the Bishop; is that accurate?
  4       A. That is accurate.
  5       Q. Okay. Do you remember testifying about this
  6   issue in your deposition in that case?
  7       A. The deposition prior to the trial?
  8       Q. Yes. Yes, sir, about a year before.
  9       A. I actually don't recall.
10       Q. Do you know if that question was asked in your
11   deposition?
12       A. Again, I don't recall whether it was or not.
13       Q. Were you you were not attempting to mislead
14   the jury; is that right?
15       A. On the contrary.
16       Q. So you forgot about your the police
17   investigation of your priests, Father Camacho and
18   Father Munoz; is that your testimony?
19       A. I had forgotten about those incidents.
20       Q. Okay. Prior to was Vicar General Cain in
21   the courtroom when you testified?
22       A. I don't recall.
23       Q. Did at any point Vicar General Cain come to
24   you and remind you that this was incorrect?
25       A. No.

  1       Q. When did you first remember that Camacho and
  2   Munoz cases?
  3       A. I don't recall exactly. But at some point I
  4   was given all the files involving those three priests.
  5       Q. Are there any other priests you've forgotten
  6   about, you think, or just those two?
  7       A. Just those two.
  8       Q. Eminence, do you remember in Fresno, a priest
  9   molesting mentally ill people?
10            MR. WOODS: Before 1985?
11            MR. MANLY: Yeah.
12            THE WITNESS: There was a case, but I don't
13   recall the time frame.
14   BY MR. MANLY:
15       Q. Do you remember a priest molesting mentally
16   ill people when you were the Bishop of Fresno I'm
17   sorry, when you were the Auxiliary Bishop in Fresno?
18       A. I don't recall the time period when that
19   actually occurred.
20       Q. Do you recall at any point becoming aware of a
21   priest sexually exploiting mentally ill people in
22   Fresno?
23       A. I remember at some point.
24       Q. Okay. When did you learn that?
25       A. I honestly don't recall.

  1       Q. Do you remember what decade?
  2            MR. WOODS: I'm sorry?
  3   BY MR. MANLY:
  4       Q. Do you remember what decade?
  5       A. No, I don't.
  6       Q. Okay. Let me read to you a portion of your
  7   deposition testimony in 1978. I'd be happy to show it
  8   to you after I read it.
  9       A. Excuse me. What year?
10       Q. I'm, sorry 1980 1997?
11            MR. WOODS: Can we have the transcript?
12            MR. MANLY: Yeah. I'll show it to you when
13   I'm done.
14            THE WITNESS: Excuse me. 1997?
15            MR. MANLY: Yes, Eminence.
16            MR. WOODS: This is the transcript in the?
17   BY MR. MANLY:
18       Q. In the Howard case.
19            Beginning at page 73, line 1:
20            "Okay. And you knew Father O'Grady
21            was a priest of the diocese over whom
22            you had control, at least as it pertains
23            to his faculties and assignments?
24                "Answer: "Yes.
25                "And if you had known he

  1            admitted to having criminal sexual
  2            contact with a 9 year old boy, you
  3            would have not placed him in the parish
  4            at St. Andrews?
  5                "Answer: Had I known all of what's
  6            in this report, I probably would have
  7            taken him out of any assignment and
  8            sent him off for a full evaluation
  9            and some determination to be made.
10            He would never have been transferred,
11          especially to a place where the pastor
12            who was there, wasn't there sometimes and
13            not sometimes, never, never, never
14            done it."
15            Okay. Do you want to see the testimony?
16            MS. SOLTAN: What page is that?
17            MR. MANLY: 73 and 74.
18            MR. WOODS: We'll wait for the question, and
19   we may need to see the rest.
20   BY MR. MANLY:
21       Q. My question is do you remember giving that
22   testimony?
23       A. Yes, I do.
24       Q. My question is: Where would you have sent him
25   off to treatment to if you didn't know treatment

  1   existed?
  2       A. Well, at this time, I probably would have
  3   consulted with the Bishops' conference to find a place.
  4   There were a number of psychological places in
  5   California that dealt with psychological problems, in
  6   the Bay area.
  7       Q. What was he going to be treated for?
  8       A. I believe to be evaluated.
  9       Q. Well, you said, "Send him off for a full
10   evaluation." Okay?
11            What was he going to be evaluated for?
12       A. He would be evaluated for whatever the
13   allegation was.
14       Q. Okay. Let me show you a document, Eminence.
15   I'll show you the Latin version and the English
16   translation.
17            MR. WOODS: Are you going to mark them?
18            MR. MANLY: Yeah. We'll mark them as
19            MS. SOLTAN: Are we at 9 and 10?
20            MR. MANLY: Why don't we mark them as 9 and
21   10.
22            MR. WOODS: Go ahead and mark them so when
23   they arrive here, they're marked. Because we're losing
24   stuff left and right.
25            MS. SOLTAN: Exhibit 9 is going to be the

  1   Latin version, and Exhibit 10 is going to be the
  2   translation. This is the 1962 document. Is that what
  3   we're calling this?
  4            MR. MANLY: Yeah.
  5            MS. SOLTAN: The 1962
  6            MR. MANLY: 1962 instruction.
  7               (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 9 and 10 were
  8               marked for identification.)
  9            MS. SOLTAN: Here you go, Cardinal.
10   BY MR. MANLY:
11       Q. Have you ever seen that document before,
12   Your Eminence?
13            MR. WOODS: Do you have a copy for me?
14            MS. SOLTAN: I beg your pardon?
15            MR. WOODS: Copy for me?
16            MR. MANLY: Oh, I'm sorry.
17            MS. SOLTAN: It's in reverse order. The Latin
18   is at the back.
19            MR. WOODS: Okay. So the English is 10, and
20   the Latin is 9.
21            And your representation is that one is the
22   correct translation of the other?
23            MR. MANLY: Right.
24            MR. WOODS: And who translated 10?
25            MS. SOLTAN: I think the document reflects it.

  1            MR. WOODS: I'm sorry. The document what?
  2            MS. SOLTAN: I think the document reflects the
  3   name of the translator and what it is a translation of.
  4            MR. WOODS: Can you show that to me?
  5            MS. SOLTAN: You might look at the very end,
  6   where it's indicated. No. Is that is that wrong?
  7   Is that the author? I'm sorry. I misspoke.
  8            MR. MANLY: I'll represent to you that's an
  9   accurate translation. You can take issue with it if
10   you want to.
11            MR. WOODS: Is this the Doyle translation?

12            MR. MANLY: I'll represent it's an accurate
13   translation.
14       Q. Have you ever seen anything like that
15   document, Your Eminence?
16            MR. HENNIGAN: What would be the basis upon
17   which you represent it's an accurate translation?
18            MR. MANLY: That it's been examined by a Latin
19   scholar, and I've been told it's an accurate
20   translation.
21            MS. SOLTAN: You can reserve all rights,
22   Counsel. We have no problem. If you find that it
23   isn't an accurate translation, you can certainly do
24   whatever you think is appropriate.
25            MR. WOODS: I just want to identify a source.

  1   This is the Doyle translation of the 1962 instruction?
  2            MR. MANLY: No, I'm not saying that.
  3            MR. HENNIGAN: Is it not that, or is it
  4            MR. MANLY: I don't I don't know that it's
  5   him. I know it's a Latin scholar.
  6            MR. WOODS: Okay. Well, it looks very
  7   similar. And I don't proclaim
  8            MR. MANLY: Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. I
  9   don't know.
10            MR. WOODS: that I can go through 50 pages
11   and tell you. But it looks very similar to one that he
12   made. Now, it may just be the format is the same. I
13   can't tell for sure.
14            MS. SOLTAN: Well, if you prefer, the Cardinal
15   perhaps could translate paragraph 73 from the Latin to
16   English for us on the record. Would you prefer that?
17            MR. MANLY: Why don't you do that, Cardinal?
18            MR. WOODS: I'm not sure that the Cardinal is
19   qualified to translate; although I'm sure he knows
20   quite a bit of Latin.
21   BY MR. MANLY:
22       Q. Have you ever all I'm trying to
23   establish I'm not going to ask you about the
24   document yet.
25            Have you ever seen anything like that before?

  1       A. Yes.
  2       Q. When did you see it for the first time?
  3       A. I believe in the last year or so this document
  4   came to my attention.
  5       Q. Okay. So your testimony is your sworn
  6   testimony is you've never seen anything like that
  7   document, that instruction, prior to 2003?
  8            MR. WOODS: I object to the vague expression,
  9   "something like that." I mean, this is the
10   BY MR. MANLY:
11       Q. Did you ever see that instruction before 2003,
12   Your Eminence?
13            MR. WOODS: This particular one, crimine
14   sollictationis?
15            MR. MANLY: That's right.
16            MR. WOODS: Have you seen this one before?
17            MR. MANLY: That's right.
18            MR. WOODS: Okay.
19            THE WITNESS: I simply don't recall seeing
20   this ever before.
21   BY MR. MANLY:
22       Q. Okay. Do you know what it says about
23   pedophilia, Eminence?
24       A. No, not specifically.
25            MS. SOLTAN: Page 22.

  1            MR. WOODS: Page 22 of the translation,
  2   Exhibit 10? The pages aren't numbered.
  3            MS. SOLTAN: Actually, if you go to the very
  4   end of the translated document, it's the last two full
  5   pages of the document, starting with what is entitled
  6   "Title IV," in Roman numerals, and "Title V." And
  7   under the section entitled "The Worst Crime" is the
  8   section that we're talking about.
  9            MR. HENNIGAN: And where is that? Is there a
10   numbered paragraph?
11            MS. SOLTAN: The second second to the last
12   page of the document in English, before the appendix.
13            MR. WOODS: Before the appendix.
14            MR. HENNIGAN: Is there a paragraph number?
15            MS. SOLTAN: Paragraph 71, 72, 73 is what
16   we're directing inviting your attention to.
17            MR. WOODS: Paragraph 71.
18            MS. SOLTAN: Would you like me to find it for
19   you?
20            MR. WOODS: Yeah. Oh, page 22 at the top.
21   Okay. The Cardinal's got it.
22            MS. SOLTAN: Here you are.
23            Can I find it for you?

24            MR. HENNIGAN: I found it.
25            MS. SOLTAN: Cardinal, may I assist you?

  1            THE WITNESS: Okay. You're looking at
  2   paragraph 73?
  3   BY MR. MANLY:
  4       Q. Yes.
  5            MR. WOODS: So we should just look at 73?
  6            MR. MANLY: Right.
  7            MS. SOLTAN: No. It's
  8            MR. MANLY: 66.
  9            MR. WOODS: 66?
10            MR. MANLY: No. 66.
11            MR. WOODS: 66.
12            MR. MANLY: Right.
13       Q. "Whenever an Ordinary immediately accepts
14       a denunciation of the crime of solicitation,
15       he should not omit telling this to the Holy
16       Office."
17            Do you see that?
18       A. Yes.
19       Q. Prior to 1985, did you ever report a priest to
20   the Holy Office of the Vatican for abusing a child?
21       A. Well, that's a different question than
22   paragraph 66.
23       Q. My question stands.
24            Did you?
25       A. No.

  1            MR. HENNIGAN: No, you don't get to do that.
  2   You don't get to throw in paragraph 66
  3            MR. MANLY: Did you
  4            MR. HENNIGAN: and act like
  5            MR. MANLY: Okay. Fine.
  6       Q. Forget paragraph 66 exists.
  7            Did you ever report to the Holy Office or to
  8   any official of the Vatican, prior to 1985, that a
  9   priest had molested a child?
10       A. Aside from this document?
11       Q. Right.
12       A. No, not to the best my recollection.
13       Q. Okay. Can you read paragraph 73 into the
14   record?
15            MR. HENNIGAN: Look, without knowing what this
16   document is, if you want it read into the record, you
17   read it.
18            MR. MANLY: Okay. I'll read it into the
19   record.
20            "To have the worst crime, for the penal
21       effects, one must do the equivalent of the
22       following: Any obscene, external act,
23       gravely sinful, perpetrated in any way by a
24       cleric or attempted by him with youths of
25       either sex with brute animals (bestiality )."

  1            MR. WOODS: "Or with brute animals."
  2   BY MR. MANLY:
  3       Q. Have you ever seen that before, Eminence?
  4            MR. WOODS: Have you seen this?
  5            MR. MANLY: That paragraph.
  6            MR. WOODS: In this document?
  7            MR. MANLY: Right.
  8            THE WITNESS: I'm not sure which translation I
  9   had seen before. I had seen this document in in
10   Latin, and I think maybe a translation. I'm not sure I
11   have seen this translation of it.
12   BY MR. MANLY:
13       Q. Did you know prior to 1985 that that
14   instruction existed on that issue?
15       A. No, I did not.
16       Q. Okay. Let me show you a document and
17   paragraph 70, let me read that into the record.
18            "All these official communications shall
19       always be made under the secret of the Holy
20       Office. And since they concern the common
21       good of the church to the greatest degree,
22       the precept of doing these things obliges
23       under serious sin (subgravi)," G R A V I.
24            What is the secret of the Holy Office,
25   Your Eminence?

  1       A. Well, if you have to go up to paragraph 66
  2   to understand the context of of those paragraphs.
  3   It all has to do with solicitation and confession.
  4       Q. Do you know if Father O'Grady ever solicited
  5   sex in the confessional?
  6       A. No, I do not.
  7       Q. Prior to 1985, did you ever have occasion to
  8   deal with a priest who solicited sex in the
  9   confessional?
10       A. Prior to 1985, no, I can't recall any case.
11       Q. Let me show you a document entitled "Gravoria
12   Delicta: The Apostolic Letter, M.P." by Brian Edward
13   Ferme.
14            Do you know Dr. Ferme?
15       A. Yes.
16       Q. Okay. Who is he?
17       A. He is a priest, I think from England, who is a
18   canon lawyer.
19       Q. Is he the dean of the canon law school at
20   Catholic University of America?
21       A. I believe presently he is.
22       Q. Okay. Is he an extremist, as far as you know,
23   you know, crazy in any way?
24            MR. WOODS: Object. Instruct the witness not
25   to answer.

  1   BY MR. MANLY:
  2       Q. You said he's a he's a priest in communion
  3   with Rome; correct, as far as you know?
  4       A. As far as I know.
  5       Q. Okay. Have you ever known him to do anything
  6   heretical or or out of the ordinary that would cause
  7   you to to question his competence as a canon lawyer
  8   and a priest?
  9       A. I have so little contact with Father Ferme, I
10   simply couldn't answer your question.
11       Q. Okay. Can you look at Page 368, starting
12   with
13            MR. WOODS: You haven't given it to us yet.
14            MR. MANLY: I will.
15       Q. starting with, "We do Know"?
16            MR. WOODS: Is this Exhibit 11 now?
17            MR. MANLY: Yes.
18            THE WITNESS: So this is not these other
19   documents now?
20            MR. MANLY: That is a new exhibit, right.
21            MR. WOODS: So this what do we have here?
22   Two documents? The first one, "Il Processo," that's
23   Exhibit 11.
24            MR. MANLY: That's that's the journal, and
25   this is an article out of the journal. I don't know

  1   what you've got on the pad there.
  2            MR. WOODS: And the article by Father Doyle is

  3   Exhibit 12?
  4            MR. MANLY: No. That's that's wrong. I
  5   didn't mean to give that to you. I'm sorry.
  6            MR. WOODS: Okay. So Exhibit 11 is a journal
  7   cover and a title page, and then it starts on Page 365
  8   with an article.
  9               (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 11 was marked for
10                identification.)
11            MR. WOODS: Do you want him to read this
12   article?
13            MS. SOLTAN: Page 368, please.
14            MR. WOODS: Page what?
15            MR. MANLY: 368.
16            MS. SOLTAN: 368, last full paragraph.
17            MR. WOODS: 368. Which paragraph?
18            MS. SOLTAN: Last full paragraph.
19            MR. WOODS: We do not know?
20            MR. MANLY: Beginning "We do know."
21            MR. WOODS: Oh, "We do know."
22            MR. MANLY: Right.
23            MR. WOODS: Okay. So you go ahead and read
24   it, and the
25            MR. MANLY: No. I want the Cardinal to read

  1   it.
  2            MR. WOODS: Out loud?
  3            MR. MANLY: Right.
  4            MR. HENNIGAN: No.
  5            MR. MANLY: Why not?
  6            MR. HENNIGAN: It's not his document. You're
  7   not going to put these word in his mouth. If you want
  8   to read them
  9            MR. MANLY: All right.
10            MS. SOLTAN: you read them.
11            MR. MANLY: "We do know that in 1962,
12            the Holy Office issued an instruction,
13          Crimen Sollicitantionis. As the title
14          suggests, these norms specifically
15            concerned the delict of solicitation
16            in order to commit a sin against the
17            sixth commandment on the occasion of
18          confession. The instruction was sent
19            to all the patriarchs, archbishops,
20            Bishops, and other ordinaries and was
21            based on the general norm found in
22            Canon 247, Section 2.
23                "The CDF could directly judge
24            this delict though if the Ordinary
25            judged the case, he had to proceed

  1            according to the instruction and had
  2            to inform the congregation of the result.
  3                "While the instruction dealt
  4            specifically with the solicitation
  5            and the procedural norms to be applied
  6            in judging this crime, the fifth
  7            chapter stated that the same norms
  8            were also be observed for crimen
  9            pessimum, Article 71, which was also
10            understood to included paedophilia."
11            Do you see that, Cardinal?
12            THE WITNESS: Yes. I'm trying to find out the
13   date of this article.
14   BY MR. MANLY:
15       Q. It's 2004, I believe.
16       A. Do you see where that says 2004?
17       Q. 2003.
18            MS. SOLTAN: I have a document with a
19   copyright of 2003, Cardinal.
20            MR. WOODS: 2003?
21            MS. SOLTAN: 2003.
22            THE WITNESS: 2003?
23            MS. SOLTAN: Yes.
24   BY MR. MANLY:
25       Q. So my question to you is: Did you prior to

  1   1985, did you know that this instruction existed for
  2   handling cases of solicitation that involved
  3   pedophilia?
  4       A. I did not.
  5       Q. Did you ever have a Bishop or anybody else
  6   tell you that this instruction existed?
  7       A. No, not except the last year or so.
  8       Q. Do you accept, Eminence, based on this
  9   article, given Mr. Ferme is the head of canon law at
10   Catholic University, that his statement is accurate?
11   Or do you take issue with it?
12            MR. WOODS: Calls for speculation. Calls for
13   an expert opinion. Instruct the witness not to answer.
14   BY MR. MANLY:
15          Q. Let's go back to your deposition in 1997 and
16   let me read to you from Page 89. I'd be happy to show
17   it to you. Actually, take that back, Page 88,
18   beginning at line
19            MR. HENNIGAN: Are we going to see a copy of
20   it?
21            MR. MANLY: Yeah. I'm going to read it,
22   though, so he can hear it.
23            MR. WOODS: Yeah. Is this the Howard trial or
24   depo?
25            MR. MANLY: Deposition.

  1            MR. WOODS: And page?
  2            MR. HENNIGAN: We don't have that.
  3            MR. WOODS: I've got it right here.
  4            Is this the trial?
  5            MR. MANLY: It's no. It's the deposition.
  6            MR. HENNIGAN: We don't have it.
  7            MR. WOODS: We don't have it.
  8            MR. MANLY: Okay. I'd be happy to share it
  9   with you.
10            MR. HENNIGAN: It would be efficient if we
11   could look at it in context.
12            MS. SOLTAN: Is that what I have?
13            MR. MANLY: Yeah. It's the '97
14            MR. WOODS: Oh, this is the deposition?
15            MR. MANLY: Yeah.
16            MR. WOODS: Oh, okay. Okay. I've got it.
17   This is I thought this was the trial.
18   BY MR. MANLY:
19       Q. So go to Page 88.
20            MR. WOODS: Page 88.
21            MR. MANLY: Actually, I think it would be
22   easier just for him to read it into the record.
23            MR. WOODS: No, no. Go ahead.
24            MR. MANLY: No, I'd like him to read it.
25            MR. WOODS: Okay. Where do you want him to

  1   read? From where to read to yourself.
  2            MR. MANLY: Line 24:
  3            "And are you aware there has been a
  4       practice that has at least been noted, where
  5       they were moved because there was interest
  6       to avoid scandal in the church."
  7            And then his answer beginning, "My

  8   understanding."
  9            MR. WOODS: Who is "they"?
10            MR. MANLY: Do you want to start from the
11   prior question? That's fine.
12            Let me know when you're done.
13            MR. WOODS: We're down to 89, line 17. Is
14   that where you want us to stop?
15            MR. MANLY: Yep.
16            MR. WOODS: That's where the highlighting
17   stops.
18            MR. MANLY: That's what I that's what I
19   want him to read.
20       Q. So beginning at line 24, "And are you aware."
21       A. Okay. So we're on Page 88, line which
22   which line do you want me
23       Q. It's it's confusing, because it's the
24   pages
25       A. Two pages are...

  1       Q. Yeah. So beginning at line 24, saying, "And
  2   are you aware there has been a practice that has at
  3   least been noted, where they were moved because"
  4       A. Oh, all right.
  5       Q. Okay.
  6            MR. WOODS: So what's the question?
  7            MR. MANLY: I want him to read it.
  8            MR. WOODS: We're not going to do that.
  9            MR. MANLY: He won't read it into the record,
10   his own testimony?
11            MR. WOODS: You read it.
12            MR. MANLY: Okay.
13            "Are you aware there's been a
14            practice that has at least been
15            noted, where they were moved because
16            there was an interest to avoid
17            scandal in the church.
18                "Answer: My understanding in
19            those earlier years was that church
20          authorities were unaware, really,
21            of the extent of this disease and
22            illness, and as was psychology and
23            psychiatry, actually, and that what
24            we have come to know today has come
25            more through evolution. And it's

  1            like alcoholism among priests, it
  2            was considered to be some kind of
  3            a moral thing; and then if you
  4            decided not to drink, you wouldn't
  5            drink. And so treatment in that,
  6            it was simply not part of the reality
  7            of the time. And so I think it's why
  8          evolution we have come to realize
  9            today what we did not know as clearly
10            in those earlier years.
11                "But my only recollection as
12            a priest, or anyone, since ordination
13          was that we had a case in Fresno
14            when I was there of a priest
15            chaplain at a state hospital of
16            adults, though this was not children,
17            who was accused of molesting some
18            of these they were mentally retarded.
19                "And so we pulled him out
20            immediately and sent him I can't
21            recall where for evaluation.
22            But he was never allowed to serve
23            again, in fact, left the priesthood.
24            In fact, he went to jail eventually,
25            I believe, and left the priesthood.

  1                "But my only recollection of
  2            dealing with one of those cases in
  3            those years is we didn't there
  4            was no tolerance for this.
  5                "Question: Actually, your answer
  6            in part leads me to my next question.
  7            And that is: Before 1984, as in the
  8            capacity of Bishop or Auxiliary Bishop,
  9            had you ever had cause or occasion
10            to deal with the issue of a priest
11            of a diocese being accused of the
12            molestation of a child or parishioner.
13                "Answer: Not of a child, although
14            one could, I believe, say at
15            Porterville State Hospital, whether
16          chronologically older, they are
17            mentally, maybe, children. But that
18            was the only case I was aware of
19            And we pulled him out of there immediately."
20       Q. Did you testify truthfully in that deposition,
21   Cardinal?
22            THE WITNESS: With the knowledge I had at the
23   time, yes.
24            MR. MANLY: I'll turn it over to Mr. Simons.
25            MS. SOLTAN: Actually, I would like to just

  1   follow up with a few things, if I may. Is that all
  2   right?
  3            MR. SIMONS: That's fine with me.
  4            MS. SOLTAN: Apparently, the hardest part of
  5   this is going to be figuring out the microphone.
  7                      EXAMINATION
  8   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  9       Q. Cardinal, you were at the diocese of
10   Fresno Monterey, which became the diocese of Fresno and
11   Monterey, from 1962 until 1980; correct? I understand
12   that correctly, yes?
13       A. 1962 to 1980, correct.
14       Q. Right. You were incardinated in 1962 and
15   remained incardinated at that diocese until you left to
16   go to Stockton?
17       A. Yes, that would be correct.
18       Q. And during that time period, you held just
19   about every office, didn't you? I mean, you were a
20   pastor and an administrator; that's correct?
21            MR. WOODS: Okay. I'm going to object.
22   There's several questions pending. Which one do you
23   want him to answer?
24            MS. SOLTAN: Well, let me do it this way,
25   because I'm trying to just expedite a little bit.

  1       Q. I understood that you were a pastor, you were
  2   an administrator, you were a Vicar General, were you an
  3   Auxiliary Bishop, you were a Chancellor. Did I did
  4   I hit them all?
  5       A. I think, except for director of
  6   Catholic Charities.
  7       Q. And director of Catholic Charities.
  8            So you had a wide range of roles during the
  9   time that you were at Fresno; yes?
10       A. That's correct.
11       Q. Okay. Did any of those roles involve
12   establishing policy on behalf of the diocese with
13   regard to the protection of children?
14            MR. WOODS: Object to the word "involve."
15   Does that mean occur?
17       Q. Do you understand what I mean by the word
18   "involve"?
19       A. Actually, I'm more confused what you mean by
20   "developing policies." Are you talking about written
21   handbooks?
22       Q. No. I'm talking about did you feel that
23   you it was one of your responsibilities to protect
24   the children of the diocese in any of those roles?
25       A. Well, obviously, as a priest, in any role

  1   you're anxious to protect everybody.
  2       Q. Right. And that it also involved protecting
  3   children, of course?
  4       A. I'll wait till there there's a lot of
  5   movement goes on over there behind you, and I find it
  6   very distracting.
  7            MR. WOODS: Could everyone sit down, please?
  8            MS. SLOAN: My back hurts.
  9            MR. WOODS: Could you stand over there, then,
10   please.
11            THE WITNESS: See, what happens is you're
12   right behind the person moving. And it's
13            MS. SLOAN: I wasn't moving until your lawyer
14   asked me to. I'm sorry.
15            MR. WOODS: I'm finding it distracting. I'm
16   sorry.
17            THE WITNESS: It would be very helpful if over
18   by that wall, then I wouldn't in my frame of view, I
19   wouldn't have anyone moving in the background.
20            MS. SOLTAN: Would you like me to move to the
21   other side of the camera? Would that help?
22            MR. WOODS: No. You're fine. You're fine
23   now.
24            MS. SOLTAN: I forgot my question. Can we
25   have that back, please?

  1            (The record was read as follows:
  2            "And that it also involved protecting
  3            children, of course?")
  4            THE WITNESS: Yes, protecting everyone.
  5   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  6       Q. Is it true to say that that was true of every
  7   single one of those roles that you had at the Diocese
  8   of Fresno?
  9       A. Well, there would be various emphasis
10   according to the specific job at hand.
11       Q. Okay. Could you please describe for me, in
12   your capacity as a priest, what did you do to protect
13   children at the diocese.
14       A. Well, as priests, we were very concerned with
15   making sure that parents were taking care of their
16   children and they were being properly nourished and
17   fed, and all the other obligations that that you
18   would have.
19       Q. What about physical abuse, if you saw evidence
20   of physical abuse, would you have done something?
21            MR. WOODS: Calls for speculation. Calls for
22   an opinion.
24       Q. Well, you indicated that you looked to see if
25   they were nourished and fed.

  1            Did you also look to see if they were being
  2   beaten, for example?
  3       A. Well, in the parishes I served, there were a
  4   lot of poor people. And so a lot of them couldn't
  5   afford food and that. So we were always concerned to
  6   make sure that they had adequate food, or whatever
  7   clothing, whatever they needed.
  8       Q. Did you also look for signs of physical abuse,
  9   like if they were being beaten, for example?
10       A. I did not personally look for abuse, no.
11       Q. Why not?
12            MR. WOODS: Are you saying is it a conscious
13   thing, I'm looking for abuse? Is that what
14            MS. SOLTAN: Absolutely.
15            MR. WOODS: Okay.
16            MS. SOLTAN: Cardinal, I
17            MR. WOODS: A a conscious awareness at that
18   time?
19            MS. SOLTAN: That's right.
20            MR. WOODS: Okay.
21            THE WITNESS: Probably not conscious, but
22   there.
24       Q. If you had seen evidence of physical abuse of
25   a child in your parish or where where you were,

  1   would you have done something about it?
  2            MR. WOODS: Calls for speculation. Calls for
  3   opinion. Instruct the witness not to answer.
  4   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  5       Q. Are you taking the advice of your counsel,
  6   sir?
  7       A. Yes.
  8       Q. During the time that you were a priest
  9   actually, in any capacity at Fresno, did you ever have
10   occasion to see what you considered to be a possibility
11   of physical abuse of a child of any kind?
12       A. No, I simply don't recall anything specific.
13       Q. All right. Did you view, in in all of your
14   various roles during at Fresno, did you supervise
15   other employees of the diocese?
16       A. Yes.
17       Q. Would that include other priests?
18       A. At times, yes.
19       Q. And lay employees as well?
20       A. Yes, at times.
21       Q. Is it fair to say that you had a supervisory
22   role in every single one of your capacities while you
23   were working at Fresno?
24       A. Some to some extent.
25       Q. All right. Did you have more of a supervisory

  1   capacity as you went up the ranks, if you will? I
  2   don't know if that's the correct phrase, but advanced
  3   in the hierarchy of the church. Did your role of
  4   supervision increase?
  5       A. I don't think so.
  6       Q. Okay. In terms of so you felt that you had
  7   a consistent role, requiring you to supervise the
  8   employees of the diocese from the time you were a
  9   priest all the way until the time you were a Bishop?
10       A. Well, "supervise" means a lot of things.
11       Q. That that's my next question.
12            What does that mean to you? What did you
13   understand that to mean when you were there?
14            MR. WOODS: In each role? Take each role and
15   explain? Okay.
16            So starting as a parish priest, each of the
17   roles.
18            THE WITNESS: Well, we'll go back to my first
19   assignment. When I was first ordained, I was at
20   St. John's Cathedral. And most of my ministry was
21   there in the parish, but also taking care of two big
22   hospitals, the county hospital and the community
23   hospital. So we were dealing primarily with trauma
24   patients and people ill, and ministering to the sick,
25   primarily, in those first four month.

  1            And the next two years, I was in Washington,
  2   D.C., so I wasn't in the diocese.
  3   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  4       Q. Before you go on, sir, let me ask you: Were
  5   the employees of the hospital employees of the diocese?
  6       A. No.
  7       Q. Were any of the employees of the hospital
  8   employees of the diocese?
  9       A. No.
10       Q. Were any procedures taken when when you
11   say, then, you were working in connection with the
12   hospital, what does that mean? What were you doing?
13       A. That means when Catholic patients were there,
14   we visited them; when there was an accident and someone
15   needed the anointing of the sick, the sacrament, then
16   we went to anoint them; we had to oftentimes comfort
17   families of sick and injured persons and, quite
18   frequently, of people who had died in an accident or an
19   injury.
20       Q. Okay. So I started out this question in terms
21   of your supervision. And you talked about the
22   hospital.
23            Were you supervising someone at the hospital?
24       A. No. But you asked me what I did in each of
25   the roles I had in the diocese. So I just started at

  1   the beginning.
  2            MS. SOLTAN: Okay. Great.
  3            MR. WOODS: She wants to know what your
  4   supervisory
  5            THE WITNESS: Yes.
  6            MR. WOODS: role was in each job.
  7            THE WITNESS: I know.
  8   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  9       Q. Okay. So when you were at St. John's, sir,
10   what was your supervisory role?
11       A. Minimal. I was there for four months.
12       Q. Okay. And your position, then, was a a
13   priest? That's the best
14       A. Yes.
15       Q. Okay. With regard to two things now, one is
16   the protection of children and the other is the
17   possible of sexual misconduct of priests, could you
18   please indicate to me what you did to ensure, number
19   one, that children were protected when you were a
20   priest at St. John's. What did you do?
21            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object that he has
22   any obligation to ensure or guarantee or affirmatively
23   protect anybody at any time, okay, as a matter of legal
24   obligation. That's not what you mean, I don't think.
25            MS. SOLTAN: Well, I'm not really sure what

  1   your comments are, because this is an oral argument.
  2   So, I mean, is that an objection of some nature?
  3            MR. WOODS: Yeah. Are you asking for an
  4   expert opinion?
  5            MS. SOLTAN: No. I'm asking for this
  6   gentleman's factual recollection
  7            MR. WOODS: Okay.
  8            MS. SOLTAN: of what he did to supervise
  9   people at St. John's in the interest of protecting
10   children.
11       Q. Which you indicated to me to be something that
12   you felt was your responsibility consistently in every
13   position you had.
14            MR. WOODS: Well, you're asking for a
15   conscious effort, something he did consciously at that
16   point in time to protect children. Okay.
17            THE WITNESS: I I'm confused by your
18   question. I'm sorry. During those four months
20       Q. Yes.
21       A. I celebrated masses and weekdays and heard
22   confessions, said mass on Sundays, preached, and helped
23   take care of the Catholic patients at two hospitals. I
24   really didn't have any supervisory role
25       Q. Well, did you have a

  1       A. of people.
  2       Q. Did you have a parish secretary?
  3       A. The parish had a parish secretary.
  4       Q. Did she work for you?
  5       A. Worked for the pastor, actually.
  6       Q. Was that you?
  7       A. No.
  8       Q. Okay. Did anyone work under you?
  9       A. Not really. I was only there four months,
10   brand new priest.
11       Q. All right. So you didn't you believe that
during the time you were at St. Johns, you didn't
13   supervise anyone?
14       A. I can't recall during those four brief months.
15   This is 1962. I simply can't recall. That wasn't my
16   job.
17       Q. Okay. Did you have any instruction during the
18   time that you were a priest at St. John's from anyone
19   else as to what you should do if something untoward
20   happened, for example, you found out there was sexual
21   misconduct by another priest?
22            MR. WOODS: Okay. So first she said
23   "anything," and then she limited it to sexual
24   misconduct by another priest. I think that's what you
25   want the answer to, the later.

  1            MS. SOLTAN: Well, actually, I want it in two
  2   areas. One is I want it with regard to protection of
  3   children. And second one I want is with regard to
  4   sexual misconduct of a priest.
  5       Q. Did you receive instruction from your
  6   supervisor as to what you were supposed to do to make
  7   sure that there was no sexual misconduct of priests
  8   toward children, and to ensure that children were
  9   protected? What instruction did you receive?
10       A. Since that was 42 years ago, I simply can't
11   recall. I'm sorry.
13       Q. All right. During the time that you were at
14   Fresno during the entire time you were in Fresno and
15   Stockton, were instructions ever given to you with
16   regard to what you should do to protect children, by
17   someone else acting on behalf of the diocese?
18       A. I can't recall anything specific, because
19   protecting children can mean many, many things.
20       Q. All right. Let's get more specific, then.
21            Protecting children from potential sexual
22   abuse?
23       A. I don't recall any instruction.
24       Q. During the entire time that you worked at
25   Fresno and at Stockton, did you give instructions to

  1   anyone with regard to ensuring the protection of
  2   children from potential sex abuse?
  3       A. I can't recall any.
  4       Q. During the time that you've worked at Fresno
  5   and at Stockton, were you aware that anyone else acting
  6   on behalf of the diocese gave instruction with regard
  7   to protecting children from sex abuse?
  8       A. No.
  9       Q. No, no one did it or no, you don't recall?
10       A. You asked if I recalled, and I said I don't
11   recall.
12       Q. Okay. What I'm really troubled by is that
13   ultimately you were the Auxiliary Bishop of Fresno and
14   you were the Bishop of Stockton. And I think you've
15   said earlier that that was tantamount to, or akin to,
16   being a CEO in a company.
17            If you didn't give the instruction, who would
18   have?
19            MR. WOODS: All right. I object to the entire
20   preamble. Misstates the prior testimony.
21            Instruct you to ignore it.
22            The question is
23            MS. SOLTAN: To ignore it?
24            MR. WOODS: if you didn't give an
25   instruction to protect children, who would have; is

  1   that the question? Okay. And I object to that
  2   question as calling for an expert opinion. It's
  3   speculation and is irrelevant to the subject matter of
  4   this case.
  5            MS. SOLTAN: I think you forgot hearsay.
  6            MR. WOODS: Also, asked and answered.
  7   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  8       Q. You indicated earlier that you delegated
  9   authorities on occasion to various other members of the
10   diocese. Particularly, the Monsignor Cain, for
11   example, had received a delegation of duties from you.
12            Did you ever delegate the responsibility
13   for
14            I'm sorry. Did you have a question?
15            MR. WOODS: I object to the question already,
16   but I'll wait for you to finish.
18       Q. Did you ever delegate authority to anyone else
19   in Fresno with regard to setting policy I'm sorry,
20   setting practices with regard to the protection of
21   children from potential sex abuse?
22       A. I don't recall, no.
23       Q. How about at Stockton, did you ever do that at
24   Stockton, delegate the responsibility for establishing
25   procedures to protect children from potential sex

  1   abuse?
  2       A. Actually, yes.
  3       Q. Okay. And who did you delegate to?
  4       A. Well, I didn't actually delegate. After the
  5   June 1985 Collegeville meeting, I informed
  6   Monsignor Cain and one or two others that after summer,
  7   people are back from vacation, that we needed to
  8   proceed to develop procedures, written procedures, to
  9   deal with this matter.
10       Q. To your knowledge, was that done?
11       A. I don't know, because I left. I was
12   reassigned shortly thereafter.
13       Q. And that directive was given to
14   Monsignor Cain?
15            MR. WOODS: He didn't call it a directive. I
16   object to the term.
18       Q. I'm sorry. What did you call it?
19       A. I told Monsignor Cain and a couple of others
20   about our meeting at Collegeville, and that it would be
21   very helpful for us, like other dioceses, to develop
22   some written procedures and policies to handle these
23   kinds of matters.
24       Q. Maybe I don't understand the way it works, but
25   I thought you were the boss.

  1            I mean, in Stockton, when you're the Bishop,
  2   aren't you the head guy?
  3            MR. WOODS: Object. Instruct you not to
  4   answer. Argumentative.
  5   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  6       Q. I mean, you were the head guy; right?
  7            MR. WOODS: Object. Don't answer.
  8            MS. SOLTAN: Object on what grounds? You
  9   don't like the word "head guy"?
10            MR. WOODS: Yeah. And it doesn't mean
11   anything.
13       Q. You were the highest ranking person at the
14   diocese in terms of the hierarchy, is that correct, in
15   1985?
16       A. Yes.
17       Q. So when you were telling Monsignor Cain that
18   you thought it might be a good idea to establish
19   written policies, was that just casual conversation?
20       A. No. It was the end of June, people were
21   beginning to take vacations. And I said as soon as
22   Labor Day is over and people are back, we need to put
23   together a working group and begin this process.
24       Q. Was that a diplomatic way of telling him to go
25   forward and do that?

  1       A. That we were all going to be involved in this,
  2   not just him.
  3       Q. So you were basically giving an instruction
  4   that the diocese should do that?
  5       A. Yes.
  6       Q. Okay. Now you have had an incident of sexual
  7   abuse, childhood sexual abuse, that you knew about in
  8   19 let's see. Was it 1981 that you said Munoz?
  9       A. Yes.
10       Q. Okay. Did you not think it might be a good
11   idea to establish policies of the nature that you
12   recommended in 1985 in 1981, after that occurred?
13            MR. WOODS: Objection. Calls for speculation.
14            You can answer.
15            THE WITNESS: Well, we already I already
16   had the tools I needed at that time in the code of
17   canon law, which is to remove the faculties and the
18   assignment. I had all I needed to do at the time to
19   deal with that problem.
21       Q. Okay. Did you do any investigation at that
22   time to see if there were any other protections that
23   you could put in place to make sure that that couldn't
24   happen again?
25            MR. WOODS: "At that time," meaning 1981?

  1            MS. SOLTAN: Correct.
  2            THE WITNESS: No. I thought that was somewhat
  3   of an isolated case. And it didn't occur to me at that
  4   time that we needed to do that.
  5   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  6       Q. Why did you think it was isolated?
  7       A. It was my first case.
  8       Q. When it happened again in 1984, did that
  9   change your opinion that maybe you should be doing
10   something to put policies in effect?
11       A. Well, we actually were putting policies in
12   effect.
13       Q. Oh, I didn't know that.
14            What policies were you putting in effect?
15       A. Following the canonical procedure, removing
16   faculties, removing assignment, acting swiftly.
17       Q. Okay. I thought there was no policy.
18            So there was a policy that was being followed;
19   it wasn't just practice?
20       A. The code of canon law gives the Bishops the
21   authority to remove faculties and assignment.
22       Q. Right. That's authority, though. That's
23   different than policies. I'm asking you if you had a
24   policy that you followed with regard to handling sexual
25   abuse claims at either the Fresno or Stockton diocese.

  1   Did you?
  2       A. Written policies?
  3       Q. Any type of policy. I don't know if somebody
  4   told you about it. Any policy.
  5       A. Well, if it isn't a written policy, it's not a
  6   policy in the way we operate.
  7       Q. Well, I thought you said earlier that you
  8   followed the Word of God. Is that the word you used?
  9            MR. WOODS: Object. Argumentative. Instruct
10   the witness not to answer.
11            MS. SOLTAN: I mean, Mr. Manly asked him if
12   there was a policy, and he said the Word of God.
13            MR. HENNIGAN: I don't think so.
14            MR. WOODS: No. That's
15            MS. SOLTAN: Did I misunderstand that?
16            MR. WOODS: Object. Instruct the witness not
17   to answer. It's argumentative.
19       Q. All right. So what policies were you
20   following, if any, in 1981, when Mr. Munoz abused the
21   child?
22            MR. WOODS: Object. Instruct the witness not
23   to answer.
25       Q. Were there policies you were following?

  1       A. I do not know what you mean by "policies."
  2       Q. Okay. I only want to know what you mean by
  3   "policies," not what I mean.
  4       A. Were there written policies to deal
  5   specifically with problems of sexual abuse of minors?
  6   Is that your question?
  7       Q. That's one of my questions.
  8       A. And I answered it many times today. No, we
  9   did not have, in effect, written policies in the
10   Diocese of Stockton.
11       Q. Right. Perhaps I misunderstood you. But then
12   you went on to say the written policies are canon law.
13            Was the written policy canon law?
14       A. Well, what I said was my authority and my tool
15   to act quickly and swiftly was already there in canon
16   law. I didn't have to have anything else written.
17       Q. Okay. So you didn't feel that there were
18   it was necessary for you to create any policies because
19   you felt that canon law gave you the authority to act
20   if something already occurred; yes?
21       A. In that in that case, the Munoz case, I had
22   all I needed. He was in Mexico. He was not in
23   Stockton. And I could terminate his faculties and his
24   assignment, and I did.
25       Q. Yeah. The thing that bothers me about that,

  1   though, is that means you're not going to act until
  2   something actually happens; the child has to be hurt
  3   before you do something.
  4            Was there any policy that you had that allowed
  5   you to put protections in place in advance of a child
  6   being hurt, to make sure that that didn't happen?
  7            MR. WOODS: Object. I object to the form of
  8   question as confusing. I object to it as asked and
  9   answered a hundred times. I asked I object that
10   it's harassing. He said there was no policy, no
11   written policy. He had authority to act.
12            MS. SOLTAN: Please don't testify, sir. You
13   can state your objections.
14            MR. WOODS: I instruct him not to answer.
16       Q. I'd like to know about hiring practices, both
17   at Fresno and Stockton.
18            Both both Fresno and Stockton had schools;
19   isn't that right?
20       A. Yes.
21       Q. Elementary schools that were run by the
22   diocese?
23       A. No. The elementary schools are operated by
24   the individual parishes.
25       Q. By the individual parishes. And the

  1   individual parishes were owned and operated by the
  2   diocese? I'm talking about the time period of 1962 to
  3   1980, in Fresno.
  4       A. They are all part of the Diocese of Fresno,
  5   correct.
  6       Q. They were. Okay.
  7            So when you were hiring priests and lay
  8   employees, in some occasions, that was to have them
  9   work with children at elementary schools; is that
10   correct?
11       A. You asked when I was hiring people?
12       Q. Well, as I understand it, in a corporation
13   sole, the Bishop is one and the same with the diocese;
14   right? Isn't that right?
15            MR. WOODS: Object. Calls for a legal
16   opinion.
18       Q. Isn't that correct?
19            MR. WOODS: Do you understand the question?
20            THE WITNESS: I I am not capable of
21   defining "corporation sole" legally. So I the
22   there was a schools department.
24       Q. Right.
25       A. The schools department had their policies.

  1   They worked for the principals and that. And I was not
  2   involved in that at all.
  3       Q. Did you as the Bishop you were made a
  4   Bishop in 1975 in Fresno, although you had the title of
  5   Auxiliary Bishop. And, of course, you were the Bishop
  6   of Stockton.
  7            Did you have the ultimate authority over the
  8   schools?
  9            MR. WOODS: That's two questions. As an
10   Auxiliary Bishop in Fresno, did you have authority over
11   the schools? That's question number one.
12            THE WITNESS: Most of that was all delegated
13   out to the superintendent of schools, the pastors, and
14   the principals of the elementary schools.
16       Q. What did you do to supervise the schools to
17   make sure that they were acting appropriately to
18   protect the children?
19            MR. WOODS: What did he do as Auxiliary Bishop
20   in Fresno?
21            THE WITNESS: That was that was not one of
22   my responsibilities.
24       Q. Were there any protections set in terms of
25   written policies with regard to, for example, hiring

  1   practices of the school?
  2            MR. WOODS: Were there any just so I
  3   understand this, were there any written policies
  4   relating to hiring for the elementary schools in
  5   Fresno, specifically in regards to childhood sexual
  6   abuse?
  7            MS. SOLTAN: Well, I think you're misstating
  8   my question. I'm asking about protecting children.
  9            MR. WOODS: What kind?
10            MS. SOLTAN: Protecting children, was there
11   any protection?
12            MR. WOODS: Was there any written policy to
13   screen employees concerning possibility of abusing
14   children?
15            MS. SOLTAN: Right.
16            THE WITNESS: I was never involved in any of
17   the policies or manuals of the school system. It was
18   all handled by the superintendent of schools.
20       Q. Okay. Were there any policies and manuals?
21       A. I simply don't know.
22       Q. How about at Stockton?
23       A. Again, we had a superintendent of schools who
24   handled all of that. And I simply don't know.
25       Q. Were fingerprint checks done of people being

  1   interviewed for positions of teachers at the diocese
  2   owned and operated by the school by the I'm
  3   sorry, at the schools owned and operated by the
  4   diocese?
  5            MR. WOODS: I object to the term "fingerprint
  6   checks." I don't know what that means in 1962.
  7            MS. SOLTAN: Do you want me to explain what
  8   that means?
  9            MR. WOODS: Tell us what you want us to
10   interpret it to mean, and then we can answer the
11   question.
13       Q. Were fingerprints taken of prospective
14   employees of the diocese to make sure that they did not
15   have criminal records prior to the time that you hired
16   them?
17            MR. WOODS: Any time between '62 and '85?
18            MS. SOLTAN: That is correct.
19            THE WITNESS: I actually do not know. It was
20   not my responsibility.
22       Q. Whose responsibility was it?
23       A. As I stated, the superintendent of schools of
24   the respective diocese.
25       Q. All right. With regard to priests being hired

  1   by the Fresno diocese or the Stockton diocese, was any
  2   type of a background check done by the diocese prior
  3   to I don't know if the right word is "hiring" the
  4   priests?
  5            MR. WOODS: Yeah. I'm going to object to the
  6   form of the question. When you say background check on
  7   a priest, do you mean could you tell us what you
  8   mean? You mean something other than watching them in
  9   seminary for years and and whatever happens to them
10   in formation at the seminary?
11            MS. SOLTAN: Well, that's an interesting
12   question.
13       Q. Are you telling me that all priests were hired
14   directly out of seminary?
15            MR. WOODS: Is the question: Are all priests
16   hired for Fresno and Stockton in those years directly
17   from a seminary?
18            MS. SOLTAN: You don't have to restate my
19   question. I think he can hear it.
20            MR. WOODS: I just want to make sure I have it
21   right.
22            THE WITNESS: Most of the priests who were
23   studying in a seminary at some location were studying
24   for either the Diocese of Monterey Fresno or, later,
25   the Diocese of Fresno or the Diocese of Stockton. Most

  1   of the priests ordained were studying, actually, for
  2   the respective diocese.
  3   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  4       Q. I'm asking if you did background checks to
  5   make sure that anybody you hired didn't have criminal
  6   background?
  7            MR. WOODS: Okay. And I object to the
  8   question. What do you mean by "background checks"?
  9   BY MS. SOLTAN:
10       Q. Do you understand what I mean, sir?
11       A. No. It's very broad.
12       Q. Did you have a policy at either or was it
13   the practice of the Stockton diocese or the Fresno
14   diocese at the time you were at either diocese to look
15   into the history of the people that you were going to
16   hire, to see if they had criminal activity in their
17   past, prior to the time they were hired?
18       A. Practice then, in those years, was to have
19   letters of recommendation from the person's pastor, and
20   that type of recommendation. We did not had not
21   evolved yet to the point we are today, where we have
22   far greater application process and evaluations,
23   et cetera.
24       Q. Okay. Well, that's what I want to know.
25   Let's talk about Oliver O'Grady.

  1            Did you have letters written letters of
  2   recommendation before Oliver O'Grady was hired?
  3       A. Oliver O'Grady was there when I got there.
  4       Q. Did his file reflect written letters of
  5   recommendation by anyone?
  6       A. I believe they reflect his progress in the
  7   seminary.
  8       Q. So there were seminary records in his
  9   personnel file?
10            MR. HENNIGAN: I'm not sure you let him finish
11   the answer to the question.
12            MS. SOLTAN: I beg your pardon?
13            MR. HENNIGAN: I think you stepped on his
14   answer.
16       Q. I beg your pardon. Were you not finished?
17       A. You confused me again.
18       Q. I'm sorry. Why don't we go back to the
19   previous question, so you can complete your answer.
20            MR. WOODS: Okay. You better read it back,
21   and the answer that we had.
22            (The record was read as follows:
23            "Did his file reflect written letters
24            of recommendation by anyone?"
25            "Answer: I believe they reflect his

  1            progress in the seminary.")
  2            THE WITNESS: And what else do you are you
  3   asking?
  4   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  5       Q. I was asking if there you believe that
  6   there were records about his progress in the seminary
  7   in his personnel file at Stockton. Did you think there
  8   was?
  9       A. There would have been seminary reports on his
10   progress during that time in his file.
11       Q. What else would there be in that file?
12       A. Usually, assignments.
13       Q. Prior assignments before coming to the
14   diocese?
15       A. No. No. What files are kept when the
16   priest actually, you know, arrives.
17       Q. Okay. Now, I believe you testified in an
18   earlier deposition that when you arrived at Stockton,
19   during the first few months I can't remember the
20   time period, but I was something to the effect of the
21   first few months you made a point of visiting each
22   and every parish to meet each and every priest. Did I
23   understand that correctly?
24       A. Not exactly.
25       Q. Okay. What part didn't I understand?

  1       A. I arrived towards the middle of April 1980
  2   1980. Bishop Guilfoyle, my predecessor, had been ill
  3   and unable to confer confirmation in the parishes.
  4   Keep in mind, we had 31 parishes, I believe, at the
  5   time.
  6            So between middle of April and middle of June,
  7   I was going to be in almost every one of those
  8   parishes, conferring the sacrament of confirmation.
  9   And so during the course of that, I knew that I would
10   be meeting all of the priests as I went.
11       Q. Okay. When you arrived at Stockton to take
12   over as the Bishop, did you do, what I would call as a
13   business lawyer, due diligence with regard to the
14   status of the diocese?
15            MR. WOODS: Object to the form of the
16   question. Object to the term
18       Q. Do you know what I mean by that, sir?
19       A. Actually, I do not.
20       Q. All right. What did you do to apprise
21   yourself of the financial condition of the diocese at
22   the time that you arrived
23            MR. WOODS: Object as irrelevant
25       Q. in 1980?

  1            MR. WOODS: to the subject matter, totally
  2   irrelevant to the subject matter of this case.
  3            But I'll let him answer because I assume this
  4   is preceding something that will be relevant.
  5            THE WITNESS: Well, again, I was almost
  6   totally involved in the next first two months, of
  7   going out to the parishes with confirmation to get all
  8   of these performed prior to mid June, when young people
  9   would leave school. So that that was my primary
10   responsibility right then.
12       Q. All right. But what I'm asking you is: Did
13   you other than that, did you review any of the
14   records of the diocese?
15       A. Not specifically. I don't recall reviewing
16   records.
17       Q. How did you know there were 31 parishes?
18       A. Well, I looked that up in the Catholic
19   Directory.
20       Q. In the Catholic Directory. How did you know
21   who the priests were?
22       A. Actually, I only knew one or two priests. And
23   I would then meet them as I went around to the various
24   parishes.
25       Q. So you reviewed absolutely nothing before you

  1   went?
  2       A. I don't recall reviewing files and documents
  3   prior to visiting.
  4       Q. Did you at any time investigate the background
  5   of any of the existing priests of the Diocese of
  6   Stockton when you arrived?
  7       A. When I arrived? I don't believe so.
  8            MS. SOLTAN: Okay. Excuse me for just a
  9   moment.
10            I wanted to know if we can take a break,
11   please. I've been asked by counsel for a brief recess.
12            MR. WOODS: Sure.
13            MS. SOLTAN: Thank you.
14            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of tape
15   number two of the videotaped deposition of Cardinal
16   Roger Mahony. The time is 2:42.
17             (A brief recess was taken.)
18            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record.
19   The time is 3:03. This is tape number three of the
20   videotaped deposition of Cardinal Roger Mahony. The
21   time is 3:03.
23       Q. Cardinal, quickly because I've been meaning to
24   ask you throughout. You're wearing a sling today?
25       A. Yes.

  1       Q. I don't want to invade your privacy about what
  2   the nature of your injury is, but are you in pain or
  3   under the influence of any pain killers that may affect
  4   your ability to give testimony today?
  5       A. No.
  6       Q. Thank you. All right. When we took our
  7   break, right before we took our break, I was asking you
  8   about what I called due diligence with regard to you
  9   arriving at the Diocese of Stockton so just to bring
10   you back to where I was.
11            What I want to know is what you did in terms
12   of reviewing documentation upon your arrival at
13   Stockton to bring yourself up to date on the doings of
14   the diocese? What did you do?
15       A. Well, in most cases when a Bishop arrives in a
16   new diocese, his first duties normally are to get to
17   know the people of the diocese, to try to visit as many
18   places in the diocese, to meet as many people as
19   possible, and that's normally the first things that you
20   do. One does not spend time with documents and things.
21   That just simply not the custom of your entry into
22   the diocese is as their new shepherd is to get to know
23   them.
24       Q. And the custom that you're referring to, is
25   that a policy that's written somewhere?

  1       A. It's not a policy as such. It's just how you
  2   are coming to a new place, the people want to meet you,
  3   and you want to meet them.
  4       Q. Right, and I appreciate that, but I'm just
  5   curious because you were at Fresno from 1962 to 1980
  6   and had never gone to any diocese, how did you know
  7   that that was the custom?
  8       A. The fact that I was going to a new place, they
  9   did not know me. I did not know them. I was very
10   anxious to get around the diocese and meet everyone.
11       Q. Right. Now as the Bishop of Stockton, you are
12   the person who has the sole legal authority to sign
13   contracts, for example, on behalf of the diocese;
14   correct?
15       A. I'm sorry. Could you repeat the first part?
16       Q. As the Bishop of Stockton, you were the only
17   person who had the legal authority to sign documents on
18   behalf of the diocese; correct?
19       A. No, that is not correct.
20       Q. Oh, who has legal authority other than
21   yourself?
22            MR. WOODS: I object. It's irrelevant to the
23   subject matter, but I'll let him answer.
24            THE WITNESS: As a Bishop, we can designate
25   someone to be attorney in fact and allow them to sign

  1   the contracts and papers.
  2   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  3       Q. Did you do that ever during the five years
  4   that you were at Stockton?
  5            MR. WOODS: Object. Irrelevant to the subject
  6   matter of the dispute.
  7            THE WITNESS: I believe that I did designate
  8   Monsignor Cain.
  9   BY MS. SOLTAN:
10       Q. And what were the circumstances of appointing
11   him as attorney in fact?
12       A. I don't remember specifically, but I don't
13   remember specifically, but I think he was
14   attorney in fact when I got there.
15       Q. Signed by the previous Bishop?
16       A. Yes.
17       Q. So did you ever appoint him as your
18   attorney in fact?
19       A. I would have to review the records to be
20   certain.
21       Q. What records would you review?
22       A. The assignment record.
23       Q. Whose assignment record would that be?
24       A. The assignment of duties to the Vicar General.
25       Q. His personnel file you mean?

  1       A. Well, normally there would be a special file
  2   for legal documents, and if I assigned him as
  3   attorney in fact, most likely it would be in that file.
  4       Q. What about INS documents? Where did you keep
  5   documents having to do with sponsorship of priests,
  6   extern priests? That's the wrong phrase, I'm sorry.
  7   Of priests that came from other areas outside the
  8   United States, where were those documents kept?
  9       A. So you are referring to non U.S. citizens?
10       Q. That's correct.
11       A. I presume they would be kept in their
12   personnel file.
13       Q. In the personnel file of the individual
14   priest?
15       A. I presume so, yes.
16       Q. So Oliver O'Grady's documents with regard to
17   being a citizen of Ireland but sponsored to be in the
18   United States to work at the Diocese of Stockton should
19   be in his personnel file?
20       A. I would presume so.
21       Q. And Camacho's documents with regard to him
22   being given faculties to work under the auspices of a
23   green card in the United States should have been in his
24   file?
25       A. I presume so but with the caveat that there

  1   may have been a general file for INS filings, and I
  2   simply do not know which file they used.

  3       Q. Okay. And what about W 2s or 1099s for
  4   withholding of payroll information for employees, were
  5   those kept in their payroll files of priests?
  6            MR. WOODS: Payroll files?
  7            MS. SOLTAN: I'm sorry.
  8       Q. Personnel files of priests?
  9       A. At that time and in many dioceses today,
10   priests do not receive their payment from the diocese
11   itself but from the school or the parish, and
12   therefore, payment, sources of payment, W 2 forms, come
13   from the source of where the funds come from.
14       Q. Are you saying that there were separate
15   payroll returns filed by the parishes as opposed to the
16   diocese?
17       A. I'm saying that if a priest were an associate
18   or a pastor in a parish and is paid through the payroll
19   of the parish, usually then the parish issues the W 2
20   form.
21       Q. You said when you were at Fresno that you were
22   aware that there were what I will call subsecret files
23   in Fresno; yes?
24            MR. WOODS: Now it's called subsecret?
25            MR. HENNIGAN: I never hear of subsecret

  1   before.
  2            MS. SOLTAN: I'm sorry. I thought it was
  3   referred to as subsecreto.
  4            MR. WOODS: The witness refers to them as
  5   confidential or restricted access files.
  6   BY MS. SOLTAN:
  7       Q. Okay. What phrase are you most comfortable
  8   with for me to call it?
  9       A. I think restricted access is the best way.
10       Q. Okay. With regard to restricted access files,
11   access was restricted to whom?
12       A. In the Diocese of Fresno you are asking?
13       Q. That is correct.
14            MR. WOODS: You are talking about the
15   personnel restricted access files?
16            MS. SOLTAN: As opposed to something else?
17       Q. Your counsel is making a distinction that I
18   hadn't heard?
19            MR. WOODS: Legal files? What kind of files?
21       Q. When you are talking about restricted access
22   files, are you only talking about files that pertain to
23   confidential information about personnel or are you
24   talking about a much wider scope of documentation?
25       A.    I'm sorry. I'm quite lost in this train of

  1   thought.
  2       Q. Cardinal, when you said restricted access
  3   files
  4       A. Yes.
  5       Q. please describe for me what's in restricted
  6   access files.
  7       A. Well, restricted access file in terms of
  8   priests.
  9       Q. I mean in terms of everything. I want to know
10   what restricted access files are.
11            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object. You've been
12   talking all day about confidential files of priests.
13   Okay? When you go to a new general question, I have to
14   object unless you are referring back to the previous
15   testimony. We been assuming all along you are
16   referring back to the previous testimony because that's
17   only part that's relevant.
18            MS. SOLTAN: You know what they say about
19   assuming.
20       Q. What did you mean when you said restricted
21   access files?
22       A. As I said this morning, we were talking about
23   priest personnel files.
24       Q. Are there restricted access files other than
25   priest personnel files?

  1       A. I'm really not sure.
  2       Q. When you were at Fresno you said that you
  3   deposited documents into the restricted access files.
  4   What type of documents did you deposit into the
  5   restricted access files?
  6       A. I testified that I very infrequently would
  7   have occasion to put something in a file. Usually had
  8   to do with a change of possibly immigration status or
  9   some other legal matter involving a priest.
10       Q. So immigration information might be in the
11   personnel files, it might be in a separate immigration
12   file, and it might be in the restricted access file?
13       A. Actually, even more places. The
14   standardization of filing has kind of evolved so that,
15   for example, one could find, say, an immigration paper
16   filed in the priest's file itself.
17       Q. Yes.
18       A. Or in the parish where he was assigned at the
19   time or in a general immigration service file. A
20   number of places. It just depended on who was filing
21   at the time where they thought it was most appropriate
22   to put it.
23       Q. Okay. So is it fair to say that there could
24   be a wide variety of documents that are kept in any
25   particular diocese restricted access files; is that

  1   fair to say?
  2       A. There could be, yes, there could be a variety
  3   of things in there.
  4       Q. Okay. When you went to Stockton, did you take
  5   efforts to find out what type of documents were kept in
  6   the confidential files of Stockton?
  7       A. Not immediately, no.
  8       Q. Why not?
  9       A. Because my first priority was to get out to
10   the parishes, visit the people, get to know the priests
11   and the whole Diocese of Stockton. That was my first
12   priority.
13       Q. Did you were you briefed with regard to
14   potential liabilities against the Diocese of Stockton
15   by anyone when you became Bishop?
16            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object to the extent
17   it calls for attorney client communications. Please
18   exclude those.
20       Q. You can answer, sir.
21       A. Again, could you repeat it?
22       Q. Were you briefed with regard to potential
23   liabilities of the Diocese of Stockton after you
24   arrived or when you arrived and became Bishop of
25   Stockton?

  1       A. I do not recall any legal briefing.
  2       Q. I didn't ask legal briefing. Were you briefed
  3   by anyone with regard to potential liability? Sir,
  4   that could include outstanding contracts, disputed
  5   monies owed, potential lawsuits because of sexual abuse
  6   claims against the diocese. There could be a whole
  7   plethora of things that could be a potential

  8   liabilities against the diocese. I'm asking you as the
  9   chief officer of the diocese, did you take any efforts
10   to find out what the potential liabilities of the
11   diocese are when you arrived?
12            MR. WOODS: Object the form of question.
13   Overly broad.
14            THE WITNESS: I can't recall anyone
15   specifically saying these are legal liabilities of the
16   diocese. My focus was on getting out into the
17   parishes.
19       Q. If no one told you, did you take any
20   independent effort to ascertain what those potential
21   liabilities would be including potential sexual abuse
22   claims against the diocese?
23       A. I honestly didn't recall at this point any
24   legal actions against the Diocese of Stockton when I
25   got there.

  1       Q. Did you take any action to ascertain whether
  2   there had been any claims against what I'll call
  3   sitting priests at the Diocese of Stockton with regard
  4   to sex abuse when you got there?
  5       A. Did I take any action?
  6       Q. Did you do anything to find out if you had any
  7   pedophiles working as priests in your diocese?
  8            MR. WOODS: Pedophile search?
  9            MS. SOLTAN: Pedophile is almost too narrow a
10   word.
11       Q. Any person who had in the past been accused of
12   acting inappropriately sexually with minors?
13       A. Did I initiate such a thing?
14       Q. That's correct.
15       A. No, I did not.
16       Q. Did you delegate that to anyone else?
17       A. No, I did not.
18       Q. So no action was taken upon your arrival at
19   Stockton to determine if you had any potential sex
20   offenders working for the diocese?
21       A. Well, I would presumed if that was the case
22   someone would have told me.
23       Q. And who would have told you?
24       A. One of the officials of the diocese.
25       Q. Like who?

  1       A. The Vicar General, Chancellor.
  2       Q. Did you ask them?
  3       A. I don't recall asking specifically.
  4            MS. SOLTAN: I'm going to turnover the reins
  5   to someone else at this time. Thank you, Cardinal.
  6            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Want to go off the record?
  7            MS. SOLTAN: Just for a brief moment.
  8            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off the record. The
  9   time is 3:16.
10            (A brief recess was taken.)
11            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record.
12   The time is 3:17.
14                        EXAMINATION
16       Q. Good afternoon. My name is Rick Simons, and
17   I'm the plaintiffs' liason counsel in the Clergy III
18   proceedings in Northern California. How do you do?
19       A. Fine. Thank you.
20       Q. I would like to ask you some questions about
21   things before the Collegeville conference of 1985.
22   Before that time, in your experience would it have been
23   inappropriate for a priest to have a child sit on his
24   lap?
25       A. During what period of time?

  1       Q. Before the Collegeville conference of 1985?
  2       A. It really depends on the circumstance.
  3       Q. It would not be inappropriate in and of itself
  4   to have a priest have a child sit on his lap before
  5   1985?
  6       A. Could have been a relative. Could have been a
  7   close friend. At that time, I would not consider that
  8   inappropriate in itself. It always depends on the
  9   circumstances obviously.
10       Q. Would it have been inappropriate before 1985
11   for a priest to bring a minor child to his private
12   bedroom in the rectory?
13       A. Would it have been appropriate did you say?
14       Q. Inappropriate?
15       A. Inappropriate. I honestly don't know.
16   Depends on the circumstances of the case, but in those
17   years, children, young people, adults coming in and out
18   of rectories was not uncommon.
19       Q. Was it uncommon during those years before 1985
20   to have children coming in and out of the private
21   bedrooms of the priests within the rectory?
22       A. I would say that was not common.
23       Q. Was there in your experience a prohibition
24   against priests bringing minors to their bedrooms
25   within the rectory before 1985?

  1       A. I would think that would have been just an
  2   unwritten common understanding that private living
  3   spaces were just for the priests.
  4       Q. Before 1985, would it have been suspicious for
  5   possible sexual misconduct for a priest to bring a
  6   child to his private bedroom in the rectory?
  7       A. Again depending on the circumstances, but in
  8   those days I can recall priests bringing alter service
  9   up to give them something to take to the sacristy a
10   missal or various things. So it wouldn't have been a
11   common suspicion. It certainly would not have been
12   common practice.
13       Q. Would it have been appropriate before 1985 for
14   a priest to have a child spend the night with him in a
15   bedroom?
16       A. I think that would have been highly
17   inappropriate.
18       Q. Would that conduct, having the child spend the
19   night with a priest in a priest's bedroom, have been
20   suspicious before 1985 for possible sexual misconduct?
21       A. I think it would have been suspicious on all
22   grounds.
23       Q. Would it have been inappropriate before 1985
24   for a priest to provide alcohol to a minor?
25       A. Yes, definitely.

  1       Q. Would it have been inappropriate before 1985
  2   for a priest to kiss a child on the mouth?
  3       A. I think in most circumstances that really
  4   would have been inappropriate.
  5       Q. Would that have been suspicious for possible
  6   grooming or other preclude to sexual misconduct between
  7   the priest and the child?
  8            MR. WOODS: Based on his understanding before
  9   1985?
10            MR. SIMONS: Yes, before 1985.
11            MR. WOODS: Going all the way back to '62?
12            MR. SIMONS: And whatever his understanding
13   was for before that.
14            THE WITNESS: Well, since I don't personally
15   recall ever seeing that happen, you know, firsthand, I
16   didn't really think about it.
18       Q. Based on your experience with regard to other
19   diocese outside of Fresno and Stockton, would those
20   activities that you have just told me would be
21   inappropriate also be inappropriate everywhere in
22   California in every diocese?
23       A. Well, of course, I can speak best to Fresno
24   and Stockton, that's where I was, but it would be my
25   assumption that in general those kinds of practices

  1   would not have been condoned.
  2       Q. You said there were some circumstances where a
  3   priest might with good reason bring a child to his
  4   bedroom. Was there any time in which a priest would
  5   have been acting appropriately before 1985 in bringing
  6   a child to his private bedroom in the rectory and
  7   closing the door with no one else present?
  8       A. I think it would be helpful if you can repeat
  9   it again for me.
10       Q. Yes. Before 1985, would it have been
11   inappropriate under any circumstances for a priest to
12   take a child unchaperoned to his private bedroom in the
13   rectory and to close the door?
14       A. Again having never seen that firsthand myself,
15   it just never occurred to me that that could or could
16   not be done and again depends on the circumstances.
17   Was the priest there to give him something and the door
18   closed on its own. It depends. It would not have been
19   normal practice.
20       Q. Would that practice of having a priest take a
21   child to his bedroom and closing the door have been
22   suspicious for possible sexual misconduct before 1985?
23       A. There certainly could be grounds for that
24   suspicion, yes.
25       Q. If an employee of the diocese learned of one

  1   of the different types of inappropriate conduct we have
  2   just discussed before 1985, that was suspicious for
  3   possible sexual misconduct, would that employee no
  4   matter what position they might have from housekeeper
  5   up to pastor have an obligation in your view to report
  6   the misconduct or the inappropriate conduct?
  7            MR. WOODS: Calls for an expert opinion.
  8   Calls for speculation.
  9            THE WITNESS: Absent a specific concrete case.
10   It's very difficult to respond to your question.
12       Q. All right. If a housekeeper in a rectory
13   observed conduct on the part of a priest which the
14   housekeeper recognized as suspicious for possible
15   sexual misconduct, would the housekeeper be expected
16   during the time that you were a Bishop or Auxiliary
17   Bishop to report that to someone in a position of
18   authority?
19            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object. That is a
20   hypothetical not based on the facts of any case that I
21   know of and calls for an expert opinion, and I'll
22   instruct him not to answer.
23            MR. SIMONS: Well, it is relevant to some of
24   the cases in Clergy III. There are specific cases with
25   that factual pattern. I'm not surprised that you would

  1   not necessarily be acquainted with those.
  2            MR. WOODS: Do you want to tell us what case
  3   are you talking about?
  4            MR. SIMONS: Robero.
  5            MR. WOODS: And give us the exact facts.
  6            MR. SIMONS: Yeah.
  7       Q. The Father Robero cases where the housekeeper
  8   observes a priest taking a child during the day to his
  9   private bedroom in the rectory and closing the door in
10   your understanding pre 1985
11            MR. HENNIGAN: Which diocese?
12            MR. SIMONS: This is Oakland. San Francisco
13   or Oakland.
14            MR. HENNIGAN: So this question has nothing to
15   do with Stockton and Fresno.
16            MR. SIMONS: It has nothing to do with
17   Stockton or Fresno directly. I has to do with policies
18   and practices of the church in general.
19            MR. WOODS: We're not getting into the
20   policies and practices of the church generally. Just
21   this Bishop's policies and practices and customs and
22   ways of conducting himself. No hypotheticals and no
23   speculative questions.
24            MR. SIMONS: Well, while I move on to another
25   subject matter, I would request that you review the

  1   court's order on Page 3, lines 19 to 22 as to the
  2   propriety of that particular set of questions. And I
  3   will move on in the mean time.
  4            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: It's getting dark. Is it
  5   all right if I put a light on?
  6            MR. SIMONS: All right with me.
  7            MR. WOODS: I'm going the read what you just
  8   mentioned.
  9            "The deposition in question should
10       concern factual matters within Cardinal
11       Mahony's knowledge and should not concern
12       his current opinions or his evaluation of
13       hypothetical situations."
14            MR. SIMONS: Actually, that's not what I
15   referred to. I referred to the next sentence which is
16   the "however."
17            MR. WOODS: That's one I like.
18            MR. SIMONS: I'm sure it is.
19            MR. WOODS: What's the one you like?
20            MR. SIMONS: I like the one that says "however
21   he may be asked questions."
22            MR. WOODS: "Concerning the policy and
23   practices of church."
24            MR. SIMONS: "And what his thoughts and
25   opinions were on relevant topics at the time periods."

  1            MR. WOODS: At the time period. Okay.
  2            MR. SIMONS: That's what I'm asking about.
  3            MR. WOODS: In his diocese in his custom and
  4   practice.
  5            MR. SIMONS: I'm asking about policies and
  6   practices of the church. If he doesn't have any
  7   knowledge
  8            MR. WOODS: The church is a misnomer. You are
  9   talking about a diocese.
10            MR. SIMONS: I'll let the misnomer part be a
11   subject of discussion between you and the judge.
12       Q. Would a priest in your experience have an
13   obligation to report to his Ordinary or a delegated
14   authority of the Ordinary suspicions of possible sexual
15   misconduct by another priest?
16       A. Yes. In my experience in Fresno and Stockton,
17   yes.
18       Q. Do you have any reason to believe that your
19   experience in Fresno and Stockton would be different
20   than the experience of other ordinaries in California
21   during that same time period before 1985?
22       A. Well, having served in three dioceses now, I
23   know very vividly the practices and that varied widely
24   depending on the local circumstances, the size of the
25   diocese, the number of people, the number of priests.

  1   So it's very difficult to speculate about places I have
  2   never served.
  3       Q. Departing from general subjects of interest to
  4   the specific question of reporting conduct that is
  5   suspicious for possible sexual molestation of children,
  6   do you have any reason to believe that the policies and
  7   practices would have been any different in any diocese
  8   in California than in Fresno and Stockton?
  9            MR. WOODS: I object. It's irrelevant to the
10   scope. It's beyond the scope of this deposition. And
11   his knowledge is not personal knowledge.
12            THE WITNESS: Well, I think that Father
13   Antonio Munoz's case a good example of what you are
14   talking about where these families went to see Father
15   Fernando Villalobos and told him about this problem and
16   he came immediately to me. I think that's a good
17   example of having Father Villalobos aware of credible
18   evidence of sexual abuse and immediately brought to it
19   the Bishop. I think that is very appropriate.
21       Q. Would it have been inappropriate for
22   Father Villalobos to withhold from his Bishop that
23   information?
24       A. It would have been inappropriate for
25   Father Villalobos to withhold from me as the Bishop at

  1   the time that information.
  2       Q. Do you have any reason to believe that that
  3   standard you have just described would be different
  4   before 1985 in any diocese within California?
  5            MR. WOODS: Object. Beyond the scope of the
  6   deposition.
  7            THE WITNESS: It's very difficult for me to
  8   testify about what other Bishops did or did not do or
  9   would have done in another diocese. I simply don't
10   know.
12       Q. In 1984, you now know that there was a police
13   investigation of Oliver O'Grady; correct?
14       A. Yes.
15       Q. You were not informed of that investigation
16   while it was in progress; is that true?
17       A. No.
18       Q. When were you first informed of a police
19   investigation into Oliver O'Grady?
20       A. Sometime towards the end of October I was
21   informed by Monsignor Cain that the Stockton Police
22   Department was investigating a report of suspected
23   child abuse that had been filed with the Child
24   Protection Services.
25       Q. Did you then personally review the

  1   confidential file for Oliver O'Grady at that time?
  2       A. At that time, I did not.
  3       Q. Did you request someone else do so?
  4       A. No, I did not.
  5       Q. Why not?
  6       A. Well, during this time I was very close to
  7   leaving the diocese for a number of commitments that
  8   would bring me back at the end of November, and I was
  9   absent during virtually this entire time. So I felt
10   the matter was being handled by the Stockton Police
11   Department, a full investigation was under way, and
12   whatever that brought forth, we would act on.
13       Q. You would have known as you prepared for your
14   other duties and demands at that time that the Stockton
15   police would not have had access to the confidential
16   files kept by the Diocese of Stockton; correct?
17            MR. WOODS: Calls for speculation. I object.
18   That's absolutely speculative. What prevents the
19   police from asking for it and looking for it,
20   subpoenaing it or anything else?
22       Q. Did you know whether or not at that time that
23   the Stockton Police Department were privy to any
24   information contained in the confidential file about
25   Oliver O'Grady?

  1       A. As I stated, I was not in Stockton during all
  2   of this time, and so I do not know what kind of
  3   conversations they had with our attorneys or other
  4   officials of the diocese.
  5       Q. Are you aware of anyone who advised the
  6   Stockton Police Department during the course of
  7   the 1984 investigation into Oliver O'Grady
  8   that the diocese had confidential files concerning
  9   him?
10       A. Was I informed?
11       Q. Yes. Are you aware of anyone who informed
12   the Stockton Police Department in 1984 that the Diocese
13   of Stockton had confidential files concerning
14   Oliver O'Grady?
15       A. No.
16       Q. Did you instruct when you learned of this
17   investigation anyone under your supervision to inform
18   the Stockton Police Department that there was a
19   confidential file concerning Oliver O'Grady?
20            MR. WOODS: Assumes that he knew there was a
21   confidential file on Oliver O'Grady so I object to the
22   form of the question.
23            THE WITNESS: I was totally unaware of any
24   secret file dealing with Father O'Grady at the time so
25   it never occurred to me.

  1   BY MR. SIMONS:
  2       Q. During the time that you were Bishop of
  3   Stockton, is it correct that there were approximately
  4   50 to 60 priests?
  5       A. I think approximately 36 to 38 diocesan
  6   priests and 20 to 22 religious priests.
  7       Q. During this time, how many of those priests
  8   had a confidential or secret file?
  9       A. I really don't know.
10       Q. Was there more than one secret file at the
11   time of 1984 when this investigation into Oliver
12   O'Grady was occurring?
13       A. You mean was there one secret file cabinet or
14   individual file?
15       Q. No. Was there more than one individual file?
16       A. My recollection was that within sometime
17   within that first year I saw the file cabinet that had
18   these files, and it was very thin. There were just a
19   few files in there, and I never even bothered to look
20   at it. Look at them.
21       Q. Were the files that were very few in that
22   cabinet organized alphabetically?
23       A. I don't recall.
24       Q. Did you ever have occasion to put any material
25   concerning Father Camacho into his confidential file?

  1       A. No.
  2       Q. Did you have any occasion to put any
  3   information concerning Father Munoz into his
  4   confidential file?
  5       A. No, I did not personally.
  6       Q. Had you ever placed any information concerning
  7   any priest into any confidential file prior to 1984
  8   when the police investigation was under way?
  9       A. No, I can't recall myself personally placing
10   anything in those files.
11       Q. What was it that had caused you to open the
12   file drawer and see that there were only a few files in
13   there?
14       A. I actually was being given a tour of some of
15   the areas of the matrimonial tribunal to see where the
16   marriage cases were and all of that, and one of priests
17   said and here are the secret files or that and opened
18   the cabinet. I think he had a key. There was just
19   practically nothing there and closed the door. That
20   was the end of it.
21       Q. You had a key to the secret files?
22       A. No, actually I did not.
23       Q. You had access to the secret files any time
24   you wished by requesting someone else to open it?
25       A. Yes, that's correct.

  1       Q. In the approximately five years that you were
  2   Bishop of Stockton, did you ever once look through to
  3   see whether there was a secret file kept on any
  4   individual priest?
  5       A. No, during my time as Bishop I don't recall
  6   ever going directly to the confidential files.
  7       Q. When Father Munoz was reported to you, you
  8   did not look to see if there was a confidential file
  9   with any history concerning that priest; is that
10   correct?
11       A. That's correct.
12       Q. When Father Camacho was reported, you did not
13   look to see if there was a confidential file concerning
14   him either; is that correct?
15       A. That's correct.
16       Q. Had you ever instructed Monsignor Cain to not
17   allow you to be in the loop, if you will, of knowledge
18   concerning those priests in your Diocese of Stockton
19   who had been accused in the past of sexual abuse of
20   children?
21       A. Did I instruct Monsignor Cain?
22       Q. Not to tell you?
23       A. To keep me out of the loop?
24       Q. Yes.
25            MR. WOODS: Out of the loop.

  1   BY MR. SIMONS:
  2       Q. Out of the loop?
  3       A. No, I did not.
  4       Q. You mentioned that when you testified in the
  5   Howard case in Stockton that at that time you did not
  6   recall either Father Munoz or Father Camacho; however,
  7   since then your recollection has been refreshed. As we
  8   have sat here today, have you remembered any other
  9   priests within the Diocese of Stockton during the time
10   that you were Bishop who were reported to you as having
11   allegedly committed sexual abuse of a child?
12       A. You mean today? Have I? No, I have no new
13   information today.
14       Q. Are you familiar with the name *****?
15       A. *****?
16       Q. *****.
17       A. ***** is the first name?
18       Q. ***** first name, ***** last name.
19       A. ***** the last name. No.
20       Q. Are you familiar with ********?
21       A. Not that I know of.
22       Q. Was there a Father John Henry who served under
23   you when you were the Bishop of Stockton?
24       A. The last name again, please.
25       Q. John Henry.

  1       A. John Henry. Not that I'm aware of.
  2       Q. Do you recall an occasion when you were the
  3   Bishop of Stockton when a Filipino mother and teenage
  4   son met with you to complain about a priest committing
  5   sexual abuse on that teenage boy?
  6       A. Could you give me a date or names or places?
  7       Q. The name would be ********* and his mother
  8   *****. The priest would be father John Henry or
  9   Father Oliver O'Grady, and the place would be either
10   St. George's or Presentation parish church?
11            MR. WOODS: And the time period?
12            MR. SIMONS: 1981.
13            THE WITNESS: That somebody approached me and
14   told me father John Henry was abusing a child?
16       Q. Had abused a teenage minor, *********.
17            MR. WOODS: You also said or Father O'Grady.
18            MR. SIMONS: Yes.
19            MR. WOODS: You want either one?
20            MR. SIMONS: Either one.
21            THE WITNESS: I have absolutely no
22   recollection of that.
24       Q. Were you familiar with Father Fernando
25   Villalobos?

  1       A. Familiar meaning?
  2       Q. Did you know him?
  3       A. Yes, I did.
  4       Q. Was he a priest under your supervision in the
  5   Diocese of Stockton?
  6       A. Yes, he was a Franciscan priest and so he was
  7   under the Franciscan provincial, but also served as my
  8   Vicar for Spanish speaking. So in that regard he was
  9   under me.
10       Q. During the time that you were Bishop of
11   Stockton, did you ever receive a report that Father
12   Fernando Villalobos had committed sexual abuse on a
13   minor?
14       A. No.
15            MR. SIMONS: Let me show you the two pages
16   comprising one letter of August 23rd, 1976, which was
17   marked as Exhibits 5 and 6 to your deposition in 1997
18   and has previously courteously been provided by your
19   counsel.
20            MR. WOODS: Do you have another copy?
21            MS. SOLTAN: I have a copy. I get you one.
22            MR. WOODS: Can we mark this as Exhibit 12, a
23   letter dated August 23, 1976, from Father O'Grady to
24   blank.
25            You can start reading it.

  1            MR. HENNIGAN: Do you have another copy?

  2            MS. SOLTAN: I have it. I just need to need
  3   to organize. Here they are. I found it. Do you want
  4   one in front of you?
  5            MR. SIMONS: Do you recall having seen?
  6            MR. WOODS: Let me finish reading it, if you
  7   don't mind.
  8            MR. SIMONS: My apologies.
  9            MR. WOODS: Okay.
11       Q. Do you see the handwritten notes that are
12   faintly copied at the top of the first page of this
13   letter?
14       A. There are a few words that I can make out
15   about half of it I can't or more that I can't.
16       Q. There appears to be some initials just to the
17   right of the August 23rd, 1976 date. Do you know whose
18   initials those are?
19       A. No. In fact, I can't tell what letters those
20   are. First looks like an M, but I can't tell.
21       Q. Other than at your deposition in 1997 and at
22   the trial in the Howard case, have you seen this letter
23   in any context, any place other than a litigation
24   matter?
25       A. No.

  1       Q. During the time that you were Bishop of
  2   Stockton, did you ever see this letter?
  3       A. No.
  4       Q. During the time that you were Bishop of
  5   Stockton, did Monsignor Cain ever advise you that
  6   Oliver O'Grady had written this letter?
  7       A. No.
  8       Q. You told me earlier that a priest aware of
  9   sexual misconduct on the part of another priest in your
10   view should report that to a superior. Does that
11   include Monsignor Cain reporting this letter to you?
12            MR. WOODS: I object to the preamble. I
13   object that it does not summarize the prior testimony
14   accurately, and he's not asking you to verify any part
15   of the preamble. He's just asking you in your view at
16   this time should Cain during the time that you were
17   in Stockton, should Cain have reported this letter to
18   you.
19            THE WITNESS: Is that correct?
21       Q. Yes.
22       A. I would say, yes, he should have.
23       Q. Should Monsignor Cain have notified the
24   Stockton police in 1984 of the existence of this letter
25   when they were investigating Oliver O'Grady?

  1       A. I'm not sure what Monsignor Cain told the
  2   police or the diocese attorney during that time.
  3       Q. I understand that. My question is should
  4   Monsignor Cain in the performance of the duties to
  5   which you assigned him have notified the Stockton
  6   police of the existence of this letter in November of
  7   1984?
  8       A. It was my understanding when this letter was
  9   written on August 23rd, 1976, that Monsignor Cain was
10   on vacation, and that upon his return, Bishop Guilfoyle
11   had told him that this matter had come up while he was
12   away, and that my recollection of Monsignor Cain's
13   deposition and testimony was that Bishop Guilfoyle said
14   something like inappropriate touching. And so
15   Monsignor Cain testifies that he does not at all recall
16   this as sexual abuse but simply as something of
17   inappropriate touching and that Monsignor Cain was not
18   involved in the discussions with this matter.
19       Q. Before 1985, would you have considered
20   inappropriate touching of a child by a priest to be
21   sexual abuse?
22            MR. WOODS: What do you mean by inappropriate
23   touching?
24            MR. SIMONS: That was his phrase. That's why
25   I'm using it.

  1            MR. WOODS: It could be anything.
  2            THE WITNESS: Well, I would have tried to find
  3   out what exactly happened.
  4   BY MR. SIMONS:
  5       Q. Do you have any understanding independent of
  6   what you have read in depositions of why this letter
  7   was not given to the Stockton police in 1984?
  8       A. I have no idea.
  9       Q. Would the events that are recorded in this
10   letter disqualify Father O'Grady from being appointed
11   as parish excuse me as pastor of his own parish?
12       A. Certainly had we been aware of prior
13   difficulty, it certainly would have had to have been

14   evaluated before his assignment to administrator or
15   pastor.
16            MR. SIMONS: Let me show you what was marked
17   as Exhibit number 35 in your deposition from 1997,
18   which is a letter of December 29, 1984.
19            MR. WOODS: We'll mark this, I guess, as
20   Exhibit 13.
21            MR. SIMONS: Please.
22            MR. WOODS: This is a letter report of Dr.
23   Morris dated December 29, 1984, to Bishop Mahony. Do
24   you have a copy for us to read?
25            (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 12 and 13 were

  1            marked for identification.)
  2            MR. WOODS: Okay.
  3   BY MR. SIMONS:
  4       Q. Do you recall receiving this letter?
  5       A. Yes, I do.
  6       Q. When you received it did you review it?
  7       A. Yes, I did.
  8       Q. And when you read the second paragraph, did
  9   it give rise to a suspicion in your mind that
10   Father O'Grady had defects related to the matter of sex
11   as far as his own psychological makeup was concerned?
12            MR. WOODS: Defects?
13            MR. HENNIGAN: I think you misread it. It
14   says defect in maturation.
15            MR. WOODS: I have a problem with the word
16   defect. You are using it in some psychological
17   connotation as a term of art or just defect meaning any
18   old problem or an issue?
20       Q. In December of 1984, it was reported to you by
21   a doctor that Father O'Grady revealed a severe defect
22   in maturation not only in the matter of sex but more
23   importantly in the matter of social relationships, and
24   he also showed a serious psychological depression.
25   That was reported to you; correct?

  1       A. Yes.
  2       Q. What did you do upon receiving this report to
  3   investigate the background and history of
  4   Oliver O'Grady during the time of his service as a
  5   priest in Stockton?
  6       A. I think it would be helpful to place in
  7   context how this evaluation by Dr. Morris arose in the
  8   first place.
  9       Q. It might be. I would ask you first if I might
10   be so bold as to answer my question, which is what did
11   you do upon receiving this letter to investigate any
12   background Oliver O'Grady had concerning his
13   performance while a priest in the Diocese of Stockton?
14       A. This letter is one conversation with
15   Dr. Morris. I had other conversations with Dr. Morris
16   about the suitability of Father O'Grady going to a
17   parish in San Andreas. And so Dr. Morris, an outside
18   psychiatric consultant whom I had asked to review
19   Father O'Grady independently, reached this conclusion
20   that in his opinion Father O'Grady could continue at
21   St. Andrew's in San Andreas, and he that pointed out
22   what was customary in that time that there were two
23   avenues to pursue: One, counseling, and the other,
24   spiritual direction and spiritual assistance. Those
25   are his two recommendations. At no point in the

  1   conversation or the letter does he say Father O'Grady
  2   is a danger to anyone nor does he say he should not
  3   remain there, he should be taken out of there.
  4       Q. Dr. Morris was not aware of the 1976 letter or
  5   of the molestation of Nancy Sloan to your knowledge,
  6   was he?
  7       A. No, to the best of my knowledge, no.
  8       Q. And you did not take any steps to look at
  9   Oliver O'Grady's secret file to determine whether there
10   was anything in there historically that might add to
11   the information upon which the evaluation of this
12   priest was based?
13       A. No, I did not.
14       Q. When a priest serves as pastor, who within the
15   parish, if anyone, is in a position to evaluate that
16   priest's conduct in terms of his personal relationships
17   with parishioners?
18       A. Well, keep in mind that he was appointed as
19   administrator of the parish not as a pastor, and this
20   what a temporary assignment until the pastor was named.
21       Q. But Oliver O'Grady was named pastor?
22       A. Eventually, yes.
23       Q. And it was your intention when you appointed
24   him administrator to appoint him as pastor?
25       A. No, he knew very well that the parish would be

  1   advertised, and he was free to apply for it and he did
  2   apply for it.
  3       Q. You had a very good personal relationship with
  4   O'Grady; right?
  5       A. I hardly knew the man actually.
  6       Q. You visited his mother in Ireland?
  7       A. Well, in my first year or so I went to Ireland
  8   and visited all of the families of the priests from
  9   Ireland serving in the United States. I began at
10   Dublin, went all the way across the south, up the north
11   across and ended up back in Dublin. I visited every
12   single family of every Irish priest.
13       Q. You received letters from him thanking you for
14   your personal favors that he felt you had performed for
15   him?
16            MR. WOODS: You mean like visiting his mother?
17            MR. SIMONS: No. Other personal favors
18   regarding his employment within the diocese.
19       Q. You received several letters from him, did you
20   not?
21       A. There were several letters received, yes.
22       Q. More than you would find in the customary
23   priest's file?
24            MR. WOODS: Object. Calls for speculation.
25            THE WITNESS: I don't know. We were a small

  1   diocese, and so I would receive more correspondence
  2   from priests there than I would here.
  3   BY MR. SIMONS:
  4       Q. Who was there to supervise Oliver O'Grady when
  5   he was appointed pastor at St. Andrews?
  6       A. There was no one actually there who was given
  7   the role of supervision. There were two retired
  8   priests living in the rectory with him, and I thought
  9   that would be helpful for his maturation in dealing
10   with authority problems as Dr. Morris suggests.
11       Q. Did you communicate with those retired priests
12   regarding Oliver O'Grady's performance as pastor at
13   St. Andrew's?
14       A. I did not.
15       Q. Did you personally visit St. Andrews during
16   the time that Oliver O'Grady was pastor?
17       A. I believe so because I believe there would
18   have been probably confirmation given up in that parish
19   during the time I was there.
20       Q. When you visited the parish, did you privately
21   seek out other persons including the retired priests to
22   ask about Father O'Grady's job performance?
23       A. No, my prior knowledge was that once the
24   parish was advertised, there was an open hearing up in
25   San Andreas which anyone in the parish was invited to

  1   give their comments about who the next pastor should be
  2   in terms of qualifications, but apparently they were
  3   also a very strongly in favor of Father O'Grady
  4   remaining as their pastor.
  5       Q. There had been a complaint from a Mr. Howard
  6   concerning Father O'Grady in 1980; correct?
  7       A. Yes.
  8       Q. And you were personally advised of that
  9   complaint?
10       A. Yes.
11       Q. And I believe you testified in one of your
12   previous depositions that you felt that his conduct
13   would be understandable as he was a young priest? Do
14   you remember that testimony?
15       A. Well, his conduct as involved with this
16   married woman. It was Mr. Howard's wife that was the
17   concern and the problem.
18       Q. Were you concerned about Father O'Grady's
19   conduct with regard to the Howard family in 1980?
20       A. I called him in and told him that he was to
21   cease and desist anymore conduct contact with
22   Mrs. Howard and the Howard family. He promised to do
23   so, and I never had another report about him.
24       Q. What other reports do you recall receiving
25   concerning Father O'Grady other than the Howard report

  1   and the Stockton police investigation?
  2       A. I can't recall any other reports as such.
  3       Q. Did you consider those two reports within the
  4   space of four years to be above the regular amount of
  5   reports of such problems that you would expect in a
  6   priest?
  7       A. It's very difficult to generalize about all
  8   priests. A young priest who felt he was trained to
  9   help someone in a marriage difficulty got too involved
10   possibly. It was always presented as a difficulty with
11   him and Mrs. Howard, and he promised not to see her
12   anymore, and I never heard anymore that he did. So I
13   presumed he was doing what he was told.
14       Q. Did part of that report concern
15   Father O'Grady's conduct with the Howard children?
16       A. If we could see what report are you
17   referring to precisely?
18       Q. You have in front of you several documents
19   that you have used to help refresh your recollection
20   concerning these matters. Do you not?
21       A. Yes.
22       Q. You reviewed those in preparation for today's
23   deposition?
24       A. Yes.
25       Q. And you created some notes as well that you

  1   have found helpful?
  2       A. Yes.
  3       Q. If I might take a moment, could I review the
  4   documents that you have refreshed your recollection
  5   with and your notes, please?
  6            MR. WOODS: Can we take a break?
  7            MR. SIMONS: I'm we sure can.
  8            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off the record. The
  9   time is 4:03.
10            (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 14 was marked for
11            identification.)
12            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record.
13   The time is 4:12.
15       Q. While we were off the record and with your
16   counsel's assistance, we have marked your notes that
17   you prepared and the materials you reviewed and brought
18   with you today in the manila file folder as a group
19   exhibit.
20            Mr. Woods, what number did you assign that
21   exhibit?
22            MR. WOODS: 14.
24       Q. 14, thank you.
25            Other than the materials contained in that

  1   file folder did you review any other documents or
  2   materials to refresh your recollection or otherwise
  3   prepare for today's deposition?
  4       A. I probably reviewed also some of the other
  5   documents from the previous deposition last August.
  6       Q. Do you remember specifically what documents?
  7       A. I actually don't.
  8       Q. You as the Bishop of Stockton had the
  9   authority to appoint a pastor to a parish; correct?
10       A. Yes, that is correct.
11       Q. You would obtain advice from the personnel
12   board and other diocesan officials but the ultimate
13   authority to appoint a pastor rested with the Bishop at
14   that time; correct?
15       A. Yes, that is correct.
16       Q. Did you have the authority to remove a pastor?
17       A. The removal of a pastor is a canonical
18   process. If the pastor does not wish to move from that
19   parish then there is a very elaborate process in canon
20   law for the removal of a pastor.
21       Q. Did you have the authority to remove a pastor
22   from his faculties, if you will, as you called it, with
23   regard to Fathers Munoz and Camacho?
24       A. Well, keep in mind that neither one of them
25   was a pastor or administrator.

  1       Q. I understand.
  2       A. They were simply associate pastors so it was
  3   very easy to remove their faculties and their
  4   assignments.
  5       Q. Did you have the power to do the same with a
  6   pastor, that's my question, as with Fathers Munoz and
  7   Camacho?
  8       A. No. No, the removal of faculties or the
  9   assignment of a pastor, canonical appointed pastor,
10   requires his consent or a canonical process.
11       Q. Did you have the authority at that time as
12   Bishop to order a parish closed?
13       A. I'm not sure what you mean by
14       Q. Could you close the parish? In other words,
15   instruct the pastor to cease offering services of the
16   church through that particular parish and merge it or
17   consolidate it with another existing parish or
18   otherwise change the structure without actually
19   removing the pastor through the canonical process?
20            MR. WOODS: Object. Calls for an expert
21   opinion on canon law. Beyond the scope of the
22   deposition.
23            THE WITNESS: Well, all practical purposes,
24   the Diocese of Fresno and Diocese of Stockton, we
25   didn't close any parishes so I don't have any

  1   experience with that.
  2   BY MR. SIMONS:
  3       Q. Did you open new parishes?
  4       A. A new parish was planned. I'm not sure if it
  5   actually opened in Stockton while I was still there.
  6   It was in northern Modesto. We acquired the property,
  7   but I don't think it actually was canonically
  8   established and opened during my time.
  9       Q. Did you have the authority as the Bishop to
10   purchase the property that you've just described that
11   was planned to be a future new parish?
12       A. Yes, in consultation usually with the dean and
13   the neighboring pastors.
14       Q. Would the final decision be the Bishops'?
15       A. Yes.
16       Q. Did you have the authority at that time if you
17   so desired to move the location of the parish church
18   from one place to another by purchasing a new piece of
19   property as a location and selling an existing
20   location?
21            MR. WOODS: Calls for an expert opinion.
22   Beyond the scope of this deposition. Totally
23   irrelevant to the subject matter of this case.
24            THE WITNESS: I have no experience of that so
25   I really don't know.

  1            MR. SIMONS: Very good. Thank you so much.
  2            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Do you want to go off the
  3   record?
  4            MR. SIMONS: Briefly.
  5            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Going off the record. The
  6   time is 4:17.
  7            (A brief recess was taken.)
  8            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Back on the record. The
  9   time is 4:18.
11                      EXAMINATION
12   BY MR. De MARCO:
13       Q. Good afternoon, Cardinal. My name is Anthony
14   DeMarco. I represent a number of the plaintiffs in the
15   Fresno diocese cases.
16            Cardinal, you functioned in the capacity of
17   Chancellor with the Fresno diocese for some time. Can
18   you describe for me the duties of the Chancellor at the
19   time you served in that capacity?
20       A. Well, at the time I served as Chancellor, 1970
21   to 1975, I would say that I was primarily secretary to
22   the Bishop Donohoe, the Bishop of Fresno. So my
23   Chancellor responsibilities or duties were quite
24   minimal.
25       Q. Was there did you have occasion to review

  1   correspondence that was sent to the Bishop?
  2       A. Bishop Donohoe would either refer things to
  3   Bishop Dennis Dougherty, the Vicar General, or to me or
  4   in some cases actually dictate a letter without either
  5   one of us being aware of it. He handled things in
  6   different ways.
  7       Q. What month you started in 1970 as
  8   Chancellor. What month of 1970? Do you recall?
  9       A. You know, I actually don't recall what month
10   that was.
11       Q. Do you recall some of your first assignments
12   for the Bishop?
13       A. I remember primarily my assignments as
14   secretary and that is setting up the calendar for
15   confirmations, the various events he had to be at.
16   There were some 90 parishes or so in the diocese so my
17   primarily responsibilities even though I was Chancellor
18   was the Bishop's secretary, and a lot of it was
19   calendaring.
20       Q. Were you aware of some sort of an effort
21   Bishop Donohoe was undertaking at that time to create
22   some sort of pool for reassignments of pastors?
23            MR. WOODS: Pool? Object to the form of the
24   question. I don't understand the term pool.
25            THE WITNESS: I'm not quite sure what you

  1   mean.
  2   BY MR. De MARCO:
  3       Q. I'm not sure which number of exhibits we're
  4   at? Is is 14?
  5            MR. WOODS: 15.
  6            MR. De MARCO: We can mark this as Exhibit 15.
  7            (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 15 was marked
  8             for identification.)
  9   BY MR. De MARCO:
Cardinal, this is a document that we've
11   received from the Diocese of Fresno recently, their
12   attorneys, the personnel file of Monsignor Anthony
13   Herdegen.
14            MR. WOODS: Is this the entire document, just
15   one page?
16            MR. De MARCO: Yes, as far as I know.
17       Q. This document, do you recall writing it?
18       A. I actually do not.
19       Q. Does it refresh your recollection as to
20   reassignments or some sort of pool being created for
21   reassignments of pastors about the time you were taking
22   office as Chancellor?
23       A. What is missing here is I don't know what
24   Bishop Donohoe asked me to do because I don't restate
25   his request in this memo so I'm not quite sure what it

  1   is he's having me do except he wanted me to find
  2   obviously some dates of assignments for priests.
  3       Q. Do you recall whether he had given you the
  4   names of priests to look into?
  5       A. I actually don't know what sparked this or the
  6   origination of this was.
  7       Q. Do you have any understanding as to what the
  8   checkmarks next to names of four of the priests on the
  9   list indicate?
10       A. No, I don't.
11       Q. Down at the bottom of the document at the RMM,
12   those are your initials, Cardinal?
13       A. Yes, that's correct.
14       Q. Prior to assuming the post of Chancellor, had
15   you had any occasion to meet Monsignor Anthony
16   Herdegen?
17       A. Yes.
18       Q. When was first time you met him?
19       A. I honestly don't know. Sometime after I was
20   ordained, but I don't know the first time.
21       Q. Did you have many meetings with him?
22       A. I don't think I had any meetings as such with
23   him. I probably met him at a clergy gathering or when
24   I drive Bishop Donohoe for confirmation to his parish.
25       Q. Had you heard any descriptions or complaints

  1   from any source prior to assuming the post of
  2   Chancellor, any complaints regarding Monsignor
  3   Herdegen?
  4       A. Complaints of any kind?
  5       Q. Any kind.
  6            MR. WOODS: Object. Irrelevant to the subject
  7   matter. I'll let him answer.
  8            THE WITNESS: I'm just not aware of any
  9   complaints against him.
10   BY MR. De MARCO:
11       Q. How about Joseph Pacheco? Prior to October of
12   1970 had you heard any negative statements at all
13   regarding Father Joseph Pacheco?
14       A. Best of my recollection, no, not at all.
15       Q. How about Father John McKee?
16       A. John McKee?
17       Q. Yes.
18            MR. WOODS: Same objection.
19            THE WITNESS: No, I can't recall any specific
20   problems with John McKee.
21   BY MR. De MARCO:
22       Q. Do you recall ever being instructed by Bishop
23   Donohoe Donohoe or Donohue?
24       A. It's Donohoe, D O N O H O E. All oh's. I
25   learned the hard way.

  1       Q. Yeah, it gets confusing.
  2            Do you recall ever receiving any instruction
  3   from Bishop Donohoe to look into either the personnel
  4   file or the confidential file of Monsignor Herdegen?
  5       A. No, I don't.
  6            MR. De MARCO: I'd like to mark the next
  7   document as an exhibit again out of the same source,
  8   the personnel file of Monsignor Herdegen.
  9            (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 16 was marked for
10            identification.)
11            MR. WOODS: Can you read the first word of the
12   second line?
13            MR. De MARCO: Prayer and the no.
14            THE WITNESS: I would guess reading,
15   R E A D I N G. Reading of two documents looks to me
16   like what it might be.
17   BY MR. De MARCO:
18       Q. Cardinal, have you ever seen this document
19   before?
20       A. I don't recall seeing it.
21            MR. De MARCO: I apologize moving from
22   document to document quickly. I know we are on short
23   time right now.
24            MR. HENNIGAN: Quick is good.
25               (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 17 was marked for

  1                identification.)
  2   BY MR. De MARCO:
  3       Q. Same question on this document if you've ever
  4   seen it before?
  5       A. I don't recall seeing it, but it looks like a
  6   form we had in the office to give a brief thumbnail
  7   sketch of a parish.
  8       Q. Who would prepare these documents?
  9       A. Could have been myself. It could have been
10   Monsignor Dougherty. It depended on who Bishop Donohoe
11   saw first if he wanted something.
12       Q. Where would he I'm sorry. I cut you off.
13       A. He would simply ask the first one of us he saw
14   to look up information for him.
15       Q. Where would you look the information up for
16   this document? What sources would you utilize?
17       A. In each of the priest's files, there was a
18   resume sheet or card in front it listed all the
19   changes, assignments and that. Financial information
20   would have come from the finance officer on the annual
21   report of the parish.
22       Q. And the annual reports for every parish were
23   maintained in the diocese chancery?
24       A. Yes, in the office of the with the finance
25   officer.

  1       Q. And were regular audits conducted of those?
  2       A. Of each location?
  3       Q. Yes.
  4       A. I don't think so. Not in my time.
  5            MR. De MARCO: I'd like to mark as the next
  6   sequential exhibit. I'll hand three over rather than
  7   jumping across the table three times.
  8               (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 18 and 19 were
  9                marked for identification.)
10   BY MR. De MARCO:
11       Q. After you've had a chance to review it, I have
12   a question about a particular aspect of this.
13            Waiting for Mr. Woods to indicate he's ready.
14            MR. WOODS: Yes.
15   BY MR. De MARCO:
16       Q. This memoranda that is purportedly authored by
17   you appears to be a confirmation of a conversation that
18   you had with Monsignor Herdegen. Does it refresh your
19   memory as to the conversation taking place?
20       A. Yes, it does.
21       Q. Cardinal, in the paragraph dealing with your
22   recommendation, not the first paragraph in there but
23   the second, it states the only difficulty that must be
24   discussed with Monsignor Herdegen is his willingness to
25   have Monsignor Crowley in the rectory with him.

  1            Do you recall why you wrote that?
  2       A. Yes.
  3       Q. Can you share that with me?
  4       A. It's normal practice if the Pastor Emeritus is
  5   going to stay in the rectory that the incoming pastor
  6   must give his consent to that arrangement.
  7       Q. Did you have any reason to believe that he
  8   wouldn't give his consent?
  9       A. No, in fact, I say so.
10       Q. Had you been informed as of the time of
11   writing this letter of Monsignor Herdegen ever having
12   minors in the rectory with him at St. John's in Wasco?
13       A. No.
14       Q. Had you ever had occasion to visit St. John's
15   Wasco as of the writing of this letter?
16       A. Again in my capacity as the secretary to the
17   Bishop, I would have driven him there for confirmation
18   or special liturgies, but that's all.
19       Q. Do you recall ever meeting the parish
20   housekeeper there as of the writing of this letter?
21       A. No.
22       Q. Do you recall meeting any other parishioners
23   there at St. John's strike that. I'm sorry.
24            Did Bishop Donohoe ever indicate that there
25   had been received letters of complaint prior to the

  1   writing of this letter regarding Monsignor Herdegen?
  2            MR. WOODS: Object. Beyond the scope of the
  3   deposition. Irrelevant to the subject matter unless
  4   limited to complaint of childhood sexual abuse, but
  5   I'll let him answer.
  6            THE WITNESS: Monsignor Herdegen was quite
  7   conservative and, following the Second Vatican Counsel,
  8   was not eager to implement the spirit and the practice
  9   of the Second Vatican Counsel. I suspect that people
10   in the parish probably voiced their unhappiness about
11   this, but I don't have anything special in mind. I
12   just know that he fought vigorously against the Second
13   Vatican Counsel.
14            MR. De MARCO: This is three copies again.
15   This one is a bit harder to read because it is in
16   handwriting. Some of the difficult passages we can
17   before I have you read through all three pages of the
18   difficult writing
19       Q. Cardinal prior to just receiving this letter
20   right now, have you ever seen this letter before?
21       A. I don't recall seeing this letter before.
22       Q. I'd like to read a couple of the sentences
23   from the letter and ask you if Bishop Donohoe ever
24   communicated to you the concerns voiced in the letter.
25   Towards the bottom of the first page it says:

  1            "Monsignor's attitude, type of leadership
  2       and his methods of teaching has been
  3       detrimental to our congregation and
  4       alienated many of our youth."
  5            Now specifically since we're here on the
  6   subject matter we are, did Bishop Donohoe ever
  7   communicate to you a concern about Monsignor Herdegen's
  8   dealings with youth?
  9            MR. HENNIGAN: (Inaudible.)
10            THE WITNESS: Again, as I said a few moments
11   ago, the problem was his authoritarian way of
12   pastoring, not at all the kind of pastoring model that
13   the Second Vatican Counsel was encouraging. Everything
14   was yes or no, and he didn't want anything changed. He
15   didn't want any new songs. He didn't want anything.
16   So people were disaffected by that. But that's the
17   only context that I can recall that that would have
18   been referring to.
19   BY MR. De MARCO:
20       Q. Was there ever any investigation to your
21   knowledge made into his dealings with youth?
22            MR. WOODS: Into his dealings with youth?
23            MR. De MARCO: With the youth of his parish.
24            MR. WOODS: Any investigation. Okay.
25            THE WITNESS: Not that I'm aware of.

  1   BY MR. De MARCO:
  2       Q. No effort that you are aware of to ask
  3   questions or take the concerns of the young
  4   parishioners of the parish and hear them out?
  5       A. No, but that would not have been my role as
  6   such. But again, it was my understanding that the
  7   dissatisfaction was over his rigidity and lack of
  8   empowering people and allowing parishioners to become
  9   involved.
10       Q. If there had been any investigation done, who
11   would have been the person to do so?
12       A. It would depend on the circumstances on what
13   the allegation was, and Bishop Donohoe would have
14   designated someone to deal with it.
15       Q. Generally speaking, if it was a concern over
16   his dealings with youth, any ideas who he may have
17   designated to conduct such as investigation?
18       A. No. He could have chosen the dean of that
19   Kern County deanery. In fact, I suspect that would
20   have been his first approach. He utilized his deans
21   quite well, and I imagine he would have asked the dean.
22       Q. But you are not aware of him ever asking the
23   dean to do any kind of investigation?
24       A. No, I'm not.
25       Q. Do you recall a Father or a Mr. excuse

  1   me Michael Denunzio of the Community Counseling
  2   Service?
  3       A. Michael Denunzio, yes.
  4       Q. What was his capacity for the diocese? Was he
  5   employed by the diocese?
  6       A. Bishop Donohoe decided to inaugurate an annual
  7   appeal in the Diocese of Fresno and contracted with
  8   community counseling service out of New York, I
  9   believe, and they assigned Michael Denunzio who I
10   believe was operating out of their San Francisco office
11   to to head up this particular appeal.
12       Q. When you say appeal, I'm not understanding.
13       A. By annual appeal, before Bishop Donohoe there
14   was never an annual request for funds on the part of
15   the people for the support of the ministries of the
16   diocese as such.
17       Q. So Mr. Denunzio's function was not in the
18   realm of counseling priests? It was to help raise
19   funds?
20       A. Community Counseling Service is a fundraising
21   nationwide organization.
22       Q. The priest counsel or the parish counsel
23   concept, was that something that was beginning to be
24   implemented in the Fresno diocese in your time there?
25       A. Both parish counsels and priest counsels?

  1       Q. Parish counsels.
  2       A. Parish counsels?
  3       Q. Yes.
  4       A. It began very gradually.
  5       Q. And what were the parish counsel's intended to
  6   be? What was their function intended to be?
  7       A. Parish counsels were an evolution from the
  8   Second Vatican Counsel allowing for the involvement of
  9   lay people in the spiritual, pastoral, economic,
10   administrative operation of the parish.
11       Q. Were you aware of Monsignor Herdegen resisting
12   effort to have parish counsels or have a parish counsel
13   at Saint John's in Wasco?
14       A. I would have presumed he would have resisted
15   having parish counsel.
16       Q. Were the parish counsels in any way intended
17   to instill some sort of oversight or control on the
18   part of parishioners at their parishes?
19       A. No, not at all.
20       Q. Cardinal, do you remember a priest by the name
21   of Benjamin Gabriel out of the Fresno diocese?
22       A. Yes, I do.
23       Q. Tell me what you remember about him. If it
24   calls for a long narrative, I'll certainly narrow it
25   down, but certainly we didn't have that much detail of

  1   Monsignor Herdegen.
  2            MR. HENNIGAN: Are you just practicing here?
  3   Why don't you do it?
  4   BY MR. De MARCO:
  5       Q. Do you recall Father Gabriel being an extern
  6   priest from the Philippines?
  7       A. I don't recall whether he was an extern or
  8   incardinated, but I do recall him being from the
  9   Philippines and not terrible well.
10       Q. What do you mean?
11       A. His health. His health was not strong.
12       Q. Do you recall there being any investigation
13   into his fitness for service in the diocese prior to
14   his serving in the Diocese of Fresno?
15            MR. WOODS: Object to the subject matter
16   unless it's limited to sexual abuse, but I'll let him
17   answer.
18            THE WITNESS: No, in fact, I don't recall when
19   Father Gabriel even came to the Diocese of Fresno.
20   BY MR. De MARCO:
21       Q. Do you recall striking up a friendship with
22   Father Gabriel?
23       A. Friendship?
24       Q. More than a mere acquaintanceship?
25       A. No, I did not.

  1       Q. Do you recall him utilizing you as a reference
  2   for being incardinated into the diocese?
  3       A. He might have. I just don't recall.
  4       Q. Do you recall ever receiving any complaints of
  5   any nature regarding Father Gabriel?
  6       A. No complaints that I can recall.
  7       Q. Do you recall ever hearing of him having
  8   minors stay with him in his rectory?
  9       A. Do you know which rectory you might be
10   referring to?
11       Q. St. Jude's in Earlimart?
12       A. My recollection was that Earlimart's a very
13   small little town and that in fact his rectory was in a
14   house trailer. Very small.
15       Q. You have a very good recollection, Cardinal.
16       A. My memory is it was a very small house
17   trailer.
18       Q. Did you ever receive any reports of him having
19   minor guests in his house trailer?
20       A. I honestly don't remember.
21       Q. Did you ever have occasion to visit him in the
22   house trailer?
23       A. I believe when I was Auxiliary Bishop I had
24   confirmation at his parish and may have visited his
25   trailer.

  1       Q. The priest senate, was that a body where the
  2   members were appointed by the Bishop or was it
  3   elective?
  4       A. The Counsel, the Vatican Counsel and then the
  5   1983 code of canon law required that at least half of
  6   the counsel be elected by the priests and the others
  7   could be appointed by the Bishop.
  8       Q. Do you recall whether Monsignor Herdegen was
  9   appointed or elected to the priest counsel or priest
10   senate, excuse me?
11       A. I really don't recall that.
12       Q. Do you recall him being on the priest senate
13   at any time while you were at the Fresno diocese?
14       A. I don't, no.
15       Q. While you were with the Fresno diocese, did
16   you ever hear Bishop Donohoe or any others discussing a
17   father John Jack Bradley, who was a Jesuit priest?
18       A. I don't recall John Jack Bradley at all.
19       Q. How about Father William Allison?
20       A. Was he an order priest, do you know?
21       Q. He was a diocesan priest and appears to be a
22   supply priest for a very short period of time in the
23   diocese.
24       A. I have no recollection of the name at all.
25       Q. How about Father James Collins?

  1       A. Last name?
  2       Q. Collins.
  3       A. James Collins. No, I have no recollection of
  4   Collins.
  5       Q. Father Mangan, a religious order priest?
  6       A. Do you know what religious order by chance?
  7       Q. Off the top, no.
  8       A. Because I don't recall the name.
  9            MR. De MARCO: One or two more questions. I
10   know we're cutting it short, and at least one other
11   counsel wants to ask questions.
12            MR. HENNIGAN: You are running out of time.
13            MR. De MARCO: I'll be very brief.
14            MR. HENNIGAN: He is using up your time. It's
15   a filibuster.
16          MR. De MARCO: Thank you, Mike. Can you
17   extend me by about three and a half seconds?
18       Q. Were you aware of any of the vocations that
19   Monsignor Herdegen was able to recruit during your time
20   at the Fresno diocese.
21            If you would you like, I'll rephrase the
22   question.
23            By vocations, Cardinal, you understand my
24   meaning someone recruited to go into the seminary?
25       A. Yes.

  1       Q. So are you not aware of any recruits that
  2   Monsignor Herdegen was able to bring to the seminary?
  3       A. No. He could have brought forth candidates.
  4   I simply can't remember any.
  5       Q. One last question. If the parish
  6   housekeeper
  7            MR. WOODS: I'm getting ready to object. This
  8   must be a great one. Go ahead.
  9            MR. HENNIGAN: The old parish housekeeper
10   question.
11            MR. De MARCO: Yes, it is.
12            MR. HENNIGAN: Same one as before.
13            MR. De MARCO: You heard the word if. Now I
14   got you.
15       Q. If the parish housekeeper at St. John's in
16   Wasco had observed boys going unchaperoned into
17   Monsignor Herdegen's bedroom, would you have expected
18    would you have expected that parish housekeeper to
19   make some report to the diocese?
20            MR. WOODS: I'm going to object for the
21   record. Calls for an expert opinion. I'll let him
22   answer.
23            THE WITNESS: Well, again as I answered
24   before to similar questions it depends on the
25   circumstances.

  1   BY MR. De MARCO:
  2       Q. If the parish housekeeper had become aware of
  3   children unsupervised and unchaperoned into the bedroom
  4   with a door shut for any length of time of Monsignor
  5   Herdegen, would you have expected the housekeeper to
  6   have made some effort to report to a higher level
  7   official?
  8       A. Going into the bedroom and the door's shut for
  9   a period of time?
10       Q. Yes.
11            MR. WOODS: I'll object to the form of the
12   question. The age of the housekeeper, what language
13   she speaks, if she knew they were there the whole time.
14   Hypothetical question but he can answer.
15            THE WITNESS: I'm not even sure he had a
16   resident housekeeper so it's very difficult to put all
17   your pure perfects together in a scenario.
18   BY MR. De MARCO:
19       Q. If we were to assume all those facts were
20   true, and it's just an assumption for the purposes of
21   the deposition today, would you have expected that
22   parish housekeeper to have made some effort to report
23   to a higher level official?
24       A. Well, if there was well founded suspicion of
25   some problem, I would expect she would have told

  1   somebody.
  2            MR. De MARCO: If Joe wants to ask something
  3   that will be relevant to his case, I'll yield the
  4   balance of my time at this point.
  5            MR. HENNIGAN: You don't have a balance your
  6   time.
  7            MR. De MARCO:   I have a balance.
  9                         EXAMINATION
11       Q. Cardinal Mahony, Mr. Woods, Mr. Hennigan, my
12   name is Joseph George. I'm one of the attorneys
13   representing Mr. *********, who is present and
14   sitting to my left.
15            Cardinal Mahony, it's been a long day. If you
16   don't understand my question, please let me know. I
17   don't want you to understand something I don't want
18   you to answer something you don't understand.
19       A. Okay.
20       Q. Cardinal, do you know ********?
21       A. Yes.
22       Q. Do you know his mother *******?
23       A. Yes.
24       Q. Do you know ****'s father ********?
25       A. Yes.

  1       Q. Cardinal Mahony, when you were Bishop of
  2   Stockton, did you socialize with the ******* family?
  3       A. Could you explain socialize?
  4       Q. Did you eat dinner at their home?
  5       A. I may have. I saw them at so many events and
  6   they were very prominent leaders so I could have, but I
  7   saw them many times.
  8       Q. Did you place with the children at the *******
  9   home?
10            MR. WOODS: That's a loaded question.
12       Q. I'll be more specific. Cardinal, did you play
13   Atari with ****?
14       A. Did I play what?
15       Q. Atari, video games?
16       A. I don't recall what Atari is. I might have
17   it, but doesn't ring any bell.
18       Q. Cardinal Mahony, I don't want to repeat any
19   testimony you've already given, and you've mentioned
20   the name Father Fernando Villalobos.
21       A. Yes.
22       Q. I know that you know him. Father Villalobos
23   is dead now; is that true?
24       A. That is correct.
25       Q. When you were Bishop of Stockton,

  1   Father Villalobos had an office at the cathedral?
  2       A. No, that's not correct.
  3       Q. Did Father Villalobos have an office next to
  4   yours at the in the Diocese of Stockton?
  5       A. You mean in the chancery office?
  6       Q. I do, Cardinal, yes.
  7       A. No, he did not.
  8       Q. Cardinal Mahony, are you aware that
  9   Father Villalobos was the chaplain for the Stockton
10   Police Department?
11       A. I believe I do recall that.
12       Q. Did Father Villalobos possess a badge from the
13   Stockton Police Department?
14       A. I actually don't know.
15       Q. Cardinal Mahony, did you go to excuse me
16   go with Father Villalobos to the **** home?
17       A. I don't recall. I may have. I don't recall.
18       Q. Cardinal Mahony, did Father Villalobos live,
19   reside at St. Mary's parish in Stockton, California?
20       A. Yes.
21       Q. Cardinal Mahony, did Father Villalobos
22   maintain a residence at Silver Creek Circle in
23   Stockton, California?
24       A. I believe he had a residence, but I was never
25   at it so I don't know where it was.

  1       Q. I want to be clear. I don't want to repeat
  2   the testimony.
  3            Did you visit Father Villalobos at this other
  4   residence, wherever it was?
  5       A. No.
  6       Q. Did you phone Father Villalobos at the other
  7   residence, call him on the telephone?
  8       A. I really don't recall. I may have. I simply
  9   don't remember.
10       Q. Are you aware if Father Villalobos called you
11   from this other residence?
12       A. He may have, yes.
13       Q. Would you have been able, and I'm not trying
14   to be tricky or play any games, would you have been
15   able to tell if Father Villalobos was calling you from
16   the St. Mary's home or the other residence?
17       A. No.
18       Q. Cardinal Mahony, are you aware if
19   Father Villalobos phoned you from the other residence
20   while ****** was present at the other
21   residence?
22       A. No, I'm not.
23       Q. Prior to 1983, Cardinal Mahony, were you aware
24   that ************ ate dinner with Father Villalobos at
25   the separate residence?

  1       A. No, I'm not.
  2       Q. Cardinal Mahony, prior to 1983, were you aware
  3   that Father Villalobos provided alcohol to **********
  4   at this separate residence?
  5       A. No, I'm not.
  6       Q. Cardinal Mahony, prior to 1983, were you aware
  7   that Father Villalobos invited ***** to spend
  8   the night at the separate residence?
  9       A. No, I'm not.
10       Q. Cardinal Mahony, prior to 1983, are you
11   aware if ****** did spend the night with
12   Father Villalobos at the separate residence?
13       A. No, I'm not.
14       Q. Cardinal Mahony, prior to 1983, were you aware
15   that Father Villalobos sexually abused ***** at
16   the separate residence?
17       A. No, I am not.
18       Q. Cardinal, I mentioned the Silver Creek Circle
19   address. Does the street Kohler K O H L E R refresh
20   your memory as to Father Villalobos's separate address?
21       A. No, it does not.
22       Q. Cardinal Mahony, in 1988 *****,
23   Mr. ********* father, contacted you regarding *****'s
24   interest in attending the seminary; is that true?
25       A. I just have a very hazy recollection of that.

  1       Q. In 1988, the same year, you assisted
  2   ********** in attending St. John's seminary in
  3   Camarillo; true?
  4       A. What year again you said?
  5       Q. 1988.
  6       A. I believe so, yes.
  7       Q. At that time, 1988, the ******** family
  8   including **** still lived in Stockton, California?
  9       A. As far as I know, yes.
10       Q. Was it unusual, Cardinal Mahony, for a person
11   living in Stockton, California to attend the St. John's
12   seminary in Camarillo, California?
13       A. No, we had seminarians quite frequently from
14   the various western dioceses.
15       Q. Was it the normal situation that someone
16   living in Stockton would attend the seminary in Menlo
17   Park?
18       A. There were very few seminarians in the Diocese
19   of Stockton. I would say the majority were there.
20   Some were in other seminaries as well.
21       Q. Cardinal Mahony, are you aware that
22   ****** nickname at St. John's was Mahony's boy?
23       A. No, I was not.
24       Q. In 2002, Mr. ******* called you, do you
25   remember this?

  1       A. I do.
  2       Q. Cardinal Mahony, you returned *****'s phone
  3   call?
  4       A. I did.
  5       Q. And you spoke to *******?
  6       A. That's correct.
  7       Q. During this conversation, Mr. ***** informed
  8   you that he was sexually abused by Father Fernando
  9   Villalobos?
10       A. At some point in the conversation, but that
11   was not his presenting issues.
12       Q. Cardinal Mahony, you responded to ***** by
13   saying nothing could be done because Fernando was dead?
14       A. That is not correct.
15       Q. Thank you, Cardinal.
16            MS. SOLTAN: I just have one follow up
17   question.
19                   FURTHER EXAMINATION
21       Q. When you left the Diocese of Stockton in about
22   1985, did you brief the incoming Bishop with regard to
23   the operations of the diocese?
24       A. No, I did not.
25       Q. You did not meet with him at all to advise him

  1   about the diocese?
  2       A. Well, he was at that point my Auxiliary Bishop
  3   here in Los Angeles so all I told him was he was going
  4   to a wonderful, small diocese in Northern California.
  5       Q. I'm sorry. You were at Stockton and he was in
  6   Los Angeles?
  7       A. He was Auxiliary Bishop. Bishop Montrose was
  8   Auxiliary Bishop here.
  9       Q. In Los Angeles?
10       A. In Los Angeles when I became the archbishop
11   here. Some months later, he was transferred to succeed
12   me in Stockton.
13            MR. HENNIGAN: Are you still on the one
14   question?
15          MS. SOLTAN: I'm sorry. It's all one. I'm
16   sorry.
17       Q. Did you brief him about Oliver O'Grady and his
18   past history with regard to the Howards and any other
19   matters having to do with sexual affairs?
20       A. No.
21            MS. SOLTAN: Thank you.
22            MR. WOODS: Thank you all.
23            MS. SOLTAN: I think what we're going to do is
24   stipulate that the original transcript will be sent to
25   Mr. Woods' office to be reviewed by the Cardinal and

  1   signed under penalty of perjury within 15 days of
  2   receipt. Is that adequate?
  3            MR. WOODS: Follow the statute. 15 days?
  4            MS. SOLTAN: I'm just asking.
  5            THE WITNESS: The holiday season. That will
  6   be difficult.
  7            MS. SOLTAN: I am difficult.
  8            Within 30 days, and we're relieving the court
  9   reporter of her duties, and the transcript will be
10   signed under penalty of perjury, and that you will
11   advise us of any changes within that 30 day period.
12            MR. WOODS: On the record, may I have
13   everyone's attention? On the record. One last thing,
14   I just want to remind everybody there's a 14 day window
15   before any of this can be released to the media or
16   anyone else. Okay? 14 days. And if we file a motion,
17   it continues. The window continues until the motion is
18   resolved.
19            MR. MANLY: Am I going to here Hennigan on
20   KFWB?
21            MS. SOLTAN: Do you have an intent of filing a
22   motion?
23            MR. WOODS: We'll read the transcript and
24   decide. There were an awful lot of questions I
25   objected to.

  1            MS. SOLTAN: Thank you. Off the record.
  2            THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of tape
  3   number three of the deposition of Cardinal Roger Mahony
  4   on November 23rd, 2004, the time is 5:02 p.m.
  5                   (Ending time: 5:02 p.m.)


  4       I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of
  5   perjury that I have read the foregoing transcript, and
  6   I have made any corrections, additions or deletions
  7   that I was desirous of making; that the foregoing is a
  8   true and correct transcript of my testimony contained
  9   therein.
11       EXECUTED this _______ day of ______________,
12   20_____, at ___________________, _________________.
                        (City)             (State)
16               _________________________________
                      Signature of Witness


Any original material on these pages is copyright © 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.