Imesch Faces New Disclosure Motion
Lawyer Seeks Release of 2 More Depositions

By Stanley Ziemba
Chicago Tribune
February 16, 2006

[Survivor's name redacted on 9/7/07 at his request.],1,4203535.story?coll=chi-newslocalssouthwest-hed

A Joliet attorney representing men suing priests and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Joliet for alleged sexual abuse wants two depositions that Bishop Joseph Imesch gave in the 1990s about priests accused of abusing minors made public.

Michael Bolos filed a court motion earlier this week in Will County on behalf of Christopher Fehrenbacher, [Redacted], David Mortell and another man, identified only as John Doe. Judge Gerald Kinney is scheduled to hear arguments on the motion on Wednesday, Bolos said.

Fehrenbacher alleged in a 2004 lawsuit that he was molested about 25 years ago by Rev. Larry Mullins at the Cathedral of St. Raymond in Joliet. "John Doe" claimed in a suit also filed in 2004 that Rev. Jeffrey Salwach abused him in the 1970s at St. Jude Parish in New Lenox.

[Redacted] and Mortell filed suits earlier this month alleging that Michael Gibbney, a former priest, molested them about 25 years ago in separate incidents at parishes in Bolingbrook and Elmhurst.

Bolos' motion asks that the court make public depositions that Imesch gave as part of suits against two other former priests, Larry Gibbs and Myles White. The depositions, which could provide further insight into how the diocese handled allegations of priest sexual abuse, have been shielded from the public under a protective order.

Earlier this month, a DuPage County judge ruled that another deposition Imesch gave be made public. That case focuses on a former priest accused of abusing a boy in the 1960s at a parish in Lombard.

"The diocese respects the legal process. It is preparing its response," said diocesan spokesman Thomas Kerber of Bolos' motion. "Our response will be fully vetted in the appropriate venue," he added.

In the DuPage case, the diocese objected to having Imesch's deposition and related documents made public, contending that unsealing them violated the privacy of individuals, including alleged victims.


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