3 1 INDEX. 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. ANDERSON ..s 1 OP 3111123350171 2 -JEJLIICIAI, 3 4 BEGINNING OF TAPE BEGINNING OF TAPE ..45 i? 1- BEGINNING OF TAPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..88 7 BEGINNING OF TAPE PM 8 BEGINNING OF TAPE DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 174 . . . . . . . 12 13 Ujdmapn 12 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT ..75 1, mm puma? to 0, 13 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 3 ..111 15 -I-aking Ami taken butt.-Ir: Gary H. 14 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT ..113 1? 5 15 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 16 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 6 ..125 H) of May, 2011, at 30 East 31:. Paul, 59 I-iinrzesotza, at.ap5IxoniIriuLe1y 1010-I 17 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 18 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 21 19 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 50 . . . . .. ..142 20 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT ..143 3? 21 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 108 24 AFFILIATED COURT EEPDETERB 25 22 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 23 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 152DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 25 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 2 4 1 APPEARANCES: 1 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 2 JEFFREY R. ANDERSON, ESQ., MICHAEL G. 2 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 68 ..173 3 FINNEGAN, ESQ., Attorneys at Law, 366 Jackson 3 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 4 Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, 4 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 184.. ..184 5 appeared for Plaintiff. 5 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 221 ..186 6 DANIEL A. HAWS, ESQ., Attorney at 6 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 220 ..186 7 Law, 30 East 7th Street, Suite 3200, St. Paul, 7 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT . . . . ..189 8 Minnesota 55101, appeared for Archdiocese of 8 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 9 St. Paul and Minneapolis. 9 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT ..190 10 THOMAS B. WIESER, ESQ., Attorney at 10 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 11 Law, 2200 Bremer Tower, 445 Mlnnesota Street, 11 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 12 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, appeared for 12 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 232 ..196 13 Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. 13 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 14 THOMAS R. BRAUN, ESQ., Attorney at 14 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 235 . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Law, 117 East Center Street, Rochester, 15 16 Minnesota 55904, appeared for Diocese of 18 17 Winona. 17 18 THOMAS M. KELLY, ESQ., Attorney at 18 19 Law, 220 South 6th Street, Suite 1225, 19 20 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, appeared for 20 21 Archbishop Harry 21 22 ALSO PRO 22 23 Paul Kinsella, vldeographer sheets Page 1 to 4 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 09:56:56 AM 5 7 1 PROCEEDINGS 1 A. OnMay2nd,2008. 2 2 Q. In the time in which you were archbishop of 3 MR. KINSELLA: Today's date is May 3 the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, 4 14, 2014, the time is 10:04 a.m. This is the 4 that entire time frame, Ithink the records 5 videotape deposition of Archbishop Harry 5 reflect that In 2002, clearly that the bishops 6 Will counsel please Identify 6 in the U.S. convened and created what was now 7 themselves for the video record? 7 called the Charter for the Protection of 8 MR. ANDERSON: For the plaintiff, 8 Children, correct? 9 Jeff Anderson. 9 A. That is correct. And I chaired the committee 10 MR. FINNEGAN: For the plaintiff, 10 which sculptured the charter. 11 Mike Finnegan. 11 Q. And that committee that you chaired, I think 12 MR. HAWS: Dan Haws for the 12 were you president of? 13 archdiocese. 13 A. I was chair of the committee. 14 MR. WIESER: Tom Wieser for the 14 Q. And the committee was called? 15 archdiocese. 15 A. The Committee for the Protection of Children. 16 MR. BRAUN: Torn Braun on behalf of 16 Q. And why was that charter created and that 17 the Diocese of Winona. 17 committee in particular constituted? 18 MR. KELLY: Thomas Kelly on behalf 18 A. The charter was created because of a -- an 19 of the archbishop. 19 apparent crisis in the Archdiocese of Boston, 20 MR. KINSELLA: Will the reporter 20 which needed some attention. 21 please swear the witness? 21 Q. And you say "apparent crisis." Do you think 22 ARCHBISHOP HARRY 22 there was a crisis in Boston that needed 23 called as a witness, being first duly sworn, 23 attention? 24 was examined and testified as follows: 24 A. I do, yes. 25 EXAMINATION 25 Q. So it was an actual crisis, not an apparent 6 8 1 BY MR. ANDERSON: 1 one? 2 Good morning, Archbishop. Would you please 2 A. It was an actual crisis. 3 state your full name for the record? 3 Q. Do you believe that there was also a crisis of 4 My full name is Harry Joseph 4 a similar nature in every diocese in the 5 And how is your health today and how are you 5 A. I wouldn't know. I -- I didn't know at that 6 feeling? 6 time and I wouldn't be able to answer that. 7 Well, I have limitations. I've been dealing 7 Q. Had there been a similar crisis in Lafayette? 8 with some health problems, but feeling pretty 8 A. The crisis was not as extensive as it was in 9 well. when the sun has come out at last in 9 Boston. It was a matter of -- of a very small 10 Minnesota. 10 number of priests, I think two who were -- 11 Yeah. Archbishop, by my calculations, you 11 perpetrated extensively. 12 have been a priest since your ordination in 12 Q. There were similar dimensions in the sense 13 1960. Is that right? 13 that Father Gauthe and others had been known 14 That's correct. 14 to have committed offenses against children 15 And you had been, including the time as 15 and also had been documented and known to have 16 coadjutor, presiding archbishop of the 16 been transferred repeatedly prior to your 17 Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis for, 17 installation as archbishop there, correct? 18 would that have been, 14 years? 18 A. I remember the name Gauthe. I don't know 19 I came up in '94 and I was coadjutor from '94 19 about their transferring -- transferring 20 till '95, and '95 to 2008 as the archbishop. 20 repeatedly. 21 And Archbishop Nienstedt was appointed as 21 Q. When the charter was created, the bishops 22 coadjutor with you in the year 2007? 22 convened in Dallas to address the crisis, did 23 That's correct. 23 you come away from that meeting as the chair 24 And your retirement was effective in 2008 24 of the committee and a participant in the 25 then? 25 bishops? conference believing there was a Page sheets 9 11 1 scandal or a crisis pertaining to the abuse of 1 the charter was Installed, created and made 2 children that was nationwide? 2 public across this country of you as 3 MR. KELLY: Well, I'm going to 3 archbishop making the finding that any priest 4 object to the form of the question. The 4 in the archdiocese against whom allegations of 5 difference between the scandal and the crisis, 5 abuse had been made were found to have been 6 perhaps counsel can break that down. 6 true? 7 MR. ANDERSON: Sure. I'll reframe 7 A. would you repeat that question, please? 8 the question. 8 Q. After the charter was created and made public 9 Did you come away from that meeting 9 in 2002 and as during your tenure as 10 and having chaired the committee with the 10 archbishop, are there any priests that were 11 belief that there was a crisis that was 11 accused of sexual abuse of minors that you 12 nationwide? 12 found to have been credibly accusedwould not use the word "crisis." 13 MR. KELLY: Is that question limited 14 Q. What would you use to describe the problem 14 to this archdiocese? 15 nationwide? 15 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 16 A. I would simply use the word some matters 16 A. I -- right now I can't -- I can't remember 17 needed some very close attention. 17 any. 18 Q. At any point in time, did you come to believe 18 BY MR. ANDERSON: 19 there was a crisis pertaining to childhood 19 Q. Can you remember that there were some that 20 sexual abuse by clerics in the Archdiocese of 20 were actually accused and found by you and/or 21 St. Paul and Minneapolis? 21 your advisors to not have been credible or 22 A. No. 22 substantiated? 23 Q. Did you ever come to believe there was a 23 MR. HAWS: You're referring to 2002 24 problem In the way it was being handled or had 24 to 2008, correct -- 25 been handled? 25 MR. ANDERSON: YesMR. HAWS: when the archbishop 2 Q. Do you believe that there has never been a 2 retired? 3 problem with the way child sexual abuse has 3 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 4 been handled by the Archdiocese of St. Paul 4 A. I'm trying -- an example might be Michael 5 and Minneapolis, based on your history and 5 Keating. 6 knowledge of it? 6 BY MR. ANDERSON: 7 A. I can say that as one looks at history, there 7 Q. What do you remember about the accusation 8 are always ways in which problems or 8 having been made concerning Keating and what 9 challenges could have been handled better. 9 was done before the determination was made 10 Q. Can you think of any instances in which you 10 that that was not credible or substantiated? 11 were the archbishop where you would look at 11 A. Well, his -- the young lady's parents met, if 12 any Individual situation and say, "That should 12 I have the -- the time frame correct, the -- 13 have been handled better"? 13 the police of -- of a certain area, and I 14 A. I couldn't now. If I had records to go over 14 forget now where it was, investigated and came 15 or something like that, I might be able to 15 to the conclusion that there was no sexual 16 give a better answer, but I would not be able 16 abuse. I met with parents of -- the young 17 to just give an answer to that. 17 lady's parents and with the young lady and 18 Q. At this point in time, and I'm happy to show 18 never heard of anything that Father Keating 19 you some records, but at this point in time, 19 did which would have been defined as sexual 20 can you think of any situations under your 20 abuse according to what the definition of the 21 watch as archbishop where you could say, "That 21 charter was, and I can't remember what that is 22 should have been handled better"? 22 right now. And in fact, I was quite disturbed 23 A. No. I can't think of any. 23 because the mother and father kept putting 24 Q. Okay. Archbishop, can you think of any 24 words into her mouth to speak and I wondered 25 instances or are there any post?2002, after 25 what all that meant, and not being a therapist 3 of 52 sheets Page 9 to 12 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56: 56 AM .15 652-15614 09:56:56 AM 13 1 or I wasn't able to figure out, 1 Q. Do you recall who, Archbishop, reported to you 2 but it raised questions in my mind. And 2 the actual ?ndings of the review board? 3 having listened to them and to the young lady 3 A. I don't remember whether it was Andy 4 on many, many occasions, I could not conclude 4 Eisenzimmer or Kevin McDonough. I don't 5 that there was sexual abuse, but sent the 5 remember. 6 situation and the case to the review board of 6 Q. Do you remember that Andy Eisenzimmer did some 7 the archdiocese, who came to the same 7 investigation pertaining to the Keating matter 8 conclusion as the police; there was no sexual 8 that was reported to the review board? 9 abuse. 9 A. I don't remember. 10 Q. Have you reviewed any documents pertaining to 10 Q. Do you remember if Andy Eisenzimmer gave you 11 the Keating matter or any part of the file? 11 any details of his own investigationdon't remember. 13 Q. Have you reviewed anything in preparation for 13 Q. Do you remember anything -- do you remember 14 today? 14 anything else about how the Keating matter got 15 A. You mean from the archdiocese? 15 handled by the archdiocese and the review 16 Q. Well, have you reviewed any documents in 16 board beyond what you just recited? 17 preparation for your deposition to 17 A. I remember that after the review board 18 A. No. 18 concluded -- gave a conclusion, Father Michael 19 Q. day, for example the depositions taken of 19 Keating was returned to the University of St. 20 others before you pertaining to this, these 20 Thomas and with no -- and his immediate 21 matters? 21 superior was made aware of the challenges 22 A. I don't -- I don't think so. I haven't looked 22 which he had faced and which which he was 23 at any papers or anything like that. 23 involved. 24 Q. Archbishop, when you refer to the Keating 24 Q. Who was that immediate superior that you 25 matter, you said that the police investigated 25 believe was informed? 14 16 1 it and concluded there was no sexual abuse. 1 A. Dr. Briel. 2 What led you to that belief? 2 Q. And who informed Dr. Briel of the information 3 A. I can't remember now. 3 concerning Keating? 4 Q. Do you recall today if the police found if 4 A. Father McDonough, I believe. 5 there was that there was no sexual abuse 5 Q. And what was Father McDonough's instructions 6 or, rather, declined to prosecute, which is -- 6 to get what was Father McDonough told to 7 can be two different things? 7 instruct Father -- Dr. Briel on? 8 A. Yes. 8 MR. KELLY: By this witness? 9 Q. Do you recall? 9 BY MR. ANDERSON: 10 A. I don't recall. 10 Q. If you know, yeah. 11 Q. Do you recall if the review board found there 11 A. I -- I don't. I don't remember. 12 was no sexual abuse? 12 Q. To your knowledge, was anybody else besides 13 A. That is -- that was the conclusion, I believe, 13 Dr. Briel to be instructed about Keating and 14 that they reached. 14 what was known to the archdiocese about his 15 Q. And on what do you base that belief? Who 15 history? 16 supplied that information to you? 16 A. I don't remember. 17 A. I can't remember. 17 Q. Do you know if any restriction was placed by 18 Q. Okay. Did you participate in the review board 18 you, then, as archbishop on Keating's faculty 19 proceedings? 19 to minister in the archdiocesedid not participate in any review 20 A. I don't -- I don't remember. 21 board proceedings. 21 Q. Do you recall why Dr. Briel was the one 22 Q. You appointed the review board that did 22 selected to have been told something about 23 convene that proceeding, correct? 23 Keating? 24 A. It's my understanding that they perpetrated 24 A. He chaired that department. 25 themselves, but I can't remember exactly. 25 Q. Were you on the board at St. Thomas? Page sheets 17 19 1 A. I was. 1 A. I don't -- I don't remember. 2 Q. Archbishop, it has been reported in the 2 (Discussion out of the hearing of 3 newspaper that yourself and, I think, Father 3 the court reporter) 4 McDonough were resigned from the board of St. 4 BY MR. ANDERSON: 5 Thomas this last year, within this last year. 6 Q. Did you, Archbishop, ever make any effort to 6 What were the circumstances of that 6 inform the public of what you learned about 7 resignation? 7 Keating and/or his history through the review 8 A. My circumstances were easily -- easy enough. 8 board and the processes that went on that 9 My term was coming to a conclusion, and when 9 you've already described? 10 all of this started with Michael Keating and 10 A. Again, I I don't remember. 11 newspapers picked it up and seemed to have 11 Q. Do you have any difficulties currently with 12 gone wild with It, I offered my resignation to 12 your memory -- 13 the president and then I offered my 13 A. I do. 14 resignation to the board and it was mutually 14 Q. -- issues related to that? 15 agreed upon. 16 A. The longer I get a farther I get away from 16 Q. And why did you offer your resignation? 16 these situations, the weaker the memory 17 A. Because I did not want my association with the 17 becomes. 18 board to -- to hurt St. Thomas in any way. 18 Q. Has there been any kind of diagnosis of any 19 Q. And why did you think that could or would? 19 kind, Archbishop, that indicates that 20 A. Because of the manner in which the media was 20 impairment of memory? 21 taking the situation. 21 A. No. 22 Q. Were you aware that that was first brought to 22 Q. I appreciate your age and that -- 23 the attentlon of the media by reason of a 23 A. Well, I think -- 24 lawsuit we brought and had not been known to 24 Q. -- sometimes goes with -- 25 the media or the public before that suit? 25 A. I think that's the secret of -- that and many 18 20 1 A. Was I aware of what? 1 other things, which will go unmentioned here 2 Q. Were you aware that the attention to the 2 because we're on tape. 3 Keating matter was brought by reason of a 3 Q. Okay. Is there any medical condition that 4 lawsuit we served on Father Keating? 4 you're aware of that you suffer that impedes 5 A. Yes. 5 your ability to remember events or -- 6 Q. And you're also aware that's the first time 6 A. Yes. 7 the public was ever known made known of the 7 Q. anything? 8 fact that Keating had been investigated and 8 A. I'm on an enormous amount of medication. I -- 9 reported to have abused a child? 9 I -- within the past couple of years I've 10 MR. KELLY: Objection, rule 611, 10 suffered from Leionnaires', pneumonia and was 11 that assumes facts not in evidence, counsel. 11 unconscious for some time. And I also am 12 The witness would have no way of knowing that 12 battling CLL and a -- and a cancer of the 13 background information. Perhaps you could ask 13 blood. 14 some foundational questions. 14 Q. Okay. So you feel that the combination of 15 BY MR. ANDERSON: 15 those conditions is making it more difficult 16 Q. You can did you understand the question? 16 for you to remember certain things? 17 A. I don't. I didn't. 17 A. I think the age has more to do with it than 18 Q. Okay. To your knowledge, before Keating was 18 anything. 19 sued by us on behalf of the young woman 19 Q. Okay. There was a criminal matter recently 20 identified as Jane Doe 20 and that was made 20 tried in Ramsey County District Court 21 known, public, to your knowledge, had anybody 21 involving Chris Wenthe and you were called by 22 in the public ever been informed of the fact 22 the defendant's lawyer, Chris Wenthe, Paul 23 that Keating had been the subject of a 23 Engh, to testify in that criminal matter and I 24 complaint of childhood sexual abuse by that 24 reviewed a transcript of that testimony. Do 25 woman or any other 25 you recall having given testimony -- 5 of 52 sheets Page 17 to 20 of 207 o5;2i,r2o14 09:56:56 AM priesthood? 2 Q. for the defense in that case -- 2 MR. KELLY: May the witness break 3 A. I do. 3 that down into two answers, one dealing with 4 Q. Archbishop? At that time how long ago 4 sexual activities and the other dealing with 5 was that? 5 child pornography? 6 A. I don't remember. 6 BY MR. ANDERSON: 7 At that time, you didn't, at least as I read 7 Q. We could, but for purposes of our questions, 8 the records, indicate any impairment of memory 8 would you agree, Archbishop, that the 9 or difficulties having any memory of those 9 possession or viewing of child pornography is 10 events. Was your memory better then than it 10 a form of sexual abuse? 11 is today? 11 A. Yes. 12 A. Well, I think it's better every day before 12 MR. ANDERSON: Okay. Does that 13 than it is the following daysatisfy you? 14 I recall correctly, I was quite disappointed 14 MR. KELLY: Sure. 15 that I was not asked many more questions 15 BY MR. ANDERSON: 16 concerning the situation. I was asked who I 16 Q. Okay. So the question, then, Archbishop, 17 was and when I was ordained and things like 17 would you like me to repeat it? 18 that, but not anything concerning having met 18 A. would you, please? 19 the young woman. And I think it might have 19 Q. I shall. At any time while archbishop, do you 20 been a different situation. 20 recall having made any effort to involuntarily 21 Q. Well, what do you mean it might have been a 21 remove any priests from the clerical state who 22 different situation? What are you referring 22 had been accused of sexual abuse, including 23 to? 23 possession of child pornography? 24 A Well, I think Chris Wenthe was accused of 24 MR. HAWS: Sexual abuse of minors? 25 violating a trust, a -- a relationship, which 25 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 22 24 1 was a professional, trusting relationship and 1 BY MR. ANDERSON: 2 that wasn't my memory of what the young lady 2 Q. From the priesthood. 3 had told me. 3 A. Now, I don't know how to answer that question. 4 Q. And so when you say it might have been a 4 Made an attempt to remove or removed? 5 different situation, do you believe that he 5 I would start with made an attempt to remove, 6 should not have been found guilty and it would 6 such as petitioned for involuntary 7 have been a different result if you'd been 7 laicization. 8 asked more questions? 8 A. I can't recall that. I I canbeen asked more questions, I -- I can 9 can't recall at this moment. 10 remember at the time I was disappointed. 10 Q. Okay. Do you recall ever making any effort to 11 Q. Because at that time you had a memory of some 11 remove them from the clerical state, any of 12 events you felt would have been helpful to him 12 those who had been accused or had committed 13 and his defense? 13 such offensesdon't know whether it would have 14 A. I would have to go back and look at the 15 been helpful, but I think it would have 15 records. 16 broadened the conversation. 16 Q. Do you recall having reported any of those who 17 Q. And you at least did have some memories that 17 had been accused or committed offenses against 18 would have broadened the conversation at that 18 minors to the 19 time? 19 A. I don't think so. 20 A. In my view. 20 Q. Archbishop, at any time, did you become aware 21 Q. Archbishop, can you identify today the names 21 of or have your advisors compile a list of 22 of any priests who have -- of the archdiocese 22 clerics in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and 23 who have been accused of sexual abuse or child 23 Minneapolis that had been accused of sexual 24 pornography pertaining to minors who you 24 abuse of minors or credibly accused of sexual 25 sought to involuntarily remove from the 25 abuse of minors? i 09:56:56 AM Page Sheets 25 27 1 A. There might have been, but I can't remember. 1 I -- 2 Q. Beyond your answers to the questions 2 Q. Do you remember what conduct Keatlng engaged 3 pertaining to Keatlng, I think you gave me 3 in towards this young woman who had reported 4 some information on Keatlng, so I'd like to go 4 misconduct by Keatlng as a child? 5 back to what you did tell me about that, and 5 A. I don't remember the -- I wouldn't be able to 6 you gave that answer based on what you did 6 say now with any definite meaning to it what 7 remember. You said the police had 7 the conduct was, but I remember realizing or 8 investigated and concluded he had not 8 thinking at the time that it was not sexual 9 committed sexual abuse and that was your 9 abuse, but, rather, boundary issues, which 10 memory, correct? 10 took place in the presence of the parents. 11 A. That's right. 11 Q. Did you make any memorandum pertaining to that 12 Q. You also remember having met with the parents, 12 finding -- 13 as I heard your account? 13 A. I don't remember. 14 A. Uh huh. 14 Q. or conclusion? 15 Q. Is that correct? 15 A. I don't remember. 16 A. That's true. 16 Q. when you had the interview that led you to 17 Q. On how many occasions did you meet with the 17 that finding or conclusion, do you know who 18 parents of that girl? 18 else was present, if anybody else? 19 A. I would be unable to say. I couldn't 19 A. Andy Eisenzimmer was present for one. I don't 20 remember. 20 know whether Father McDonough was present for 21 Q. And did you also -- 21 -- he was present for one at least and Michael 22 A. And excuse me. And the young lady, too. 22 Keatlng was present for one, but it seems to 23 Q. Yeah, okay. That was my next question. Did 23 me now that there were others in which there 24 you meet with the than young lady who had 24 were the four of us. 25 claimed that Father Keatlng had engaged her in 25 Q. It's correct to say that Michael Keatlng 26 28 1 some sexual misconduct? 1 denied any kind of sexual abuse, correct? 2 A. I met with her and her parents. 2 A. He did. 3 Q. They were together? 3 Q. Did he admit to any boundary violation with 4 A. They were together. 4 the then childone occasion, but may have been 5 A. That -- now, that I can't remember. But I can 6 more? 6 remember the father because they were 7 A. It was more. 7 so encouraging of all thisHow many would you estimate? 8 remember saying to the father, "If this were 9 A. I wouldn't remember. 9 my daughter, I would say that 'enough's enough 10 Q. And you did say that, according to the 10 of this,"' whatever, watching television or 11 definition of the charter, you determined that 11 whatever it was, I can't even recallshe did not report a charter 12 was not sexual abuse. 13 violation, is that -- 13 Q. Did you believe that the father was attempting 14 A. That was what I said. 14 to get her -- his daughter to exaggerate what 15 Q. When you say "a charter vio ation," that means 15 had actually happened? 16 the priest engaging in some sexual contact 16 A. I was suspicious of the mother and father 17 with the youth, correct? 17 because I did -- I don't know why, but I was. '18 A. No. I meant the definition of sexual abuse 18 Q. And today, you can't tell us why you have 19 according to the charter, which I would be 19 articulated those suspicions? 20 unable to give now. 20 A. Well, they kept interrupting the daughter and 21 Q. Okay. And as you used the term "sexual 21 filling In and suggesting what might have 22 abuse," what does that mean? Any sexual 22 happened, whether she was able to say so or 23 contact between the adult, the priestwondered the part that they played 24 child? 24 in all of this. 25 A. I would have to look at the definition again, 25 Q. Is it your memory, Father, as you recall the 7 of 52 sheets Page 25 to 23 of 2-07 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 05/21/2014 09:56: 56 AM 29 31 1 meeting with the girl, that she in fact did 1 just to try to see if we can focus on what you 2 not report to you that Keating had engaged in 2 can remember, I'll try to take an exhibit here 3 some sexual contact with her? 3 and use that. 4 A. I don't understand that question. 4 A. All right. 5 Q. Let me rephrase the question. Do you recall 5 Q. I'm going to get a copy ofan exhibit here and 6 the girl telling you that Keating had rubbed 6 Michael's getting it for me right now and 7 her breasts? 7 we'll wait a moment so we can supply this to 8 A. No. I don't remember that. 8 you all. 9 Q. Do you recall the girl telling you that 9 MR. KELLY: You got enough copies? 10 Keating had rubbed his genitals against her? 10 MR. FINNEGAN: I got at least five. 11 A. I don't recall that. 11 MR. HAWS: Go ahead. 12 Q. Do you recall the girl reporting that Keating 12 BY MR. ANDERSON: 13 would have her on his lap? 13 Q. Archbishop, we placed before you an exhibit 14 A. That I -- it seems familiar, but I I can't 14 we've marked for identification Exhibit 174. 15 say for sure now. 15 It is a memorandum, It's also noted that it 16 Q. What do you recall having been reported to you 16 was a document obtained by MPR News. But 17 that you believed happened in the presence of 17 you'dated August 12th, 18 the parents that led you to the conclusion it 18 2002. And are you looking to retrieve your 19 wasn't sexual abuse? 19 glasses? 20 A. Things like holding hands while watching 20 A. I am. 21 television and -- and sitting close to one 21 Q. Sure. Take your time. 22 another, but none of these things which you've 22 A. Now I have them. (Examining documents). 23 just mentioned -- I -- I don't recall any the top that it's dated August 24 them. 24 12th, 2002? 25 Q. You did say you listened to the young lady on 25 A. I can, yeah. 30 32 1 many occasions. Can you identify how many -- 1 Q. And do you see that it is a memo to Archbishop 2 A. No. 2 and the archbishop's council? 3 Q. -- occasions that wascan't. 4 Q. Who was then on the archbishop's council? 5 Q. There is some evidence that the young lady 5 A. That was Andy Father Kevin 6 prepared, with the help of a friend, a DVD of 6 McDonough, whoever was auxiliary bishop at the 7 her account of some things. Did you see the 7 time, Sister Dominica Brennan, John Blerbaum, 8 8 I believe. 9 A. No. 9 Q. And you convened that council and/or created 10 Q. Do you remember seeing such a 10 it for what purpose, Archbishop? 11 A. No. I don't remember seeing it at all. 11 A. Advisory. We would look at different issues. 12 Q. Okay. Do you remember anything about Andy 12 Q. Not just sexual abuse, but whatever -- 13 Elsenzimmer's attempt to interview other girls 13 A. Oh, no. 14 who may have been involved with Keating? 14 Q. might be presented? 15 A. No. 15 A. No. Financial -- financial, and that's why 16 Q. Beyond Keating and In your tenure as the 16 the representation was so varied. 17 archbishop, are there any other priests that 17 Q. Got it. In this case, the memo is from Father 18 you recall who were accused of sexual abuse of 18 Kevin McDonough, correct? 19 a minor and you as archbishop ultimately 19 A. That's right. 20 concluded it was not sexual abuse? 20 Q. And at that time he is vicar general, correct? 21 A. I don't remember. I simply don't remember. 21 A. Vicar general, that's true. 22 (Discussion out of the hearing of 22 Q. Appointed by you to be? 23 the court reporter) 23 A. Yes. 24 BY MR. ANDERSON: 24 Q. At that time, did you consider him your 25 Q. What I'm going to do, A_rchbishop, it seems -- 25 primary advisor on matters of sexual abuse? Page 29 to 32_of 207 8 of 52 sheets 9?of.52 sheets 33 35 1 A. Yes, on many things. 1 Q. Then the next sentence he states to you, "Of 2 Q. Okay. But on sexual abuse, you had several 2 course, that failure was not a cover-up, but, 3 advisors, but fair to say that he was primary? 3 rather, lack of time and resources to follow 4 A. He was. 4 up." Do you agree with that statement, 5 Okay. And you'll see on regard -- on the 5 Archbishop? 6 regarding line, it says, ?Generating 6 A. Yes. 7 communication with parishes having some 7 Q. Why was there a lack of time given to the 8 connection to a history of clergy sexual 8 problem of sexual abuse by clerics in this 9 abuse." My first question to you is, on a 9 archdiocese? 10 quick glance, do you recognize them as having 10 A. well, I think there was some time given to 11 received the memo today? 11 that very -- very terrible thing. I remember one occasion going to a parish In 13 Q. Okay. 13 the south with Father McDonough for an evening 14 MR. HAWS: Counsel, did you identify 14 meeting. I remember going to Forest Lake and 15 the exhibit number? I don't remember the 15 inviting people, and I was the only one at 16 MR. ANDERSON: I did. It's 174. 16 that meeting, to tell them about past problems 17 MR. HAWS: Ijust don't remember if 17 and to invite others to come and come forward. 18 you got it on the record. 18 And I think there would have been a couple of 19 BY MR. ANDERSON: 19 others that I participated in, but I can't 20 Q. Okay. Let's walk through it, then, and see if 20 remember now where they werehelps refresh your memory or recollection 21 unfortunate that we did not follow this more 22 of events at that time. It begins, and I'll 22 closely. 23 read it and then ask you a question, it 23 Q. You had been in the Archdiocese of St. Paul 24 states, "We have a significant number of 24 and Minneapolis, first as coadjutor and then 25 parishes that were served at one time or 25 archbishop, since '94, so as of 2002, we're 34 36 1 another - before, during, or after known 1 talking about you having been here eight 2 offenses - by priests with a history of sexual 2 years, correct? 3 abuse of minors." Do you have any memory of 3 A. Yes. 4 how many priests this would be referring to, 4 Q. When Kevin McDonough refers to this not being 5 Archbishop? 5 a cover-up, but rather a failure -- or rather 6 A. No. 6 a lack of time, whose responsibility was it to 7 Q. In the third sentence it reads, "On one or 7 give It the time necessary to protect the 8 more occasions this summer, our failure to do" 8 kids? 9 I better read the sentence before itresponsibility, and I'm coupling 10 second sentence says, "For years we have 10 with this memo with the time that I chaired 11 acknowledged that there are good reasons to 11 that charter and we were implementing the 12 implement a healing process in such parishes: 12 charter throughout the country, and so, 13 For example, to help other possible victims to 13 consequently, I was out of the diocese a great 14 come forward and to break the unhealthy 14 deal doing talks on the charter and trying to 15 secrets that often remain in such parishes." 15 get dioceses on board. And It's unfortunate 16 Do you agree with that statement? 16 that we did not pay more attention to this as 17 A. Yes. 17 a result. 18 Q. The next sentence in the memo to you states, 18 Q. To whom did you delegate from 1994 to 2002 -- 19 "On one or more occasions this summer," this 19 A. Well, the vicar general ex-officio would be 20 refers to the summer of 2002 now, "our failure 20 the delegate of the bishop when he's out. 21 to do so in specific instances has been viewed 21 Q. And was it then Kevin McDonough's -- 22 as part of a Do you believe 22 A. It was, yes. 23 there had been a cover-up in some instances of 23 Q. -- job to give the time necessary to -- 24 sexual abuse at that time? 24 A. Necessary and It would have been Andy 25 A. I can't think of any. 25 E senzimmer?s and our canonical -- our Page 33 to 36 of 207 05/21;2o14 o9?5s:5e AM 37 39 1 canonical attorney, Sister Dominica. 1 same fashion that is described here, but, 2 MR. KELLY: Archbishop, make sure 2 nevertheless, it wasn't a complete negation. 3 you wait until Mr. Anderson has completed his 3 Q. Now, this memo is in August of 2002, I think 4 question before you start 4 the charter was actually promulgated at the 5 THE WITNESS: Oh, excuse me. 5 bishops? meeting in Dallas in June of 2002 -- 6 MR. KELLY: -- giving your answer. 6 A. June, that's right. 7 THE WITNESS: All right. Thank you. 7 Q. is that correct? 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 A. That's correct. 9 Q. Did you ever in any way reprimand or 9 Q. So this is referring back in time that this 10 discipline Father McDonough, Andy Eisenzimmer 10 was not a cover?up, but rather a failure of 11 or Sister Dominica or any of those you 11 lack of time and lack of resources. Can you 12 delegated with the responsibility for 12 remember what the lack of resources what 13 protecting the kids from abuse by children 13 Father McDonough is referring to when he says 14 (sic) for having failed to give that issue a 14 "iack of resources devoted to this"? 15 lack of time between 1994 and 2002? 15 A. I don't know. I don't know because we had 16 A. I don't know. The answer to that is no. 16 someone in an office we were paying a salary 17 Q. At any time while archbishop, did you ever 17 and -- for this very purpose. 18 reprimand, discipline or even scold any of 18 Q. And do you remember today what resources had 19 those to whom you delegated responsibility for 19 been devoted to the protection of children and 20 the protection of children and failed to give 20 prevention of sexual abuse by clerics from 21 it either the lack of time or resources 21 1994 to the implementation of the charter in 22 required? 22 2002? 23 A. I don't think so. 23 MR. HAWS: Just for the record, to 24 Q. If you're told they had given this a lack of 24 the extent you're referring to this document 25 time in 2002, why didn't you discipline, 25 as dealing with that issue in particular, the 38 40 1 reprimand or scold those responsible? 1 document speaks for itself and I think it's 2 A. I don't remember. 2 out of context, but go ahead. 3 Q. The sentence goes on to say, "And resources to 3 A. I don't remember. 4 follow up." So he's attributing that failure 4 BY MR. ANDERSON: 5 not to a cover?up, but both a lack of time and 5 Q. He goes on to state, want to propose that 6 resources to follow up. So my question to 6 we ought to devote the resources now to 7 you, Archbishop, is, is what resources -- why 7 'lancing the boil? while there is residual 8 weren't the resources given to do what was 8 interest/fear/concern/anger about this issue." 9 necessary to protect the kids from abuse by 9 Do you remember Father McDonough discussing 10 the priests from 1994 to 2002 when this memo 10 lancing the boil with you? 11 was written? 11 A. I don't, no. 12 A. Well, I think, if I'm reading this correctly, 12 Q. The next paragraph, Archbishop, states, 13 that many programs were initiated in parishes 13 further motivator for particular work with 14 and -- and even established establishing an 14 these parishes is this: The local media are 15 officer -- office with my delegate in that 15 researching our history and are likely 16 officeoffice 16 eventually to publish a list of our known 17 for the protection of children. And she did 17 offenders." My question to you is, do you 18 much of this work, going around and talking in 18 remember Father McDonough expressing this 19 parishes and implementing the charter. So it 19 sentiment to you? 20 -- it is not completely negating resources or 20 A. I don't. 21 time because we did a great deal of that. We 21 Q. There's reference here to concern over the 22 established -- that that office was 22 media getting a list and publishing it. This 23 established by my predecessor, Archbishop 23 is a list of offenders who had committed 24 Roach, and -- and so this was a continuing 24 sexual abuse, is it not? 26 thing that she was_doing, and maybe not in the 25 A. Yes. 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page sheets 41 43 1 Q. How many were on that list? 1 have to deal with its disclosure sooner or 2 A. I don't know. 2 iater." so 1 read this to mean clearly that 3 Q. When you became archbishop here, first as 3 there already is a list that has been created 4 coadjutor and then ultimately Installed by the 4 and there's now discussion about, you know, 5 Holy Father as the archbishop, did you take 5 the list becoming known whether you want to or 6 any time with your predecessor, Archbishop 6 not. Do you remember anything about that, 7 Roach, to create a list of those offenders 7 Archbishop? 8 known to him and his advlsors so that when you 8 A. I don't. I don't. 9 took over, you know, the helm, so to speak, 9 Q. He goes on to write, would prefer to see us 10 you would know who was at risk or who had 10 in the position of having already prepared 11 offended? 11 local parishes for this likelihood." Do you 12 A. It seems to me that he did speak with me about 12 remember anything, any discussion about 13 it and -- but I think most of those people who 13 preparing the parishes for the likelihood of 14 had all of them who had offended and the 14 disclosure of a number of priests on a list 15 offenses were known were out of ministry. 15 who have been accused of molesting children? 16 Q. Are you sure of that? 16 A. I don't remember discussion. 17 A. No. I'm not sure because it was before 2002. 17 Q. He goes on to say, propose that we take the 18 Q. Okay. 18 following steps:" And you'll see step number 19 A. No. I'm not sure of that. That -- that would 19 1, he states, "We should identify a list of 20 not be true. 20 parishes that potentially deserve this 21 Q. Yeah. 21 attention." Do you know if such a list of 22 A. That happened only after 2002. 22 parishes where priests who had offended was 23 Q. So the question, then, is, do you recall 23 prepared at that time as is being suggested 24 having gotten a list from Archbishop Roach of 24 here? 25 people he knew to have offended who either 25 A. I don't remember. 42 44 1 were in ministry or 1 0. Number 2, he proposes, "We should call a 2 A. I don't know whether it was a list. I 2 meeting that involves the pastors, trustees 3 remember him speaking to me about some 3 and parish council presidents of all such 4 problematic priests. 4 parishes." Do you recall that action having 5 Q. Do you remember having made any memorandum or 5 been taken or implemented? 6 recording of that? 6 A. I don't remember. 7 A. I don't remember. 7 Q. Item number 3 is, he proposes, "We would then 8 Q. Was it your practice to usually create memos 8 meet individually with the small leadership 9 when he would give information such as that to 9 group of each parish and go over the relevant 10 you that you thought important to keep 10 history with each of them." Do you recall 11 A. Sometimes -- 11 having implemented that recommendation? 12 Q. -- and remember? 12 A. Faintly in my memory I think that had been 13 A. I did and sometimes I didn't and I might 13 done in some parishes, but it's faint in my 14 have, but I can't remember. 14 memory. I know that the two parishes that I 16 Q. Did you, at the time Archbishop Roach shared 15 spoke of earlier, they're clear in my memory, 16 that information with you early in your tenure 16 but I can't recall the others. 17 or at any time, ask anyone to create a list of 17 Q. And the two parishes that you do recall having 18 priests accused of select e? of molesting 18 clone that were? 19 minors? 19 A. The one at Forest Lake and a parish down in 20 A. I don't -- I don't remember whether I did or 20 the southern part of the diocese and I can't 21 not. 21 remember what parish it was. 22 Q. The paragraph goes on to, in the next 22 Q. Was the one in parish (sic) lake involving 23 sentence, he states, "Even if we do not 23 Krautkremer? 24 preemptively release all of that information 24 A. I don't remember. I remember there were two 25 ourselves (publish the list), we are going to 25 priests who were in that parish who had 11 of 52 sheets Page 41 to 44 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 45 47 1 offended. 1 Q. Okay. Did you have a similar experience in 2 Q. was that Father Kern? 2 the other parish in the southern part of the 3 A. I don't remember. 3 diocese? 4 Q. Do you remember Our Lady of Grace? 4 A. Yes. Yeah. 5 A. You mean in Edina? 5 Q. Describe what you can remember about that 6 Q. Yes, where Kern was. 6 experience in that parish. 7 A. No. 7 A. Just people expressing their distress, if they 8 Q. Okay. 8 had been offended or a family member had been 9 A. I'm not -- remember the parish, but I didn't 9 offended, and their happiness that I had come. 10 know he was there. 10 And the same in Forest Lake, the happiness 11 MR. KINSELLA: Excuse me, off the 11 that I'd come and -- and expression of pain 12 video record to change tape. 12 that they had experienced from that from 13 MR. ANDERSON: He's going to change 13 the sexual abuse. 14 the tape. If you want to take a break while 14 Q. Do you remember having made promises to those 15 we do, you can, or if you want to continue. 15 victims or the members of those parishes -- 16 (Discussion off the record) 16 A. You know, I don't -- 17 MR. KINSELLA: Back on the video 17 Q. -- that had expressed their concern and their 18 record, 11:05 a.m. 18 pain?? 19 BY MR. ANDERSON: 19 A. I don't remember. 20 Q. Archbishop, I think you indicated you didn't 20 Q. Do you remember what action, if any, you took 21 recall the name of the priest who may have 21 responsive to those expressions you heard in 22 molested minors in Forest Lake that was -- 22 those parishes from those victims and those 23 where there was some meeting, but you also 23 concerned parishioners? 24 mentioned Minneapolis, South Minneapolis. Do 24 A. I don't remember because the the situation 25 you remember the name of the priest? 25 had already been attended to. I think they not South Minneapolis. A southern 1 had received some compensation and the priests 2 part of the diocese -- archdiocese. 2 were -- were already laicized. 3 Q. Okay. 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. I don't remember the name of the town. 4 A. I think. 5 Q. Okay. And do you remember the name of the 5 Q. You're not sure of that? 6 priest who had offended? 6 A. I'm not sure of that. 7 A. No, I don't. 7 Q. When you say "laicized," you're talking 8 Q. Do you remember what disclosure or discussion 8 about that's actually removal from the 9 was made in either of those parishes 9 clerical state -- 10 concerning the offender? 10 A. That's right. 11 A. No. I remember in Forest Lakethe Vatican? 12 was more of a -- my receiving expressions of 12 A. That's right. 13 concern from the people who had -- some of 13 Q. But you're not sure of that? 14 whom had been offended by the priest. And -- 14 A. Not sure. 15 and I don't remember the other parish -- the 15 Q. Okay. Item number 4, the next page, I'll 16 meeting in the other parish at all, except 16 direct your attention to that, under the 17 that I was there with Father Mcoonough. 17 proposals given by Father McDonough, it 18 Q. Okay. And it sounds like there were 18 states, "We would ask them to consider whether 19 expressions of concern by several victims or 19 and how to involve a broader leadership group 20 family members of several victims -- 20 in the discussion." Do you remember that 21 A. Yes. 21 item? 22 Q. -- of that offender -- 22 A. No. 23 A. That's right. 23 Q. Okay. Item 5 is -- 24 Q. -- whose identity you don't remember today? 24 (Discussion out of the hearing of 25 A. I don't remember. 25 the court reporter) 09:56:56 AM Page sheets is of 52 sheets 49 51 1 A. Oh, excuse me. 1 known to either you or the archdiocese 2 BY MR. ANDERSON: 2 pertaining to Gil Gustafson? 3 Q. That's okay. Item 5 is, "We would then send a 3 A. I think I made arrangements with him to seek 4 staff member to each such parish to work out a 4 laicization and not re-seek -- not seek 5 process of communication and follow up with 5 re-entry into the priesthood, and it was a 6 each parish." Do you remember, Archbishop, 6 financial arrangement, but I don't recall what 7 having done or directed that that be done? 7 it was. 8 A. No. I don't remember. 8 Q. You do recall that Gil Gustafson was -- 9 Q. He goes on to state, do not believe we 9 (Discussion out of the hearing of 10 currently have sufficient staff support to 10 the court reporter) 11 carry out this effort with internal resources, 11 BY MR. ANDERSON: 12 therefore, we should bring someone in on a 12 Q. Did you give Gil Gustafson money to do that? 13 contract basis to organize the effort." Do 13 A. I think I did. 14 you remember having done that or followed 14 Q. How much? 15 such" -- 15 A. I don't rememberyou recall meeting with Brian Herrity, 17 Q. The next paragraph 17 H-e?r?r?i?t?y, the child that he had been 18 MR. KELLY: Excuse me. Was the 18 convicted of having engaged in criminal sexual 19 answer do you remember or was that your answer 19 conduct towards when Brian was ten years old? 20 no? 20 A. I don't recall having met him, but I may have. 21 THE WITNESS: No. No. I don't 21 Q. Do you recall meeting with his parents, Jeff 22 remember It. 22 Herrity or Cheryl Herrity, and making promises 23 MR. ANDERSON: Okay. Thank you, 23 to them? 24 Tom. Did I cut him off? 24 A. No. 25 MR. KELLY: No. He just said two 25 Q. I'm gonna come back to Gil Gustafson, but for 50 52 1 things. 1 the moment, direct your attention back to this 2 MR. ANDERSON: Okay. 2 exhibit, and the next priest identified with 3 BY MR. ANDERSON: 3 known abuse history is Michael Stevens, St. 4 Q. The next paragraph he writes, "Here is a 4 Michael, Prior Lake; Epiphany, Coon Rapids. 5 partial list of the parishes that merit 5 What can you tell us, Archbishop, about what 6 special attention." And then in caps he says, 6 the history was known to the archdiocese to 7 "Priests with known abuse histories." The 7 have been concerning Michael Stevens at this 8 first is Gilbert Gustafson, St. Mary of the 8 time? 9 Lake, White Bear Lake, WBL. What do you 9 A. Well, when I arrived in the archdiocese, any 10 remember about what the archdiocese knew about 10 sexual abuse, I believe, happened prior to my 11 Gil Gustafson and his history of abuse at that 11 arrival and Michael Stevens was working in the 12 time? 12 computer room in the archdiocese. And then 13 A. His history of the -- the experience of abuse, 13 after the charter, he -- he was removed from 14 I think, happened before my arrival here and 14 that position and I don't know where he was. 15 then he was in treatment and worked in an 15 I I've -- I don't know where -- 16 isolated capacity in the Chancery for some 16 Q. Do you remember anything else about Stevens? 17 time until 2002 and said Mass at the Poor 17 A. No. No. 18 Clare Convent in Minneapolis and he he 18 Q. The next identified here is Robert Thurner, 19 seemed to have been making very fine progress 19 St. Mark's, St. Paul and then a number of 20 at that time. And then after the charter, he 20 assignments including St. John, Hopkins; St. 21 no longer was permitted to say a Mass publicly 21 Joseph, West St. Paul; St. Therese, St. Paul; 22 anywhere. And then he also was removed from 22 Most Holy Trinity, St. Louis Park; St. 23 the Chancery. So he's -- I think he does some 23 Michael, Prior Lake; St. Edward, Bloomington; 24 kind of work now, but I don't know what it is. 24 St. Luke, St. Paul. What do you remember 25 Q. Do you recall anything else about the history 25 about the history known to the archdiocese of Page 49?to 52 of 257 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 53 55 1 abuse by him? 1 Q. All right. After, I'll represent to you, 2 A. I have no memory of it at all, except that he 2 Archbishop, that that civil case of Scheffler 3 -- had abused and that's all I would know. 3 versus the archdiocese resulted in a verdict 4 Q. Do you have any memory of how many kids? 4 of $500,000 in compensatory damages and 5 A. No. 5 $500,000 in punitive damages, and right after 6 Q. The next is Lee Krautkremer, identified St. 6 the verdict there was a public relations or 7 Peter, Forest Lake; St. Joseph, Lino Lakes; 7 public release done by the archdiocese and 8 St. Michael, St. Michael; St. Michael, West 8 under your signature or name where it was 9 St. Paul; St. Margaret Mary, Golden Valley; 9 stated, and I paraphrase, "By reason of this 10 St. Peter, North St. Paul and Immaculate 10 verdict today in Hennepin County District 11 Conception, Faribault. What can you tell us 11 Court, the archdiocese will have to reduce or 12 about what was known to the archdiocese 12 curtail its ministry to the poor." My 13 concerning his abuses? 13 question to you, Archbishopdon't know it any of that. 14 remember having participated in or allowing 15 Q. Robert Kapoun is the next listed, St. Raphael, 15 such a release like that to have been made? 16 St. Scholastica, Heidelberg; St. 16 A. No. 17 Patrick, St. Joseph; St. Catherine, rural New 17 MR. HAWS: I object to the form and 18 Prague; St. Kevin, Minneapolis; Most Holy 18 it's out of context as well. 19 Redeemer, Montgomery. What do you remember 19 BY MR. ANDERSON: 20 about his abuse history and that known to the 20 Q. Just a minute. Okay. At that time or any 21 archdiocese? 21 time. 22 A. He might have been -- that one parish in 22 A. I don't remember it. 23 Montgomery might have been the parish which I 23 Q. Okay. The next name identified here is Robert 24 referred to earlier which I visited, that 24 Zasacki, Z?a-s-a?c?k?i, and then a number of 25 could have been, but that's all -- but that's 25 parishes listed. Can you identify for us what 54 56 1 only a guess and I don't know any more. 1 you remember or know about what the 2 Q. Archbishop, do you remember there was a jury 2 archdiocese knew about his abuse history? 3 trial held in Hennepin County where the 3 A. I didn't know anything of his abuse history 4 plaintiff was identified Initially as John 4 and he was removed, I think, from Sacred Heart 5 Doe, but who ultimately became public using 5 in Robbinsdale, I think. 6 the name Dale Scheffler and the civil case was 6 Q. That's one of the parishes listed here. He 7 brought against both the Archdiocese of St. 7 was at St. Peter, Forest Lake; Sacred Heart in 8 Paul and Minneapolis and Father Robert Kapoun, 8 Robbinsdaie. 9 also known as the Polka Padre, and that case 9 A. well, yes, but I don't know anything of his 10 went to a civil jury and a verdict was 10 abusive history. 11 rendered and at that time I believe you were 11 Q. The next listed is -- the next priest 12 the archbishop. Do you remember that? 12 listed -- 13 A. No. No, I don't. 13 A. Excuse me, except that it came to the fore 14 Q. Do you remember during your tenure at all any 14 rather -- I think after this 2002 and then I 15 civil verdicts going to where damages were 15 I think I was the one who removed him. 16 awarded by juries during your tenure at the 16 That's -- that's all. Excuse me. 17 archdiocese by reason of sexual abuse and the 17 Q. That's okay. That's okay. What else do you 18 negligent handling of it by the archdiocese? 18 remember about that, anything else? 19 A. I don't remember any specifically, but there 19 A. No. 20 must have been because I've had two or three 20 Q. Okay. The next listed is Father Paul 21 depositions and I -- but I don't know -- I 21 Palmitessa, Holy Redeemer in Maplewood and St. 22 can't remember what they were for, with you. 22 Paul, Zumbrota. What do you remember about 23 And -- and I would imagine that the jury would 23 the history known concerning him and minors? 24 have rendered a verdict and -- but I I 24 A. That's the first time I've ever come across 25 can't tell you now what they were. 25 th_at name, to my recollection. 09:55:55 AM Page 5sheets 57 59 1 Q. Okay. The next listed is Tim McCarthy and a 1 A. No. 2 number of parishes listed where he had worked 2 Q. -- yourself -- 3 as of this date. What can you tell us about 3 A. No. 4 the history known to the archdiocese about his 4 Q. -- to get to the bottom of who he had abused, 5 abuse? 5 when he had abused and done something to 6 A. I can't tell you anything because, in my 6 correct it, at least to those in the 7 judgment, this is the first time I've come 7 archdiocese? 8 across that name, in my memory. 8 A. No. I would -- I would hear about him and I 9 Q. The next listed is Tom Gillespie, OSB, that 9 would read about him, but I've never met him. 10 means Order of St. Benedict, obviously you 10 Q. Did you ever make any efforts or direct any of 11 know that to be St. John's, correct? 11 your consultants or advisors to go to the 12 A. That's right. 12 parishes where he had worked in the 13 Q. Okay. And what can you tell us, if anything, 13 Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis and 14 about what was known to the archdiocese 14 had been known to have abused to try to reach 15 concerning his abuse history? 15 out to other people who may have been abused 16 A. I can't tell you anything because, once again, 16 to help them heal or the parishes to heal? 17 to my memory, this is the first time I've come 17 A. I don't think -- I -- no. I did not. And I 18 across that name. 18 -- the reason for that is I had the impression 19 Q. Turning to the next page, Archbishop, the name 19 that all of that was taken care of by my 20 Eugene Salvatore Corlca and a number of 20 predecessor. When I arrived, this seemed to 21 parishes are listed. It looks like what 21 have been a closed case, it was over with. 22 can you tell us, if anything, about what was 22 Q. Do you remember what Archbishop Roach told you 23 known to the archdiocese about his history of 23 about what he knew about -- 24 abuse? 24 A. I don't remember. 25 A. The again, this is the first time, to my 25 Q. Torn Adamson? 58 60 1 memory, I've come across this name. 1 A. I don't remember. 2 MR. KELLY: Excuse me, Archbishop, 2 Q. The next one listed is Joseph Heitzer, several 3 you mean today is the first time -- 3 New Ulm parishes, St. Peter in Forest Lake. 4 THE WITNESS: Today. 4 What can you tell us about what was known by 5 MR. KELLY: or in 2002? 5 the archdiocese as of 2002 concerning him? 6 THE WITNESS: No. Today is the 6 A. I'm looking at that name, it seems to me, for 7 first time. The name is completely unfamiliar 7 the first time ever. 8 to me. 8 Q. The next is Alfred Longley, several parishes 9 BY MR. ANDERSON: 9 listed. What can you tell us about what was 10 Q. Okay. The next listed is Thomas Adamson and 10 known about his abuse history? 11 is that name familiar to you? 11 A. Once again, I'm looking at that name for the 12 A. Very much so. 12 first time. 13 Q. Okay. 13 Q. The next listed is Harold Whittet, 14 A. I think that's why we're here. 14 W?h-i?t?t-e-t. What can you tell us about him 15 Q. That's one of the reasons. 15 and his history known -- his history of abuse 16 A. Uh huh. Yes, that name is familiar to me. 16 known to the archdiocese? 17 Q. Okay. And that was familiar to you because, 17 A. Once again, I'm looking at that name, I 18 as of 2002, you were aware that there had been 18 believe, for the first time. 19 a lot of litigation -- 19 Q. The next is Rudolph Henrich. What can you 20 A. Yes. 20 tell us about his history of abuse of minors 21 Q. initiated by a number of survivors with 21 and known to the archdiocese? 22 whom we had worked for many years concerning 22 A. Once again, I'm looking at that name, it seems 23 him, correct? 23 to me, for the first time. 24 A. That's right. 24 Q. The next listed is Francis Reynolds, several 25 Q. Had you ever met with Tom Adamson -- 25 parishes listed. What can you tell us about 15 of 52 sheets Page 57 to 60 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 61 63 1 his history known to the archdiocese? 1 abuse of minors? 2 A. Looking at that name for the first time. 2 A. No. I think he -- and I can't -- I can't say 3 Q. The next listed is Ambrose Fiibin. What can 3 for sure. I -- I probably met him once in 4 you tell us -- and several parishes. What can 4 passing. He's very elderly, I think, isn't 5 you tell us what was known about his abuse 5 he? I'm not surecan't say 6 history and known to the archdiocese as of 6 for sure. 7 2002? 7 Q. when this is listed as a disputed claim or 8 A. Looking at that name for the first time. 8 marginal behavior, undue attention, did you 9 Q. The next category and in capital -- if you 9 read that then or do you read that now to mean 10 want to take a break at any time, Archbishop; 10 that this is where the priest denies having 11 is this a good time? 11 committed It or what? 12 A. I'm -- I'm fine. 12 A. No. I would read that as not a sexual abuse, 13 Q. Okay. 13 but, rather, as behavior that would be 14 A. For now. Thank you. 14 questionable. 16 Q. Okay. You just let me know If 15 Q. Okay. You did remove -- you did remove 16 A. All right. 16 Desutter for sexual abuse, though? 17 Q. -- anytime you feel like it. 17 A. I think I did. 18 A. Thank you. 18 Q. And do you have any knowledge of John Brown 19 Q. We'll try to do it 19 having committed sexual abuse of minors at any 20 MR. ANDERSON: We should take a 20 time? 21 break. 21 A. I cannot recall the history of his -- you 22 MR. KELLY: What do you anticipate 22 know, I can't recall his history. 23 the length of the deposition? Just a general 23 Q. The next listed is at page 4, there is one 24 idea. 24 removal on this document and I don't have that 25 MR. ANDERSON: Let's take a break 25 name at the moment, the next listed is page 4 62 64 1 and we can discuss it. 1 at the top is Jerome Kern. Did you take any 2 MR. KELLY: Sounds good. 2 action -- 3 MR. KINSELLA: Off the video record. 3 A. I belleve that I did. 4 (Recess taken) 4 Q. What? 5 MR. KINSELLA: Back on the video 5 A. Removed him from active ministry. 6 record, the time is 11:44 a.m. . 6 Q. When? 7 BY MR. ANDERSON: 7 A. I can't recall. And I say I believe I did, so 8 Q. Archbishop, I'm directing your attention back 8 I can't say that for certain. 9 to the Exhibit 174, I'm now on page 3 of it 9 Q. For sexual abuse of minors? 10 and the topic is ?Priests with disputed 10 A. It must have been because that would have been 11 claims, marginal behavior or undue attention." 11 the only reason. 12 The first listed is Gilbert Desutter. Did you 12 Q. Joseph Wajda is the next listed. 13 take any action pertaining to Desutter and 13 A. I did remove him. 14 sexual abuse of minors? 14 Q. When? 15 A. It seems to me that after the charter of 2002 15 A. I can't remember. 16 I did. He was not living In the archdiocese 16 Q. For sexual abuse of minors? 17 at that time, but I think he was living in 17 A. Yes. 18 Arizona, but it seems to me that I did. 18 Q. Was he reported by you or your office to the 19 Q. And what did you do? 19 20 A. Removed him from ministry, I think. 20 A. It had happened some years ago before that law 21 Q. The next listed is John McGrath. Did you take 21 was passed, I think. 22 any action re -- 22 Q. Do you have any memory of having taken any 23 A. That name is unfamiliar to me. 23 other action, other than having removed him? 24 Q. The next listed is John Brown. Did you take 24 A. I can't remember. 25 any action in connection with him and sexual 25 Q. Next listed is Richard Jeub. Did you take any_ 05/21/2014 09: 56:56 AM Page sheets 17 of 52 sheets 65 67 1 action responsive to him and sexual abuse of 1 A. I don't remember. 2 minors? 2 Q. Did you conduct any investigation to or 3 A. I can't remember. 3 direct that any investigation be done by that 4 Q. There is indications in the file that Jeub and 4 pastor or your then vicar general or others to 5 Kern, both of those names listed here, were 5 find out -- 6 switched out in their assignment at Our Lady 6 A. I -- I don't -- 7 of Grace. Did you do that or do you remember 7 Q. -- what was there? 8 having done that? 8 A. I don't remember. 9 A. No. I didn't even know they were in Our Lady 9 Q. The next listed -- 10 of Grace. 10 (Discussion out of the hearing of 11 Q. The next listed is Dennis Kampa. Did you take 11 the court reporter) 12 any action responsive to him having -- 12 BY MR. ANDERSON: 13 A. I can't -- I can't remember. 13 Q. Did you restrict him at that time in any way? 14 Q. Next listed is Joseph Galiatin. Did you take 14 A. No. I don't -- I don't think so. 15 any action responsive to him? 15 Q. The next listed is Harry Walsh. What action 16 A. No. 16 did you take? 17 Q. Have you ever received information that he had 17 A. That name is unfamiliar to me. 18 abused? 18 Q. Do you ever have you ever known him to have 19 A. Not that he had abused, but that he had acted 19 abused youth? 20 in with an inappropriate touch. 20 A. I don't know anything -- I don't know anything 21 Q. Where did you get that information? 21 about him. 22 A. From his pastor. 22 Q. Underneath that there is listed Bishop Dudley. 23 Q. Who was that? 23 What do you know about Dudley having been 24 A. I can't think of his name right now. 24 accused of having abused youth? 25 Q. When did you receive that? 25 MR. HAWS: I'll object, some of this 66 68 1 A. That would have been -- I've been retired six 1 information I understand is protected and 2 years. Maybe ten years ago. 2 subject to other protections of prior 3 Q. And that was inappropriate touch of a minor? 3 discussions, but at least for the record. 4 A. Of -- I don't know whether the person was a 4 BY MR. ANDERSON: 6 minor or not, I can't remember. It was a 5 Q. This is a public document I'm referring to, so 6 touch like up here (Indicating). 6 what can you tell me about it? 7 Q. For the record, you're pointing to your left 7 A. I can tell you I would -- in my judgment, it 8 shoulder? 8 was the most ludicrous accusation that could 9 A. Yes. 9 have been made about anyone. He was accused 10 Q. Okay. Did you receive any information that he 10 of dancing on a floor in his cassock, and if 11 had touched the genitals of a youth that he 11 -- you'd have to know Bishop Dudley and his 12 had under his control? 12 family, A, he would not have been dancing and 13 A. Never. Never. 13 coming close to a young lady and some years 14 (Discussion out of the hearing of 14 ago. And he was exonerated, incidentally. 15 the court reporter) 15 Q. Who exonerated him? 16 BY MR. ANDERSON: 16 A. I don't remember. 17 Q. What were the circumstances of the touch as 17 Q. When was the accusation that you described as 18 reported to you? 18 ludicrous made? 19 A. I think it was a re a camping weekend or 19 A. I don't remember. 20 something like that. 20 Q. How many accusations of abuse or misconduct 21 Q. And you say it was the pastor that made the 21 were made against Bishop Dudley? 22 report or was it a family member? 22 A. I don't remember. 23 A. A pastor, I think. 23 Q. What makes you believe that that accusation or 24 Q. And he had received the information from whom, 24 any others, if there were, pertaining to 25 do you know? 25 Dudley would be described as ludicrous? _Page 55 t6 es or'2o7 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 69 71 1 MR. KELLY: I'll object, the witness 1 A. He -- absolutely. 2 testl?ed 2 Q. And you believed him? 3 MR. ANDERSON: I'll rephrase it if 3 A. Absolutely. 4 you don't like it. 4 Q. Do you have any knowledge that settlement -- 5 BY MR. ANDERSON: 5 any settlements had been made with any of his 6 Q. Why do you use the term " udicrous"? 6 accusers? 7 A. Because I knew Bishop Dudley so well and it 7 A. I don't remember. 8 was just incompatible, that kind of behavior, 8 Q. When you look at the exhibit, then, of the 9 dancing on a floor -- the floor with a high 9 names of all these people we've identified in 10 school girl was incompatible with his 10 this exhibit and this memo provided to you in 11 character. 11 2002, my next series of questions pertains to 12 Q. In your experience, Archbishop, you were the 12 all of these. Did you ever make any public 13 head of the committee for the protection of 13 disclosures of the history known to the 14 children and as a part of the charter and, you 14 archdiocese concerning any of those priests 15 know, you've been a priest for many, many 15 accused or found to have committed sexual 16 years and many capacities as pastor, as 16 abuse? 17 rector, as archbishop and the like; isn't 17 A. I can't remember that. There could have been. 18 (sic) your experience inform you that some of 18 I don't think there was any systemic approach 19 the most trusted and revered priests among you 19 to it, but there could have been a disclosure 20 and us can often also be offenders? 20 of one name or two names or more than that to 21 MR. KELLY: Objected to as calling 21 a parish or group. 22 for speculation -- 22 Q. Did you, Archbishop, or anybody at your 23 MR. HAWS: Of the highest ranks. 23 direction ever report to law enforcement any 24 MR. KELLY: -- of the highest order. 24 of the names on this list, Exhibit 174, or any 25 A. I don't want to speculate, but I have -- I've 25 other priest reported to have abused children? 70 72 1 always found where -- where there was smoke, 1 MR. HAWS: Object to the form. 2 there was fire. In other words, if a person 2 Report to whom? 3 acts strangely and then was accused, then one 3 BY MR. ANDERSON: 4 could validate it. But my judgment and my 4 Q. Report to the archdiocese. 5 experience is, is that many great, great men 5 A. Report to the archdiocese? 6 like Bishop Dudley could have been accused, or 6 Q. Yes. The question is, did you or anybody at 7 Bishop Howard Hubbard in Albany, which was 7 your direction ever report suspicions of 8 terrible, and found to be exonerated, free of 8 sexual abuse by priests or information you or 9 all those accusations by people who were just 9 the archdiocese had received about that to law 10 not right in the head. 10 enforcement? 11 BY MR. ANDERSON: 11 A. To law enforcement -- 12 Q. To your knowledge, is there one accuser or 12 Q. Yes. 13 more than one accuser pertaining to Dudley? 13 A. -- I have not, and I -- I don't know whether 14 A. I don't remember. 14 anyone under in -- on my staff did. 15 (Discussion out of the hearing of 15 Q. Did you ever direct your vicar general or 16 the court reporter) 16 anybody on your staff to make such a report to 17 BY MR. ANDERSON: 17 law enforcement? 18 Q. Did you ever ask Dudley if he had abused? 18 A. I can't recall that I did. 19 A. Yes. 19 Q. Did you while archbishop consider yourself to 20 Q. When? 20 be a mandated reporter? 21 A. when we were on retreat, talking about this. 21 A. I think I did when that when -- when that 22 Q. When do you estimate that to have been? 22 law came in, I -- I think I did. 23 A. I can't remember. 23 Q. Do you know what constitutes under the law the 24 Q. And did he deny to you that he had been abused 24 kind of Information that required you to be or 25 -- he had abused? 25 to make a report? 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page sheets 73 75 1 A. No. 1 there were no offenders in ministry? 2 (Discussion out of the hearing of 2 A. After 2002? 3 the court reporter) 3 Q. Before 2002. 4 BY MR. ANDERSON: 4 A. I -- I can't remember whether I made that 5 Did you or anybody at your -- under your 5 promise before 2002 because we were at a 6 direction ever turn over any of the files 6 different place at that time, too, and in 7 pertaining to any of the priests on this 7 under in understanding what "pedophile" 8 Exhibit 174 or any other priests who had been 8 meant. 9 accused of or recorded to have abused minors? 9 Q. Would you agree that don't know. I don't remember and I don't 10 responsibility of the archbishop before 2002 11 know. 11 to make sure that each priest assigned in the 12 (Discussion out of the hearing of 12 archdiocese is safe and not a risk of harm to 13 the court reporter) 13 children? 14 BY MR. ANDERSON: 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Do you know if anybody, any official of the 15 Q. Did you make a promise to the people, the 16 archdiocese has ever turned over any files to 16 parishioners, the public that there would be 17 law enforcement 17 no priest in ministry who had offended after 18 A. I don't know. 18 the charter in 2002? 19 Q. concerning a priest who's abused? 19 A. I think I did, yes. 20 A. I don't know. 20 (Discussion out of the hearing of 21 Q. Can you say that you did not do that or have 21 the court reporter) 22 that done? 22 BY MR. ANDERSON: 23 A. I can't say. 23 Q. I'm going to show you an exhibit, we've marked 24 Q. Archbishop, would you agree that you as 24 it Exhibit 102, and while Mike is retrieving 25 archbishop have a responsibility to keep the 25 it, Archbishop, it reflects the year 1998 and 74 76 1 children safe? 1 it's an article, I believe, about the church 2 A. Yes. 2 and sexual abuse. And I'm putting Exhibit 102 3 Q. Would you agree that you as archbishop made a 3 before you and there is a statement attributed 4 promise to the people to do everything that 4 in this article to Father McDonough, the then 5 you could to keep the children safe? 5 vicar general, and and in it it says, 6 A. Yes. 6 "Church updates sex abuse policy." Did you 7 Q. Did you ever make that pledge as archbishop in 7 update the sex abuse policy in 1998? 8 the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis 8 A. It would have been a committee, I believe. 9 before 2002 and the Charter for Protection of 9 Q. And then it states, "Official: 15 10 Children was instituted? 10 archdiocesan priests in the last 50 years have 11 A. I don't remember. I might have when I first 11 been credibly accused of molesting minors." 12 came here in my opening talk, but I can't 12 Where did that information come from, 13 remember. 13 Archbishop? 14 Q. Would you agree that the archdiocese and the 14 A. I don't know. I -- I would not know. I don't 15 archbishop should never, ever gamble with the 15 remember. 16 safety of children -- 16 Q. The article begins by stating in 1984, 17 A. Yes. 17 Reverend McDonough sat in a meeting, you 18 Q. -- when it comes to the priests? 18 weren't here then, so I'm not going to ask you 19 A. Yes. 19 about that, but the last on the first page 20 Q. Would you agree that the archdiocese should 20 of this, directing your attention to the last 21 make every effort possible to protect the 21 column, I'm going to read what it says in the 22 children from abuse by priests? 22 second?to?the? ast paragraph and ask you a 23 A. Yes. 23 question. It states, "For the first time, 24 Q. Did you as archbishop promise the people and 24 McDonough revealed the extent of the problem 25 the parishioneriais wias the public that 25 in an interview this week. Fifteen priests in 19 of 52 sheets Page 73 to 76 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 77 79 1 the archdiocese have been ?credibly? accused 1 something like that to look at our records and 2 of molesting minors during the past 50 years, 2 to make sure we were corresponding information 3 McDonough said." This is while you're 3 that was reflected In our records. 4 archbishop. Do you remember a list of 15 4 Q. In any case, the data assembled and reported 5 priests having been prepared at that time who 5 publicly about offenders was to determine what 6 had been credibly accused? 6 priests had offended children, correct? 7 A. No. 7 A. Yeslist at that time? 8 Q. And was the goal to show that the numbers were 9 A. I can't remember. 9 less than other institutions?? 10 Q. It goes on to state, or he is quoted as going 10 A. No. I think the goal was simply to show that 11 on -- is quoted as having said, "The number is 11 we were doing our homework and making a noble 12 higher than the national average, McDonough 12 attempt at reducing the numbers. 13 said, but corresponds to experts? predictions 13 Q. Was the belief at that time by yourself and 14 that about 2 percent of priests abuse 14 the committee that most of the abuse had 15 children." So at that time, was there some 15 happened in the 19705? 16 kind of expert consultation or review done 16 A. No. Because the abuse had been happening 17 that led Kevin McDonough to make this public 17 right up to 2002, as we all know, and with the 18 statement?" 18 lawsuit situation, but the -- the attempt of 19 A. I don't recall. 19 the committee was to get the bishops on board, 20 Q. In the middle of the article you'll see in 20 the bishops of this country, and which they 21 capital letters an emphasis, he's quoted as 21 all pledged themselves to, except two, and -- 22 stating, "Priests who molested children are 22 and reduce the numbers of any priest in 23 not allowed to work In a parish setting or 23 ministry or any priest who had this 24 have any contact with children, McDonough 24 inclination for pedophile (sic) to get him out 25 said." This is 1998. Is that true, 25 of ministry and not give him that opportunity 78 80 1 Archbishop, and was it then? 1 because we had not really come -- I had never 2 A. I -- I would -- I would need to go back and 2 heard of the word pedophile when I was a young 3 look at records, which I don't have, but if he 3 priest or when I was rector of the seminary. 4 said that, we -- that's what we certainly came 4 We didn't -- we had no idea, no idea what this 5 out with in the charter and that was In 2002, 5 was even. And -- and then even on the -- In 6 so I'm presuming It it was true. 6 Institutions, they weren't 7 Q. Well, this is four years before the charter. 7 handling it correctly. They -- as you know, 8 A. Yes. 8 they would send a letter back to the bishop, 9 Q. Okay. Was any national study done by bishops 9 "This man is fine with his ministry" and send 10 at any time before 2004 or 2002 to determine 10 him back in and it wasn't fine. It was like 11 the numbers of priests who had offended? 11 many other diseases, they -- they had not 12 A. I don't remember. 12 really verified this as a very serious disease 13 Q. As a result of the charter and the promises 13 and that the person could revert to at any 14 made to the people and the public, there was 14 moment. It's not just simply a matter of 15 data assembled and commissioned by the John 15 going to a house of affirmation or a house of 16 Jay study, and I think it was through your 16 study in order to have this 17 committee, to get some numbers about priests 17 taken care of because that -- that simply was 18 who were credibly accused or had been the 18 not true, although everyone thought it was 19 subject of substantiated allegations, correct? 19 true, attorneys, 20 A. Yes. 20 medical doctors and bishops. And then then 21 Q. Were the names of those priests actually given 21 when it became evident that the inclination to 22 to the John Jay College or just the numbers? 22 be a pedophile was a very, very serious thing 23 A. I don't remember. I don't rememberand many times untreatabie, then we 24 remember we had the -- I called them 24 looked at it more carefully. 25 inspectors come every other year or 25 Q. Archbishop, you're referring to pedophilia as Page sheets 81 83 1 a disease and that you didn't understand the 1 think. 2 disease, would you say 2 Q. Did he, when appointed coadjutor or in 3 A That's right. 3 succession to you as archbishop, ever ask you 4 -- that's correct? 4 who you knew to be offenders and I guess 5 A That's right. 5 that's the question. 6 It's also correct, is it not, that you knew 6 A. He probably did. At this moment I can't 7 when you were ordained and have always known 7 remember. So I -- I I can't -- I can't 8 that it was a crime for an adult to engage in 8 answer that yes or no because I can't 9 any sexual contact with a kid 9 remember. 10 A. That's right. 10 Q. So you can't say whether he did or whether he 11 Q. correct? 11 didn't today -- 12 A. Correct. 12 A. No. I can't say. 13 Q. So there was never any mystery about that 13 Q. -- is what you're really saying? 14 being a crime 14 (Discussion out of the hearing of 16 A. No. 15 the court reporter) 16 Q. -- correct? 16 BY MR. ANDERSON: 17 A. That's right. 17 Q. At any time, Archbishop, did you have 18 Q. When all this data was assembled by the 18 discussions with any of your advisors that the 19 Catholic bishops, yourself included, and John 19 practice of not recording certain things 20 Jay College was commissioned to help assemble 20 pertaining to sexual abuse by priests should 21 it, why weren't the names of those priests who 21 be adhered to because there was a possibility 22 were the subject of that review who were 22 we, that is, the attorneys for the survivors, 23 determined to have been credibly accused made 23 would force its disclosure in litigation? 24 known to the public in 2004 when it was 24 A. I never -- 26 assembled? 25 MR. KELLY: Excuse me a seconddon't know. I don't remember why. 1 object to the question to the extent that 2 Q. If the goal was to protect kids in the future 2 advlsors may include counsel for the 3 from abuse and to help those that had been 3 archdiocese or the archbishop and in that 4 abused, wouldn't the best course have been to 4 respect it's privileged. 5 make such a disclosure to achieve those goals? 5 BY MR. ANDERSON: 6 A. As we look back on it now, the answer to that 6 Q. So excepting advice from lawyers, did you ever 7 would be yes. But we cannot forget that we 7 deploy or employ the practice with your 8 were in uncharted water at that time after the 8 advlsors of not putting certain things in 9 charter. And I think that since that time, 9 writing concerning sexual abuse -- 10 many improvements have been made in 10 A. I can't -- 11 recognizing names of those who had been 11 Q. because just a moment -- because it 12 credibly -- credibly accused. 12 could be forced to have been disclosed in 13 Q. Archbishop, there has been, while you were 13 litigation? 14 here, a resistance to release the names of the 14 A. I never recall such a conversation. 15 credibly accused offenders assembled who were 15 (Discussion out of the hearing of 16 identified to have been, according to the John 16 the court reporter) 17 Jay study, 33 in number here. Why did you 17 BY MR. ANDERSON: 18 resist the public disclosure of those names on 18 Q. Other than Bishop Dudley, who you asked if he 19 that list, those priests determined to have 19 had offended, do you recall ever -- did you 20 been credibly accused? 20 ever ask any accused offender if he had 21 A. I don't know. I just don't know. 21 actually committed such an offense or any 22 Q. Did you ever tell or advise Archbishop 22 offenses against children? 23 Nienstedt, your successor, to release that 23 A. I probably did, but I -- I cannot pinpoint any 24 list? 24 specific instanceneveriscussed it, I don't 25 Q. But Dudley is the only one you remember today?_ 21 of 52 shEaFs Page 81 to 84 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 o5/21/E014 09:56:56 AM 85 87 1 A. Yes, because I remember the the scene with 1 removed from there so that you could review a 2 him, he was going through a great deal. 2 history of any priest accused -- 3 Q. And you remember that because you were so 3 A. I have -- 4 close to him? 4 Q. of having offended and see what was 5 A. Yes. 5 reflected by those files? 6 MR. HAWS: Again, just so the record 6 A. I have asked for files. 7 is clear as to Bishop Dudley, I believe that 7 Q. Who did you request? 8 there are Issues that that matter should be 8 A. I can't remember. 9 sealed or anything related to that discussion 9 Q. Do you ever did you ever take any action 10 should be sealed pending resolution. 10 responsive to a review of a file concerning 11 BY MR. ANDERSON: 11 sexual molestation by priests accused? 12 Q. Pertaining to documents, Archbishop, records 12 A. I can't remember. 13 pertaining to a priest who is accused of abuse 13 Q. Did you, yourself, maintain any files of your 14 and a report that would be made, where would 14 own, special files, apart from those in the 15 such a report be filed in the documents of the 16 vault? 16 archdiocesethe filing cabinet in the walk-in file. 17 Q. Do you know if anybody else did on the topic 18 Q. Where was that housed, what cabinet? 18 of sexual abuse? 19 A. It's on the first floor corridor. 20 Q. Are there any other files besides those in the 21 Q. Of in whose office? 21 vault that you were aware of maintained, at 22 A. It's -- it's not an office. It's a walk-in 22 least pertinent to the topics of sexual abuse, 23 file. It's outside of many offices. 23 accusations made against priests -- 24 Q. Sometimes there's been reference to a vaultthis in the nature of a vault? 25 Q. beyond those in the vault? 86 88 1 A. That -- that is the vault. 1 A. Not that I knew of. 2 0. Okay. 2 MR. KINSELLA: Off the video record 3 A. Excuse me, that's the vault. 3 to change tape. 4 Q. Okay. And this is on the main level? 4 (Discussion off the record) 5 A. That's right. 5 (Recess taken) 6 Q. Of the Chancery? 6 MR. KINSELLA: Back on the video 7 A. Yes. 7 record, 1:19 p.m. 8 Q. And In that vault on the main level of the 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 9 Chancery, what files were housed and 9 Q. Archbishop, I'd like to turn to the topic of 10 information pertaining to the topic of sexual 10 payments made to priests who have been -- who 11 abuse by priests of the archdiocese and how it 11 have molested kids and payments made to them. 12 was being handled? 12 Is there a practice in the archdiocese under 13 A. Well, it would be under the -- in the file of 13 your tenure where certain priests who had been 14 the individual priest. 14 found to have molested children receive extra 15 Q. And in that vault, how many priests would you 15 payments for housing, and otherwise, 16 estimate were there files that contained 16 under an account identified as 1-515? 17 evidence of at least accusations of abuse? 17 MR. HAWS: Object to the form. 18 A. I could not tell you because I've only think I've been in the file -- in the the 19 MR. HAWS: You can answer. 20 vault twice in all the years that I was there. 20 THE WITNESS: Oh, I can answer? 21 Q. What prompted you to go into the vault? 21 BY MR. ANDERSON: 22 A. I can't even remember. Maybe I was looking 22 Q. Yeah. 23 for my own file, but I get claustrophobia when 23 A. First of all, I think it was you, Mr. 24 I'm in there, so I I never went in. 24 Finnegan, who referred to an account in the 25 Q. Did you ever direct that any of the files be 25 newspaper that I had and I directed and Page sheets 23 of 52 shiee?ts 89 91 1 controlled. I called Kevin McDonough up that 1 considered to be an offender under the charter 2 night, I said, "Where was that account?" 2 definition received extra payments? 3 Because I had no account like that. There 3 MR. HAWS: Well, object to the form. 4 might have been a Hill account or an 4 I don't think the Archbishop said "extra 5 0'Shaunessey account from years ago, but that 5 paymentsthe fiscal office. 6 A. I did not say "extra payments," I just said 7 But I believed, and I believe 7 "payments." 8 strongly so, that when we were sending these 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 9 priests out after dismissing them from the 9 Q. Okay. And the payments were amounts 10 priesthood, Iaicizing them, in justice we 10 for living? 11 needed to give them some provision of whether 11 A. That I don't know how it was worked out in the 12 their retirement or -- and than some other 12 fiscal office. 13 housing provision. And I think the document 13 Q. Was Kevin McDonough authorized to be one of 14 that was taken from the Chancery and given to 14 the handlers of that particular protocol? 15 the Minnesota Public Radio, a document that 16 A. He worked with the fiscal office, yes. 16 was signed by me and signed by Gil Gustafson, 16 Q. You made reference to the priests that were 17 which he brought to my attention, agreeing to 17 lalclzed. Can you Identify by name what 18 so much money and I don't know how much money 18 priests actually were lalclzed -- 19 it was at -- at this time, but I did that and 18 A. They -- 20 I did it for others because I didn't -- I felt 20 Q. Just a moment, let me finish the question -- 21 very strongly that they would not be able to 21 for having sexually abused youth? 22 get jobs very easily and so I wanted to give 22 A. Gil Gustafson was. Some of the ones on this 23 them some help. 23 list were. Robert Kapoun, Robert Thurner, 24 Q. Some of those who received these payments who 24 Michael Stevens. The ones that were on this 25 had offended had not actually been lalclzed or 25 list, I think they were all removed from 90 92 1 removed from the clerical state, rather their 1 ministry. Whether all of them were laiclzed, 2 facilities had just been removed, correct? 2 I don't know. 3 A. Yes, until 2002. 3 Q. Okay. Well, let's, yeah, let's clear up our 4 Q. And then did the payments stop going to them 4 terms here, because removed from ministry, for 5 after 2002 or did they continue? 5 purposes of definition, you as the archbishop 6 A. No. I think they -- whatever were -- we we 6 had the power to remove the faculties to 7 agreed upon, they continued. 7 minister? 8 Q. How many would you estimate were accused or 8 A. That's right. 9 determined to have abused kids who received 9 Q. And you are empowered to do that under the 10 these payments under your watch? 10 canon law, correct? 11 A. I can't -- I couldn't make a guess. 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. What individual within the archdiocese on your 12 Q. And so when you say "removed from ministry," 13 watch would be the one that would make the 13 that means that they are taken out of an 14 accounting and issue the checks and do the 14 assignment and given instructions by you as 15 accounting of these payments made and -- 15 the archbishop and their superior that they 16 A. It would have been the fiscal office and that 16 are not to publicly minister -- 17 was John Bierbaum. Austin Ward before he 17 A. That's true. 18 passed. 18 Q. -- that's called removal from ministry, 19 Q. And what about Scott Domeier, was he involved 19 correct? 20 in that fiscal office? 20 A. Correct. 21 A. Scott Domeier was involved in that office. 21 Q. Okay. So when we refer to removal from 22 And he might have done it, too, I'm not sure. 22 ministry, let's talk about that category of 23 He -- he was not the CFO, he was the one next 23 priest. And some of those priests received 24 to him. 24 extra assistance, correct? 25 Q. Is it your belief that every priest who was 25 MR. HAWS: Objection, that's not the Page 89 to 92 of 207 05/21/2014 AM 93 95 1 testimony of the Archbishop, it was payments 1 A. The -- yes, excuse me, they did, and that was 2 as he's described. His testimony speaks for 2 Bishop Scicluna. 3 itself. 3 Q. Did you ever discuss any issue of childhood 4 BY MR. ANDERSON: 4 sexual abuse or it being a problem with John 6 Q. Is it correct to say that some of those 5 Paul 6 priests receive allowances? 6 A. Yes. 7 A. It would be. 7 Q. What was that discussion? 8 Q. And okay. And they received them, those 8 A. It was a discussion when I was sent as bishop 9 allowances, both before and after the charter? 9 to Lafayette, I had a private meeting with 10 A. I don't know. 10 John Paul II, and on that occasion told him 11 Q. Okay. And then there's other categories of 11 that it was my opinion that something needed 12 priests that are laicized, is the term that's 12 to be done in a systematic way In order to 13 commonly used for our purposes, laicized would 13 take care of these issues when they arose. 14 it be correct to say is actual removal from 14 Q. And did he take any action in response to that 15 the clerical state by the Vatican on a 15 conversation? 16 petition either by the priest or his superior? 16 A. Yes, he -- he engaged in it, he was interested 17 A. Yespositive experience to 18 Q. Okay. And a laicized priest is somebody who 18 to talk about it. And then Benedict became 19 only the Vatican can achieve, correct, for 19 more active in taking the removal of the 20 removal from the clerical state? 20 priests from the congregation for the clergy 21 A. I'm -- I'm not sure. I'm not sure. It could 21 to the congregation -- the congregation for 22 be from a -- a canonical trial within the 22 the faith and Monsignor Scicluna at the time 23 archdiocese also, but I'm not sure. I -- my 23 as the active person. 24 canon law is not clear on that. 24 Q. And that's 2001 when Benedict took a more 26 Q. In any case, you as the archbishop at no time 25 active involvement and required that all 94 96 1 had the power to remove a priest from the 1 priests be reported to the CDF under his 2 clerical state? 2 jurisdictionwas after 2002, I think, but I'm not 4 Q. That's correct? 4 sure. 6 A. That's correct. 5 Q. All right. In any case, the conversation that 6 Q. What priests who had offended children, if 6 you had with John Paul II, can you point to 7 any, did you discuss with John Paul II at an 7 any changes made or actions specifically taken 8 ad llmina visit or at any other time, if you 8 by John Paul II responsive to the conversation 9 did? 9 you had with him or the identification of the 10 A. I did not because those were not things you 10 problem you described? 11 would discuss with John Paul II. The canon 11 A. I can't point to any changes that occurred in 12 lawyer for the diocese would send in a 12 him from a converstion with me. But I think 13 petition and prepare the case. And then it 13 as time went on and the bishops of the our 14 would be sent to the congregation for clergy 14 country had the -- met in Dallas, I think I 15 and then the prefect of that congregation 15 had met with him after that, too, and the 16 would bring that to the attention of the Pope, 16 conversation was positive and he was much more 17 or he would have the the authority to do so 17 knowledgeable about the problem. 18 himself. 18 Q. Did you have any other conversations with him 19 Q. And the prefect for the congregation was then 19 on this topic, John Paul 20 Cardinal Ratzinger? 20 A. Not that I remember. 21 A. No. He was prefect of the congregation for 21 Q. Any conversations with his successor, 22 the faith. There's a -- there are several 22 Benedict? 23 congregations in Rome. 23 A. I can't remember. We've had conversations, 24 Q. But for purposes of removal for sexual abuse, 24 but I can't remember whether this topic was in 25 didn't the complaints go to the 25 the _fore because he had -- because the charter 06:56:56 AM Page 93 to 9'5 of 207 24 of?52 sheets '97 Er s2 sheets 99 1 was just being implemented. 1 A. He did. 2 Q. You did mention that you made some 2 Q. How did he express that to you? 3 recommendations to John Paul II about this 3 A. Well, I'm just reflecting now on the meeting 4 issue and it being a problem. What 4 and I -- I remember a man sitting there 5 recommendations specifically did you recommend 5 concerned. 6 to him? 6 Q. Any conversations with any of the prefects 7 A. I -- I think my recommendations were very 7 that were charged with dealing with sexual 8 general, like this needs to be looked at and 8 abuse by clerics? 9 we need to act on it or something like that. 9 A. None of them were specifically charged, but it 10 Q. Anything more specific than that? 10 would have come under their their office, 11 A. I don't think I can recall that now. 11 if it happened, the clergy -- the congregation 12 Q. Was this at the time that the charter had 12 for clergy, the congregation for bishops. 13 been 13 Q. And whom did you discuss it with and when? 14 (Discussion out of the hearing of 14 A. I can't remember their names. They they 16 the court reporter) 15 had changed several times during my time as 16 BY MR. ANDERSON: 16 the archbishop or as bishop, but they -- they 17 Q. It sounds like there may have been two 17 were -- one was a Spaniard, I think, and 18 conversations with John Paul II. Is that 18 another was an Italian, but I can't remember 19 correct? 19 specifically who they were, except, I mean, 20 A. There were many conversations with him. 20 their names. 21 Q. I'm talking about the topic that pertains to 21 Q. Any conversations with Cardinal Ratzinger when 22 sexual abuse and dealing with the problem. 22 he was prefect on this topic? 23 A. I can only remember the one. 23 A. When he was prefect for the congregation of 24 Q. Okay. Was that before the charter or after 24 the -- for the faith, yes. 25 the charter? 25 Q. And what was the nature of those 1987 when I first went to Lafayette 1 conversations? 2 and it was more concerning the challenge in 2 A. That was at an ad Iimina visit. This -- that 3 Lafayette, which were sexual abuse 3 we expressed gratitude to him that he was 4 perpetrated, really, by -- the majority of 4 moving on this in a more aggressive way since 6 those numbers by two priests. 5 he brought these cases over to the 6 (Discussion out of the hearing of 6 congregation for the faith rather than the 7 the court reporter) 7 congregation for clergy. 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 Q. Beyond him taking control of, effectively, the 9 Q. Did John Paul II ask you anything about 9 files and the complaints, what action, if any, 10 scandal and express any concerns about that 10 did you see taken by him and that department 11 widening? 11 responding to the information given them -- 12 A. John according to my memory, now, that 12 A. An appointment -- 13 would have been almost 30 years ago, according 13 Q. and what changes? 14 to my memory, he expressed great concern for 14 A. An appointment of Monsignor Scicluna at the 15 families and children and I was sitting across 15 time, who was a Maltese, a brilliant canon 16 from him at a very small table. 16 lawyer, with the opportunity express to you or was it expressed in 17 don't have this right canonically, I'm sure, 18 that meeting that this was not a problem 18 but to bypass a long canonical procedure and 19 specific to Lafayette, but perhaps global in 19 get them out of ministry. 20 dimension and much deeper than thought? 20 Q. Any other action taken responsive to that 21 A. He didn't express that to me. 21 information? 22 Q. Did he give the impression that he had any 22 A. I can't remember of any other. 23 appreciation for -- 23 Q. I'd like to turn your attention to Curtis 24 A. He did. 24 Wehmeyer. And when in time, Archbishop, did 25 Q. the magnitude of it? 25 he first co?e onto yo?ar as a potential Page 97 to 100 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 101 103 1 risk of harm while he was in ministry? 1 superior to determine whether or not he could 2 A. He never came on my radar as a potential risk 2 or should continue? 3 of harm to children. He had a same-sex 3 A. I don't remember. 4 attraction and that was evident from the 4 Q. When he was sent there, it was paid for by the 5 encounter that he had in a book store. And 5 archdiocese and he was required to go, 6 after that we sent him to a 6 correct? 7 institute, I think it might have been in 7 A. Yes. 8 Philadelphia. 8 Q. And did you read the findings that were made? 9 Q. St. Luke's? 9 A. I probably did, but I can't remember. 10 A. No. St. Luke's is in Washingtonmatter of practice, you did have access 11 might have gone to St. Luke's, I can't recall. 11 to that information -- 12 But a same-sex attraction does not a predator 12 A. I did, yes. 13 make, so I -- I was satisfied with the results 13 Q. -- is that correct? Correct? 14 of that study that they did and nothing came 14 A. Yes. 15 back which would have indicated that he was a 15 Q. What else do you recall about Father Wehmeyer 16 -- a danger to children. 16 and him coming onto your radar for Issues 17 Q. When in time did he come onto your radar for 17 relating to his sexuality, be It same-sex 18 the problem that you've described as a same- 18 attraction or anything else pertaining to his 19 sex attraction that prompted him to be sent 19 sexuality? 20 for assessment -- 20 A. That was the only thing that came on my radar, 21 A. I would not -- 21 that he had a same-sex attraction. 22 Q. and treatment? 22 Q. And after he returned from the facility, was 23 A. -- remember the year. 23 he continued in ministry? 24 Q. What was the source of the information you 24 A. He was. 25 got? Where did you get the information that 25 Q. And did you receive any information from any 102 104 1 he gave -- 1 other source about about him and/or his 2 A. From Father McDonough. 2 sexuality or his fitness to be in ministry 3 Q. What did Father McDonough tell you? 3 that concerned you? 4 A. He told me that a gentleman called him and 4 A. There wasn't anything that gravely concerned 5 told him that Curtis Wehmeyer had made 5 me. There was nothing about his sexuality. 6 overtures to him at a book store. 6 There was -- I received a not complaints, 7 Q. And did Father McDonough make any records of 7 but in a conversation with people at West St. 8 that or did you -- 8 Paul were not pleased with his personality, 9 A. I can't remember. 9 they thought he was a -- too quiet, too 10 Q. -- any notes? 10 introverted. 11 A. I can't remember. 11 Q. Do you know when that conversation was? 12 Q. Was It your practice to take notes yourself or 12 A. I don't. 13 record memoranda of such conversations or to 13 Q. But he was assigned in West St. Paul? 14 expect him to or what? 14 A. Yesthink it was both. He -- he would 15 Q. And was he on monitoring at that time? 16 and I would at times, too. 16 A. He would come in to see me on a regular basis. 17 Q. In any case, was it on that information 17 Q. Was the concern raised by those folks that 18 brought to you by Father McDonough exclusively 18 Wehmeyer was too secretive? 19 that caused the decision to be made to send 19 A. Not secretive. Quiet, unfriendly, apparently 20 him to a facility out East? 20 unfriendly. And it wasn't in the form of a 21 A. I think it was. 21 complaint. They just wanted him to loosen up 22 Q. And when he was sent, was It your expectation 22 a bit. 23 and that of Curtis Wehmeyer that the report or 23 Q. Any other concerns ever raised about Curtis 24 findings that they made would be made 24 Wehmeyer that you haven't identi?ed? 25 available to you as the archbishop and his 25 A. Not to my knowledge. 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 101 iishe?ets 105 107 1 Q. At some point, Curtis Wehmeyer came to see you 1 A. I can't remember. 2 personally and you met with him, correct? 2 Q. Were there regular appointments? 3 A. I did. 3 A. They were -- I mean, they weren't -- not 4 Q. And was that after the West St. Paul meeting 4 or anything like that. He would call 5 or what prompted that? 5 for an appointment as anyone would. 6 A. It was before the St. Paul 6 Q. And with whom would he call who would he 7 Q. And what prompted his meeting with you? 7 call to set up an appointment with you as the 8 A. He his same-sex attraction and he wanted to 8 archbishop? 9 be sure and to walk the straight and narrow 9 A. He would call my secretary. 10 path. And I would meet with him and ask him 10 Q. Who was your secretary? 11 about his life of prayer and -- and anything 11 A. Sister Ann Ganiey, I believe, at the time. 12 else that would be of ministerial interest. 12 Q. And was she your secretary the entire tenure 13 Q. And did you have more than one meeting with 13 of your -- 14 him? 14 A. No. She she died. She was a wonderful 15 A. I did. 15 lady. She died with cancer and then she was 16 MR. KELLY: Excuse me. I feel 16 taken over that position was taken over by 17 compelled to raise a privilege issue. This 17 her assistant, Bobbie Dawson. 18 does take on the nature of a conversation 18 Q. And did you have any other secretaries 19 between a member of the clergy and -- 19 besides -- 20 MR. ANDERSON: Ithink questions foundationally that eviscerates any 21 Q. those two? Did you ever report any of the 22 claim of privilege. 22 conversations you had with Wehmeyer to any of 23 MR. KELLY: Well 23 your colleagues about what he had been 24 MR. ANDERSON: And these are 24 discussing with you? 25 conversations that have been already the 25 A. I don't think I did. 106 108 1 subjects of both disclosure and discovery, so 1 Q. Okay. Any other times or instances where you 2 it's the first time we've heard that privilege 2 received information, reports, rumors or 3 asserted. 3 complaints concerning Curtis Wehmeyer and his 4 MR. KELLY: Well, I don't have the 4 sexuality and the expression of it that you 5 benefit of that history and, of course, I 5 haven't identified? 6 don't know about Mr. Wehmeyer and whether he's 6 A. No. Not -- not according to my memory or it 7 waived the privilege. And, as I saidthink if there were, it would come 8 not have the benefit of the history of this 8 right up to me. 9 litigation, but it is a concern for me, and 9 Q. Did you ever look at the file maintained by 10 out of an abundance of caution, I raise the 10 the archdiocese concerning Wehmeyer? 11 objection. 11 A. No. 12 MR. ANDERSON: I'll respect that, 12 Q. Have you to this dayquestion foundationally so 13 A. No. 14 that I can alleviate your concern and 14 (Discussion out of the hearing of 15 objection, if it's proper. 15 the court reporter) 16 MR. KELLY: I'd love to have my 16 BY MR. ANDERSON: 17 concerns alleviated. 17 Q. Do you claim, Archbishop, the conversations 18 BY MR. ANDERSON: 18 that Wehmeyer had with you were in the nature 19 Q. Okay. Is it correct to say that the meetings 19 of confessional or privileged? 20 you had with Wehmeyer would help you determine 20 A. I -- they -- they might have been. It would 21 whether or not he was fit to continue in 21 be hard now for me to remember that. 22 ministry? 22 Q. I guess that doesn't dispatch with that issue, 23 A. No. 23 does it? Okay. 24 Q. How many different times did you meet with 24 (Discussion out of the hearing of 25 him? 25 the court reporter) 27?or?"?F1eets Page 105 to 108 of 207 o5/21/2'o14 o9:56:567iM os/2372014 09:56:56 AH 109 111 1 BY MR. ANDERSON: 1 that topic. Okay? 2 Q. Was it your practice to hear confessions of 2 MR. KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Anderson. 3 priests in the archdiocese? 3 BY MR. ANDERSON: 4 A. It wasn't my practice. 4 Q. I'm going to direct your attention, 5 Q. Did any other priests come to you for the kind 5 Archbishop, to some documents that came out of 8 of -- with the kind of information that 6 the Wehmeyer file -- 7 Wehmeyer came to you with or was he the only 7 A. Uh huh. 8 one with whom you had such a relationship? 8 Q. and that have been supplied here. And we 9 A. I would have no. I would have many priests 9 placed before you Exhibit 3. I'm going to try 10 coming in and I would ask them how their 10 to move through these as quickly as it's 11 prayer life was, but they would have their own 11 possible, appreciating the time and your 12 confessors. 12 circumstance. So I'm going to direct your 13 Q. Okay. So as the presiding archbishop, it 13 attention to this one, it's dated August 15th, 14 would not be expected that you would be the 14 1996, it's addressed to you and it's from 15 confessor 15 Reverend Stan Mader, the co-vocation director, 16 A. No. 16 concerning Wehmeyer. And in the middle of the 17 Q. or entering into a priest/penitent 17 second paragraph, I'm going to read a portion 18 relationship with them, correct? 18 of it, Archbishop, and then ask you a 19 A. That's right. That's right. Unless there 19 question, ifI may. 20 were an emergency. 20 Directing your attention to the 21 Q. And he didn't come to you for an emergency? 21 middle paragraph, the second sentence -- I 22 A. No. 22 think I better read the whole thing and then 23 Q. So what did you talk to him about? 23 ask the question. It states, "My reservations 24 MR. KELLY: Objection. I apologize 24 regarding Curt are in two areas. One, given 25 for delaying the proceedings here, but I am 25 the level of his skills, will he be able to 110 112 1 concerned about the confidentiality of the 1 juggle all he needs to In order to 2 communications, and out of respect for Mr. 2 academically prepare for priesthood while he 3 Wehmeyer, I think it would be inappropriate 3 continues to work on the other Issues: 4 for the archbishop to disclose the contents of 4 Understanding and controlling his sexuality, 5 communications made between the two of them 5 dealing with family issues, and developing 6 when the possibility exists in Mr. Wehmeyer's 6 intimacy skills." My question to you, 7 mind that those communications were privileged 7 Archbishop, is, what did you learn about his 8 and confidential. And unless there is a 8 difficulty controlling his sexuality while he 9 waiver from Mr. Wehmeyer, I believe that 9 was in seminary? 10 Minnesota statutes 595 would prohibit inquiry 10 A. I don't think I learned anything. No -- 11 into this as privileged information, and as 11 nothing ever was brought to my attention 12 such, I would instruct the archbishop not to 12 concerning his controlling sexuality or lack 13 answer the question. And while we're trying 13 of control thereof. 14 to be as forthcoming as we can, we also must 14 Q. Well, this tells you that he's having 15 weigh the confidential nature of this and the 15 difficulty controlling sexuality, does it not? 16 rights of Mr. Wehmeyer, so I would instruct 16 MR. HAWS: Well, I'll object, the 17 him not to answer. 17 document speaks for itself. Doesn't 18 (Discussion out of the hearing of 18 specifically state that. 19 the court reporter) 19 BY MR. ANDERSON: 20 MR. ANDERSON: And while we may 20 Q. Well, it says "and controlling his sexuality." 21 disagree, I'll respect the instruction and 21 Do you have any -- 22 move on. 22 A. I have no (Examining documents) I -- I 23 BY MR. ANDERSON: 23 really can't go back in time and give a full 24 Q. And thus in respect of that instruction, I'm 24 response to that. 25 not ask you any further CEJESUOFIS on 25 Q. Okay. My question is I'll move on. Page 109 sheets 29 of 52 sheets Page 113 the bottom of that same 1 scope of the assessment to the answering of 2 paragraph, the last sentence, it states, "For 2 these two questions? 3 that reason, a strong support system and good 3 MR. KELLY: Object to as a 4 intimacy skills are very important. I am 4 misstatement. He has not restricted the 5 concerned Curt does not have them at the 5 assessment in any way. He's asked for 6 desired level yet. I believe he can attain 6 specific answers to specific questions. Rule 7 them." Do you recall taking any action 7 611 8 responsive to this letter concerning the 8 MR. ANDERSON: Okay. Well, I'll 9 concerns raised in it? 9 rephrase it, that's okay. 10 A. I don't recall taking any action. 10 BY MR. ANDERSON: 11 Q. The last paragraph, I'll read a portion of it 11 Q. Were you aware that he's restricting the 12 and ask you a question. It states, "In 12 response in the assessment given to answering 13 summary, I do not believe he is ready for 13 specific questions? 14 Theology I. I think he is a bit of a risk at 14 A. No. 15 any level at this time, but certainly 15 Q. If this document reflects that, do you have 16 redeemable." Do you remember him being a bit 16 any do you know why the response would be 17 of a risk in seminary and, if so, why? 17 restricted as opposed to a full-blown 18 A. I don't remember his being a risk at all in 18 assessment? 19 the seminary. 19 MR. KELLY: I object to as calling 20 Q. Did you take any action responsive to this 20 for speculation, Rule 611. 21 letter? 21 MR. HAWS: And lack of foundation. 22 A. I can't remember. 22 BY MR. ANDERSON: 23 Q. I'm going to put before you Exhibit 4. And, 23 Q. You can answer. 24 Archbishop, this one is again and all these 24 MR. HAWS: Obviously, the Archbishop 25 will be coming from the files, and this one is 25 isn't copied on this or doesn't appear to be 114 116 1 dated June 1st, 2004, it's to the assessment 1 one and you never asked him if he's read it or 2 staff at St. Luke Institute, it's from Father 2 seen it. 3 Kevin McDonough 3 BY MR. ANDERSON: 4 A. Uh huh. 4 Q. You can answer. Do you know why? 5 Q. regarding Father Curtis Wehmeyer. And 5 A. No. 6 you'll see that it is two full pages, at least 6 Q. At the second page, Archbishop, I'd direct 7 the ones that I have, the first two pages I'm 7 your attention to it. At the second paragraph 8 going to take some portions out of in the 8 of this, I'll read it and then ask you a 9 interest of brevity and direct your attention 9 question. It states, "As our conversations 10 to the first paragraph. First, it begins by 10 continued, however, I proposed to him a 11 saying, "I'm grateful to you for your 11 possibility lying somewhere between innocent 12 assistance in the assessment of Father Curtis 12 misunderstanding and deliberate cruising. I 13 Wehmeyer." So does this confirm for you that 13 suggest that he may have had some interest in 14 Wehmeyer was sent to St. Luke's for 14 engaging the conversation to see where it 15 assessment? 16 might go and it might have triggered curiosity 16 A. It does now, yes, thank you. 16 and even a sense of danger on his part. Are 17 Q. Okay. And then It goes on to state at the 17 you familiar did Kevin McDonough report to '18 fourth sentence, want to ask that any 19 you this the contents of this inquiry made 19 disclosures to the Archdiocese of St. Paul and 19 of him? 20 Minneapolis, either written or verbal, will 20 A. I can't remember. 21 only be in response to the following 21 Q. Okay. What did you understand at this point 22 questions." This is Kevin McDonough 22 in time that Wehmeyer was sent to St. Luke's 23 addressing this to St. Luke's. And there's 23 and Kevin McDonough was involved in this what 24 really two questions he asks them to answer. 24 Father McDonough's relationship was to 25 were you aware that he was restricting the 25 Wehmeyer? gas it closer than that of other 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 117 119 1 priests? 1 privilege, and to the extent that -- 2 Oh, no. I don't think so at all. 2 MR. ANDERSON: Wait a minute. Are 3 You had mentioned that he had tried to pick up 3 you representing Wehmeyer? 4 some people at a book store. Do you know how 4 MR. KELLY: No. But I'm 5 old those people were? 5 representing this client and it's if this 6 No. 6 is privileged information, he should not be 7 I'm going to direct your attention to Exhibit 7 talking about it. 8 5, and this would be a report from St. Luke's, 8 MR. ANDERSON: I'm representing to 9 Archbishop, and it's addressed to Kevin 9 you that it has not been information that has 10 McDonough, your then vicar general, and under 10 been asserted as privileged, it's already been 11 the circumstances, I expect that Father 11 placed in the public record and the subject of 12 McDonough and Curtis Wehmeyer both understood 12 multiple inquiries without objection. 13 that you would have access to the information 13 MR. KELLY: I want the record to 14 contained in this? 14 reflect that the archbishop and I and perhaps 15 I don't know. 15 others have an ongoing concern about the 16 Okay. In any case, looking at Exhibit 5, it's 16 con?dentiality and privacy of Mr. Wehmeyer, 17 from St. Luke Institute dated June 18, 2004, 17 as we should. 18 it's addressed to Father Kevin McDonough, your 18 MR. ANDERSON: So noted. 19 then vicar general, correct? 19 MR. HAWS: Just so the record's 20 That's true. 20 clear, there were many objections regarding 21 In the middle at the second page, if you 21 production of some of this information and 22 look at it in the middle of that paragraph 22 we've been ordered to produce much of the 23 there's a sentence, I'm going to ask you a 23 information. 24 question, reading from it, and then ask you if 24 MR. KELLY: And, as I said, I don't _25 it's anything you had heard before as reported 25 have the benefit of the background on some of 118 120 1 to you. 1 this litigation. 2 MR. KELLY: Counsel, may I interrupt 2 BY MR. ANDERSON: 3 you for a minute? Is this a public document 3 Directing your attention, then, Archbishop, to 4 already? 4 the middle of that paragraph, I'm just gonna 5 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 5 read a sentence from it at page 2 and ask you 6 MR. KELLY: So has there been any 6 a question about that information and if it 7 waiver of privilege on this by Mr. Wehmeyer? 7 was in any way news to you. First, it says, 8 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 8 "Father Wehmeyer was not dressed in clerics 9 MR. KELLY: There has been? 9 and during his visit to this establishment 10 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 10 became engaged with two young men separately 11 MR. KELLY: Does it extend to these 11 in a conversation that had ?some sexual 12 proceedings? 12 undertones to it.? While the intentions of 13 MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 13 each party remain unclear, the first 14 Is that signed? Did he sign something to -- 14 conversation ended abruptly when Father 15 MR. ANDERSON: All these documents 15 Wehmeyer asked the young man, ?Are you 16 have been the subject of a great deal of 16 horny?"' Is that information you had received 17 inquiry by Kevin McDonough and others and have 17 or remember received before -- 18 been inserted into the into the public 18 Yes. 19 record, and when the assessment was done, the 19 -- Archbishop? Okay. The next paragraph 20 privilege was waived and it was shared. 20 says, "In a memo dated June 1st, 2004, you, 21 MR. KELLY: May I have 21 Father McDonough, requested that our feedback 22 MR. ANDERSON: And there's never 22 focus strictly on three referral questions." 23 been an assertion of the privilege on it. 23 I may have asked you this, but are you aware 24 MR. KELLY: Well, I don't know if 24 that as to the motives why the feedback was 25 Mr. Wehmeyer has been ever asked to waive 25 restricted to the three referral questions 05/21/2014 09:55:56 AM Page 117 to 120 of 207- 30 of 52 sheets 121 123 1 only? 1 discomfort with his sexuality, his difficulty 2 No. 2 acknowledging sexual motivations and 3 (Discussion out of the hearing of 3 attractions, and the preoccupying presence of 4 the court reporter) 4 sexual urges that detract from his ability to 5 BY MR. ANDERSON: 5 be at peace with himself." Were you aware of 6 Did you ever ask Curtis Wehmeyer about this 6 that information? 7 information, about his approaching the young 7 A. If I read this at the time, I must have been 8 man and, "Are you horny?" 8 aware of it. 9 I'm not sure whether or not I did. 9 Q. I'll direct your attention, then, to page 8 10 At page 4 of the substance abuse history in 10 and under the middle paragraph, numerically 11 the middle, it makes reference to the fact 11 designated number 1, "Individual 12 that during at the fifth sentence, I'll 12 the fifth sentence down, I 13 just read it, it says, "During this period, 13 will read a portion of it, then ask you a 14 Father Wehmeyer received two DUIs, one during 14 question about it. It states, ''several issues 15 his college years and another in 1990." Did 15 were noted during this evaluation that would 16 you have information about his history of 16 be Important for Father Wehmeyer to discuss 17 17 with his therapist, including his past sexual 18 No. 18 behavior and current sexual feelings, his 19 In the history, it states, 19 current and long-term feelings of anxiety and 20 "Father Wehmeyer displayed considerable 20 depression." Is that information made known 21 anxiety when talking about his sexual 21 to you? 22 history." And the last sentence of that 22 A. If this report had been given to me, and I'm 23 paragraph it states, "He hinted at a 23 sure that it was, then I would have been aware 24 considerable struggle maintaining his 24 of it. And, in fact, it seems to me I might 25 celibacy. Father Wehmeyer acknowledged a 25 have talked with Father Wehmeyer about talking 122 124 1 consistent challenge to ?keep custody of my 1 about this with his therapist. 2 thoughts and eyes."' Is that information you 2 Q. Okay. And you had permission to talk to his 3 had received? 3 therapist -- 4 I can't remember it. 4 A No. 5 If you direct -- I direct your attention to 5 did you not? Okay. You asked him to talk 6 page 6 of this, it would be under the 6 to his therapist? 7 diagnosis, Archbishop. 7 A. Yes. 8 Uh huh. 8 Q. Did you ever talk to his therapist? 9 And under the diagnosis there are five, but 9 A. No. 10 diagnosis number 1, it states page 9, then, and under item number 7, 11 "Sexuai disorder, not otherwise specified: 11 there's a middle of that paragraph that I'll 1,2 Unintegrated sexuality." were you aware that 12 read to you and ask a question. It says, 13 that diagnosis had been made of him? 13 ''should Father Wehmeyer be unable or unwilling 14 If this report had been given to me, I would 14 to follow the recommendations outlined in this 16 have read it at the time. 15 report, or should additional information 16 And do you recall discussing it with him or 16 become available to the diocese about other 17 Father McDonough? 1? concerning or otherwise risky behavior, we 18 I don't recall. 18 would be forced to reconsider our current 19 The next page at 7, I'll direct your attention 19 evaluation of Father Wehmeyer." That implies 20 in the summary portion and recommendations, it 20 that this information is being made to the 21 begins with, "We make the diagnosis of sexual 21 diocese, and if other information comes forth, 22 disorder not otherwise specified." And then I 22 they might change their findings, correct? 23 go to the last sentence and I'll read it, then 23 A. Uh huh. 24 ask you a question. It states, "Unintegrated 24 Q. Yes? 25 sexuality refers to Father Wehmeyer's 26 A. That's -- yes. 31 of 52 sheets Page 121 to 124 of 207 75/51/2014 09:56:56 A131 125 127 1 Q. Let's turn, then, to the next exhibit, which 1 forth -- 2 would be -- first -- 2 MR. ANDERSON: Well, look, I can ask 3 (Discussion out of the hearing of 3 another question if you don't like the 4 the court reporter) 4 question, so let's just get through it. If 6 BY MR. ANDERSON: 5 you don't like that question, I'll withdraw 6 Q. Let's go to the next exhibit then and that's 6 it. 7 Exhibit 6, Archbishop. And this is dated 7 MR. KELLY: I -- okay. 8 September 7, 2004. This would be after the 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 9 St. Luke's report that we were reading from 9 Q. Okay. Archbishop, do you remember, did you 10 was rendered, and as chair of the diocese, 10 put restrictions on Wehmeyer? 11 archdiocese, and this is to you and Bill was surprised to have read 12 Fallon, who was then your chancellor, correct? 12 that. I -- that's a surprise to me. I don't 13 A. Yes, he was the chancellor. 13 know -- I might have missed or I might have 14 Q. And it's from Kevin McDonough, your then vicar 14 missed it or whatever, but I can't remember a 15 general? 15 restriction on him. 16 A. Yes. 16 Q. Okay. This reflects that there was 17 Q. And it's dated September 7th, 2004, correct? 17 restriction put on him and this reflects that 18 A. Correct, that's right. 18 there was restriction lifted, does it not? 19 Q. Concerning Curtis Wehmeyer. And at the second 19 MR. HAWS: But it also, counsel, you 20 paragraph, I'll read it -- I'll read a portion 20 didn't include the conditions under which he's 21 of it in the interest of brevity and then ask 21 restricted as part of -- 22 a question. In the middle of it it says, "In 22 MR. ANDERSON: Well, I'm just asking 23 fact, we agreed to lift the restriction that I 23 about the restrictions. 24 had placed earlier this summer on his 24 MR. HAWS: But it's part of the 25 participation in youth programming. We had 25 document that you haven't stated and put into 126 128 1 put that restriction on because he constituted 1 context. 2 a danger" -- 2 MR. ANDERSON: If you want to ask 3 MR. HAWS: Counsel, you misstated 3 questions, you can when you have a chance, but 4 that. Can you read that again? 4 I'm going to ask the questions we need to ask 5 MR. ANDERSON: Oh, sure. 5 to get through this. 6 MR. HAWS: It says "not." 6 BY MR. ANDERSON: 7 BY MR. ANDERSON: 7 Q. Archbishop, first -- 8 Q. Okay. I'm sorry, let me read it again. I'll 8 MR. HAWS: As long as it's fairly 9 start with, "In fact, we agreed to lift the 9 done so. 10 restriction thatI had placed earlier this 10 BY MR. ANDERSON: 11 summer on his participating in youth 11 Q. First question is, is you're aware this 12 programming. We had put that restriction on, 12 document reflects that some restrictions were 13 not because he constituted a danger, but so 13 put on him, right, correct? 14 that there would not be occasion for 14 A. It says that. We have put the restriction on, 15 misunderstanding and rumors." So why was a 15 not because he constituted a danger, but that 16 restriction put on him to not have contact 16 there would be no occasion for 17 with youth if there wasn't concern about the 17 misunderstanding and rumors, yes. I'm aware 18 expression of his sexuality towards them? 18 now, I was not aware -- I -- it did not come 19 MR. HAWS: Again, that misrepresents 19 to my memory. 20 the testimony and the evidence, misstated not have contact with 21 facts, and It also left out a portion of the 21 youth, restricted on having contact from 22 document as to why that you didn't read into 22 youth, how can he be in ministry and not have 23 the record. 23 contact with youth? Can you answer that for 24 MR. KELLY: And Ijoin in that 24 me? 25 objection and point out that the reason set 25 A. No. 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 125 to 128 of 207 32 of 129 131 1 Q. I'm going to show you Exhibit Number 7. And 1 is, did you ever receive information that 2 this is to you as Archbishop and it's 2 indicated Wehmeyer had engaged in behavior 3 from Kevin McDonough again, it's dated 3 consistent with sexual addiction or was a sex 4 February 24th, 2005, and in the third 4 addict? 5 paragraph of this memo to you it states, 5 A. No. I I don't think so. 6 "Father Rohlfing told me that he knew of yet 6 Q. Do you recall receiving this memo? 7 another similar incident. It happened while 7 A. I don't recall it. 8 he and Father Wehmeyer were students at the 8 Q. Turn to the second page and let's look at it 9 seminary and while they were studying Jerusalem." The next paragraph states, "When 10 A. (Examining documents). 11 Father Rohlfing spoke with his friend shortly 11 Q. Do you recall concerns being expressed to you 12 thereafter, the story that Curtis told him was 12 or by any of your officials about a publicity 13 this." And then the last sentence says, "When 13 concerning Wehmeyer's conduct and people 14 he showed no interest, they asked if he wanted 14 knowing what he was doing? 15 a male prostitute. Trying to extricate from 15 A. No, I don't -- I -- I don't. 16 the situation, he spoke with them, and they 16 Q. Let me refer you to the last paragraph of this 17 misunderstood what he was saying." The next 17 memo. It's cc'd to Tim Rourke. Did you know 18 sentence, and I'll read it and then ask the 18 him to be Wehmeyer's monitor? 19 question, the next sentence says, "As you can 19 A. Tim Rourke worked for the archdiocese, didn't 20 see, this bears remarkable similarities to the 20 he? 21 situation at the book store last year." Is it 21 Q. Yes. 22 fair to say that when this was written and 22 A. Yes. I didn't -- I didn't realize that he was 23 received by you, that this was new 23 his monitor. 24 information, not known before about Wehmeyer 24 Q. Okay. Did you know that Wehmeyer was on 25 and his history? 25 monitoring? 130 132 1 A. Yes, I can't recall today receiving this. 1 A. I -- right at this moment, no. I might have 2 Q. Okay. 2 then. 3 A. I'm reading it with great interest, but I 3 Q. Okay. Let's look at the last paragraph and 4 can't recall receiving it. 4 I'll read it, then ask a question. It states, 5 Q. In any case, do you have any information that 5 do not believe that Father Wehmeyer 6 this information was brought back to St. 6 actually goes to these parks to pick up other 7 Luke's and they were told, as they had asked 7 men. Rather, he likes to be around the 8 to be, if did it surface, that there's some 8 environment where such things are happening, 9 new information, you got to take another look 9 since it gives him some sort of thrill. He is 10 at this guy? 10 creating a significant risk for himself of 11 A. I don't -- I don't know. 11 highly unfavorable publicity." Do you recall 12 Q. Exhibit 8, Archbishop, is again from the file 12 having conversations with him or others about 13 of Curtis Wehmeyer, this is dated August 3rd, 13 him creating scandal or publicity? 14 2006, it's a memo to the file of Curtis 14 A. I I don't recall that. Was this sent to 15 Wehmeyer from Kevin McDonough and it regards a 15 Tim Rourke or no? 16 concern about Father Wehmeyer and a response. 16 Q. It was to the file of Wehmeyer. 17 This pertains to on Friday afternoon, July 17 A. File. But I think Tim -- Tim Rourke would 18 28th, visit by Ramsey County Sheriff Deputy 18 have pursued that with him. 19 Leyden, and it recounts what is described, I 19 Q. Do you know that he did? 20 think, as cruising. And then at the last 20 A. I don't. 21 paragraph, there is a sentence I will read and 21 MR. KINSELLA: Off the video record 22 then ask you a question. The memo states, 22 to change tape. 23 "Deputy Leyden told me he believed that Father 23 THE WITNESS: All right. No, I 24 was exhibiting behavior consistent with sexual 24 don't. 25 addiction." My question to you, Archbishop, 25 (Recess taken) 33 of 52 sheets Page 129 to_I32 of 207 0532132014 09:56:56 133 135 1 MR. KINSELLA: Back on the video 1 I had been retired then and things would not 2 record, 2:20 p.m. 2 have been copied to me. 3 BY MR. ANDERSON: 3 Q. What was your retirement, May? I can't 4 Q. I'm looking at a document from the file of 4 remember. 5 Wehmeyer where it's reflected in 2012, they're 5 A. My retirement was in 2008. 6 looking back and I'll read Eight, okay. Did you have concerns, 7 If -- If this is something you learned 7 Archbishop, that a priest who would pick up 8 while you were archbishop. It states, "Father 8 or 20-year?olds would also pick 9 Wehmeyer developed a pattern of sexually 9 up kids 18 or under? 10 inappropriate behavior that led to 10 A. A could answer that better, I 11 intervention and assessment at St. Luke's 11 think, than I could. I I -- I don't know. 12 Institute in 2004." I guess you knew that, 12 (Discussion out of the hearing of 13 correct? 13 the court reporter) 14 A. Yes. 14 BY MR. ANDERSON: 15 Q. It then states, "In 2006, the archdiocese 15 Q. Did you ever ask a that question 16 received additional reports of sexually 16 as you viewed the -- 17 inappropriate behavior best described as 17 A. I don't -- 18 cruising." Did you know that? 18 Q. -- conduct of Wehmeyer or others? 19 A. Yes. 19 A. No. But I think in our committee work, 20 Q. It then goes on to state, "In response, Father 20 there's on our committee from 21 Wehmeyer was asked to join Sexual Addicts 21 Johns Hopkins that -- a wonderful Jewish man, 22 Anonymous." Did you know that? 22 Dr. Berlin, and a priest and 23 A. No. 23 they always differentiated the ages and there 24 Q. And it goes on to state, "and was enrolled in 24 were people who were attracted to older people 25 the monitoring program." Did you 25 or younger people, they always differentiated 134 136 1 know that? 1 that. 2 A. I did today, it came back to me today when I 2 Q. Tell me, Archbishop, when Father Shelley first 3 saw that copied to Tim Rourke. 3 came onto your radar as a source of concern 4 Q. Did you receive any information from any other 4 about him either viewing viewing or being 5 source about Wehmeyer and/or his expression of 5 in possession of child pornography. 6 sexuality as a priest? 6 A. I don't -- it was before I retired. I don't 7 A. No. 7 remember the circumstances. They're not clear 8 (Discussion out of the hearing of 8 to me now at all. 9 the court reporter) 9 Q. What do you remember about Shelley? 10 BY MR. ANDERSON: 10 A. That there was an incident concerning 11 Q. Did you learn about a DUI that he got in 2009? 11 computers, and then they looked at it, someone 12 A. Today I I might have known about it then, 12 looked at it more closely, I don't know who 13 but today it came to me in this report here. 13 that was, and determined it was pornography. 14 Oh, wait. 2009? 14 That's what I recall. 15 Q. Yeah, in September of 2009, the records show 15 Q. And do you remember receiving and being told 16 that he got a DUI 16 that it was borderline child pornography that 17 A. No. I didn't know that, I don't think. 17 he was viewing? 18 Q. The police report reflects that he was trying 18 A. I don't -- 19 to pick up teenagers to go back to his 19 Q. -- and had possession of? 20 campground to park -- to party. Is that 20 A. No. No, I don't. Unless that occurred 21 information known to you at any time? 21 afterwards. But the initial -- don't even recall what it was now. 23 Q. So when I made that statement to you, is that 23 Q. There are records, Archbishop, in 2004 that 24 the first time you had heard that said? 24 show that an investigation was done and 25 A. I think that was the first _lit_ne today because 25 Richard Setter Associates were retained to 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 133 sheets 35 of 52 sheets 1 137 139 1 evaluate the computer 1 will come up or push them accidentally, but I 2 A. Yes. 2 would not know, but it would alarm me if 3 Q. and Items on it. Do you 3 anyone did that deliberately. 4 A. Yes, I recall that now. 4 Q. Did Father McDonough tell you that these 5 Q. And there was a report prepared by Setter and 5 weren't actual search terms, they were pop-up 6 In consultation with a forensics expert by the 6 images and there was an innocent explanation 7 name of Johnson given to the archdiocese. Did 7 for what seemed to be child porn searches? 8 you read that report? 8 A. I don't recall what he told me, really. 9 A. I don't think so. 9 (Discussion out of the hearing report from Father McDonough or 10 the court reporter) 11 others about what the report found? 11 BY MR. ANDERSONmemory serves me correctly, the 12 Q. At any time, did you make a report or order 13 report did not find any child pornography. 13 any of your subordinates to make a report that basis of what -- who told 14 law enforcement of suspicions concerning 16 you that? 15 Shelley and possession of child pornography? 16 A. I think Father McDonough. 16 A. No. Because I thought this Mrthe basis of that you continued 17 Sutter? 18 Shelley in ministry? 18 Q. Setter. 19 A. No. I think we removed him from ministry at 19 A. Setter. I thought he -- if he thought it 20 that time. 20 necessary to make a report, but there wasn't 21 Q. If the record reflects otherwise, would you -- 21 evidence enough to make a report, that was my 22 how long was he removed from ministry? 22 conclusion, I think. 23 A. Well, he's still removed from ministry, I 23 Q. Well, Setter Associates were private 24 think. 24 investigators hired by the archdiocese, 25 Q. Well, let's just let me suggest, I think the 25"" correct? 138 140 1 record reflects that in 2004, after some 1 A. Uh huh. Yes. 2 investigation was done, there was a 2 Q. And it's also correct that you and Father 3 continuation in ministry until he announced a 3 McDonough at that time and other clergy were 4 retirement in 2013. Is that news to you? 4 mandated reporters, correct? 5 A. I can't remember any of it, I I just don't 5 A. I -- if that's if that's true. I yes. 6 remember, I'm sorry. 6 Q. And Setter was required to make findings to 7 Q. In the report, they're describing the computer 7 Father McDonough and hired to make findings 8 and the images on it and some of the search 8 simply, correct? 9 terms. It states that he had used the search 9 A. I don't remember. 10 terms that could be determined to be 10 Q. Did you order that the computer images and/or 11 borderline illegal, such as "free naked boy 11 the disks evaluated at that time be retained 12 pictures." Did you receive that information? 12 in the vaultdon't -- I don't recall ordering that. 14 Q. There were terms, search terms used by him, 14 Q. Do you remember anything else about Shelley 15 "hardcore teen boys," "European teen boys," 15 and/or suspicions of his computer use -- 16 "helpless teen boys." Did you learn thatand images pertaining to youth? 18 (Discussion out of the hearing of 18 A. No. 19 the court reporter) 19 Q. Anything else that you haven't we haven't 20 BY MR. ANDERSON: 20 covered that is In your knowledge about 21 Q. Does that or receiving that information In 21 Shelley and sexual issues? 22 2004, if available to you, alarm you? 22 A. No. I have nothing I know nothing more. 23 A. Oh, yes. But I -- I must tell you, I don't 23 Q. Did you ever learn anything about him having a 24 know anything about computers and I've heard 24 young person, 18-year-old, living in his 25 from people you can push things and things 25 rectory? Page 137 to 140 of 207 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 141 143 1 A. No. 1 2 Q. I'm going to direct your attention back to 2 3 Father Keating for a moment. And the 3 4 individual who is the young woman that you 4 5 referred to we'll refer to in this proceeding 5 6 as Jane Doe 20 because she's the one that 6 7 brought suit against Father Keating. Okay? 7 8 A. Uh huh. 8 9 Q. Is that okay with you, Father? Archbishop? 9 10 A. Oh, yes, of course. 10 11 Q. And so did you learn in Kevin in the 11 12 Investigation of Keating that he had admitted 12 13 to a passionate physical encounter with a girl 13 14 named 14 15 A. No. I read that in the paper, I think, this 15 16 past fall, but I never knew of that during 16 17 that time I was meeting with the young Ms. Doe 17 18 and her parents. 18 19 Q. How many girls did you think he had, as 19 20 reported to you, engaged in some kind of 20 21 boundary violations with? 21 22 A. Miss -- the one who came in with her parents, 22 23 that was the only one I ever knew of. 23 24 (Discussion out of the hearing of 24 25 the court reporter05/21/2014 09:56:56 Page 141 sheets 145 I'm gonna turn to Joseph Gallatln. And when 23 23 did he come onto your radar as a source of 24 24 concern, possible 26 25 A. I don't I don't remember the year. 37 of s2'Eheets_ Page 145 to 148 of o5;21/2014 09:55:55 AM 149' 05/21/2014 09:56:Silly, I don't know, laughing. My memory is 2 A. Might have been ten years ago. 2 interfering here, too. Laughing with 3 Q. And what information came to your attention, 3 youngsters as though he were a youngster. 4 Archbishop? 4 That's the only way I can describe it. 5 A. His pastor indicated that when they were 5 Q. Anything else about Wehmann that would be 6 having a camp experience, he touched the chest 6 cause for concern that came to your attention 7 of one of the with his finger only, with 7 as archbishopthe studentsmemory, no. 9 recall is that is that's just about all I 9 Q. Freddy Montero, he came onto your radar as 10 can recall about it. There -- there -- it 10 having some of these cause was a cause of 11 wasn't any more than that, I don't from 11 concern, correct? 12 what I can recall. 12 A. Who is that? 13 Q. He was recently reported to have been removed 13 Q. Freddy Montero. 14 from ministry for what was called boundary 14 A. Oh, the -- 15 violations. 15 Q. Ecuadorean priest. 16 A. Yes. 16 A. Yes. That was nearing the end of his time 17 Q. And that was reported by the archdiocese on 17 here, and I'm glad you brought him up. His -- 18 December 29th, 2013. My question to you, 18 he -- he was loaned to us for a period of 19 Archbishop, is, at any time, was any 19 time. His time was up, he was ready to go 20 restriction placed on his ministry to prevent 20 back to Bolivia, I think, is that right, 21 him from engaging in misconduct with youth or 21 Bolivia? 22 boundary violations with youth? 22 Q. Well, actually, he was in Ecuador. 23 A. I don't remember and I -- I presume that he 23 A. Ecuador, he was ready to go back to Ecuador. 24 went to St. Luke's or Philadelphia and was living with a lady. 25 don't remember what their recommendations 25 Q. He was actually living with Father McDonough, 150 152 1 would have been. 1 wasn't he? 2 (Discussion out of the hearing of 2 A. Well, he supposedly. 3 the court reporter) 3 Q. And then it was learned that he was living 4 BY MR. ANDERSON: 4 with a lady 5 Q. I'm going to go to Father Wehmann. And he was 5 A. With a lady, yes. 6 another priest who was recently publicly 6 Q. correct? 7 revealed to have been removed from ministry, 7 A. Yes. 8 obviously not on your watch. My question to 8 Q. And then it was also learned that he was also 9 you is, when did Father Wehmann and how, if he 9 suspected of having sexually abused the lady's 10 did, come onto your radar as having engaged in 10 four-year-old child, correct? 11 some conduct suspicious of boundary violations 11 A. Yes, absolutely. 12 or abuse? 12 Q. And that went to the police, did it not? 13 A. Never abuse, never boundary violations. I 13 A. That's right. And they found nothing -- 14 think acting silly or immature. That's my 14 nothing to -- to hold that in -- they they 15 only memory of this. 15 did not believe that and so he was cleared to 16 Q. And what was your source of all the 16 go back to Ecuador. 17 information you knew about that? 17 Q. Did you learn that, Archbishop, from Kevin 18 A. I can't remember. 18 McDonough? 19 Q. Was Father McDonough the one that was the 19 A. I don't know where I learned it, but I would 20 transmitter or the source or others? 20 tell you this, that a group of women from -- 21 A. He probably would have been. But there was 21 Q. Well, let me just -- just wait for a question. 22 never any issue of sexual abuse or any 22 I want to know if you learned that from 23 boundary violation, I don't think. 23 McDonough when you said he was cleared. Were 24 Q. What was it that you learned that he did that 24 you aware that -- 25 you describe as being silly? 25 (Discussion out of the hearing of Page 149 sheets" 155' 153 1 the court reporter) 1 four-year-old. While no charges have been 2 BY MR. ANDERSON: 2 filed and the child has not made any 3 Q. -- that at the time -- first, that Father 3 incriminating overture to the police, the case 4 McDonough drove him to the airport to go back 4 is still under investigation." Did you know 5 to Ecuador? 5 that when he had did you know thatthought he was -- I thought it was 7 Q. Were you aware that child protection 7 cleared by the police. 8 investigations of Hennepin County Human 8 Q. The last paragraph it states, "Seeing that 9 Services and Public Health Department in their 9 Father Montero has completed a five?year stay 10 assessment of that child and Montero's conduct 10 here in the archdiocese and that he has yet to 11 found, "We determined that sexual abuse 11 be cleared of the accusation of possible child 12 occurred based on reported information in the 12 sexual abuse, His Excellency, Archbishop Harry 13 interviews obtained during the assessment"? 13 has decided to withdraw Father 14 A. No. 14 Montero's faculties here in the Archdiocese of 15 Q. Were you aware that Montero was allowed to go 15 St. Paul and Minneapolis and, thus, Father 16 back to Ecuador before the police completed 16 Montero's future is at your Excel ency's 17 their investigation? 17 disposition." Did you know you were returning 18 MR. HAWS: Objection, misstates 18 him to Ecuador and permitting him to leave in 19 evidence and testimony. 19 the middle of the investigation? 20 BY MR. ANDERSON: - 20 A. I thought the investigation had been 21 Q. Were you aware of that? 21 completed. 22 MR. HAWS: You can answer as best 22 Q. I'm going to direct your attention to Father 23 you know. 23 Vavra. When did he come onto your radar as a 24 A. No. 24 source of some concern pertaining to youth, if 25 (Discussion out of the hearing of 25_ he did? 154 156 1 the court reporter) 1 A. He didn't. I didn't -- I didn't know the man. 2 BY MR. ANDERSON: 2 I think it was before my time. 3 Q. I'm going to direct your attention to Exhibit 3 Q. In 1996, let's look at Exhibit 197. There 4 108 and -- 4 might be something here I need to ask you 5 MR. KELLY: Do we have that? 5 about, Archbishop, that would be on your 6 MR. ANDERSON: I'm just gonna give 5 watch, so if you'll give me a moment. 7 that to you here. 7 MR. FINNEGAN: (Handing documents). 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 9 Q. And while he is, this is the time frame of 9 Q. And so what I want to do, Archbishop, is 10 2007, Archbishop, contextually, it's dated 10 direct your attention to Exhibit 197. This is 11 July 12th, 2007. This would be a letter from 11 something that is dated November 26, 1996, 12 then Bishop Pates, it's cc'd to you at the 12 it's to you and Bishop Welsh from Father 13 second page, you'll see. And first, directing 13 McDonough regarding Father Vavra. And at the 14 your attention to the third paragraph, the 14 second page there's a reference I'm going to 15 last sentence, it states, "While Father 15 read and then ask you if you know anything 16 Montero denies this relationship, there's 16 about it. It states, "The staff at the 17 credible evidence that points to its veracity, 17 treatment center saw to it that an important 18 which alone should be reason for concluding 18 diagnostic tool was used with Father Vavra. 19 his ministry in this archdiocese." That's 19 You may recall that Father Vavra acknowledged 20 referring to the relationship with the woman, 20 having had sexual contact with one blank," 21 correct? 21 that is, some identifying information has been 22 A. Correct. 22 taken out. "This happened about blank ago." 23 Q. Okay. Then it goes on to state, 23 And then when I read down that paragraph, 24 "Unfortunately, however, there's been an 24 there's a sentence that says I'll read and 25 allegation of child sexual abuse involving a 25 then I'll ask you a_question. It sis, "The 39 of 52 sheets Page 153 to 155 of 207* 05/21/2014 -159 157 1 second area of sexual attraction for him was 1 Q. Do you recall any restrictions having been put 2 with adolescent post?pubescent males. Father 2 on his ministry or any disclosures made to the 3 Foley indicated that this is consistent with 3 public about him or his history until he was 4 and secondary to Vavra's adult male 4 sued by Ted Kramer in 2002? 5 attraction." My question don't remember. 6 know he had a sexual attraction to adolescent 6 Q. I'm going to ask you about Father Thurner. 7 post?pubescent males? 7 When, If at all, did he come onto your radar 8 A. No. 8 as somebody who had abused youth? 9 Q. If you had known that, would you have 9 A. I don't remember. 10 restricted his ministry? 10 Q. Do you remember that he did? 11 A. I think it was restricted, wasnremember that it came to my attention 12 the charter -- at the time of the charter. 12 somewhere along the line and that's when he 13 Q. Let me ask you this. Tell me if you remember 13 was removed from ministry. 14 taking any action. Did you take any action 14 Q. Is it your belief that he was removed from 15 responsive to Vavra and a history known? 15 ministry immediately upon the 16 A. I can't remember. 16 official receiving information he had abused? 17 Q. When you took action, if the records reflect 17 A. I don't remember. I don't know. 18 that he was removed from ministry in 2002, did 18 Q. As it pertains to Father Gil Gustafsonyour officials alert the public 19 did learn, because I think we had touched upon 20 as to the reasons for his restriction, if it 20 this before, that he had been convicted at one 21 was done under the charter or shortly after? 21 time in the '80s? 22 A I don't remember again. 22 A. Yes. 23 (Discussion out of the hearing of 23 Q. And do you recall meeting with the parents of 24 the court reporter) 24 that victim who he had been convicted of and 25 BY MR. ANDERSON: 25 making a promise to them that they or that 158 160 1 Q. I'm going to ask you about Father Krautkremer, 1 he would not be allowed to continue in 2 Archbishop, and if you get weary here, I'm 2 ministry and/or around kids? 3 trying to get through this as quickly as 3 A. I don't recall. I don't recall ever having 4 possible. 4 met them. 5 A. Thank you. 5 (Discussion out of the hearing of 6 Q. If you need to take a break, let me know. Are 6 the court reporter) 7 you okay? 7 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 A. I'm okay. 8 Q. What work was Gustafson allowed to do at the 9 Q. I'd like to ask you about Father Krautkremer 9 archdiocese and In the Chancery? 10 and did he come onto your radar and within 10 A. He worked in -- I don't know where he worked. 11 your knowledge that he had offended? 11 I can't remember now. 12 A. I can't remember anything about Father 12 Q. When complaint was made about him being 13 Krautkremer Krautkremer. 13 allowed to continue in some aspects of 14 Q. Did you learn that in 1987, he had admitted 14 ministry, but at the Chancery, did you make 16 abusing youth? 15 the assertion to the family member that 16 A. I didn't. 16 complained about that that those restrictions 17 Q. Did you learn that it was recorded and/or 17 imposed on him by you were far greater 18 reported the odds are that he was likely to 18 punishment than being sent to jail? 19 abuse again? Had you heard that from any 19 A. I don't -- I don't remember anyone complaining 20 sourcefair to say, then, that you don't 22 Q. Did you know and permit him in 1998 to do 22 remember making such a statement to anybody? 23 he p?out work or supply work in three 23 A. I don't remember, no. 24 different parishes? 24 Q. He was placed on a disability for pedophilia, 25 A. I don't -- I don't remember. 25 wasn't he? 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 157 sheets 41 of 52 sheets 181 163 1 A. I don't know. I don't remember. 1 retired. 2 Q. If the records show that he is receiving 2 Q. Well, I'm interested in what they are. 3 payments for pedophilia and receiving 3 A. Well, I would not state them here. 4 disability payments for that, do you have any 4 Q. Father Wajda, Joseph Wajda, did he come onto 5 knowledge of how that happened and why? 5 your radar as having abused a number of folks, 6 A. No. He would not be receiving payments for 6 kids? 7 pedophilia. He'd be receiving payments 7 A. Yes. 8 because he victimized and is not able to work 8 Q. And what action did you take? 9 at an adequate position anymore, that's why he 9 A. I can't remember the sequence of events. He 10 would receive payments. 10 -- I don't know whether he -- this happened 11 Q. If that's the case, Archbishop, what message 11 some years ago, before my time, I believe, 12 do you think that sends to the victims that he 12 and -- 13 abused that he's receiving payments for having 13 Q. Okay. 14 victimized them? 14 A. -- he was working In the tribunal and then 15 A. I don't know, but what message would it send 15 when this came to my attention, I -- I think, 16 to the world If we threw these people out in 16 I'm not sure, I removed him. 17 the street without any difficulty without 17 Q. Archbishop, I think if we take a break, a 18 any assistance? 18 short break, my hope is that on return I'll be 19 Q. If they were thrown into jail 19 able to finish in about 15 minutes, but I have 20 A. That would be -- 20 to -- I have to meet with the brains of the 21 Q. -- and reported to the police? 21 operation here. 22 A. That that would be something else. 22 A. All right. 23 Q. That would send a powerful message, wouldn't 23 Q. And if you'll give me that lead, I'll -- 24 It? 24 A. And I'll -- 26 A. Yes. 25 Q. -- a breakthe files that were maintained on 1 A. I'll hold you to your word, 15 minutes. 2 Gustafson or other priests who had offended 2 Q. I'm not I'm not giving you my word because 3 were made available to law enforcement, that 3 I don't want to make a promise I can't deliver 4 would also send a powerful message, wouldn't 4 on, but I'm gonna try. Okay? 5 it? 6 A. All right. Wonderful. 6 A. Powerful message, yes. 6 Q. Is that good enough? 7 Q. Why hasn't it been sent? 7 A. That's good enough. 8 A. Why hasn't what been sent? 8 MR. ANDERSON: Okay. Thanks. Let's 9 Q. Why hasn't It been done? Why haven't the 9 take a break. 10 files been turned over to the police? 10 MR. KINSELLA: Off the video recorddon't know. I don't know. 11 (Recess taken) 12 Q. If the people and the public and the 12 MR. KINSELLA: Back on the video 13 parishioners were told the truth about the 13 record, 3:18 p.m. 14 history known to the archdiocese of those 14 BY MR. ANDERSON: 15 priests who had offended and had been warned 15 Q. Archbishop, I'm going to try to walk you 16 and there had been a full disclosure of that 16 through a few more things here as soon as 17 history known to the archdiocese, that would 17 possible and I've put before you Exhibit 152. 18 send a powerful message, too, wouldn't it? 18 And it's dated March 25th, 2008, it's a memo 19 A. It would. 19 to you, Archbishop it's from Father 20 Q. Do you think it's time for the archdiocese to 20 Kevin McDonough and it regards two charter 21 do that? 21 priests. When the term in quotation marks 22 A. That will be up to the present archbishop. 22 here is "charter priests," that means to you 23 Q. Do you have a view of what the best practice 23 and to Father McDonough what? 24 is? 24 A. Someone had been removed from the priesthood 25 A. I don't -- I don'tit my views since I 25 because of the charter and that is because of Page 161 to 164 of 57 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM 165 167 1 abuse of children. 1 because his work was not ministrygoes on to say, "and their relationship 2 consulting with parish councils or whoever 3 to the archdiocese." And because this is 3 they were, but they it wasn't ministry in a 4 addressed to you, I assume you received it; 4 parish. I don't think it was a violation of 5 fair assumption? 5 the charter. 6 A. Fair assumption. 6 Q. Do you believe that allowing Gustafson to work 7 Q. Okay. The two priests here are Gilbert 7 at the parishes as a consultant is consistent 8 Gustafson and Michael Stevens and they are 8 with the promise made to the people of zero 9 being allowed to continue in some capacities 9 tolerance? 10 doing priestly work, are they not? 10 A. I I don't -- I don't see that as ministry. 11 A. (Examining documents) It wasn't priestly work, 11 It was a matter of going in and speaking with 12 I don't think. It was -- Michael Stevens was 12 adults or what I don't even know what he 13 office work and I don't recall the work that 13 did, to be honest with you. I would need to 14 Gus -- Gustafson did. 14 review the charter again and -- and see what 15 Q. First, both of these are men who are priests 15 the restrictions were. 16 who had been convicted of childhood sexual 16 Q. Would you view the continuation of him in this 17 abuse, correct? 17 capacity, as you see it here, as a very 18 A. Correct. 18 dangerous loophole in the charter? 19 Q. And under the charter, there was a promise 19 MR. HAWS: Well, object to the form. 20 made to the people that those that had 20 MR. KELLY: "This here" being what? 21 violated children would not be allowed to 21 BY MR. ANDERSON: 22 continue in ministry in any form, correct? 22 Q. The continuation of Gilbert Gustafson in this 23 A. Correct. 23 capacity as reflected in this memorandum. 24 Q. If you look at the paragraph, second paragraph 24 A. I don't know. I could not answer that now 25 here, it says in regard to Gilbert Gustafson, 25 because I would have to find out what work he 166 168 1 "He's been employed for several years by a 1 would have been doing. 2 consulting firm called Henderson Associates. 2 Q. Did you ever ask him -- 3 That firm, which includes several 3 A. I can't remember -- 4 professionals, makes its own management with 4 Q. in 2008 what work he was doing and what 5 parishes." And -- 5 efforts could be made in that work to keep him 6 MR. HAWS: Arrangements, not 6 away from kids, knowing he's a diagnosed and 7 management. 7 convicted pedophile? 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 A. I don't know whether I ever asked him. I 9 Q. Excuse me, "own arrangements with parishes." 9 might have asked Father McDonough, but I can't 10 It states, "We have neither banned nor 10 remember. 11 recommended the firm, rather, we will allow 11 Q. The next paragraph addresses Michael Stevens 12 them to tell potential parish clients that the 12 and it states, "He has a private consulting 13 head of the firm, Greg Henderson, has 13 business in which he sets up computer systems 14 undergone a day-long ?Getting to Know the 14 and trouble-shoots them." It states, 15 Catholic Archdiocese Program? that we provide 15 number of our parishes contract with him." Do 16 on occasion to consultants. My own belief is 16 you see that to be a problem with the promise 17 that, even when Greg Henderson assigns Gilbert 17 made under the charter and him -- 18 Gustafson to work with one of the 18 A. That would be more of a -- a problem because 19 client-parishes, there is no violation of the 19 he would be working in the parish. 20 charter involved." Don't you think, 20 Q. But he was allowed to continue, was he not? 21 Archbishop, that allowing Gil Gustafson to 21 A. He worked at the Chancery in -- with computers 22 work as a consultant, knowing his history with 22 and probably -- but he would have had no 23 these parishes and -- that that is a violation 23 relationship with children. 24 of the charter and the spirit of it? 24 Q. Let me ask you this. Did you personally take 25 A. I don't think it's a violation of the charter 25 any action responsive to the information 55/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 165 sheets 43 of 52 sheets 169 171 1 contained in Exhibit 152? 1 0. Okay. 2 MR. KELLY: Could you give the 2 A. That's absolutely correct. 3 archbishop a minute to read the full 3 Q. I'm going to show you an exhibit now to be 4 paragraph? 4 read together, they're marked exhibits -- 5 MR. ANDERSON: Sure. 5 (Discussion out of the hearing of 6 A. I I think I can. I can't recall. I can't 6 the court reporter) 7 recall at all. 7 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 BY MR. ANDERSON: 8 Q. Okay. I'm going to go now to a part of the 9 Q. Do you have any documents or files that you 9 deposition that we'll mark as sealed, okay? 10 have -- 10 And that is just under the court order here 11 (Discussion out of the hearing of 11 because I'm going to be asking some questions 12 the court reporter) 12 that pertain to matters that the court has for 13 BY MR. ANDERSON: 13 the moment deemed to be sealed. Okay? 14 Q. that you maintain on your own reflecting 14 A. (Nods head). 15 your own experience around the sexual abuse 15 16 and handling I'm going to show you an Exhibit 166, 18 19 Archbishop, it's a handwritten note and I 19 20 think I'm -- 20 21 (Discussion out of the hearing of 21 22 the court reporter) 22 23 BY MR. ANDERSON: 23 24 Q. Archbishop, this is handwritten, it would come 24 25 from the file, I believe, of Eugene Coricahuh. 1 2 Q. And do you recognize the handwritingOkay. Let me read it and see if you have 4 5 information. It's -- I read it to state, "The 5 6 rest of Corica's file is In Archbishop 6 7 fireproof closet," I believe. 7 8 A. Uh huh. 8 9 Q. Did you have a fireproof closetdon't remember at all. It's like the 10 11 secret fund I had to which you referred. No. 11 12 This -- that -- that person, whoever wrote 12 13 this, must have been referring to the 13 14 fireproof vault, but my closet would not -- 14 15 not have passed -- this is comical. My closet 15 16 would not have passed the fire -- firemen's 16 17 inspection. 17 18 Q. So this must then, in your view and 18 19 experience, be referring to the vault you've 19 20 already shared 20 21 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. with us and no other file kept by you or 22 23 under your control pertaining to sexual abuse, 23 24 to your knowledge, correct? 24 25 A. Not tmy knowledge. 25 Page 169 to 172 of 207 05/21/2014 09:55:55 AM 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 197 How many priests under your watch as 20 20 archbishop do you estimate were accused of 21 21 sexual abuse of minors in some form that were 22 22 sent to treatment or assessment at St. Luke's? 23 23 A. I wouldn't want to guess. I would need to 24 24 count them. 25 25 Q. They were used quite regularly, were they not, 198 200 1 1 for assessing and treating of potential 2 2 offenders? 3 3 A. Not when we -- one considers the number of 4 4 priests we have in the archdiocese, but, 5 5 again, I would not render a guess because I'd 6 6 have to go over the files and count them. 7 7 Q. Is it fair to say that the number is in excess 8 8 of a dozen, but you can't be more precise than 9 9 that? 10 10 A. I would not render that guess. 11 11 Q. What contacts did you have with the folks at 12 12 St. Louis St. Luke's when a referral would 13 13 be made for treatment or assessment of a 14 14 potential offender? 15 15 A. Usually Father McDonough had the contact. I 16 16 was on the first board of St. Luke's -- Luke's 17 17 and it's grown tremendously since that time 18 18 and -- but he would make the contact or Bishop 19 19 Pates would. 20 20 Q. And St. Luke's was actually you were a 21 21 member of the first board of St. Luke's? 22 22 A. I was. 23 23 Q. And that was when were they constituted and 24 24 for what purpose? [25 25 A. I'm wondering, I in the early '80s, 50 of 52 sheets 201 203 1 perhaps, I'm not sure, or late '70s. And 1 bleed in also. 2 constituted to render treatment for priests, 2 Q. And your consulters, Kevin McDonough included 3 and now it has expanded for religious women, 3 and others over the years had authority given 4 for ministers, anyone in a ministerial 4 by you to them to send troubled priests to St. 5 position, I believe. 5 Luke's for these assessments, correct? 6 Q. And it's all Catholic clergy from various 6 A. Well, not exactly. I'd send them. 7 A. Not only Catholic, no. Protestant ministers 7 Q. You would send them? 8 now and they've -- they've expanded. 8 A. At the recommendation of my senior staff, 9 Q. But originally it was Catholic only? 9 Kevin McDonough, Bill Fallon, Andy 10 A. Originally it was Catholic priests. 10 Eisenzimmer. 11 Q. And you were on the board and a number of 11 Q. And to your knowledge, is that a practice that 12 other clergy served on that board? 12 has been continued by your successor? 13 A. Clergy, criminal behavior 13 A. It has been, I believe. And with -- there's 14 people, attorney -- a couple of attorneys. 14 also a wonderful hospital in 15 Q. And they were created and funded and founded 15 right outside of Philadelphia, 16 to basically help the Catholic bishops and the 16 and that is priests, religious, and I don't 17 superiors to evaluate and treat priests who 17 know whether Protestant ministers and/or wives 18 had problems -- 18 use that facility now, but they do at St. 19 A. That's correct. 19 Luke's. 20 -Q. including addiction, sexual abuse and other 20 Q. Okay. I think this is my final question to 21 maladies, correct? 21 you. When Archbishop Nlenstedt became 22 A. That is correct, yes. 22 installed, I believe was It originally as 23 Q. And then to give them advice about whether or 23 coadjutor with you? 24 not they were fit to minister or be allowed to 24 A. He was welcomed as coadjutor in 2007. And 25 continue in ministry? 25 then on the morning of May 2nd, when I turned 202 204 1 A. Correct. '1 75, he became immediately the archbishop and I 2 MR. KINSELLA: Excuse me, off the 2. rejoiced. 3 record to change tape. 3 Q. Okay. And at any time, Archbishop, did he 4 (Recess taken) 4 ever ask you to inform him of what priests 5 MR. KINSELLA: Back on the video 5 were in the archdiocese that were a hazard and 6 record 4:21 p.m. 6 posed a risk of harm to the children so that 7 BY MR. ANDERSON: 7 he could have the benefit of your knowledge 8 Q. And it's fair to say that when they were 8 and experience? 9 originally constituted and utilized, that they 9 A. I don't think he ever asked me, but I -- I 10 were funded exclusively originally by the 10 believe that he was in communication about 11 Catholic Conference of Bishops and the 11 this subject with Andy and Kevin 12 religious superiors? 12 McDonough. 13 A. No. No. That has always been a sore point 13 Q. What leads you to that belief? 14 because it was -- they were funded by the 14 A. Perhaps from a -- memories of conversations, 15 patients who came in and private donations. 15 perhaps, that they were going to have with him 16 Q. Oh. 16 about this. 17 A. It was never funded by the National Conference 17 Q. Has Archbishop Nlenstedt ever asked you to 18 of Catholic Bishops. 18 this day to tell you anything that you know 19 Q. And so the archdiocese, when you'd utilize 19 about the problem of sexual abuse and who 20 them for assessment, treatment and the like 20 poses such a problem in the archdiocese? 21 for troubled or offending priests, you'd send 21 A. I don't believe so. 22 them the fees and the costs of that 22 MR. ANDERSON: Thank you, 23 evaluation, treatment and the like? 23 Archbishop, that's all I have. 24 A. Yes, that's correct. And now I think, but I 24 THE WITNESS: And thank you, you've 25 couldn't swear to It, that insurance policies 25 kept your word -- is 51 of 52 sheets Page 201 to 204 of 207 05/21/2014 AM - 205 1 MR.ANDERSON: Itried. 2 THE WITNESS: --one more question. 1 BTRTE OF MINNESOTA 3 And thank you,Mr.Finnegan,for notbringing 2 COUNTY OF RAMSEY 4 up one ofthose newspapers again. I--Iwas 3 I hereby certify that rapozted the 5 going to send you over and say, "Send rn a :1 of nanny on the 14th day of May, 3014, an SL. Paul. Minnesota, 6 note once in a while, too." 5 HIM duly 6 7 MR. KINSELLAI Off the video rd. That. the was tr.-umczibed under my dircutinn and is a lcun tecur? of the 8 testimony of the H:1nen5; 3 That the cost uf the cniginnl has been charged 9 1 tn the party who noticed the dupuaition. and thax all paxties who ordered copies have been 10 10 charged at the name zai? int ?u?h 11 1] what 1 am not a relative or employue or or counsel af any nf thu parties, ex 12 12 rnintiva ur employee of such attorney or counsel; 13 That I am net financially inteseuzed in nation and H0 contract wilh the partied. actoznayn, on persons with action that a: has a substantial hnn?oncy to affect my impartiality: 15 15 that uno ;ight to rand and uign the deposithw 1? by the uitnusn was not waivnd. and a copy was pzovided to him for hin ueujuw: .3 CD WITNESS MY HARD ASE SEAL THIS l?th day of May, 2014Gary W, Hermes -ARCHBISHOP HARRY do hereby certify that I have read the foregoing transcript of my deposition and beiieve the same to be true and correct, except as follows: (Noting the page number and iine number of the change or addition and the reason for ItSubscribed to and sworn B0 (9 before me this day 2014. BO 43 of_ 25 05/21/2014 09:56:56 AM Page 205 sheets Memorandum l2 August 2002 Memo To: Archbishop and Archbishop?s Council From: Father Kevin McDonough Re: Generating Communication wi-th Parishes Having Some Connection to a I-Iistory_o_f_ Clergy Sexual Abuse We have a significant number of parishes that were served at one time or another before, during, or after known offenses by priests with a history of sexual abuse of minors. For years we have acknowledged that there are good reasons to implement a healing process in some such parishes: for example, to help other possible victims to come forward and to break the unhealthy secrets that often remain in such parishes. On one or more occasions this summer, our failure to do so in speci?c instances has been viewed as part of a ?cover-up?. Of course, that failure was not a cover-up, but rather lack of time and resources to follow up. I want to propose that we ought to devote the resources now to ?lancing the boil? while there is residual interest/fear/concern/anger about this issue. A further motivator for particular work with these parishes is this: the local media are researching our history and are likely eventually to publish a list of our known offenders. Even if we do not preemptively release all of that information ourselves (?publish the list?), we are going to have to deal with its disclosure sooner or later. I would prefer to see us in the position of having already prepared local parishes for this likelihood. I propose that we take the following steps: 1. We should identify a list of parishes that potentially deserve this attention. 2. We should call a meeting that involves the pastors, trustees, and parish council presidents of all such parishes. The meeting would include a presentation about the policies of our Archdiocese about sexual misconduct, a description of the possible effects of this history on a parish, and the outcomes of our past work with such parishes. 3. We would then meet individually with the small leadership group of each parish and go over the relevant history with each of them. fgrviwould ask them to consider whether and how to involve a broader leadership group in the discussion. 5. We would then send a staff member to each such parish to work out a process of communication and follow up with each parish. I do not believe we currently have sufficient staff support to carry out this effort with internal resources. Therefore, we should bring someone in on a contract basis to organize the effort. I propose that Patricia Gries be hired in that capacity. There may be other equally quali?ed candidates. 1 suggest that we move on this relatively quickly, so that we can initiate the meetings this fall. Here is a partial list of the parishes that merit special attention: Priests with known abuse histories: Gilbert Gustafson: Saint Mary of the Lake, WBL Michael Stevens: Saint Michael, Prior Lake; Epiphany, Coon Rapids Robert Thurner: Saint Mark, Saint Paul; Saint John, Hopkins; Saint Joseph, West Saint Paul; Saint Therese, Saint Paul; Most Holy Trinity, Saint Louis Park; Saint Michael, Prior Lake; St. Edward, Bloomington; Saint Luke, Saint Paul Lee Krautkremer: Saint Peter, Forest Lake; Saint Joseph, Lino Lakes; Saint Michael, Saint Michael; Saint Michael, W. Saint Paul; Saint Margaret Mary, Golden Valley; Saint Peter, N. Saint Paul; Immaculate Conception, Faribault Robert Kapoun: Saint Raphael, Saint Seholastica, Heidelberg; Saint Patrick, Saint Joseph, Saint Catherine, rural New Prague; St. Kevin, Minneapolis; Most Holy Redeemer, Montgomery Robert Zasacki: Saint Peter, Forest Lake; Sacred Heart, Robbinsdale; Saint Joseph, Hopkins; Saint Joseph, Delano, Saint Peter, Delano Paul Palmitessa: Holy Redeemer, Maplewood; Saint Paul, Zumbrota. Timothy McCarthy: Saint Andrew, Elysian; Saint. Peter Claver, Saint Paul; Holy Redeemer, Maplewood; Saint Leo, Saint Paul, All Saints, Lakeville; Guardian Angels, Lake Elmo; Saint Joseph, Circle Pines Tom Gillespie OSB: Saint Bernard, Saint Paul; Saint Mary, Stillwater. ii ii aw Eugene (Salvatore) Corina: Saint Bricigct, Minneapolis; Saint Raphael, Holy Family, Saint Louis Park; Saint Patrici<, Grove Holy Childhood, Saint Patti, temp. Saint Thomas Saint Patti Park: lmtnaculate Risen Savior, Apple Valley; Saint Bottiface, Saint at Saint Leo, Saint Paul, and helped out; was from Winona Diocese 95 em; He-itzer: Several New Ultn parisltes; Saint Peter. Forest Lake. Saint Richard, Rieh?eid; .Inanacutate. Conception, Paribault; Saint Jude of the Lake. Mahtomcdi Saint Augustine, South Saint Paul; Saint Rose of Lima. Roseville. Rudolph Henriclt: Saint Golden Valley; Saint Saint Paul; Saint Mark. Shakopee Saint Fwneis Xaviet?. Buffalo: Maternity of BVM, Saint Paul; Saint Patrick, Saint Paul; Saint Ma1'guret Mary. Golden Vailey, Our Lady of Perpetual 1?-ielp, Minneapolis Eilbin: Saint Pius X. Saint I-Ielena, Mimteapolis; Nortlt?eld; Lake Benton; Eden Valley; Saint Ignal-ins, Atinandale, Saint Bridget, Priests with dlsnutetl claims. inarainal lteltavlar, or tinting altentiat Amiuaciatxion, Minneapolis; Saint. William. Fridley; Saint Michael, Prior Lake; Saint Mary, Saint Patti; Saint Peter. Rlch?eld; Saint. Mark. Saint Paul; Iratnaeulate Conception, Faribault (spiritual director) Saint Helena. Mittneapolis; Sacred Heatt. Robbinsdale; ,!g;11n Erown: Saint Mary.Waver1y; Saint Saint Patti; Hatcelwaod: Saint Maple Lalte, S:tci'ecl Heart, Saint John. St. Patti, Saint Joseplt, Hopitins; Saint Antl1o1tyot'l"adutt. Mintteapolis, Immaculate Conception, Madison Lake; Saint Mtuy, I I I It La :33 Saint Mark. Saint Patti; Our Lady ot?Grace, Edina; IHM, Minnetonkn; Saint Peter. Forest Lake; Saint Dominic, Northiield ?t Saint Raphael, Cl'yts'lt1i.', Conception, Columbia Heights: Saint Andrew, Saint Paul; Saint Rose of Litn-.1. Roseville, Saint Joseph, Waconia, Saint Peter and Paul, Loretto, Our Minneapolis. Blessed Sacrament, Saint Paul gm}: Om Lady of Grace, Eclina; Saint Mark; Saint Paul; Our Lady of (Saint lictriiti. Minneapolis; Sacred Heart, Robbinsdale: Saint Rose of Lima, llti.-nwille; lilt?. King, Minneapolis. Saint Joseph, Hopkins [}L't1ni5 Fatibault; Saint Mark", Saint Paul; Saint Vittee-nt. Pine Island: Saint. Michael, Kenyon; Saint Joseph. W. SiIi1tt~ Paul, I-I_oi-y Fantily. Saint Louis Park, Holy Trinity. S. Saint? Paul 103 g-pl; Qallatin: Saint Hubon. Saint Btn'na1'd, Saint Paul. any Wa lab: Holy South Saint Paul; Saint Henry. Monticello; Saint Pius X. White Benrintke: Maternityti1'l3]cssed Virgin. Saint Paul. Saint Stephen. Minneapolis; Saint Anne. LoSncn.r; All Saints. Lakeville Please note as well that we have three unresolved situations: Bishop Dudley and The outcome of their investigations may also affect this list. ?om .34.. :5 gmucun?u? wrau?wu Eu? 1.. Emma mm. mm. an z?nmauun :95 52:? u..rvuumawuv 2: aw 9:3 ..:u.uW.mu.mwxQ\ ham. EM .35? .._m.38a.u2 an mama 2.. 3. 9.. game: A .3. uoqwanunm dom?uud Ha. nmn?muanw 33 3. E3 wad Ham 3 m??n m.n.n_._anaauE MESH 3.. man. .u Ham ?ura 3355 .3 uummn- .Hm IUHUW 53 FE nun EH3 ?mu?m a van P33. nuau?an Eu.? amr?? .35 Sm . E: uh? ?uman ?a noun uunauu?ua .5. b?a?anu? Hm 3.. 3m?Jm3 ll mmauuwu no H: 3 ao?unuohm? ?emhmxummdq?a muo?? mmwmomo? mo Luomsoum m?muouu. Emma. 28:. 3% om #43 $63 y?ombo . an #8 Pm . :11! 1 .b.Em runa?u n_ ??mamuau ME .5. 35? 3.3 .35 .3398 3 2: dunno 5.6 :mm. 5 E?duu?inaa?wioan 933 ~33 3 ?munnm Swami 35 ?noon .n3u.E Hanan c3.n 55 ?.35 an vacuum. 3 nmu an ?an. unnu E: uuaumaao man can 8.3. 223 2.. .a..o=m..uom ms. ??amuaanum 33885 .h8Euw bud . uu?uamdm ha 35 qomamu?zm an ntm? has? um unn?mn En M: 8.03 .33 can maam munaqu ?tum w?uamuauun 05 Eb u?n??ou QMNE 3 3.3 m5. 3 2: .6 333; 3 Eu. .uS.?..uanuu Bah dong mm 433 .5230 mu.=.3uo.? 4.5: ?aw -auE~mE? mmun? ?u?oam u?m?no? 3 mm? nutn d? .8 .353 mun?? EM .383 39.5 3 mmam nu?a. ::nn-3 Evin .50 uua?? .En..nu Mam mm ha .5 32.38 3. u?o?mu Ea .3 mm 8:38 an #5 35.6 aunt 3 an?ua?ua as 3 .53 ..2Eu 5: Em 5333 a um! 95 .5. Maria 3 E33 hn?. U550 awnuhm?amum A2. 33% Eu m??m?om Edam un?t; ham Bu: 2: 3. voa?xuu mam? 3 auto GDUUNUH u? mu. ?uaa? ?ns? 3 M5 .8. manna Em mama aamwmawuwampswaawm 5 m??unmra um. ??aam as mung: maa??gun?u?maa3351 3, cm ma?a mm 8.40.3 3n5? can udmm 3 MEE. ?sa?uz Emu .23 ?anks. _o.m.nB? an 33.3 2.53 ms .EunB8u ?war: .5: data .39 made dnmB..? ..Ua.5u .3 MUENUHD nah 9? any use ??aua GU33. u-30? u%U nOmVn_Uh.? 05 Gun ??rh?mnu??d ?.35 3.03 .35? ununnhma munnou noun. ham Hmwou 3 man mz?um. no na?? AES Hrqnauudau . wuu??a acah?su and .dam..whmau.. mm ou?mnm no A035 3 333%. 9.8.5 :2 an Euuh?m 5.3 BNES hum . d?hnonna mu?oomu ?nmuanu mama can .?.mumm.?a.umn4. m?mu. nan Humsh??s? -mwu_E P?un .653 um? .95. 5. in On U03 Ma Eu?. mm} w? 5.2. ma?a ?ma 95. me: man .3 33.3: an .5 $2 335 me @533m?amm ma 3 ??nw gnaw mH._3w_. you $0.5 ?nd 9.253 mzunh. unnuuon .0330 mum 093 .3 madam? an. 35 Hg .623 ?ux: 0.: Aha nuh?u mn ??an awn u?oo . . -. .. . Ewu?a manna our. .aa??B33% 36 . un??u 9: mam gamma baa? Bu ammw 3: 3. E3 on Em. .u.=won .53 ?pan .9538 B..u_.un3 aa? #332: uu??um nun auu?oau . HNHEEU ma ?wand mnmzopum ?wau Q5 3 s? wit: .3 H555: Ma 336:3 .33 nmu?onua has uq?um um?h? daa?m? 3? ma?a Enawoa Emumucm 53.. ??uuaumnuaawuoneauun uH.Hm.a4.h5au3.un..?uUnuu..n.. bu .n_nmcPU..nwu.n ._cAnv.m H5 dwaouonuuqumaw Juana .3 ?an uama A?au? bmma .mu..EEu ununn?ww. _o.Euu ouuonn .u.?h..on.u?wE.nnua?.E..?5m. $53.3 . d?nmiu??au ?aqn?ana??mu?u? magmas amps 5 o8.8.% Ea 2.2 mm EOE 494$ 00L or DIVINITY P-2 OP SAINT PAUL AND MINNEAPOLIS 2260 Summit Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105-1094 (612) 962.6890 FAX (612) 9625790 HUG 15 '96 '5 VO CATION OFFICE August is, 1996 . Most Reverend Harry J. D.D. Archbishop of saint Paul and Minneapolis Chancery - 226 summit Avenue Saint Paul. Minnesota 55102 Dear Archbishop You asked for my thoughts re ardihg the candidacy?o?L?1m1js.Hehmey?rT' As I mentioned at our meet an on he 13th. we have been impressed with the growth Curt has disglayed. He is honest, sincere. can show humor, and is pro erfu . A rist has determined - and no agree - there seems little ance of recidivism of alcohol abuse. He presents himself as melancholy at times. and takes a mild anti-depressant, but according to the shows no signs of clinical depression. I suspect there may be people in the seminary now less to work on it. His debt does not mentally healthy than curtis. and less willing bother me much. as it was generated by school and car bills. not whimsical acquisitions. ny reservations regarding Curt are in two areas. One. given the level of his skills. will he be able to Juggle all he needs to in order to academically prepare for priesthood while he continues to work on other issues: understandin and controlling his sexuality. dealing with family issues, and developing in imacy skills. He is not a strong student and I am concerned he may not do well in all areas at once. Support for the homosexual candidate - if that indeed is his orientation - within and outside the seminary is not as strong as for heterosexual one. For that reason. a strong support stem and good intimacy skills are very im ortant. I am concerned Curt does not eve them at the desired level yet. I be ieve he can attain them. The second area or concern really looks at Curt ten years'from now. Once he is out of the cocoon of? seminary and first assignments and living alone, will he be able to handle what is tossed at him? Obviously, this is very difficult to project, and depends on the depth to which he enters into the formation program. th in the past year speaks well for him in this case. I believe his grow In summary. I do not believe he is read: for Theology 1. I think he is a bit of a risk at any level at this time. but cer ainly redeemable. I appreciate his him punished for that, but I hink there are honesty and would not want to see some unresolved issues which may be better addressed outside seminary. Sincerely yours in Christ, Rev. Stan Moder Co-vocation Director A Recipient of the Annual Catholic Appeal 6x5 ARCH-000826 to undergo a variety of forms of testing; you will - MEMO T0: Assessment Staff at Saint Luke Institute FROM: Father Kevin MoDonough June -1, 2004 RE: Father Curtis Wehmeyer for your assistance in an assessment of Father-_Curtis ?Welnneycr. Below I idcnt that leads to the request for an assessment. -B eforc I do so, however, are seeking answers. want to ask that any cl either written or verbal, would I understand that you will ask Father W-chrneyer also conduct a clinical interview with him. I do on. If Father Wehmeyer chooses to disclose that he will be free to do so. I want to be careful, in regard to all other matters. . I am grateful to you I will describe the inc want to alert you to the questions for which disclosures to the Archdiocese of Saint Paul an only be responsive to the following questions. not want us to have access to that irrfonnati information inn subsequent. therapy setting, however, to protect Father ?Wehmeyer's priwaey Here are the questions for which we are seeking an answer: Ibelievc that the incident being described constitutes irnprudont risk part. It is not, on the one hand, simply a matter of an the other hand, part of a regular pattern of ?_?cruising? and ?picking up" anonymous sexual partners. My understanding is that Father Wehrneyer somewhat reluctantly shares this characterization of the event as well. Is this characterization consistent with what you will have learned about Father Wehrneyer?s personality and commitments? Is he telling the truth in reluctantly agreeing with my characterization of.the incident? 1) As I will discuss below, taking behavior on Father innocent misunderstanding, nor is it, on the incident, does the incident reveal either Wflratever the accuracy of my characterization problems that should be address ed? for Father I situational or chronic emotional and - institution and is of the highest possible cred healthy functioning as a priest? If so, what are those problems? 3) If you have identi?ed problems, 'what recommendations would you have for treatment modalities? In regard to a description of the incident, 1 am material that I received from Patrick Menlce. Patrick was not.a witness to the incident, but information to me. I have known Patrick for many years. In fact, he is by a Catholic Cliurcinrelated ibility. Patrick used the sheet of pirates that you will ?nd attaehedto check the visual itlentiflcation of the two men whose reports are included. Both of them irnrnediately identi?ed Father Welnneyer. . 5 . Ll ARCH-000398 - -simply to engage in conversation with an interesting Page two Re: Fr. Curtis Wehmeyer June 1. 2004 When I confronted Father Wehmeycr about this report on Thursday, May 27, he initially indicated that the situation was purely a matter of misunderstanding. Father Wehmeyer?s remarks, he said, were at most an attempt on his part to understand what the?rst young man ?was looking for from the conversation so that he could extricate himself as gently as possible. I offered to have an independent investigator with whotn the Archdiocese regularly works interview the two complainants and Fatlier Wehmeyer to help assess the situation. Father Wehmeyer indicated he was open to having that happen. I proposed to him a possibility lying somewhere liberate cruising. I suggested that he may have had some interest in engaging the conversation to see. where it might go. That it might have triggered. curiosity and even a sense of danger-on his part. I suggested to him that he might have been staying in the conversation for a time not simply because he did not know how to disengage but also because there was something attractiveiand interesting in it. He agreed t.hat_that might be so, but could not come to any speci?city about what the element of interest, curiosity, or danger might have been. Nevertheless he indicated his willingness to explore this through an assessment process. As our conversation continued, however, between innocent misunderstanding and do information diet I have so far. I-?ether Wehincyer was not in his for people. He_ clerical dress, and he was in a place that he understood to be a ?rueeting_.place was there at 10:30 at night. ?He engaged in a conversation with a young man, and the conversation clearly had some sexual undertones to it. Father Wehmeyer did not imply disengage from the conversation and walk away. It is certainly possible to consider that a "pick up? that did not work out. There are other possible" elraraeterizntions, as well. For example, it could have been "?irting that became uncomfortable. It could have been a very uneareful attempt and apparently interested person. Or it could have been, as'I suggest above, an act of risk taking. That is, it seems to me that Father Wehmeyer had a fairly good intuition that the conversation was leading into ?forbidden subjects.? Never?teless, his curiosity was piquer_l and he stayed with the conversation to see where it would go. When it ended abruptly, he tried to ?nd some way to repair what he only too late recognised could be some damage. Here is my assessment of the it clear that there is no violation of Minnesota civil law involved. There was stion of the desire for sexual contact, and so the lntetl is reasonably low. Nonetheless, i.n the himself in a situation in which Permit me to make no sexual contact or even any direct sugge likelihood that even a moral law has been vio sensitive times in which we ?nd ourselves, Father Wehmeyer put his integrity is subject to a certain amount of questioning. I grateful to you for whatever clari?cation you can offer as -we try to sort this out. Father Wehmeyer does not s_eem,to have a clear self understanding of his own part in this immediately available to him. -Alternatively, he may understand it quite well and be reluctant to explain it to me. Nonetheless, I believe that he would pro?t from further insigln. Our desire to protect the integrity of his Ininistry would also be served by better I am grateful for your help. ARC H-000399 Saint institute PLEASE NOTE: The information provided in the enclosed evaluation sunimary letter is provided Within the scope of and subject to the medical records and con?dentiality privileges as recognized in the State of Mary1and.As such it should not be re-disclosed without the written permission of the patient or unless required bylaw. June 18, 2004 Con?dential Father Kevin McDonough Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis 226 Summit Avenue St. Paul, MN 55102 Re: Reverend Curtis Wehrneyer SLI 14963 Dear Father McDonough: of Father Curtis 39--vein-old priest from your for taking the time to be present with us at the evaluation feedback session Friday, June 2001} via telephone. It was important to havehim present to -hear the evaluation findings first-hand and to provide support for Father Weluneycr. This improves communication and also provides an opportunity for discussion about what future steps might be taken. Tlienk you very much for the referral diocese. you also to Sui11tLui?o Institute on June 2004 and completed the evaluation process on June 2004. It is the impression of the evaluation staff that Father Wehmeyer was cooperative with the evaluation process. We therefore believe the data and impressions we gathered have enabled us to make on accurate assessment of Father Wehmeye1"s current and physical functioning. 8901 New Hampshire Avenue - Silver Spring. Maryland 20903 - (301) 445-7970 - (301) 422-5400 . Attllialed with Ascension Health EX 6 I'*'sthe1' Woh1ucye1'csn1o to ARCH-000550 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehmeycr SLI 14963 Page 2 1c diocese received a yer was referred for evaluation after tl athor Welinieycr and two My inappropria'tc bcliavior between ?ocliavl or occurred around 1tl:3(l at night in late May 2004 at a is important to note that Father aclorowledgcd this as a place where people met for sex ual liaisons. Father Wclnucyer was not dressed in clerics, and during his visit to this establislnnent, became engaged with two young men, separately, in a conversation that had "some sexual undertones to it." While the intentions of each party remained unclear, the ?rst conversation ended abruptly when Father Welimoyer asked the young man "are you horny?" During the course of these events, it became known to the two men that Father Wehmcyer was a priest at one of the men's girl?iend?s parish. This event was subsequently reported to the diocese, which interviewed the two men. Father Wclunoyer was identi?ed via photograph, and subsequently asked to come for an evaluation at St. Luke's to assess his current level and emotional functioning, to offer recommendations for treatment. As you know, l"atlrc1'Welu11c complaint about some margins adult men. By all accounts, this Barnes and Noble bookstore. It In a memo dated June 1. 2004, you, Father McDonough, requested that our feedback focus strictly on three referral questions: in concern consistent with what we have learned lity and And, is be telling the truth a) characterization of the 1. Is the characterization of the even about Father Wchmeycfs persons in reluctantly agreeing with your (Father Mcllonough? incident? 2. Does this incident reveal situational or chronic emotional or problems that should be addressed for Father Wehmcyer?s healthy functioning as a priest and, if so, what are those problems? 3. What recommendations do we offer on these identi?ed problems? ?When we evaluate an individual who has been having emotional and/or behavioral problems, we include an assessment of a wide variety of motivations, developmental experiences and physical factors. Our assessment protocol includes the following elements: interview. Clinical interview. Physical and neurological examination. Electrocardiogram. Chest x-ray. testing testing including mess abstraction, visual perception, and mental ?exibility. Spiritual assessment. including personality and projective tests. urcs of intelligence, attention, memory, ARCH-000551 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehmeyer SL1 14963 P3863 ion among the evaluation team members ocess is a discuss th the client to report our findings and the ovaluce?s work in each of these areas. focus only on the questions asked uring the evaluation interviews The ?nal step in the evaluation pr about the client. We then meet wi Typically, our written evaluation report sununariaes However. given your request that our feedback to the diocese in your eonuruutiqu? of June 1, 2004, much of the data collected will be omitted from this report. As such, the following sununaty and report will reflect only the data deemed relevant to the referral questions, diagnoses, and recommendations. Any additional information that the diocese or Father Weluneyer might require will be available upon request. RY: We take a detailed background history from our clients in order attitudes and hehavior. Although Father tcry, we will include only the conducted the BACKGROUND HISTO to understand the impact of past events on current Wehmeycr gave us many details about his background his clinically relevant information in this report. Steve Wong, evaluation. mm Father Weluneyer was born in Anchorage, Alaska and is the third of four children. The family moved twice during Father Wehmcye?s childhood: at age 1 they moved to they moved to the upper peninsula. Signi?cant the lower peninsula oflviichigan. and at age 8 about Father Welu11eyor?s family situation includes his mothers history of alcoholism, and her subsequent neglect of the children. She died in 1936 ?'on1 lung cancer. Father ?Wohmeyer sees his father twice a year and does not speak to him much on the phone. al nurturing for the children. Father Father felt that he did not provide much emotion Weinnoyer also felt that his father was too critical cfhis mother and reacted to her alcoholism by distancing himself. gcademicl?oelal Father described that he was ?an average to shove average" student in school. Socially, Father Wchmeyer reported that he was quite shy in elementary school due to the family problems he was experiencing related to his mother's alcoholism. He stated that he gradually became more outgoing and in high school had a larger group of friends. After going to college Father Woluneyer stated that he began to socialize with c, going out to hers and dancing. In retrospect he is a more ?wild? crowd. He began drinlcing mor aware that his friends at this time were more buddies" than good friends. In terms of current relationships I-?athcr ?Wehmeyer described that he is close to friends, family and he also has a healthy spiritual life. However, he acknowledged that he has grown farther away from friends and family and he is not as open as he use to be. He stated he has three or four people that he considers close friends, however, he only speaks to one once a week and the others even less ?equently. Father Wehmeyer reported that he attended college for architecture and worked in this field prior to entering seminary. ARCH-000552 maintaining his celibacy. Father Welnneyer acknowledged a consistent challenge to June 13, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wchmeyer 14953 Pase4 Substance Abuse Father acknowledged that his drinking was problematic 'al life and most of his friends were just (luring college, that it caused strain on his family and soot "drinking buddies?. After college, Father Wehmcyer in several architectinnl firms and his .high level of drinking continued. He stated that he had a "crash" while working at an architectural than where many of his past feelings and resentrnonts about his childhood returned. During this period, Father Wehmeycr received two DUI's: one during his college years and another in 1990. He described that he made a decision to quit drinking and through Alcoliolics He described that as he his sobriety he felt turned to his ?higher power . pence and security and began to revisit his Catholic upbringing and started working for a church. A priest suggested that if he were to return to graduate school that he study something that would also potentially prepare him for seminary. he did this and ended up joining the seminary. Father Wehmeyer was ordained in 2001. He described that his ?rst few years as a priest were quite mentor. Father dif?cnlt due to heing assigned to a pastor who was not supportive or a good Welnneyer described that he began to feel ?abandoned and pushed away". He added that this contributed to a ?mid life crisis" where he began to question where he is at in his life when he turns 40. splayed considerable anxiety when talking about his Father Wehmeyer di sexual history. On several occasions he voiced discomfort speaking about this aspect of his life lions. Father Wehineyer appeared to be and deliberated about whether or not to answer qnes signi?cantly conflicted over his sexual orientation. On one hand he repeatedly noted that he had "worked through" this with his counselor, however, many of his conmients appeared to indicate signi?cant shame and negative feelings about his sexuality. I-?attic: ?Wehrneyer described that he "takes celibacy acrIotIsIy" but that it is ?an all day project". He hinted at a considerable struggle "keep custody of my thoughts and eyes?. I-IISTORY: In in-tervicws, Father Wehmeyer was oriented in all spheres. There was no evidence of process, and he denied any suicidal or homicidal ideation. His insight and judgment appeared grossly intact for day-to-day Father Wehmeyer appeared both anxious and distraetible in interviews. ?He es and dates, and appeared easily distracted ?not feeling Behaviorally, evidenced some mild difficulty in his memory for tini by details of the conversation. He noted some distress in his life that has tell him good about hirnself." Speci?cally, he noted some tension over turning 40 this year, disappointnients and con?ict with his pastes in his current assignment, disappointments over a lack of fellowship and guidance as a young diocesan priest, struggles with his sexuality and the church's teachings, and a general in his life that has left him feeling isolated. ed in therapy on and off since 1996. He recently Father Wehmeyer noted that he has been involv ?scared about the new level he was getting to discontinued this work in January 2004, as he was ARCH-000553 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehmeyer SLI 14963 Page 5 in therapy." He was unable to specify what he meant by a "new level.? This illustrated one of the difficulties observed in interviews with Father Wetnneyor: a dif?culty being speci?c about his experiences and motivations. To this end, Father Wehrneyer appeared overly concerned with whether the interviewer understood what he was trying to say, and tended to become anxiously distracted by irrelevant details when asked for specifics about his statements or experiences. Additionally, there were a few occasions during this weal: where Father Wehmoyer was hesitant about answering questions as he felt they were inappropriate to discuss outside the contertt of either therapy or spiritual direction. PHYSICAL EXAIVIINATION AND LABORATORY EXAMINATION: There were no diagnoses or abnormal laboratory results noted in Father Wehmeyer?s physical examination. SPIRITUAL ASSESSMENT: As part of his evaluation, Father Wehmeyer completed a spirituality questionnaire which was reviewed and discussed with him by a member of our pastoral program. Meg Parrish, CSJ, MS, MA conducted the spiritual assessment. Father Wehmeyer appeared aware of the lack of balance between his spiritual exercises and his Sacrament of Reconciliation and making His practices of a prayer life, reception ofthe is He seemed to not have the depth of? a yearly retreat have deteriorated over the last few year . relationship with himself, with others and therefore with God that he needs for fuliilhnent. He does share with his spiritual director, a female cousin and a serninarian ?-lend but needs to broaden that circle of intimate sharing. it priest?s support group would be help?il if he could ?nd a group that shares their struggles with each other. Father Weluncyer stated that prayer was the core ofhis life when he was in seminary. He has had spiritual direction with some regularity. Having a regular confossor, who could get to know his patterns, would be helpful and would give him another person to help support his spiritual life. Father Wehmeyer stated that he loves his vocation and is af?nned by tile people in his ministry. There appears to be a tension between his sexuality and celibacy. He will need to come to grips with his sexuality before he can adequately discern whether or not he can embrace celibacy. GICAL EXAMINATION: The hnniau brain is the organ of the body responsible for the highest level of integration ofboth experience and behavior. As part of our evaluation, we do an extensive neurocognitive screening assessment. Gary Thompson, reviewed the testing. In general, Father Wehmeyer?s pro?le was within normal limits. However, there was a subtle relative weakness in the area of visual, perceptual, and spatial This pattern ofweaknesses did not reach the level of being dingnosablo, and Father did not note any self-perception of dif?culty in this, or other, areas. TESTING: testing is an important part of our evaluation procedure. We use it to compare responses our clients make to objective norms and to validate ARCH-000554 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehmeyer SL1 14963 Page 6 our interview impressions tlnough test data. testing is composed of two different parts. Personality testing assesses a cIicnt?s personality traits and the and weaknesses that accompany these traits. These tests can also assess the level of distress a client is currently experiencing. Projective testing assesses a clicnt?s habitual ways of handling thittking and emotional processes. It can also assess the presence of speci?c conflict areas. Andrew L. Martin, Psy.D. conducted and reviewed the testing. Father Wehmeyer completed two computerized measures, the MMPI-2 and ll]. His performance on these two tests was useful in providing information and was suggestive of Father Wchnicyer?s investment and cooperation in the evaluation procedure. These tests portrayed Father as an depressed, anxious, and irritable individual who has difficulty managing routine affairs, lacks an outlet for intense emotions, and may experience difficulties with nternory, concentration, or decision rnai-ring. he appears to be at risk for chronically misunderstanding others? motives, and harbors a tension between a desire to withdraw socially and a fear of abandonment. He appears to have difficulty ousting others, -is hypersensitive to what others think about him, and is likely to feel insecure in relationships. :1 to the presence of signi?cant situationaly-based his comfort and ability to make effect decisions. he tends to ovcrvaluc his own needs and appears at risk for the impact that his actions have upon others. Father appears to deal with uncertainty he also appears to manage distress by about himself via intelleotualizstion, although or ignoring subtle aspects of his experiences. As such, he is at risk for an view of the world that may be distorted fromithe way inwhich others see things. Father Wehmeyer?s projective testing points emotional ?distress that is currently impacting DIAGNOSES: Axis I - (contains current clinical disorders or conditions except for personality disorders.) 1. 302.9 Sexual Disorder, Not Otherwise Speci?ed: Unintegratcd Sexuality 2. 309.28 Adjustn1entDisordcr with mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood 3. Rule Out: 296.90 Mood Disorder Not Speci?ed: Mixed Anxiety and Depression 4. v62.2 Occupational Problem . 5. 305.00 Alcohol Abuse, by History (Rule Out is used when there is some evidence that a diagnosis may apply but more data is needed to make a ?rm diagnosis.) Axis II - (contains personality disorder or maladaptive personality traits.) 555 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehmeyer SLI ii 14963 P86 7 Deferred, but prominent Paranoid traits noted Axis HI - (contains current signi?cant medical conditions.) 1. No Diagnoses SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Father Wehn1eyer?s cooperation with the evaluation has helped us come to some conclusions that we hope are helpful for his treatment. During the course of this evaluation, Father Wehmeyer was open with members of the evaluation was also asked detailed questions about his sexual team about his history of alcohol abuse. history, attractions, and behavior. Our current diagnoses and recommendations reflect our best understanding of these aspects of Father Wehnteyefs functioning. We make the diagnosis _of Sexual Disorder Not Otherwise Speci?ed, Unintegrated to reflect the need for Father Wehmeyer to continue his work in coming to a greater conscious awareness and acceptance of his sexuality, his sexual urges, and his sexual attractions. Unintegrated Sexuality refers to Father Wehmeyer?s discomfort with his sexuality, his difficulty acknowledging sexual motivations and attractions, and the preoccupying presence of sexual urges that detract from his ability to be at peace with himself. Our diagnoses in the realm of mood disorders reflect both current tlif?culties in this area, as well as what we suspect is Father Wehn1eyer's more long?term level of emotional equilibrium. We make a diagnosis of Adj ustrnent Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood to re?ect the current emotional stressors in Father Wehmeyor?s life and their effect upon him. However, the presence of these strong, current emotions detracts from our ability to understand Father Weluneycr?s emotional landscape over the longer term. Based on his self?report and data obtained during this evaluation, we make a tentative diagnosis of a Mood Disorder Not Otherwise Speci?ed with Mixed Anxiety and Depression to name what we suspect is Father Wehrneyer's chronic level of emotional adjustment. Taken together, these two diagnoses name both the presence of current, situationally based distress, as well as what we suspect is a more chronic form of this distress that has been present over a longer period of time and is more connected to both ongoing interpersonal and emotional factors, as well as historical and genetic determinants. It is likely that as Father Wehrneycr ?nds relief for his situational concerns, the more long?term diagnosis will become clearer and he will be able to focus more directly on these chronic issues. ational Problem to name Father Wehmeyer?s need for support We make a diagnosis of a Occup ed priest, and his need for ongoing discernment about how to and guidance as a recently ordain live within his vows. ARCH-000556 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehmeyer SLI 14963 Page 3 We make a diagnosis of Alcohol Abuse, by History to name Father history of problematic drinlting. Speci?cally, he has two DUl's in his history. Altliough Father Wehn1sycr's cturcnt pattern of alcohol use does not appear to be problematic, this remains an area in which he should exert vigilance, as well as work to understand what vulnerabilities contributed to his past abuse. Our diagnosis in the realm of personality traits and disorders reflects many qualities that Father Wehrnoycr brings to new situations, and that often impair his ability to effectively be in relationships. Father Weluneyer?s current level of distress complicates our ability to accurately diagno so the presence of any personality disorder. As such, we defer diagnosis in this area at the present time. However, we do note the presence of prominent paranoid traits. Paranoid traits refer to Father Weluneyer's d-if?eulty trusting others, his difficulty voicing his emotions and motivations, and his preoccupation with how he appears to others. Father Weiuneycr should focus on these traits and their in?uence in his life. Additionally, it-is likely that as I-?ather current level of distress subsides that a clearer picture of his ersonality dynamics will emerge. infonnation gathered about Father Welnneyer (luring the On the basis ofthese diagnoses and the ted several recornrnendations that we think will be course of this evaluation, we have construe for his treatment: 1. We recommend that Father Wehnteycr re-enter outpatient individual with a quali?ed, licensed therapist. Father Wehrneyer should see his therapist no fess than once per week for a standard therapy session. Several issues were noted during this evaluation that would be important for Father Weluneyer to discuss with his therapist, including his past sexual behavior and current sexual feelings, his current and long-term feelings of anxiety and depression, his history of alcohol abuse, his difficulty identifying and naming his internal motivations, and his di?ieulty trusting others. As suggested in the evaluation feedback session, it vroitlti be in Father Wehrneyefs best interest to share this evaluation letter with his therapist in order to safeguard against his characteristic tendency to minimize or ignore problem areas in his life. Sharing this evaluation letter with his therapist would likely prevent a premature cessation of therapy and promote a greater sense of openness and vulnerability. Additionally, as noted at the feedback session, Father Wehnieyer should participate in this therapy for ofonc year and should be accountable to a diocesan superior for maintaining his appointments. This well help Father historical tendency to stop therapy when it becomes difficult, and assist him in pushing through these difficult periods. 2. Group We recornmenrl that Father Weluncyer engage in an outpatient group. Group therapy is also a very nsoiitl support in the sometimes difficult work of therapy. Another bene?t Father would receive from group therapy would be the opportunity to receive feedback front peers about how they perceive ARCH-000557 June 18, 2004 Father Kevin McDonough Re: Reverend Curtis Wehrneyer SLI 14963 Page 9 him, to work on relationships within a therapeutic setting, and to receive feedback about the paranoid personality traits noted above. Wehmeyer would bene?t greatly from the 3. Spiritual Direction: We believe that Father continuation of his worl-: with his spiritual director. 4. Pastoral Mentor: Father voiced his wish for a mentor to support him in the early stages of his life as an ordained priest. We recommend that he work with diocesan officials to obtain a mentor who could serve as both a source of support, guidance, and, when needed, correction. 5. Pastoral Snppogt Father Wohmeyer also voiced his feeling of being distant from other priests within his diocese. We recommend that he work with diocesan officials in order to identify and join a pastoral support group, which could assist him with both his need for fellowship, as well as help him to foster a healthy identity. lt is important to note that this recommendation serve to replace the above rceonunendation for group psyehotlrerapy. These are meant to be two distinct groups, and two distinct recommendations. 6. Diocesan Aecountab?ltx: ed above, Father Wehmeyer would bene?t ti-orn additional contact with a diocesan representative who could help him to be accountable to the needs identi?ed within this report, including Father Wehrneyefs need for ongoing services. This support would be of service to Father Wehmeyer in persevering in his treatment at times when he may be at risk for terminating therapy prematurely. The recommendations listed above are based upon our Possible Inpatient I ftgeatntentt st behavior and current emotional and current understanding of Father Wehmeyefs pa risks. Based on the information available to us, we do not diagnose Father Wehmeyer as having an active ad diotlvo or compulsive behavior problem at the present time. However, there are a number of emotional and risks that are a concern to us at this time. Should Father Welnneyerbe unable or unwilling to follow the recommendations outlined in this report, or should additional information become available to the diocese about other concerning or otherwise risky behavior, we would be forced to reconsider our current evaluation ofFathe1: Wehmeyer. Should additional information come to light, Father Welnneyer would likely be recommended for inpatient treatment and, at that time, should return to St. in order to enter a period of residential treatment. To his credit, Father Wehmeyer appeared to understand the need for these recommendations. important ministerial, spiritual and intellectual It is clear in reports from the diocese that he possesses the capacity to be a valuable of the diocese. We hope this report is of help to you and to Father Wehmeyer. and that it addresses the questions identified by the diocese regarding Father Welur1eyer?s current ?metioning. We also hope that these reconunendations will lead to greater health and greater peace for him. it ether Wehmeyer is a man with ARCH-000558 Fa1i1m' Kevin McDonough June: 18, 2004 Re: (Iurtis SLI M963 P131910 is our hope that Father receives the for me problems listed mi 7:1 and mbova so that he can make his nmny remaining years both - If you have. any quastiona or we can be of other assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, 30 Andrew L. Martin, Pay. . cnniowi Ptyohologi-st 7fai?~@ Stephan Montana, of Clinical Services cc: Ruvuond Curtis Wobmcyur ARCH-000559 MEMO TO: /Archbishop Bill Fallon FROM: Fr. Kevin McDonough DATE: September 2004 Father-Curtis Wehmeyer As part of our ongoing follow-up to the incident of poorjudgment last spring, Father Wehmeyer and I met with Father Piche, pastor of Saint Joseph, and Jane Nordin, principal of the elementary school there. That meeting took place on Friday, September 3. Father Wehmeyer and I described the incident to the other two participants and some of the with them. They had a chance to raise some questions. The meeting was a very positive one, and concluded with words of support for F_athcr Wehmeyer?s ministry. In fact, we agreed to lift the restriction that I had placed earlier this summer on his participating in youth programming. ?We had put that restriction on_not because he constituted a danger but so that there would not be occasion for misunderstanding and rumors. The condition for the lilting of tlie restriction, however, is that the two priests will sit- down with the religious education director and the youth minister (a husband and wife team) at the parish and have a conversation similar to the one that we had on September 3. Interesting, Father Piche reported that he had heard absolutely nothing in the parish about this until just a week or so ago. Someone came to him reporting that she had ?bad1_1ews" to share. The bad news turned out to he a very distorted version of the incident fromiast spring. Farther Piche was ableto tell the person that he -knew all about it, and that the facts were quite those reported by this person. She indicated that she would go back to her source and correct the misirnpression being shared. Jane Nordin said that she had heard nothing -about this from anyone in the parish, but was pleased to have the information. After the meeting, Father Wehmeyer and I visited about his articipation in counselitig. He has been working with Dr. Paul Ruff to get a series of appointments established through next fall. I offered to meet with them at anytime that would be helpful. Father - Wehmeyer and I agreed that ?we would speak again in late October about the progress that he is making in counseling. I am sending a copy of this memo to the participants in the September 3 conversation. If they disagree with any of the characterization here, they can contact me. cc: Father Piche ane Nordin . Father Wehrneyer Exko ARCH-000637 HLE EBPY MEMO TO: Archbishop FROM: Fr. Kevin McDonough DATE: February 24, 2005 RE: . Father Curtis Wehmeyer Archbishop, you and I have both been dealing with Father Wehmeyer. I received some more information on Tuesday, February 22. Permit me to describe the information and then make a suggestion about what to do with it. I received a call from Father Cory Rohl?ng, a good friend to Father Wehmeyer. He was concerned because he had heard rumors about the other two matters which are pending with Father Wehmeyer. The first is the question of his encounter with two young men in a book store. The second is the still obscure citation that -he received in a public park. Father Rohl?ng told me that he _knew of yet another, similar incident. It happened while he and_ Father Wehmeyer were students in the Seminary and while they were studying in Jerusalem: The two of.them, then seminarians, and athird seminarian from Wisconsin, were walking down a street in Jerusalem. Two young men, adults but still young, began to taunt.Curlis Wehmeyer, who evidently dismissed them. Walking past seminarian Cory Itolil?ng, the two young men said something about his friend being a ?faggo - When Father Rohi?ng spoke with his friend shortly thereafter, the story that Curtis told him was this. He had been in a book store and the two young n1ea'approach_ed him about ?wanted a male jJ1't}3lih1te. Trying to extricate himselfiiom the situa offering contact with a female prostitute. When he showed no interest, they asked if he tion, he spoke with thorn, and they ?rnisunderstood" what he was saying. As you can see, this bears remarkable similarities to the situation at the book store last year. We are still waiting to ?nd out through some sources what the exact cause of the citation was in the park. I believe I should have that information quite soon. I propose that, should this third story be similar to the other two, then Father _Wehmeyer should be confronted immediately. He should be told that there is a attem far more serious than he has so far admitted to. My suggestion is that we would remove from parochial work and ask him to undergo intensive Altemstively, we. might simply remove - him, put him on reduced pay, and give him time to about what he woulri like to do to get his life in order. I would certainly be willing to have that confrontation with Father Wehmeyer. Since you, however, have also been speaking with him, I do not want to work at cross purposes to you. How would you like to proceed? E17 ARCH-000412 3 August 2006 Memo To: File of Father Curtis Wehmeyer From: Father Kevin McDor-rough Re: A Concern about Father Wehmeyer, and a Response On Friday afternoon, Juiy 28, I was visited hy a.Rarnsey County?Sherifi?s deputy named Steve Lcyden am unsure of the correct spelling of his name). He wanted to raise a concern about one of our priests. During the meeting he identi?ed the priest by name as Fr. correctly indicated his new assigmnent, as administrator- at Blessed Sacrament, and-visually identi?ed him from the Clergy Photo Directory of the Archdiocese. 1 was certain that there was no possibility of mistaken identity. ncern. Without He provided a signi?cant amount of detail in the description of his co repeating that detail, here are the main points: . - parking lot. . with a sexual addiction. He wanted to in such places as an invitation On Wednesday, July 26, he saw Father-Wo11n1oyc1' '.?hanging around" in a_ parking lot of a Ramsey County park commonly identified as a place where adult men seek sexual encounters with one another. When Deputy Loyden approached Father Wehmeyer, he offered a somewhat odd and inconsistent set of explanations for why he was in the park. The deputy told Father that the park was known to be an area where adult sexual solicitation took place. After some conversation," Father Wehraeyer drove away. Shortly thereafter, the deputy condoned his rounds. He saw Father?s truck leaving a connected per}: area, also widely known as apick-up place. And yet again, a_short time later, he saw'I'ather's vehicle leaving a third such park. .Deputy Loyden was making a traffic stop near the ?afstpaxk Fina1ly,'on the next day, Welnneyer's truck leaving the mentioned above.? Once again, he identi?ed Father ieverl that Father was exhibiting behavior consistent at us on notice in order to get some help for Father. He noted that Father had done nothing illegal, and speci?cally that he had not improperly solicited sex or drugs. Nonetheless, he considered Father-?s "hanging around" to further trouble, including becoming the tr-ictirn of demeanor tiol-zet. He offered to have Father targeted in a forthcoming sting operation, if that appeared to he the only effective way to help Father Wehrneyer recognize the danger of his helnwior. I told him that I did not think that would and that Iwould call Father. 'Ncvertheless,I asked that he and his colleagues would always enforce the law strictly inregard to our priests. I welcomed any further such information he could provide about any priest, either to prevent a crime or to see to follow?up afterward. Deputy Leyden told me that he hel violence or the subject of a mis EX ARCH-000451 I a recovery on his own. He asked to meet wi to call either Tina or me for our description Ratlter, he likes to he aroun - personality issues are reflected in diateiy thereafter and told hi in that he was "out of cl behavior. Witch I told him the first part of the story at. A?crl added more detail, however, his denial crumbled. He admitted that he was "playing on the edge". He told me that he resolved to stop immediately. Unfortunately, in spite of his professed participation in a twelve step recovery progratn he was not able to offer concrete suggestions ahout how he would translate that resolution into behavior. When I suggested that he call his BA sponsor, he at ?rst demurred, but then conceded that he would do so. We set an appointment to meet today I called Father inuno control". He denied any untowar above, he offered a non-credible deni Rourke to join us. I told Father that I was because of the potential self-destructiveness it (1 about the lies that he told when me to be indicative of someone We met in my office today. I asked Ti concerned about his cruising behavior, signalled. I told him that I was even more concerns confronted by the deputy and by me they seemed to who is not serious about his recovery. mising, and acknowledged that it was an expression id us that he had had several good talks vvith his and had come to realize that he cannot effect th Tim Rourke for a period of time so that he'ceuId be held more regularly accountable for honesty in therapy and for attendance and heart-felt participation in SA. Tim agreed to -set up a scllaedulc of such meetings. . He didrtot try to explain away_hi's of real hrol-ienness in his life. He to sponsor and his SA group since last Friday, Dr. Paul Ruff, and to requelat and rcleasehim Detective Le2yden?s com laint. Father Wehineyer said he would do, although he will not be able to until Dr. R. ff returns from his vacation on or around August 21. -Either Tim orl should receive a (tall in the week or so thereaften If not, we will call Father to an accounting. i i also asked him to speak with his therapist, - Z. I do not believe that Father Weluneycr goes to these perks to pick up other men. the environment where such things are he? pening, since_it_ 1. He is creating a signi?cant risk for himso ?of highly he is not facing whatever and lrnmature tl1is_behavier. We will keep some on him to ?_?work his program". No other steps appear to be called for currently. i gives him some sort of thri-l unfavorable publicity, even as Cc: Tim Rourke i 1 I 1 I ARCH-000452 ?(Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today andfo:-even? mo. in sit!? 0i'tler- of 1Ilt.' ENGLISH July 12, 2007 Monseitor Angel P. Sanchez Loaiza Obispo de Guaranda 10 de Agosto 617 Apartado 15 Guaranda, Bolivar ECUADOR Dear Bishop Sanchez, The peace of Christ to you and the people of your diocese. It was good to talk with you last week, though we certainly wish it had been under different circumstances; With this letter, wewould like to formally document the content of our call to you concerning Father Fredy Montero, a priest of the Diocese of Guaranda, and in ministry here in the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis for the past ?ve years. - 1 On June 19, 2007, it was broughfto the attention of Father Kevin M'cDonough, Vicar General of the Archdiocese that Father Montero and a woman; a parishioner from his parish and - collaborator with several ofhis media projects had been living together since November, 2006. While Father Montero denies this relationship, there is credible evidence that points to its veracity, which alone would be reason for concluding his ministry in this archdiocese. Uiifortunately, however, there has been an allegation of child sexual abuse involving a four-year- old girl. While no charges have been filed and ?the child has not made any incriminating overture to the police, the case is still under investigation. Unrelated, yet of de?nite concern, is that the investigation is looking -into the possibility of pornographic content on Father Montero ?s computer. there is some suspicion regarding the misappropriation of money on the part of Father but there is some evidence that reveals large sums Finally, (1) deposited -into Father Montero?s personal Montero. Again, no charges ave been ?led, of money in relatively short periods of time being bank account and (2)'wired to Ecuador. Mentcro has completed a ?ve-year-stay here in the Archdioceseand that of possible child sexual abuse, His Excellency, Archbishop Harry has decided to withdraw Father Montero?s faculties here in the Archdiocese "of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, and thus Father Montero?s future is at Your Excellency?s disposition. I personally communicated this decision and his consequent status Seeing that Father he has yet to be cleared of the accusation ARCH 64 Monsefior xingel P. Srinchez Loaiza Juiy I2, 2007 200?, here at the arehdiocesan ehancery. Mr. Andy of the Archdiocese, and Mr. Paul Engh, Personal While we are grateful for the generous service cloned by how his tenure has ended. to Father Montero on Monday, July 2, Eisenzimmer, Clranceilor for Civil itffairs Attorney for Father Montero, were present. that he has rendered in his veans here, we are sad I encouraged him to cooperate with the investigation with the civil authorities, as will the Archdiocese. it is our sincere hope that the outcome of this investigation might clear Father Montero oi? the grievous allegations again he also will receive the guidance andfor counseling needed to resoive the other issues that have presented in the past month. arently preparing to return to Ecuador, in my meeting with Father Montero, At this point in time, Father Montero is app though we are uncertain of his exact date of departure. is a painful and difficult situation for all faithful of both our involved. Be assured of Again, we realize that this dioceseswho are affected. our prayers for you, Father Montero, and all the Sinenrel-y_ yours in Christ, is dew, Anne Attea . Coordinator for Hispanic Ministry Archdiocese of Saint Pan! and Minneapolis Most Pat-ee, D.D. . . Hrohiltbditdn-"Hf. ee: Most Reverend Harry Reverend Kevin Me-Donough Reverend Fredy Montero Sister Dominica Brennan, OP Mr. Andrew Eisenzinuner ARCH 65 an A smcm? 26zNqvenib_er_l99'6- . Archbishop ?and,Bishop Welsh RE: eej-we the saint on-November 22 for Ji1et?:ting- Fstl1'e1' Vevrs,? Wh?c presume we receive more detnile?i ilifcirhistibn in wzrilzingfrom the "Center, I give you st?nmaty we discussed. I-bhase e_mo__u1_1t-of-_ progress that I have ever seen for a in treshnent program. Of course, had quite-a, distance to go. Even so, Ihed not expeotled to work as of to pro?t from it asmucli ee he Even?n the -__sev_e1_1 fweelts sinee Il'ast'saw'-him, there hasbeen some rather'stun'nin? I thiit the ehallen?ng meeting that we hes at the beginning of October hjmto face some issues about ai1ge1' and a sense of entitlement. "I'h_ese go ?tesrezy core of the problems that ?he"has been dealing with.? 7 As "you recoil, his problem is that he has had along series-of essentially sexual encounters throughouthis sdult_1ife. For sexual behavior involved going -to the bath houses. In more recent yesijs, he has been" semis] with people he knew He has also-gotten into some very-' - disproportionate earetaldng relationships and these? has resulted in threats -t'o'.l1is I ministty. FntI1e1'Vavmis_stable_, perhaps for the first thne i_ti-his_1ife, to . persons of an injured ?ghter. for justice? end ?iend of the to see how? he ?has sexualized many situations and 'hss'1iv'ed in? a ?bout the psre he is o?bring to others. He is able to name the warning sigee that lead into sexualized thinlcing?and then behavior. He has learned sppropriate ?assertiveness. He is a much better listener and has learned to? identify when he is his EXHIBIT . - - - -.-- - . . - . - - -.-.-. - "1 . Memo To: Archbishop anti Bi?hop Welgh hid sexual Qd?t ct_wi_t]; one F??h?r . .pr'cijg'aI:ju . - mi? . a_1_ adult" '_Th_e him?was with Hiedp? malgs. Futhaif F?l??r?n?i??arfbd _i1_s. .- - "Willi? . . . . o11'eftl1athe'ha_ ever 30:11. 7, Zdgu ?ipy_ s? Father 'Fath_e,r 3'51? 'thn_t_Fathor qt? 1 . . 7 Page: 2 Nqveinbcr I996 m1tho1'ity or is?ucs. 'H_e'hns teuns -of both emoIi_ong1l._ He__l:_1gs pounds. For 9411 at Ig?vpuld gu?ss to bgf-the first tinic in his h'?s?somc - _t1??atrn?nt. -- . . - sta?' lit the. ij?duneht an impq?ant dj?gli?s?b 3391 us?d with Fa_uth?e -You mu rccalla?iat Fa'thar"V1wra achl??rlad 1- ahkcd T?is about o. Mthe October 111 14' aithpuglg I - - - .1. Folcy -. reaf-i_hyounge_r dr . H, . 3; cfeeai Iqiik . .. ?and fs-very hdnest about the?i. _-As la?g a__s where he can address those issues F?th?i do ?ery well in '-Fautlier Dr. was . final He? hnportanc? of Father "r to .see}lc' outside on himself." He 11as.,been leami?gtbigi?i sp . _1:r.catment setting" ?dam: in very good job of it Father Vitirra to cultivtite real friends, par?qx?arly amo 2 amdng priests who have an ability to addre?? these issu?i for 3 All of the rebomme?da?ons om.-5 Treatment Center are su?1m?ti?.u aiix the .. I i?ercpre contmcit, .a copy of which I am atta'c1iin'g. We - I copy in the mail soda; whatl am attaching is the dis_?ussion_ Ai?CH-o2aas3 .M_emo To: and Bishop Welsh 3 26 November 1996 I Father Vavfa the Treahnent Center on Monday, .Noi."remher 25. He will be have given him-peroiission to stay?-wi?t his elderly parents _th__ro't1gh the inotith of December. His father Has to go in for his .. mother? is unabie to ?care for herself. ,The- brother who lives-in town with has recently had -surgery and is also enable to oate for the parents. Itoid that--we to having him return to work right after the ?ist of the jreir. On the wayto W3 Ineeting, I rqa?zed that vie had missed uefiitjportant $613 in our -process. Because we began this situation right the ei1d= of Archbishop term,? and given some of the - . I-?ether Vavra's - soon. We an and itmigtit heiail rightto . . continue? to moire arrangements in that rege_.rtI.? Even so, I recalling the . -great Bo'ai*ti expressed vgiien we assignment Kern witi1out'i5.raiting'for their final reoomniet1dation.' 1 'need.to discuss the ofail of this. - assignment that"-I reviewed _trea11nei1t providers is-this. ?As - discussed last week,? 1- recommended-that Father Vaiea step - "'pastorato at St. Philip?s. Instead, assigned his hometown. Father Peron, as of his young.age,' and could use the help. We haveto ?fact that he is something of a ?one-man'show? and may an . ?associate. ?This was the preliminary indication Ilia: he gave to Fathet'Isrhs2eski; although he? expressed a willingness to talk to me about" Father vaes. We would need to do some parish regard to Father Vavr?a's history '-and conditions for assignment. We make sure that he hasithe tin1e'avaiiab_le to continue to see-his a5we?k1y- 3 basis, to check in iwith a priest monitor weekly at the outset toZjpaItieipate' in 1 one or more support groups. He will also have to be fies to atti:ngi,aftereare . conferences everysix months for the next two yeaks. - I that we will have feedbi1oJt- from -.the Trcat1_nent' Center. Overall, Twas ex1re_tne_ly hnpressed?-andenien -infoyeii, by;-the I progress, that this very. loneiy and isolated individualfhas made?. at belie-we that i_f.he - keeps a positive set of relationships in his life, he is quite airoid the ARCH-029364 - - .- .1 7 - - . -.-.. ..L ta '26'Novemb'cr 1996 the can. Gerii?il?y 59-. - sexual and h?ll?d?lie? A '1._I.rith_ liia P?ri?hiun?irs. - I-?Ice: I I I. j- I Mania To: {Ar'chbi'ahop and Biemfa-welsh Page 4 1 If Enbfositie25 March 2008 Memo To: Archbishop From: Father Kevin McDonough I Re: Two ?Charter P.riest_s" and their Relationship to the Archdiocese Archbishop, I have your note of March 3 about with you about two of our fd?ner priests and their re ationship with the Archdiocese. ?Please permit me? to 'a'ddr?es's each -in tum. In.r'eg'ard to Gilbert Gu'stafscn_: He has been employed for several years by a consulting ?nn called Henderson and Associates. That firm, which includes several professionals, makes ?its own arrangements with parishes. We have neither banned nor recommended the ?rm. Rather, we allow them to tell potential parish-clients that the head of the firm, Greg Henderson, has undergone a day-tong ?Getting to Know the Catholic Archdiocese" program that we provide on occasion to consultants. My own belief is that, even when Greg Henderson assigns Gilbert Gnstafson to work with one of the client-parishes, there is no violation of the Charter involved. My thinking is this: it would be unreasonable to expect that we would not deposit ?mds with a bank or fly on an airline or even contract with a garbage collection company that hired a former priest. None of that work is ?priestly ministry"; the same. is true for the consulting that Henderson and Associates docs. Of course, given that you are among the authors of the Charter, you know much better what it does and does not permit! Please let me know what you would like to have us do in regard to that firm and our parishes. In regard to Michael Stevens: He has a private consulting business in which he sets up computer systems -and tI'0t-tbjle-slmots them. A number of our parislies contract with him-? either because they knew his work when he was in the Computer Services Team or because of word of mouth since then. The Archdiocese itself has occasionally contracl'ct'l with him to come back to us on an hourly basis to trouble- shoot systems that he had developed or installed when he was on our staff. With the passage of time, the systems that he installed or developed are being phased out, and - we have less and less need For the itifonnation that he alone knows. As you are aware, we are currently understaffed in the computer area, and it was proposed that Michael Stevens be put on a more table contract or retainer. 1 vetoed that idea because I thought it violated or, at least, could appear to eiremnvent the If you think that we are violating the Charter, ltowcver, either by his independent contracting with parishes or by our occasional Archdioeestm contracting with him for the systems he left us, please let me know. By the way. 1 am meeting with him in early April to continue encouraging him toward laicization and an independent economic existence. ARCH-015326 NJ.-SEE 3. 95.9.. WP bbmu. &J.wn1?cm Dmom