1, Page 337-17, Page 349 (DELETED-repeat of legal
1 A. That awareness was not primary in my mind, Mr.
2 Pasternack. I know the process that you're using. I
3 believe when an allegation is brought to you, your
4 focus is upon that individual and that particular time,
5 and it simply does not occur to you that you should
6 initiate an investigation.
7 The Church is not an institution that initiates
8 investigations. The allegation that was brought to us was
9 done not as a result of an investigation but by the free
10 will of the people. It simply must have appeared to me
11 that if any other people had been so violated, they too
12 would have come forth and have notified us, so that we
13 might be able to respond to their particular need and
14 that sensitivity.
15 But the need for an investigation, as I mentioned
16 repeatedly yesterday, the Church is simply -- never has
17 made a public announcement to parishes that, "So-and-
18 has been accused of sexual molestation; and therefore,
19 anyone is aware of such, let them come forth." And I
20 explained yesterday, and briefly I'll explain again, that
21 the Church has always expressed sensitivity to the
22 of all people, the privacy of individuals, so that no one
23 is being falsely accused or being made objects of
24 suspicion of others within a parish, so that there is no
25 division of that parish.
1 We have not, then, made general announcements to
2 parishes asking if anyone who may have been molested
3 Father X, they should come forward. We have not done
4 that. That has not been our tradition.
5 Q. How could you, then, in your own intellectual
6 process, expect children to come forward about sexual
7 conduct when you, yourself, were too ashamed and
8 and hypocritical to come forward about your own sexual
10 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object,
11 misrepresents the testimony.
12 Q. Go ahead and answer.
13 A. Children are very close to their parents. They
14 are not adults. And I think that children who have felt
15 that something wrong has occurred in their life would
16 free enough to be able to share this information either
17 with parents or those individuals who are closest to
18 in some cases grandparents.
19 Q. So is it your belief that children without
20 education, without maturity, are more capable of
21 forward to reveal sexual misconduct than an
22 with a wonderful education and maturity?
23 A. You're assuming that I did not reveal that to
24 anyone. Yesterday you questioned me about did I
25 this to anyone, to a confessor, and I told you that that
1 is privileged knowledge, because any knowledge
2 confessor and penitent is privileged knowledge.
3 A child, it seems to me, if they have felt hurt by
4 anyone, as they frequently are hurt, would share that
5 with parents. That has simply been an assumption in my
6 mind. I don't believe it's a question of having more
7 education or greater formation to be able to share a hurt
8 that a person has suffered within themselves. I'm not an
9 expert in that field, nor do I claim to be or ever have
10 claimed to be such an expert. I certainly would listen
11 psychiatrists or psychologists who are skilled in sexual
12 abuse of children, and they certainly could instruct me.
13 They can instruct us all.
14 Q. Whether or not you acknowledged your own conduct
15 in the context of the confessional, I presume we will
16 never know, but you did not divulge it publicly,
18 A. No, I did not.
19 Q. But would you have expected, then, a child who
20 did not have your education, maturity, etc., to reveal
21 publicly what you, yourself, couldn't?
22 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and
24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: It's asked and answered.
25 Q. Go ahead and answer.
1 A. I believe I responded to that question already,
2 Mr. Pasternack.
3 Q. No, you responded by saying you weren't going to
4 tell me what happened in the confessional. And now I'm
5 asking you if you -- since you publicly couldn't reveal
6 your own conduct, why is it that you expect a child
7 publicly reveal?
8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection.
9 MS. KENNEDY: Asked and answered.
10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Asked and answered, and
11 it misstates the evidence. His prior response did not --
12 it alluded to the confessional, but it also talked about
13 the distinction between his own position and those of
14 children who have parents and loved ones and
15 they could go to.
16 Q. Go ahead and answer, Archbishop.
17 A. As I said previously, Mr. Pasternack, it seems
18 to me -- it seemed to me then, that in dealing with a
19 specific allegation, I did not feel a responsibility, I
20 was not aware of such to go back to other parishes or to
21 make public announcements, because I felt that if any
22 child -- or additional child had been violated, that they
23 would come forward.
24 Q. That doesn't answer the question. The question
25 is, if you couldn't publicly reveal what you had done,
1 do you expect a child could publicly reveal what had
2 done to them?
3 MS. KENNEDY: Objection.
4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, it misstates
5 the evidence. And he doesn't expect children to publicly
6 reveal what was done to them. He's just stated that that
7 revelation would be private within the family or to their
8 loved ones.
9 MS. KENNEDY: It misstates the evidence
10 both given earlier today and his testimony yesterday.
11 Q. Go ahead and answer, please, Archbishop.
12 A. Mr. Pasternack, I just would repeat again that I
13 would expect children to share intimately with those
14 are closest to them, parents, grandparents or siblings,
15 events in their own life. I don't consider that to be a
16 public revelation. I would consider that to be quite
17 private within the walls of the family, within a loving
18 concern of a family, not a public revelation of any
19 that may have occurred.
20 Q. Does canon law prohibit causing or fomenting
21 scandal in the Church?
22 A. Canon law does not -- in one instance, it refers
23 to something similar. I am not going to say that's
24 particularly causing scandal, but it cautions about it,
25 that in cases in which allegations have been brought
1 against a priest of any kind, that any type of
2 investigation into that allegation should be done
3 discreetly, so as not to bring a sense of division and a
4 sense of guilt to people and spread scandal to people
5 within that parish community.
6 Q. What canon is that?
7 A. I would have to refer to the Code of Canon Law
8 to find that canon, sir.
9 Q. Do you have any opinions, Archbishop, looking
10 back in retrospect as you see what has happened to the
11 Archidocese of Santa Fe, as you see what's happened
12 all -- with all the people who have come forward --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- as to whether you performed adequately by not
15 more diligently investigating when these matters were
16 originally coming up?
17 A. I would say this, in all honesty, I think every
18 one of us, hindsight is 20/20 vision. When you look
19 we can always see things much clearer than we could
20 we first looked at them. We have many Monday-
21 quarterbacks who would call a play differently, so that
22 team might have won on Saturday. I think all of us,
23 in one way or another, know that we can improve on
24 procedures, on our actions, on our programs, whatever
25 may be. Even parents know that they can improve their
1 parental guidance of children once they've gained
2 experience. And I would say the same is true about me
3 these cases.
4 I was inexperienced with pedophiliA. I did not know
5 what allegations entailed. I was unaware of any
6 and continued damage that a child might suffer from
7 These were not issues that were public in the 1960s or
8 '70s and perhaps even early '80s. And so I acted -- and
9 this is the bottom line to your question -- I acted
10 according to what I knew and what I thought was best.
11 The information that we have now would lead me to
12 take a different course of action, so as to offer greater
13 protection to our children, because that is the greatest
14 concern of our Church is the common good of the
15 whom we serve. And we have to continually look out
16 that common good.
17 And so today, with knowledge that I have, I would
18 want to do things more effectively, more thoroughly,
19 perhaps with greater continual follow-up, so that all
20 children would be protected.
21 Q. As these allegations of sexual misconduct by
22 your clergy came to your attention and in some cases
23 confirmed by admissions of the alleged perpetrator --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- did you ever call up any psychiatrist, any
1 psychologist and ask, "Do you think there might be other
2 children out there that I should be worried about?"
3 A. No, I didn't ask that specific question, but I
4 would like you to know that I did speak with many
5 psychiatrists and many psychologists in the process of
6 therapy for these priests. These experts, the
7 psychotherapists, who certainly have gone through
8 and have a far greater knowledge than I have or would
9 had at that time, did not mention to me or suggest to me
10 that I should take or enter into a procedure of public
11 announcements or investigations. That was never
12 to my attention by any of our psychiatrists.
13 Q. You're talking now, aren't you, about cases
14 where individual priests were in counseling, and you
15 ask for status reports on them?
16 A. Yes, but that did not exclude the opportunity
17 for any expert to be able to share with me any
18 concerns or directives or suggestions.
19 Q. The specific question, though, was did you ever
20 ask any psychologist or psychiatrist whether there
21 be other victims?
22 A. And I replied to that that I did not.
23 Q. When you did have a priest who was in counseling
24 and you got a status report, isn't it the case that on
25 many occasions the status report from the professional
1 that there would likely be or could be other victims?
2 A. No, I don't recall occasions of them saying that
3 there may likely have been many other victims.
4 Q. Any other victims?
5 A. Or any other victims.
6 Q. You mentioned in responding to whether you
7 initiated any investigations that basically that's not the
8 way the Church functions.
9 A. True.
10 Q. What is it, if you know, about the philosophy of
11 the Church which causes a lack of investigation under
12 type of circumstance?
13 A. I don't want to have to continue to repeat, but
14 the Church is concerned about the privacy and the
15 name of every individual within parishes. She is
16 concerned what would happen with public gossip and
17 and malicious accusations of one another, how this
18 result in the perhaps defamation of one family or
19 or cause children to be hurt because of general
20 allegations and suspicions of others.
21 And so the Church has always cautioned that any type
22 of event that could be scandalous, not just for Church,
23 not thinking of official Church, but scandalous for the
24 people of the Church, where this could hurt them, that
25 these events have to be treated with great caution and
1 with prudence lest they hurt innocent people. That
2 to be the general concern of our Church.
3 Q. Do you have an opinion, now, looking back in
4 retrospect, as to whether that prudence and caution
5 allow a terrible problem to fester secretly?
6 A. What I have learned now in 1994 is that
7 confirmed pedophiles, as we have looked at them,
8 is their first occasion that they have molested a child,
9 that there is a possibility that they have molested
10 others, that is one of the characteristics that seems to
11 accompany pedophiliA.
12 And with that knowledge now, I would be more
13 in any investigation that I would make with any
14 that would be brought to me, so as to make certain that
15 would cover as much of the field as possible, both for
16 child that has been hurt and providing for that child and
17 for the family, but also to inquire from the family about
18 any possible other cases, asking also the psychiatrist
19 might be helping the child to question whether the
20 would know others, and to try to investigate any other
21 circumstances that could lead to possible victims. I
22 would try to be more thorough.
23 Q. The question was whether you have an opinion as
24 to whether the secrecy that was fomented in the
25 Archidocese of Santa Fe allowed a great scandal to go
2 A. I don't -- you can call it secrecy. I think
3 that might characterize or mischaracterize the efforts.
4 We were trying to not make a public scandal, it is true.
5 We were trying to protect the good name of the people
6 had come to us, because they're entitled to that, as well.
7 And it appears that there were other victims that did not
8 come forward immediately or were not known to us who
9 since then surfaced. And apparently these victims who
10 have come forward have, in fact, been hurt to one
11 or another because they did not receive counseling
13 Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether this policy
14 of the Church of avoiding public scandal ended up
15 resulting in many people being hurt?
16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection. The
17 testimony is -- it mischaracterizes the testimony.
18 Archbishop Sanchez' testimony was not that there was
19 policy of the Church of avoiding public scandal. His
20 testimony is there was a policy of announcing -- not
21 announcing from the pulpit allegations of abuse to
22 individual parishioners within the Archidocese.
23 A. My opinion --
24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mischaracterizes the
1 A. My opinion is that our procedure was a good
2 procedure because it protects individuals, as well. But
3 my opinion would be that our procedure could be more
4 extensive and more private, being private, but still to
5 conduct investigations to search out individuals who
6 also have been molested by the person accused.
7 Q. I do want to make it clear, Archbishop, that the
8 speaking and coaching objections are going to result in
9 motion to resume your deposition. I just want to make
10 sure that was on the record so that it could be --
11 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: You can make that --
12 MR. PASTERNACK: So that you and your
13 counsel could be aware of that.
14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll make it clear that
15 any effort to resume the Archbishop's deposition will be
16 strenuously contested.
17 Q. Well, Archbishop, let me ask you this: If you
18 have an opinion on this, if a child in a northern New
19 Mexico community, Abiquiu or Canjilon or Coyote,
20 forward and gone public with an accusation that a
21 priest had sexually molested him or her, would that
22 been the type of thing that canon law would refer to as
23 public scandal that should be avoided?
24 A. Oh, no. If they came forward publicly, either
25 to the Church or to any civil authorities, that's simply a
1 fact that has to take place. That is a scandal,
2 certainly, because the priest has been accused of
3 molesting a child or children. But that is not to be
4 avoided that way. That's a fact.
5 The scandal about which I am referring is that which
6 can hurt people unjustly who are innocent. I spoke to
7 yesterday about defamation and possible calumny, and I
8 think your interpretation was this was just in reference
9 to the perpetrator, and I was speaking in reference to the
10 people within the Church community.
11 Q. Is there a difference in the scandal level
12 caused by a child who comes forward and publicly
13 that, "Father So-and-So has molested me," or the
14 member of the child who comes to you and says, "My
15 says that Father So-and-So has molested me"? Is one a
16 bigger scandal than the other?
17 A. I think in terms of -- both of them are serious,
18 but in terms of public knowledge, one becomes more
19 than the other.
20 Q. Well, once scandal reaches a certain level, is
21 it then the type of scandal that the Church does not
22 to have become public for the reasons you specified?
23 A. No. I think what you're saying is that the
24 Church is trying to avoid any bad news in that concept
25 itself. That's not the ideA. The Church is not looked at
1 at as a separate institution apart from the people of the
2 community. The people of the community are
3 Church. And it's that people, that community, that is the
4 object of concern, when I speak about the Church trying
5 avoid false allegations, one against the other, which
6 could be created by any public announcements. Private
7 investigations are something else.
8 Q. Then would it be the case, sir, that if the
9 child came forward without coming to the chancery first
10 and said, "Father So-and-So did this to me," that's
11 exactly the type of public scandal that the Church
12 have wanted to avoid?
13 A. But it's one child accusing one priest. It's
14 not a question of how many out there may also be
15 not guilty, but be offended by this person and should
16 forward. That's the difference.
17 Q. So would it be better, then, for the child to
18 conduct his investigation and round up other victims for
19 corroboration, thereby making it less scandalous when
20 publicly reveal?
21 A. No, the child and the parents, actually, of the
22 child, certainly are free to address the issue however
23 they would choose, whether that was to come to
24 authorities or to go directly to any civil authorities. I
25 believe they come to Church authorities because they
1 that this person represents the Church; and therefore,
2 they feel the Church authorities should know this, and
3 this man should be removed from his position.
4 Q. The next question, then, is even if a person had
5 come to you and reported this on behalf of himself, as a
6 small child or through his or her parents, based on what
7 you've already said, isn't it true that you likely
8 wouldn't have investigated the matter anyway, because
9 wouldn't have occurred to you that there would be other
11 A. I would have taken the concern of the people who
12 brought it to me, but I would not have made a public
13 announcement at the Church whether there would be
14 victims involved. And I'm talking about 1970s, when
15 knowledge about this was very, very limited.
16 Q. Are you saying that knowledge was limited in
17 the -- on the part of the Church, or are you saying that
18 knowledge of everyone was limited about the injury
19 by child abuse?
20 A. My opinion would be that knowledge about child
21 abuse was a limited fact generally in the public. It
22 certainly did not have the high profile position that it
23 has today.
24 Q. All right.
25 A. And the knowledge that accompanies that high
1 profile position.
2 Q. Can you identify with any type of range when you
3 began to discover that childhood sexual abuse causes
5 A. I did not begin to address the issue of child
6 abuse with any type of focus to be able to gather
7 information I could into the late 1980s.
8 Q. Would you expect that children who were sexually
9 abused in the '70s would know in the '70s a greater level
10 of information about the injury than you as an adult
11 A. No, sir, but neither would their parents.
12 Q. Where the priest admits guilt, so there's no
13 question about stirring up false accusations or false
14 rumors, would it still be scandalous to announce his
15 from the pulpit and solicit others who may have been
16 injured to come forward?
17 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, misstates
18 Archbishop Sanchez' testimony. He has not -- where a
19 priest admits guilt does not necessarily exclude false
20 accusations towards other victims in the past.
21 MR. BENNETT: I want to jump in here, too,
22 and also join. I want to object to the coaching
23 objection. The only objection in the deposition, that I
24 understand the rules provide for, is an objection to the
25 form of the question, and I think this is coaching the
1 witness, and he's putting words in the witness' mouth,
2 I think it's highly improper. And I'm going to object to
4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, the question
5 misstates the evidence. I feel it's incumbent to set the
6 record straight as to what the evidence has been.
7 MR. BENNETT: I think the record speaks for
8 itself, and your testimony is not what we're here for, Mr.
10 MR. PASTERNACK: Just to be clear, what I'd
11 like to do here is go back and have the court reporter
12 read the question, so that Mr. Winterbottom can be
13 that the question didn't repeat testimony. It simply
14 asked a question. Would you please do that.
15 [The record was read by the reporter.]
16 Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) You can ahead and answer.
17 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Same objection,
18 misstates the testimony of the Archbishop Sanchez.
19 A. The question was whether this would be
20 considered scandalous to announce it from the pulpit,
21 this priest has admitted molesting a child and then
22 publicly to invite all who may have been molested to
23 forward. It would be offensive to people to hear a
24 announcement of that nature. They would be told, one,
25 that the priest had been so accused is being removed
1 that purpose.
2 The second announcement, that of there being other
3 children who might possibly have been victimized to
4 come forward, that portion of that announcement could
5 begin to cause the type of questioning within the
6 community to which I had alluded previously over and
7 again, how one might begin to wonder about this child
8 that child.
9 Q. Is that a yes, Archbishop? Yes, it would be
10 scandalous to announce the admitted conduct of a
12 A. It could be scandalous to the people, the second
13 part, not to admit the child molester. That could offend
14 them. It's scandalous -- anything that's done that is
15 sinful or shameful in a church that's public is
16 scandalous. That has a scandalous connotation. So the
17 answer is yes to your question.
18 Q. All right. In the eyes of the Church, is it
19 more important to prevent scandal than to prevent the
20 of children?
21 A. No. I think that you're excluding any
22 possibilities of in-betweens. The Church has a great
23 concern for all of its people. Its children are God's
24 gift to us. We have to protect them. We're not going to
25 do something that would endanger the children. That is
1 not the Church's action.
2 I know that you're saying that if we don't announce
3 something publicly that this is going to endanger the
4 children. The Church's policy has always been not to
5 public announcements about things that could lead to
6 people being divided one against the other, of this type
7 of public scandal, as you would want to call it. It does
8 not exclude the Church's concern for any other victims
9 may be present in that community.
10 Q. Is there a middle ground, in your opinion,
11 between avoidance of public scandal and rape of
12 A. You're making two comparisons, which you're
13 assuming that if there's no public announcement there's
14 automatically the rape of children. I'm saying that if a
15 rape of a child has occurred, any type of molestation,
16 it's brought to our attention, that action is taken
17 seriously. The family is received and provided with
18 whatever is necessary for that child. But the need to
19 make a public announcement simply has not been the
21 Q. Then wouldn't it be the case, sir, that the only
22 way the injuries of the child could be addressed and
23 remediated is if the child has more courage than you?
24 A. No, sir. The courage of the Church is to be
25 able to respond to the needs of that family. And if the
1 family themselves feel that there possibly could be other
2 victims, and they make any comment, an investigation
3 begun to try to find any other families, any other
4 children, specifically, who may have been injured.
5 Q. I'm not asking about the courage of the Church.
6 Isn't it true that for the system, as you described the
7 Church's system, to function properly, a child has to
8 more courage than you, as Archbishop, had?
9 A. No, sir. I don't believe that a child has to
10 have more courage than I had. I had to deal with
11 everything that was brought to my attention and to deal
12 with it immediately. I'm not certain what you are
13 alluding to when you're talking about a child needing
14 courage to admit that he has been violated. Is this what
15 you're referring to?
16 Q. Yes. Your whole system, doesn't it depend on
17 the child having more courage in disclosing sexual
18 than you, yourself, were able to muster?
19 A. I did not initiate an investigation, and I have
20 testified to that. And I testified to the fact that I did
21 not initiate such an investigation for several reasons.
22 One, I was unaware that there could possibly be other
23 victims. That was not my primary focus.
24 But secondly, in response to your question about any
25 public announcements or that it might surface any
1 victims, I have responded that this has not been the
2 tradition of the Church and has not been such because it
3 is always considered the good of the people within that
4 community and would, in fact, depend upon the privacy,
5 right of the individuals to come forward when they chose
6 to come forward.
7 Q. With all respect, sir, isn't it true that for
8 the traditions of the Church to have worked in the way
9 described, a little child would have to have more
10 than that which you personally showed?
11 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and
13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, I think the
14 Archbishop has answered this question now several
15 and he's done the best he could. If you're not satisfied
16 with his answer, Mr. Pasternack, rephrase the question.
17 A. I can't right offhand think of examples that I
18 could share, but I'm wondering -- and this is a question,
19 in my mind -- whether a school in which a child
20 has revealed a molestation to the principal and the
21 principal is removed, whether public announcements
22 then made to parents and children. I'm asking that as
23 inquiry. I'm just unaware of having read or heard about
24 such procedures. Because we're talking about the
25 procedure of the Catholic Church in response to such
2 Q. That wasn't my question.
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. My question is, in order for your system of the
5 Church to work in the way you described it, doesn't that
6 depend upon a little child having more courage to
7 than you, as an Archbishop, as a trusted and revered
8 authority figure, as an admired representative of God on
9 earth, had the ability to muster yourself?
10 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and
12 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, asked and
14 A. Sir, I believe that a child has to have courage
15 to come forward to reveal any act of molestation
16 himself, his person. That requires courage to tell any
17 one of his own family members.
18 I have to have the courage to be able to respond and
19 support that child and that family when that allegation
20 brought to my attention.
21 Q. When Father Wolf now proclaims, on occasion,
22 information about people he believes to have been
23 who were molesting children in New Mexico, do you
24 opinion on whether that's scandalous on the part of
1 A. No, sir. I think that Father Wolf is making
2 statements publicly that, in fact, have been covered in
3 the news media, and I think he is making every effort to
4 assure the general public that the Church's concern for
5 any victim. I know that publicly, we also established an
6 open line so that people anywhere in this state or
7 could call in and make known to us any allegation that
8 they choose. I know that we also set up that independent
9 commission for that purpose, as well. So I don't believe
10 his actions are scandalous.
11 Q. In retrospect, Archbishop, and perhaps engaging
12 in Monday-morning quarterbacking, do you feel you
14 A. I feel, sir, that I did the best job I could at
15 that time with what I knew and what procedures I was
16 of. If you're asking whether I would do things
17 differently today, perhaps I would.
18 Q. Perhaps? Is there any doubt in your mind that
19 you were careless?
20 A. Well --
21 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, misstates the
22 evidence. He didn't state he was careless.
23 A. I'm saying that perhaps I would --
24 Q. Excuse me.
25 A. Sorry.
1 MR. PASTERNACK: When you ask someone, Mr.
2 Winterbottom, if they think they were careless, you are
3 not accusing them of having previously said it. Please
4 refrain from coaching, improper objections which will
5 unquestionably have to inconvenience this man by
6 him back.
7 Q. Now, I will ask you again --
8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I will make the
9 objections, Mr. Pasternack, as I feel they are necessary.
10 Q. -- in retrospect, is there any doubt in your
11 mind that you were careless?
12 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, misstates the
13 evidence, and it's asked and answered.
14 A. I responded to your question if there was any
15 doubt in my mind if I was careless. I said that I did the
16 job as best I could given the circumstances and the
17 knowledge I had at that time. I added that I felt that
18 perhaps -- I used that word -- I would do things
19 differently today if such a situation arose.
20 You objected to the word "perhaps." By that, I meant
21 if such a situation came to me and the situation were
22 that I felt investigations were warranted because of the
23 event, I would have an investigation.
24 Q. Do you, as you sit here today, feel that it's
25 possible that you addressed the problem of childhood
1 sexual abuse while you were Archbishop properly?
2 A. I feel I did the best I could. I wish I had
3 known more about it. I wish that the awareness of
4 pedophilia as we know it today had been known to all of
5 at that time, certainly to me, so that I could have done a
6 better job and more effective one in helping families,
7 children, and protecting others.
8 Q. When allegations of child molestation by priests
9 first started coming in to you --
10 A. Yes, sir.
11 Q. -- did you make any effort to learn about it?
12 I've asked if you asked any psychologists or
13 psychiatrists. But did you go to a library, call up a
14 cardinal, call up the Vatican, get a book, read a
15 magazine, do anything to develop an understanding
16 what literature or information there was about the
17 consequences of childhood sexual abuse?
18 A. No, sir, I did not make that effort.
19 Q. Okay. Let's, if we may, please, Archbishop,
20 turn to Arthur Perrault. When did you first make the
21 acquaintance of Arthur Perrault?
22 A. I made the acquaintance of Arthur Perrault when
23 he was appointed as a teacher at St. Pius X High
24 believe in the year 1967.
25 Q. Were you there at the time as a teacher?
1 A. I was there at the time as a teacher. In fact,
2 it was my last year at St. Pius. I had been there for
3 seven years, and that was my last year.
4 Q. Was it the '67-'68 school year that was your
5 last year, or '66-'67?
6 A. No, my last school year was '67-'68.
7 Q. And did you come to find out while the two of
8 you were at Pius together where he was from and how
9 gotten to New Mexico?
10 A. No, sir, I did not. We were not friends to that
11 extent where we simply shared personal information
12 one another. He was assigned as one of the professors.
13 There were many others, as you might imagine. And
14 that I had been there a number of years, I had my own
15 friends, and he was simply another teacher.
16 Q. In the way the Church works, it's my
17 understanding that it is somewhat unusual for a priest
18 was incardinated somewhere else to come into a
19 archidocese. Is it somewhat unusual, absent a military
20 assignment or just visiting?
21 A. It might be unusual in some diocese. It was not
22 unusual in this Archidocese. Many priests who had
23 in this Archidocese for many years were not native to
24 Archidocese. In fact, the majority, I would say, of the
25 priests who served in this archidocese were from other
1 areas of the country and had come here to work with this
2 Archidocese. Some were ordained for this Archidocese,
3 coming from other areas. Others had been ordained
4 elsewhere and had come to work here.
5 Q. Are you able to quantify the proportion of those
6 who were ordained elsewhere and came to work here
7 here via Servants of the Paraclete?
8 A. No, I couldn't give you an accurate number to
9 that, Mr. Pasternack.
10 Q. Do you recall any range of numbers?
11 A. First of all, I wasn't aware of those who came
12 to the Archidocese via the Paracletes. I just knew that
13 there were a number of priests who were here from
14 of the Archidocese, who were not native to the
16 Q. While you were at St. Pius, did anyone from the
17 Archidocese -- realizing that at the time you weren't
18 running it, you were an employee -- did anyone from
19 Archidocese tell you or anybody at St. Pius, as far as
20 know, about any sexual allegations or history of Arthur
22 A. No, sir, nothing.
23 Q. While you were at St. Pius, did any of the
24 students at St. Pius, even one, come to you and report
25 that Arthur Perrault had in any fashion sexually
2 A. No, sir, none came to me.
3 Q. When did you first learn, if you learned, that
4 Arthur Perrault had come to New Mexico via Servants
6 MR. KONRAD: I'm going to object to the
7 form of the question, as the phrase "via Servants of the
8 Paraclete" is meaningless. It's ambiguous.
9 Q. Go ahead and answer.
10 A. I'm not accurately sure when I learned it. I'm
11 trying to recall in my memory the years of the '70s or
13 Q. Fair enough. Let me ask you this: What is the
14 first situation under which you recall learning that
15 Arthur Perrault was accused of or had a history of being
16 sex offender?
17 MR. KONRAD: I'm going to object to the
18 form of the question as assuming facts not in evidence.
19 There's been no evidence that at the time he had been
20 accused of or had a history of being a sex offender.
21 Q. Go ahead and answer.
22 A. I was unaware of any history of a sex offense.
23 Probably until I had asked him to enter into therapy,
24 I don't recall even the -- any knowledge, any specific
25 knowledge, about any specific allegations that may
1 been made against him. I may have very well have had
2 what I would call a general knowledge that there had
3 allegations against him, but I was unaware of any
4 ones. And that would have probably surfaced in -- on
5 occasion of asking him to enter into therapy.
6 Q. Approximately when do you recall asking him to
7 enter into therapy?
8 A. I know that I had him in therapy, and I had
9 spoken with the doctor repeatedly beginning in either
10 1980, early 1981. I believe that there was another
11 occasion that we spoke -- that's Father Perrault and
12 myself -- about him continuing therapy. I use the word
13 "continuing" because he had indicated that he had seen
14 therapist named -- a Dr. Hermann, and that he had been
15 seeing him. And I had asked him to continue his
16 that he was undergoing at that time.
17 Q. Was that sometime before you asked him to enter
18 into therapy?
19 A. Before I asked him to enter into therapy with a
20 Dr. VanDenHeuvel, right.
21 Q. Right, okay. Do you recall what specific
22 episode or episodes occurred that caused you to ask
23 Perrault to enter into therapy with Dr. VanDenHeuvel?
24 A. Yes. When we had dealt with Father Jason
25 Sigler, the former Father Jason Sigler in 1981, I had
1 spoken with Dr. VanDenHeuvel, whether he would be
2 offer continual therapy to Father Art Perrault, and he
3 said he would be able to receive him.
4 I don't recall whether he had known Father Art
5 Perrault previously, but I asked him at that time that
6 Father Perrault would go there, so that he would have
7 regular contact with a therapist for regular monitoring, I
8 guess you'd use that word.
9 Q. All right. Please explain why it is that
10 whatever happened with Father Jason Sigler in roughly
11 caused you to talk to VanDenHeuvel about Perrault?
12 A. Yes. Father Jason Sigler had been accused of
13 molesting children at St. Therese parish in
14 His pastor had come to me and brought this to my
15 attention. And upon questioning Father Sigler about it,
16 he had admitted his guilt and was asked then to cease
17 his assignment immediately and faculties removed,
18 was asked to return to Jemez Springs, the Servants of
19 Paraclete, for treatment, and that he would have no
20 any assignment in the Archidocese.
21 Because of this, the allegations of the sexual abuse
22 that had occurred, in conference with my attorney at
23 time over it, because I had spoken with him about this,
24 felt that Father Perrault -- we could start a process
25 where anyone who has ever had any problem should
1 continual care with a therapist for their well-being.
2 Q. Well, who else was put into the therapy as a
3 result of the Sigler thing? Perrault and who else?
4 A. He was -- Father Jason Sigler and Father
5 Perrault were the only ones that I had in therapy at that
7 Q. Well, didn't you just say that it was anyone who
8 had had that kind of problem in the past?
9 A. No, that that would become a process for us that
10 we would follow. This was going to become --
11 Q. So you didn't go back at that point in 1981 and
12 ask Ed Donnollan to enter into therapy?
13 A. I may have asked Father Donnollan to enter into
14 therapy. I think it was a little later, but it wasn't for
15 any type of sexual molestation, as I mentioned
16 It was because of his continued harassment of people
17 his anger, and so he went into therapy.
18 Q. And would it be equally the case that you didn't
19 ask in 1981 to enter into therapy?
20 A. I can't recall the year when we had Father
21 into therapy. We had him there twice, if I
22 recall correctly, in Jemez Springs for therapy.
23 Q. And by the way, when Jason Sigler admitted to
24 you in 1981 these things happened, would it be
25 say that you again did not alert the parishioners at St.
1 Therese, at Fort Sumner, at Abiquiu, at Immaculate
2 Conception in Las Vegas where he had previously
3 that he was now an admitted, confessed child molester?
4 A. No, sir, we did not make that general
5 announcement, as we have discussed previously.
6 Q. What was it that caused you to have the opinion
7 or know in 1981 that Perrault needed this therapy for
8 matters relating to sex?
9 A. I don't have a recollection of the event, but I
10 am told that a woman named Mrs. Nowak had
approached me in
11 the mid 1970s, '76 or '77, I'm not certain, but -- and had
12 informed me that she felt that Father Perrault who had
13 been a friend of the family, had in fact molested one or
14 two of her boys. And I don't recall what form of
15 molestation that she may have mentioned to me at all.
16 don't recall that conversation.
17 Q. Let me ask you, then, before you continue. Are
18 you saying that now, in 1994, you do not recall any
19 alleged conversation with Mrs. Nowak in the mid or
21 A. That's right.
22 Q. But are you also saying that in 1981, you must
23 have recalled it because it's probably why you put
24 Perrault into therapy? 1981.
25 A. I put Father Arthur Perrault into therapy as a
1 result of the events, as I said, with Jason Sigler and as
2 a precaution for his own behavior and monitoring,
3 strengthening him continually.
4 Q. Was the motivating factor in 1981 your
5 recollection of, at that point, of the meeting with a
6 lady --
7 A. It must have been. That's -- I would assume
8 that, even though I don't recall the meeting with her.
9 But it must have been referring back to that event that
10 she had made known to me in whatever year that was.
11 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to why that
12 particular episode in the mid or late 1970s escapes
13 current memory?
14 A. I wish I did know, sir. But it may very well
15 have been the first occasion that anyone spoke to me
16 anything. She may not have used what I would call
17 descriptive language as we use today. It may have
18 shrouded in terms such as, "abusing my sons,"
19 has happened there," and "I just don't think that Father
20 should continue to be close to us, or perhaps do
21 ministry he was in."
22 I do not recall the specifics in meeting with Father
23 Perrault at any of her requests, but I have a vague
24 recollection in my mind of having confronted Father
25 Perrault about some issue. But I can't recall the
1 specific issue.
2 Q. Well, would it be accurate to say that this
3 conversation which you think may have happened in the
4 to late 1970s was apparently vivid in your mind in 1981,
5 so that when the Sigler thing came up, you instantly got
6 Perrault in touch with VanDenHeuvel?
7 A. I don't know if it was vividly in my mind. Any
8 allegation that would have come up, I would have also
9 passed on to our attorneys and sort of left it in their
10 hands this way. And I believe it was at the attorneys'
11 initiative in speaking with me that the recommendation
12 made that we would keep Arthur Perrault in therapy,
13 was -- I have to imagine that I chose Dr.
14 simply because the man he had seen previously, a Dr.
15 Hermann, was no longer available to him. Perhaps he
16 retired or whatever. But I asked him to see Dr.
18 Q. When you learned at some point in the mid to
19 late '70s through this mother of a boy who reported that
20 her son had been abused, did you conduct any
21 of Perrault?
22 A. No, sir. I did not conduct any investigation of
23 Perrault, not that I can recall. As I said, I don't
24 recall the specific conversation with the mother. I don't
25 recall a specific conversation with Father Art Perrault.
1 Q. Did you continue to allow him to have parish
2 assignments even after the mother had made these
4 A. In the mid '70s, at that time, Father Perrault
5 was -- his principal assignment was that of director of
6 the liturgy for the Archidocese, and the printing of a
7 liturgical newsletter, as well as of a communication to
8 the Archidocese called the Commentator. He was given
9 half-time assignment so as to enable him to assist on
10 Sundays in the celebration of Mass for parishioners at
11 Anunciation parish. But he was not involved in the full
12 parish program.
13 Q. But isn't it true that throughout the mid and
14 late 1970s, and continuing on into 1980, he was
15 work in parochial work at Anunciation?
16 A. Sir, he was doing what we call part-time or
17 weekend assignment work, which means that it's
18 hearing of confessions on the weekend and of
19 of the Eucharist for the parish. Also to celebrate Mass
20 during the weekdays, whenever the pastor would ask
21 assistance, because they would have perhaps a funeral
22 something else. But he was not the full-time pastor or
23 full-time assistant to Anunciation at that time.
24 Q. No, but he was there and administering Holy
25 Sacraments, wasn't he?
1 A. Only on the weekends, celebration of the
2 Eucharist and the celebration of the sacrament of
3 confession for them, right.
4 Q. You don't expect, do you, that child abuse is
5 limited to Mondays through Fridays?
6 A. No, sir.
7 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object,
9 A. No, sir, child abuse can occur any time. Nor do
10 I recall at this time where Mrs. Nowak may have said
11 abuse had occurred. I simply don't recall the
12 conversation with her.
13 Q. Why didn't you conduct an investigation when she
14 told you about Arthur Perrault?
15 A. This was my first allegation that had been
16 brought to me as a new Archbishop. I certainly had no
17 experience whether investigations needed to be done or
18 whether I needed simply to confront the priest who was
19 accused, and if such was -- if such was the truth, if he
20 had admitted to that, to see that he would receive
21 therapeutic psychotherapy, help for himself, so that this
22 action would not be repeated in the future.
23 Q. Did you have a meeting with him and confront him
24 with Ms. Nowak's allegations?
25 A. As I mentioned a few moments ago, I recall
1 meeting with Father Perrault. I don't recall whether that
2 was the confrontation with him or not.
3 Q. Do you recall whether he admitted in the meeting
4 that he had molested children?
5 A. I don't recall the content of the meeting with
6 him at all, as I mentioned. I just recall meeting with
8 Q. Do you recall pulling his personnel file,
9 looking at it and seeing if there was any history of
10 sexual abuse?
11 A. No, sir, I do not recall that either.
12 Q. Do you recall whether you placed him on any type
13 of supervision, such that when he was around children
14 weekends at various parishes, he would be supervised?
15 A. I may very well have done that as part of that
16 conversation. I also may very well have asked him to
17 continue to see Dr. Hermann for therapy.
18 Q. Do you recall whether or not you put additional
19 supervision on him, or I think you just said you may
20 A. I'm using the word "may" because none of those
21 particulars are in my active memory.
22 Q. Would it be accurate to say, then, that as best
23 as you currently recall today --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- you can't say that you probably employed
1 additional supervisory measures on him?
2 A. I could not say with certitude, no.
3 Q. Hadn't there already been allegations a few
4 years before, in 1974, that he had molested a boy at Our
5 Lady of Guadalupe in Albuquerque?
6 A. Not to my knowledge, sir. Not at all.
7 Q. Then can you tell us, anyone who may be watching
8 the tape, what action, if any, you took with regard to
9 Arthur Perrault's alleged sexual misconduct between the
10 time you received the complaint from the lady in the
11 1970s and the time you placed him into therapy with
12 VanDenHeuvel as a result of the Sigler situation?
13 A. I've already mentioned that I do not have an
14 active recall of any specific actions with Father
15 resulting from the conversation with Mrs. Nowak, as
16 stated it. I don't recall the conversation. I don't
17 recall the confrontation with Father, although I do
18 meeting with him for a meeting which would have
been of a
19 serious nature. But I don't recall the contents of that.
20 Q. Do you recall meeting with him again in 1981 to
21 tell him that he would be asked to enter into therapy
23 A. No, I don't recall that meeting. But I do know
24 that I had sent him to Dr. VanDenHeuvel, and there
25 document sent from doctor's office that he reported, as
1 requested. And then after that, he continued in therapy,
2 then, for the next 10, 11, 12 years on a regular basis.
3 Q. When you sent him to VanDenHeuvel in 1981, did
4 you ask VanDenHeuvel whether there might have been
5 Perrault victims?
6 A. No, sir, I did not ask him that question, nor
7 did he offer me any information in that regard.
8 Q. Was there an additional triggering event between
9 the conversation that you refer to in the mid 1970s and
10 the time you sent him to VanDenHeuvel in 1981? Had
11 been accused of molesting anybody else?
12 A. Could you repeat it just one more time, just so
13 I don't --
14 Q. You've testified about the conversation with the
15 lady in the mid '70s or late '70s. You have testified
16 that after the Sigler revelations in '81, you put Perrault
17 in therapy. And my specific question is: Had there been
18 any allegations against Arthur Perrault of a sexual
19 nature, between the conversation in the mid to late '70s
20 and the time you put him into therapy as a result of the
21 Sigler episode?
22 A. No, sir, no allegations were brought to my
23 attention. In addition to that, in one letter from the
24 therapist, from Dr. VanDenHeuvel, in 1983, he
25 that the therapy with Father Perrault was proceeding
1 well. He felt that he was getting himself more in contact
2 with all the reality. He felt better regarding
3 interpersonal relationships, and he indicated that there
4 had been -- as far as he could see, there had been no
5 other incidents in the life of Father Perrault for the
6 past seven years.
7 He also included in that letter, he said, "Given his
8 progress, I can see no reason why you would not want to
9 give him a full-time pastoral assignment." The statement
10 was simply made in the letter. We did not give -- take
11 any action on that statement. But that was part of the
12 testimony of the psychiatrist.
13 Q. You seem to have a very precise recall of that
14 letter. Have you seen it lately?
15 A. I have seen the letter.
16 Q. How recently?
17 A. I saw that as recent as this morning.
18 Q. And prior to this morning, did you have the same
19 recollection of those events as you do now that you
20 the letter this morning?
21 A. No, sir, I would not have recalled all those
22 events, but seeing the letter written with the
23 that's what I could refer to.
24 Q. However, isn't it correct, Archbishop, that by
25 the fall of 1984, you were beginning to receive reports
1 that he was molesting again?
2 A. Fall of 1984?
3 Q. I'll try to be more specific.
4 A. If you could, please.
5 Q. Your chancellor, in September of 1984, was
6 Father Starkey, wasn't it?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. And didn't Father Starkey come to you in
9 September of 1984, or thereabouts, and say that Elaine
10 Paul Montoya had come in and said that Perrault had
11 sexually molested them?
12 MS. KENNEDY: I'm going to object to the
13 form of the question, Mr. Pasternack. You know that
14 testimony was about allegations occurring in the early
15 '70s, and the form of your question was putting it as he
16 was molesting again.
17 Q. Go ahead and answer, Archbishop.
18 A. I don't recall the names Elaine Montoya -- I
19 don't recall that name nor any visit with Father Starkey
20 regarding any allegation that they had brought to him.
21 Again, I cannot say that it did not happen.
22 Many, many things were brought to my attention about
23 various things that I would have no recall about. But I
24 don't recall that specifically at all. I know that Father
25 Perrault continued in his therapy with Dr.
1 He continued for 11 years. And I'm sure that if there had
2 been something that had surfaced that was of a serious
3 nature, the doctor also would have brought that to my
4 attention, and we would have discussed it.
5 Q. Do you know whether Father Starkey ever gave the
6 doctor any information about allegations against
7 A. Not that I would know, no. It's possible he may
8 have called the doctor, but I would not be able to testify
9 to that.
10 Q. Did you or any of your representatives, as best
11 you recall, ever refer anyone who identified themselves
12 a victim of Arthur Perrault to the Archidocese attorney,
13 Charles Reynolds, for representation?
14 A. Any of the victims?
15 Q. That's right.
16 A. Not that I recall, no.
17 Q. In 1984, do you recall what the policy would
18 have been if somebody came in to report that they had
19 sexually abused by a priest? Would they be
20 given an audience with you or would this have had to
21 its way up the channels through the chancellor?
22 A. Most of the time people spoke with Father
23 Starkey. He is the one who took most phone calls about
24 everything. And people would call to have a meeting
25 him, and he would do the meeting with the people.
1 Sometimes he would say something to me about
2 whatever, but on most occasions, he simply did not
3 with me about the things that he felt he was handling,
4 I would not get that specific information. So I never met
5 as far as I can recall, I never met with the Montoyas.
6 Q. Are you saying, sir, that then it's possible
7 that someone who alleged to have been sexually abused
8 priest might get only as far as Starkey, and you would
9 never know?
10 A. Not by way of policy, no.
11 Q. But by way of happenstance?
12 A. It could have happened.
13 Q. If that occurred, do you find that acceptable,
14 that child abuse reports stop at the chancellor?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. Would you have wanted Starkey to bring such
17 matters to your attention?
18 A. I think anything of a serious nature should have
19 been brought to my attention.
20 Q. By 1984, would you consider Perrault to have
21 been a friend of yours?
22 A. Actually, Father Art Perrault never really
23 became a friend, as you would want to characterize
24 He was an acquaintance. He was a priest of the
25 Archidocese. We had frequent contact because of our --
1 the ministry that he was involved in and my own
2 responsibilities. But I had similar contact with all of
3 our pastors that way. But he was no friend. We never
4 a dinner together, other than at his rectory when I was
5 visiting there for confirmation. We never went to any
6 recreational movie or whatever together.
7 Q. Do you recall when the woman in the mid to late
8 '70s met with you, whether she insisted that Perrault be
9 placed into the care of a mental health practitioner?
10 A. No, sir, I don't recall that. I have not seen
11 any documentation in that regard. If you have
12 to refresh my memory, I'd be happy to look at it, but I
13 simply do not recall meeting with Mrs. Nowak.
14 Q. Well, do you remember whether you participated
15 in the selection of Simon Hermann to be Perrault's
17 A. No. What I understood from Art Perrault was
18 that he had been seeing this gentleman and apparently
19 already known him. I did not know Dr. Hermann.
20 Q. Did you ever direct or facilitate Perrault's
21 mental health care through a Dr. David Rosenstein?
22 A. Never heard of the name.
23 Q. Do you recall whether you told the lady at the
24 time of the meeting in the mid to late '70s, these words
25 or words to this effect, "What do you want from me?
1 send these people from all over the country."
2 A. No, I don't recall anything of our conversation.
3 I'm glad you're mentioning these things. Maybe that will
4 help snap.
5 Q. Have you experienced this, that sometimes there
6 are things that you don't recall, and then there's a
7 triggering event that brings it to your current
9 A. Sometimes it would bring a general concept in my
10 mind. Not specifics, but sometimes a general concept
11 appear. You know, in any given day, as you might
12 the office of the Archbishop has just numerous
13 upon it, both with phone calls, the amount of mail that
14 arrives daily, and the daily interviews with priests,
15 religious and laity, besides the nighttime obligations of
16 visiting parishes, meeting with parish councils and
17 greeting hundreds of people continually, and I just -- I
18 think sometimes for your own protection, you put out of
19 your mind the activity of the day, so as to try to
20 yourself to each thing that comes next. So there's just
21 been many things that I could not give you detailed
22 account of.
23 Q. Have there been some things that you've put out
24 of your mind because they were painful?
25 A. That's possible. That's possible.
1 Q. Is it just possible or do you know that on
2 occasion you have done that?
3 A. I could not swear that I have done that on
4 occasion. That is possible. I think that's been
5 described in whatever I read as a defensive mechanism,
6 that people, in general, like to forget those things that
7 are painful, and they like to remember the things that
9 [The witness conferred with his attorney.]
10 Q. Before we get back on Perrault, let me just ask
11 you about this settlement that you now feel is not
12 confidential, the Anthony Fontana-Clive Lynn matter.
13 A. Oh, yes, surely.
14 Q. What do you recall about that settlement?
15 A. Since the settlement was not a confidential
16 settlement, that has been brought to my attention now,
17 feel free that I can share whatever recollection I have
19 It appears to me -- to the best of my recollection,
20 that the Archidocese was given notice by an attorney, I
21 believe it was directly from Mr. Fontana, who was an
22 attorney in LouisianA. I can't recall the city.
23 In any event, he had put us on notice that he was --
24 had been notified by another attorney in Albuquerque
25 a young person in the city of Mora, New Mexico, had
1 brought to her attention that he had been abused by a
2 Father Clive Lynn a few years earlier. Mr. Fontana
3 brought this to our attention around, I guess, 1988, 1989,
4 in that areA. And that the alleged abuse had occurred
5 when Father Lynn was in Mora, which would have made
6 around, I suppose, 1984 or so.
7 And he would want us to contact him and to speak to
8 him about it. I brought this to the to the attention of
9 the Archdiocesan attorney, Mr. Chuck Reynolds. Mr.
10 Reynolds contacted Mr. Fontana and the Albuquerque
11 liaison. As a result of that, Mr. Fontana came out to
12 meet with us personally and informed us of the details
13 mentioned that he would be willing to enter into a
14 settlement for this without going to trial or having to
15 bother with more time, etc., etc.
16 And I was impressed with Mr. FontanA. He had
17 mentioned to me that his brother, I believe, is a
18 priest, and so we had much in common to talk about.
19 seemed to be very personal and open. I told him that I
20 appreciated his information.
21 As a result of the meeting, our attorney then
22 contacted the insurance company that was covering us
23 that time.
24 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Excuse me, Archbishop,
25 I'm going to instruct you not to discuss anything within
1 the attorney-client privilege; that is, you can discuss
2 your conversations with Mr. FontanA. You can discuss
3 the settlement was. But in terms of discussions between
4 yourself and your attorney or your attorney and other
5 individuals, I'm going to instruct you not to go into
6 those areas.
7 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
8 A. As a result of our effort, then, on behalf of
9 the request of Mr. Fontana representing this person from
10 Mora, whom I never met, incidentally, whom I never
11 interviewed, nor did I meet the family, a settlement
12 reached and agreed upon, and Mr. Fontana had
13 me his willingness to provide me with information
14 regarding how to work with priests who may have
15 difficulties and to provide me with information in
16 regarding pedophilia and what was taking place.
17 simply mentioned to him that I was certainly not as
18 informed at all about this issue as he was, and he
19 quite open to that fact.
20 So after the settlement, I did write him a letter --
21 no, he sent me a letter, in fact, with information, just
22 some points about establishing a policy for the
23 Archidocese, things of this nature, that he felt would be
24 of assistance to try to have a handle on any issues
25 concerning pedophiliA. I responded with a letter of
1 appreciation for his interest and his assistance. And
2 that was the gist of our relationship.
3 Q. What was the amount of the settlement?
4 A. I believe -- and I have not seen that figure for
5 about six, seven years. But I believe it was $200,000 to
6 $250,000. I think that was the cap. Yes, it was between
7 $200,000 and $250,000.
8 Q. Now, do you recall approximately when Mr.
9 Fontana first contacted you about this allegation?
10 A. The first contact, I believe, was -- I would say
11 probably 1989. I don't recall what part of the year. But
12 I choose that year because it was after Clive Lynn had
13 left Raton and had returned to his family in Ireland. So
14 it would have to put it at that time, about '88, '89. I
15 think it was probably 1989.
16 Q. And the allegations that Mr. Fontana made which
17 arose in Mora, would those things have chronologically
18 preceded Father Lynn's tenure in Raton?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, you've testified yesterday that there was
21 some indication from people in Raton that he had
22 abused. You now had information that he had abused
23 Raton, in MorA. At that point, then, in 1989, did you
24 contact the people of Raton, the people of Mora or the
25 people at St. Therese to tell them what you had learned
1 about Father Lynn and to ask if any of them had been
2 similarly treated?
3 A. No, sir, I did not.
4 Q. Did you make any offers to the woman who had
5 complained to you about the molestation of her own son
6 once you settled the case with Mr. Fontana?
7 A. No, sir, we did not.
8 Q. Why?
9 A. I suppose I was responding to the requests of
10 individuals, and it did not occur to me to take the
11 initiative and to contact whoever it was in Raton that
12 made the allegations to speak with them about any
14 Q. Did you feel it was not incumbent upon you to
15 reveal to the people in Raton that now a financial
16 settlement had been made with regard to a priest whom
17 alleged had sexually molested them?
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. Did you kind of hope that the whole situation
20 would blow over, and you wouldn't hear from the
22 A. Well, I think that you are hoping that each case
23 can be settled, and you hope that there's peace in
24 parishes and peace in different families that may have
25 been upset. And I just did not take the initiative to
1 reopen any of these issues.
2 Q. In your mind, did you think back to the Raton
3 allegations and at least offer prayers for those people?
4 A. Oh, I've offered prayers for our people
5 continually. I suppose one of the biggest things in my
6 mind was Father Lynn and the fact that he was out of
7 country, and we couldn't even confront him.
8 Incidentally, when he had left the country, we had
9 suspended him from all of his faculties.
10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, this
11 might be a good time to take a break. We've been at it
12 for over an hour.
13 MR. PASTERNACK: Okay.
14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Thank you.
15 MR. GOFFE: The time, as indicated on the
16 screen, is 10:45 AM. We will go off the record.
17 [A recess was taken.]
18 MR. GOFFE: The time is 11:07. We are back
19 on the record.
20 Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) Did there come a time,
21 Archbishop, when you directed Arthur Perrault to go to
23 A. Yes, sir. I asked Father Arthur Perrault to go
24 to Southdown in the summer of 1992.
25 Q. Why?
1 A. It was a result of a meeting with a gentleman
2 named and his wife; their counselor, I believe
3 her name was Dr. Schreiner; their attorney; and a
4 confrontation -- this was held at the office of Dr.
5 Schreiner with Father Art Perrault, his attorney and his
6 therapist. And the confrontation was due to the fact that
7 Mr. had revealed to his therapist in the
8 course of therapy that he, in fact, had been abused by
9 Father Art Perrault in the early 1970s. And all of this
10 came to light in his therapy with her, and they had
11 notified us that the attorney of Mr. had notified
12 the Archidocese of this fact.
13 And we had met with them, and through a series of
14 meetings with the family and with their therapist, we
15 had -- they had asked for a settlement with certain
16 demands, and a part of it was they wanted Father
17 Perrault to enter into a program of therapeutic care that
18 they felt would be in accord with what they felt was
19 adequate for sexual care.
20 Whether they had required it or not, I felt that
21 Father Perrault should go into a program at that time to
22 have another re-evaluation totally by a center apart
23 his therapist who had been seeing him for a number of
24 years and to give us a chance to see what that
25 would result in. So I did send him to Southdown in the
1 summer of 1992.
2 Q. Would it be accurate to say, then, that you made
3 the determination, not in consultation with
4 to send him to Southdown?
5 A. VanDenHeuvel was informed that this was my
6 intention. It was not -- I did not consult him seeking
7 his approval. But I did inform the therapist that I was
8 asking his patient to enter into an evaluation setting at
9 Southdown that summer.
10 Q. Had your inexperience or perhaps even naivete
11 about psychological issues enhanced by that point that
12 felt you were going to make the therapeutic directions
13 rather than listen to VanDenHeuvel?
14 A. Dr. VanDenHeuvel had, in fact, been guiding
15 Father Arthur Perrault for about 12 years by that time.
16 And I thought that it was good for a whole team to
17 evaluation of a man such as Father Arthur Perrault who
18 now been confronted with an allegation. I was present
19 that. And it was my first time that I had seen such a
20 confrontation with therapists present, attorneys present,
21 and the people, family, present. And I felt that I wanted
22 this type of a follow-up to take place for Arthur
24 Q. What was Father Perrault's reaction at the
1 A. He did not say much because his own attorney was
2 was present with him, and she was instructing him not to
3 reply. And in fact, they did not want too much of a
4 reply, if I recall correctly. The confrontation was
5 actually an opportunity, if my memory serves me right,
6 this gentleman, , to be able to express himself
7 thoroughly and without interruption to all of us and in
8 the presence of the accused about what he felt had
9 happened to him back around 1971. And so he had that
10 opportunity for about an hour and a half to do that
11 without interruption.
12 Q. Did he vividly describe repeated acts of sexual
14 A. He -- I wouldn't say repeatedly or vividly.
15 There were vivid descriptions, certainly vivid to me. I
16 don't know how it affected others, but it certainly
17 affected me strongly, yes.
18 Q. Did he give numerous examples of abuse?
19 A. He mentioned that it occurred on several
20 occasions. I don't recall the number or whatever. But
21 the vivid description was certainly very shocking.
22 Q. If these events were presented to you in 1992 as
23 having occurred in 1971, why did you care to send him
24 Southdown? Wasn't it a resolved issue, since it had
25 happened 20 years ago?
1 A. It was not a resolved issue in my mind, because
2 he's still a priest of the Archidocese. But also because
3 the therapist there -- I respected her comments. She
4 seemed to be well aware of issues of sexuality and
5 molestation of children, and she would explain things
6 well. I was present not only for that one occasion, but
7 for two additional meetings with her and the others
8 she had a chance to explain various things about
9 pedophilia, but most especially about someone like
10 . And I came to respect her. And she felt that for
11 Father Art Perrault to really have a general --
12 comprehensive, rather, understanding of his actions and
13 his own inclinations, that he needed to be in a setting
14 where people had specialized in that type of work and
15 with simply a general psychiatrist who had been
17 And I thought that her advice was well given, and I
18 listened to that. And so I felt I would immediately
19 recommend to her -- I spoke with her about Southdown,
20 I got information, some written documents from
21 advertising their type of program, and she was pleased
22 with that and felt that that would be a good place for
23 to go.
24 Q. Hadn't you already sent Sabine Griego to
1 A. I had sent Sabine Griego to Southdown. That's
2 how I came to know about it.
3 Q. And in this conversation with Dr. Schreiner, or
4 these conversations, did she make it clear to you that
5 somebody who had molested a child 20 years ago might
6 be a risk to be a child molester thereafter?
7 A. I don't recall a specific statement such as you
8 have made, Mr. Pasternack, but the instruction that she
9 was offering to all of us who were there present was
10 enlightening, and I believe it was at that time that I
11 began to understand that pedophilia was not -- I
12 call it -- maybe the word is "addictive." I don't know
13 all what "addictive" totally means in psychiatric
15 But it is a type of illness where a person has to
16 monitor it always, much like alcoholism; that it's not
17 simply an illness that, once treated, can hopefully be
18 overcome immediately; that it's going to have to be
19 treated and re-treated continually in their life.
20 I was interested in her comments because I realized
21 that in the country there were various opinions about
22 pedophilia, whether or not it is able to be corrected
23 totally or whether it's never able to be totally
24 corrected. And her comments were that it's a type of
25 illness that is addictive and a person has to monitor it
1 with continual psychotherapy and especially a -- in a
2 setting dealing with psychiatrists who are skilled in
3 sexual abuse, especially of minors.
4 Q. Can you direct me to any professional literature
5 or lay literature that has ever said that pedophilia is
7 A. I would say that literature prior to the 19 --
8 1985 probably dealt with pedophilia as one of the types
9 sexual illnesses that could be treated and treated
10 effectively with proper psychotherapy, not calling it
11 addictive or permanent.
12 Q. And were you reading that literature back in
14 A. Not reading that particular literature, sir, but
15 these were comments that were being made. In fact,
16 Schreiner referred to that type of comments or opinions
17 psychotherapists as being distinct from the opinion of
18 psychotherapists today.
19 Q. Have you, yourself, sir, ever read an article
20 anywhere that ever said that pedophilia was curable?
21 A. I did not read an article, but I did hear an
22 address on one occasion given to the National
23 of Catholic Bishops where we had a panel of
24 addressing us, and one of them addressed the issue
25 that in his opinion, that this was not yet a settled
1 issue; that in fact, pedophilia is not correctable; that
2 he felt that the final word has not yet been spoken in
3 that regard.
4 Q. When was that conference?
5 A. That conference -- I think that particular one
6 was around 1990.
7 Q. And was that the first time you recall ever
8 hearing anyone say that pedophilia might be curable?
9 A. No. I had assumed, in fact, that pedophilia was
10 like any other illness; it was curable. What I
11 discovered, and especially now in the 1990s, was that
12 and more the psychotherapy field is holding that it may
13 not be curable.
14 Q. From what sources had you, prior to 1990,
15 derived the assumption that pedophilia might be
16 A. Simply by the fact that in dealing with the
17 psychologists and psychiatrists who had dealt with our
18 priests, they were recommending for them to be able to
19 placed in another setting, to be -- to act as priestly
20 ministers of people. I had to assume, sir, that they were
21 saying to me that this man has, in fact, reached a stage
22 of a level of cure, that he is functional without being a
23 danger to others.
24 Q. Well, with regard to Perrault, I have in front
25 of you, if you'd like to look at it, his personnel file
1 and then a series of letters that were delivered to me by
2 counsel for the Archidocese on January 11, 1994, a
3 of days after we settled most of the Perrault cases, from
4 VanDenHeuvel, and I don't see in either of those any
5 indication, once you became Archbishop, that Perrault
6 fit to work with children. Are you aware of any such
7 indication? Let me take that little note off there.
8 That's not part of the -- thanks.
9 MR. KONRAD: Can we have those marked and
10 made an exhibit to the deposition? Could we have Dr.
11 VanDenHeuvel's letters marked as an exhibit and made
12 exhibit to the deposition?
13 MR. PASTERNACK: Yes.
14 [A discussion was held off the record.]
15 MR. GOFFE: The time is 11:22. We will go
16 off the record. This is the end of tape 6.
17 [A recess was taken.]
18 MR. GOFFE: The time is 11:27. We are back
19 on the record. This is the beginning of tape number 7 in
20 the deposition of Archbishop Sanchez.
21 Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) Archbishop, let me rephrase
22 this question a little bit. I believe you indicated the
23 therapists in some fashion had told you that Perrault
24 acceptable to return to parish work?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Are you aware of any documents that exist
2 anywhere where any therapist ever expressed that
3 to you?
4 A. These documents that I have in front of me do
5 indicate that having examined him, that they would find
6 reason why he should not. And I would like to read from
7 couple of them, if I may.
8 Q. Let's establish what the first one is. You're
9 referring to a letter of April 26, 1966?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. From Dr. Salazar to James Peter Davis?
12 A. Right.
13 Q. Let me ask you first, did you ever, as
14 Archbishop, ever review Arthur Perrault's personnel
15 A. No, I did not, sir.
16 Q. So the letter that you have in front of you here
17 is not something that you ever looked at or relied on?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Then let us forget that, because the question
20 was what information had been given to you. Is there
21 other information?
22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'll object to limiting
23 the Archbishop's perusal of the April 26, 1966, letter
24 from the Salazar Clinic, in that before the break, while
25 we were examining the documents -- and we examined
1 document -- you suggested that the Archbishop review
2 portions of the personnel file of Mr. Perrault in which
3 this letter is placed. And you also asked him if he was
4 aware -- the question, as I recall it, after the break,
5 was, "Are you aware of any documents that indicate that
6 Father Perrault was fit for parish work?"
7 To the extent, Archbishop, that the referral to
8 the April 26, 1966, letter helps you answer that, I would
9 ask you to give a full and complete answer with
10 to that letter.
11 MR. PASTERNACK: Mr. Winterbottom, if you
12 want to ask questions of your client, you can. You will
13 not rephrase my questions or you will be pretty assured
14 that this deposition will resume in a way that this
15 coaching ceases.
16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I would like you to --
17 Q. Now, Archbishop I will ask you again. Do you
18 have any documents that you had ever reviewed when
19 were Archbishop where any mental health practitioner
20 told you that Perrault was fit to do parish work?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. What is that?
23 A. A document from Dr. Joseph VanDenHeuvel, which
24 was addressed to me in 1983.
25 Q. All right, let's take a look at that. What
1 exactly is the date of that?
2 A. It's January 4th, 1983.
3 MR. PASTERNACK: Let's label the whole
4 package in the order that it was given to me by fax as
5 Exhibit 11.
6 [Exhibit 11 was marked for identification.]
7 Q. And what language in there did you rely on to
8 conclude that he was fit to do parish work?
9 MR. TINKLER: For the record, why don't you
10 number the pages.
11 MR. PASTERNACK: They're numbered at the
12 top on the fax, Bennett.
13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: For the record, Exhibit
14 11 starts with Page 3.
15 A. The statement by the psychologist reads as
16 follows: "Furthermore, indications are that his growth
17 will be further promoted by increased opportunities to
18 interact with adults on a regular ongoing one-to-one
19 basis. Thus I would recommend that full-time parish
20 would be considered at this time."
21 Q. Now, he had been doing full-time parish work up
22 to that time as well, hadn't he?
23 A. No, sir, not at all.
24 Q. Just part-time parish work?
25 A. In fact, he was out of part-time parish work for
1 at least four years by this time.
2 Q. And are you saying that you took Dr.
3 VanDenHeuvel's statement that he should be
4 work with adults as being permission to do unsupervised
5 work, as well, with children in a parochial setting?
6 A. No, sir. I took his recommendation that we, as
7 an Archidocese, certainly as a personnel board, would
8 able to listen to the psychologist, his recommendation of
9 Father Perrault, if we ever chose, would, in fact, be
10 qualified to serve in a parish.
11 Q. In fact, by 1983, roughly the same time as that
12 letter, had not you received complaints from an
13 Anunciation nun by the name of Sister Pauline who
14 directly to you that Perrault was sexually molesting
15 children in Anunciation?
16 A. No, sir, I have not -- I have no recollection of
17 any Sister Pauline speaking to me.
18 Q. And I want to make it clear. Is that something
19 you absolutely deny or simply don't recall?
20 A. Sir, I cannot recall it.
21 Q. Had Father Kemper ever complained to you that
22 Perrault was sexually molesting children at
23 A. No, sir.
24 [The witness conferred with his attorney.]
25 Q. In approximately November of 1980, did a lady
1 named meet with you and tell you that Perrault
2 had molested her son ?
3 A. No, sir, I have no recollection of meeting with
4 a .
5 Q. So you don't deny it; you just don't remember?
6 A. I have no recollection of it.
7 Q. Did Ms. subsequently bring to your
8 attention after December of 1981, that had in fact
9 killed himself because he had been molested by
10 A. No, sir.
11 Q. Do you know Sister Mary Mortz?
12 A. Yes, sir, yes, I do.
13 Q. Did Sister Mary Mortz ever speak with you about
14 Perrault molesting parish children?
15 A. Sister Mary Mortz spoke with me once about the
16 anger displayed by Father Perrault toward her in their
17 sharing of mutual area for their ministries at the
18 Catholic Center.
19 Q. The question was, did Sister Mortz ever speak to
20 you about Arthur Perrault molesting children?
21 A. No, sir.
22 Q. Do you deny that she did, or you just don't
24 A. I have no recollection of her mentioning
25 anything about sexual molestation.
1 Q. Isn't it correct, sir, that shortly after Mary
2 Mortz made such a representation to you, she was
3 transferred from the Archidocese of Santa Fe?
4 A. No, sir, she was not transferred by us at all.
5 She had worked with us for several years, specifically in
6 the area of the handicapped, was a very dedicated
7 But her own religious community asked her to serve
8 I don't recall where. I believe it was in California
9 somewhere, because they needed her. She was a very
10 qualified person.
11 Q. Did Sister Mary Mortz ever tell you that once
12 she had disclosed abuse by Arthur Perrault, her car
13 to be shot at?
14 A. I did not hear that she had been shot at by
16 Q. Do you know a woman by the name of Della Hall?
17 A. Della Hall was one of the directors of our
18 Catholic Center. In fact, I believe she took over from
19 Father Perrault after he had terminated his work at the
20 pastoral center.
21 Q. That's also known as El Centro Pastoral?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Do you recall Della Hall ever telling you that
24 she had caught Perrault molesting little boys at El
1 A. No, sir.
2 Q. And is that something, again, you simply don't
3 recall, or do you deny?
4 A. I don't think it would have occurred, because I
5 had occasion to meet with Della Hall and her husband
6 times, many, many times. And they would have -- if
7 had ever mentioned one thing to me, I'm certain that
8 would have repeated, and there was never any repetition
9 anything. I just don't have any recollection of them ever
10 having mentioned it to me.
11 Q. It's important for us to differentiate, though.
12 Do you deny it, or do you simply not recall it?
13 A. I have no recollection of them ever speaking to
14 me about it.
15 Q. Did Father Biczak ever report to you that Arthur
16 Perrault had been caught molesting children?
17 A. No, sir.
18 Q. Deny or don't recall?
19 A. I don't recall any occasion in which he would
20 have spoken to me about that issue.
21 Q. Did Father Francis Eggert ever report to you
22 that Perrault had been caught molesting children?
23 A. No, sir.
24 Q. Do you deny it or not recall?
25 A. I have no recollection of him ever speaking to
1 me. You cannot deny something if you don't recall.
2 Q. Did Father Walter Cassidy ever discuss with you
3 complaints that he had caught Perrault molesting
4 A. No, sir.
5 Q. Did Noby Hurley, while president of the St. Pius
6 school board, complain to you that Perrault had been
7 caught molesting children?
8 A. No, sir.
9 Q. Why was -- well, was it your direction that kept
10 Perrault in therapy with VanDenHeuvel for the 12 years
11 that you mentioned?
12 A. First of all, I felt that he should be in
13 therapy, as I mentioned, in 1981. I certainly did not
14 have intention that he would continue for 12 years,
15 principally because of the expense involved. But he,
16 himself, volunteered to pay for his own therapy,
17 continuing therapy. As long as he was willing to do
18 I felt he should continue that way. And the doctor felt
19 that it was good maintenance for him.
20 Q. Why?
21 A. Simply because he was doing well with the
22 doctor, and the doctor was indicating that he was
23 progressing as a human being and improving in his
24 to deal with people, and those were all positive
25 Q. Other than Exhibit 11 where VanDenHeuvel states
1 in 1983 that Perrault should be given increased
2 opportunities to interact with adults on a regular,
3 ongoing, one-to-one basis and was recommending that it
4 full-time parish work, did you receive any other written
5 documentation from any mental health practitioner that
6 said that Perrault was ready to work in a parochial
7 assignment at all?
8 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Is that other than Dr.
10 MR. PASTERNACK: Yes.
11 A. There was a verbal approval extended to me by
12 Dr. VanDenHeuvel, the same doctor, prior to the
13 of Father Perrault as pastor at St. Bernadette parish
14 three years after this letter was written. Even though he
15 had recommended him for parish work, we continued to
16 him to function as a director of the Catholic Center, El
17 Centro Pastoral, and to do the publications that he was
19 When the opening came at St. Bernadette's parish, his
20 name was one of the recommendations, and I asked the
21 therapist, Dr. VanDenHeuvel, if he felt that Father
22 be considered as a candidate for the parish, and his
23 response was affirmative.
24 Q. If Perrault, though, had needed, at your
25 direction, therapy, which Perrault paid for, with
1 VanDenHeuvel because of sexual-related issues, did you
2 feel the need, once it came to your attention in May of
3 '81, and you began specifying that therapy, to go back to
4 the people at Pius, back to the people at El Centro
5 Pastoral, back to the people at Anunciation, back to the
6 people at Assumption and say, "I've got a guy that I put
7 into therapy because of sexual problems. Did he ever
9 A. As I mentioned to you before, the one
10 allegation, which is now public, that I don't have a
11 recollection of it, that we referred to earlier this
12 morning by Mrs. Nowak, was the allegation that led to
13 continual therapy. I had no further reason to feel that
14 he should be given any special treatment or be kept out
15 parishes. He was in therapy. His doctor had assured me,
16 in this document of 1983, or '81, that he had no
17 of this nature for some six or seven years. So I had no
18 reason to act differently.
19 Q. Sir, after the meeting with in 19 --
20 what did you say, 1992?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did it occur to you then to go back and warn the
23 people from Pius, from our Lady of Guadalupe, from
24 Anunciation, from Assumption, from El Centro
25 from any parish assignment he had had since the time
1 had allegedly molested , "Hey, this guy is a sex
2 offender. If he hurt any of your children, please come to
3 us, and we'll help you." Did that occur to you?
4 A. No, sir. The event that they referred to had
5 occurred 20 years before. By the time this became
6 to me and brought to my attention in 1992, we did have
7 place, as I have mentioned before, public notice to
8 everyone that if there had ever been any type of sexual
9 molestation by any priest in the Archidocese, they could
10 kindly called the 800 number and speak directly with
11 and we would have interviews with them and give
12 attention to them. So the invitation was open.
13 The papers were carrying a lot of that information at
14 that time, likewise, regarding the special commission.
15 They received apparently many, many letters. They
16 independent of myself, and people were free to make
17 to them any type of allegation that they had on their
19 Q. Sir, isn't it true that the settlement with
20 predated by several months lawsuits against Arthur
21 Perrault based on similar conduct?
22 A. The allegation made by -- the settlement with
23 did conclude in the spring of 1992. Further
24 allegations against Father Arthur Perrault did not
25 public until, I believe, September or October of that
2 However, the announcement, as far as people are
3 concerned hearing announcement about any priest, to
4 forward regarding any priest, that was already in place
5 for almost a year.
6 Q. In between the spring of 92, when you settled
7 with , and October of '92 when other Perrault
8 victims started coming forward by filing lawsuits, did
9 or anyone in the Archidocese undertake any efforts to go
10 back to the people at the parishes and organizations
11 Perrault had worked and warn them of what Perrault
12 have done and specifically offer them assistance
13 of what Perrault might have done?
14 MS. KENNEDY: Objection, asked and answered
16 Q. Go ahead and answer.
17 A. We did not do anything specific as you have
18 indicated. We did not go back to those centers. He had
19 taught at St. Pius in the '60s. Anyone who had attended
20 school in the '60s, Lord knows, they have graduated.
21 They're living all over the country.
22 We used the 800 number to try to reach the greatest
23 number of people possible in this whole area who may
24 had any knowledge of any priest that they wanted to
1 Q. In fact, sir, after you reached the settlement
2 with in the spring of 1992, you continued to
3 allow Arthur Perrault to serve as pastor at St.
4 Bernadette's for a period of time, didn't you?
5 A. I did, until -- he had gone, of course, to
6 Southdown for his -- what do you call it? Well, all of
7 the testing that they do and evaluation. And he had
8 indicated to me also his desire to enter into a sabbatical
9 which was to begin October 1st of that year, and I had
10 reason to remove him from the parish, knowing that he
11 under therapy, that he had gone to Southdown, would
12 a sabbatical and would, in fact, continue to go to
13 Southdown upon his return from the sabbatical.
14 Q. What is the canonical statute of limitations on
15 being a child molester? Are you saying that if 20 years
16 or five years or one year goes by without an allegation,
17 that the hands still have the power to administer the
19 A. Sir, ordination, the character of priests never
20 ceases. That does not mean that they have permission
21 function. But he had been the pastor of this parish and
22 had functioned well. There had been no allegations
23 against him. He was continuing to see his therapist
24 regularly. He went through the full evaluation at
25 Southdown, with specialists, returned, and I saw no
1 to remove him immediately from anything of this nature.
2 His request to have a sabbatical, I thought, was a
3 good one at that time and would remove him, of course,
4 from any type of parish work. And upon his return from
5 the sabbatical, he would then go to Southdown for their
7 Q. Isn't it true, sir, that you were allowing the
8 hands of a known child molester to administer the Holy
9 Sacraments of the Church; yes or no?
10 A. Yes, sir. There is also in our Church something
11 that I have referred to before in previous depositions,
12 and that is a concept of sacramental forgiveness, and it
13 is a sacramental forgiveness that we regard as essential
14 for a person to continue to administer the sacraments.
15 The concept of a person having been a child molester
16 with an allegation dating back 20 years would not
17 him from celebrating Holy Mass 20 years later.
18 I had to assume that this event that we had
19 concluded, as shocking as it was, had been shared with
20 him, with his therapist, with his confessor, with his
21 and in fact, that he had had worked effectively at St.
22 Bernadette for some six years with high regard from the
23 people just gave me the information that I felt that he
24 could continue for the next two months to complete his
25 stay at St. Bernadette before taking that sabbatical.
1 Q. If you had come to learn that a priest had
2 murdered someone, would you continue to allow him to
3 administer the Holy Sacraments?
4 A. The concept -- I would have to deal with the
5 individual. I cannot just say yes or no to a question
6 like that.
7 Q. Really?
8 A. Yes. In other words, what were the
9 circumstances? Had he served a term sometime in his
10 for this? Where is he at in it?
11 Q. So it is possible that a priest could murder
12 someone and go on to serve the Holy Sacraments?
13 MR. KONRAD: Objection, calls for
15 Q. Is that possible?
16 A. It's possible for a person who has a life that
17 has been marked with sin to have a conversion and
18 ultimately to enter a seminary and to become ordained
19 priest and to live an outstanding life and an honest life
20 and an integral life as a priest. The fact that he would
21 have sinned at any time in his life before does not
22 destroy that integrity.
23 Q. How about after he's ordained, he then goes to
24 to murder someone without justification. Could he be
25 allowed thereafter, under any circumstances, to
1 the Holy Sacraments?
2 A. Again, it depends on himself. He can celebrate
3 the Holy Mass privately. Investigation would have to be
4 made about what took place, where this happened, who
5 about it, has there been any notification.
6 Q. Why would who knew about it be important? God
7 knows about it, doesn't he?
8 A. Yes, but apparently you have one understanding
9 of forgiveness from God, and we have another
14 A. Sir, I cannot enter into the mind and the heart
15 of God. I have to believe that a person's action, the
16 they have conducted themselves for many years is
17 to me that the person is contrite and that they have, in
18 fact, requested forgiveness for whatever wrong they
19 done in their life.
20 Q. Do you know what the parishioners at St.
21 Bernadette's were told about Perrault's departure when
22 finally departed?
23 A. No, sir.
24 Q. Did you undertake any action to tell the people
25 at St. Bernadette's that he was departing because he
1 going off for treatment as a sex offender?
2 A. No, sir. You mean his departure from the parish
3 in October?
4 Q. Yes.
5 A. Sir, he had held -- he had announced to the
6 people that he was, in fact, taking a sabbatical from the
7 parish, and they'd held even a farewell reception in his
9 Q. All right.
10 A. And so that announcement had taken place.
11 Q. How about when he left to go to Southdown; do
12 you know if he announced from the parish that he was
13 leaving to go there because he was a sex offender?
14 A. No, sir, he did not make any announcement of
15 that nature, not to the best of my knowledge.
16 Q. And do you feel that he should have or should
17 not have?
18 A. I don't believe that he should have made that
19 announcement to the people unless he felt that he
20 want to personally. This event had occurred 20 years
21 prior. He could have told them that he was going off to
22 Southdown for an evaluation.
23 Q. In your mind, did you consider, after speaking
24 with Mr. and his therapist, that there might be
25 other Arthur Perrault victims out there?
1 A. I don't recall us discussing additional victims,
2 although I know that Mrs. Schreiner alluded to the fact
3 that confirmed pedophiles oftentimes are engaged with
4 than one person. And that was part of the instruction
5 that she was giving to all of us.
6 Q. Do you recall in your mind reflecting upon
7 whether there might be other Arthur Perrault victims out
9 A. I'm sure it was part of my thinking.
10 Q. And was part of your thinking at any time taking
11 active steps to find those victims and offer them the
12 that you, as Archbishop, could offer?
13 A. We did not take any specific steps, other than
14 to have, again, the public announcement to all the
15 in our Catholic newspaper and the secular newspapers,
16 the radio and TV, that an 800 number was available for
17 anyone who may have felt offended at any time.
18 Q. But not specifically by Perrault?
19 A. But not specifically by Perrault.
20 Q. And, in fact, at the time of his sabbatical from
21 St. Bernadette's, wasn't St. Bernadette's the largest
22 parish in terms of population and revenues in the
23 Archidocese of Santa Fe?
24 A. It was the largest in -- well, I don't know if I
25 could call it the largest in numbers. We had about
1 others that were very close to that. But it was one of
2 the largest in the Archidocese, yes.
3 Q. And by that time, 1992, Father Perrault had
4 become a rather powerful priest, hadn't he, in the
5 hierarchy of the Church?
6 A. No. He was a pastor, and that was all that he
8 Q. Well, he was a pastor. He was a military
9 chaplain in line for promotion to general. He still had
10 editorial responsibility at People of God. He was still
11 the chief liturgist for the Archidocese, wasn't he?
12 A. No, he was not.
13 Q. Who was the chief liturgist by that point?
14 A. We had a commission, and we had a full-time
15 person. The full-time person was Mary Francis Resa,
16 she headed a full-time liturgical commission under the
17 direction of Father -- he's a pastor of Holy Rosary
18 parish, but his name escapes me at this time.
19 Q. But in any event, he was pastor of one of the
20 largest parishes, if not the largest; he was a military
21 chaplain of high rank in the Archidocese, right?
22 A. Well, he was --
23 Q. I understand the chaplain --
24 A. His position with the military really does not
25 affect the Archidocese. He had been a member
1 of the chaplain for the Air National Guard for many
2 beginning with my predecessor, as the Archbishop. He
3 had permission from him to serve as chaplain and then
4 later transferred from the Air Guard to the Air Reserve.
5 And they liked his work, apparently, whatever work he
6 doing with them, and they promoted him consistently.
7 did not affect his position with us.
8 His position as editor of the newspaper was more of a
9 burden than it was of a title. I realize that for some
10 people the editor of a newspaper appears to be a very
11 powerful position or a strong financial one. He had no
12 salary for it and was, in fact, simply seeing that the
13 paper was properly put together by a secretary.
14 Q. Did you ever attend or observe a Mass put on by
15 Arthur Perrault at St. Bernadette's?
16 A. I celebrated Mass there myself, but I have not
17 attended a Mass in which he was a celebrant.
18 Q. Were you in St. Bernadette's after the
19 remodeling of it?
20 A. Oh, yes.
21 Q. And would you agree it's a very beautiful and
22 impressive facility?
23 A. Yes, it's a beautiful and impressive facility.
24 He had worked together with his pastoral council
25 what restoration of the church should take place.
12 A. Any victim -- any additional victims to which
13 you may refer were adults at this time and certainly
14 free as adults to be able to testify or to come forward
15 and make known to us that they had been victimized.
16 Q. When you were talking about -- I believe you
17 were talking about how you couldn't know what was in
18 mind of God in terms of whether Perrault had been
19 in the mind of God for what he had done 20 years
20 In the way that the Church is structured, in order to
21 resume any parochial work or be allowed to continue in
22 parochial work, did he have to at least get your
23 forgiveness, as well?
24 A. The forgiveness of -- it's implicit in any
25 assignment. If a person is given an assignment in a
1 parish, it shows the support of the bishop, whoever he
2 be, for that individual, that we would not place him in
3 that assignment if we did not feel that that individual
4 has proven himself to be worthy of that assignment.
5 Q. So you would not have allowed him to remain at
6 St. Bernadette's and serve from spring of '92 until
7 October of '92 unless you, in your own mind, had
8 him for what he may have done in the past?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And given what Dr. Schreiner had told you about
11 the tendency of pedophilia to be addictive or
12 given the complaints from Mr. , given the seminar
13 that you attended where it was discussed that
14 may not be curable, may be, given the complaint in
15 1970s that you acknowledge happened, do you feel
16 looking at it, that it was reasonable for you to forgive
17 him and allow him to continue in parish service?
18 A. Forgiveness, first of all, is a spiritual
19 quality. Putting in service or continuing in service is
20 something else. A person can be forgiven without being
21 given an opportunity to serve. So I'd like to make that
23 In my own faith, Our Lord Jesus asks us to forgive
24 one another as He has forgiven us. We pray that in the
25 Lord's Prayer as Christian people repeatedly, because
1 recognize that as we ask God to forgive us, so must we
2 willing to forgive others. So forgiveness is a spiritual
3 act that I have always felt is important to extend to
4 people who have shown their own contrition.
5 I think your question is more precisely regarding
6 whether he should have ever been independently
7 continue at St. Bernadette after that point or whether he
8 was going to continuing to be a source of possible
9 to others.
10 And I am saying that he was under the guidance of a
11 therapist; and therefore, with the assurance of the
12 therapist and the fact that he had gone to Southdown
13 gone through the evaluation which indicated that they
14 that there was no acting out at this time and the fact
15 they'd indicated that there was no urgency for him to
16 enter into the full program, although they would
17 at a future date that that would occur, with that
18 assurance, I allowed him to remain there for the
19 additional month and a half.
20 Q. Are you saying that Southdown informed you
21 verbally it was their opinion that he should enter their
22 full sex offender program?
23 A. No, sir, just the opposite. They informed me
24 that they did not find it necessary for him to enter it at
25 this time. They would recommend that at some future
1 that this could be helpful. Their sex offender program is
2 not only for those who have offended at this point, but
3 it's also type of program that enriches and strengthens a
5 Q. If they were telling you that he needs to enter
6 the full sex offender program in the future, didn't that
7 make you believe that he might be a danger now?
8 A. No, sir, they were saying that there was no
9 indication of his need for that now, and that was an
10 assurance to me. Their statement was a
11 that this could be helpful for him in the future.
12 Q. So you did not, in your mind, view Arthur
13 Perrault as a danger despite what you knew by the
14 of '92; is that right?
15 A. I did not consider him a potential danger to
16 anyone in the Spring of '92 because of his presence
17 his therapist, the continuing therapy that he was
18 receiving, evaluation that he received, the fact that
19 there had been no allegations for several years and
20 the fact that the people of St. Bernadette, meeting with
21 them repeatedly, had nothing but affirmative things to
22 about him. With that in mind, I allowed him to remain
23 there for the additional six weeks.
24 Q. How do you know there were no other complaints?
25 A. Because I had not received them.
1 Q. But the system breaks down, doesn't it, if
2 Starkey had received complaints and not passed them
3 to you?
4 A. Father Starkey was no longer part of the
5 organization receiving any type of complaints. Father
6 Wolf was in charge at that time and, in addition to that,
7 was assisted with investigators. And we had, again, as I
8 mentioned that 800 number and other avenues for people
9 make known to us any possible complaints.
10 Q. I'm not just talking about complaints that might
11 have come in after Wolf came in. If Starkey didn't pass
12 complaints along to you when Starkey was your
13 A. Right.
14 Q. -- then it would be incorrect to say there had
15 been no complaints?
16 A. Well, I would not have been -- I could not be
17 accountable for things that I was unaware of.
16 Q. And the question that I don't believe we ever
17 quite got answered was, did VanDenHeuvel tell you
18 the meeting with that Perrault was fit to
19 continue to work in a parish?
20 A. No, he did not say that, nor did he deny it.
21 Q. And would you agree, sir, that even if God
22 forgives, even if a psychologist says the person is
23 not to reoffend, the person still may pose a danger?
24 A. The -- yes. I think, as I have come to
25 understand the concept of pedophilia, that is possible,
1 more possible than for you or for myself to be sinful in
2 some other way, because of the -- what they call an
3 addictive illness.
4 But I have to say that if that person is properly
5 supervised, such as an alcoholic, that that person can
6 function effectively and without failure. The
7 possibility, perhaps, is always there, but with proper
8 maintenance and support, that person can function
9 effectively, and it appears that he did function
10 effectively at St. Bernadette's.
11 Q. Why was Perrault allowed to go on so many years
12 doing this, Archbishop?
13 A. Doing what, sir?
14 Q. Sexually molesting children.
15 A. Would you mention to me the occasions that
16 you're referring to?
17 Q. All right. Why was he allowed to molest David
18 Bibo, Greg Monen, the Nowak brothers, Elaine
19 Montoya, Dana Kainz, Michael Harris, Conrad Jiron,
20 chancery offices? Why was he allowed to go on so
21 years molesting children?
22 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Objection, states facts
23 not in evidence.
24 A. You have --
25 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: And allegations not in
1 evidence, for that matter.
2 A. You have mentioned names that I have not heard.
3 The allegations that I had dealt with were those that we
4 have discussed here this morning, and it appeared to me
5 that with proper counseling of this man, proper therapy
6 and support, that he could work effectively. There was
7 indication to the contrary.
8 I believe that if the therapist at any time had
9 indicated to me that Father Perrault constituted a
10 continual danger to children, that I would not have
11 allowed him to function in that way. There was a great
12 period of his priesthood in which he did not function in
13 parish. He was outside of parish work. We felt that was
14 also proper support for him.
15 Q. Would you agree, sir, that your forgiveness or
16 even God's forgiveness does not necessarily remove the
17 danger that someone poses?
18 A. Excuse me once again?
19 Q. Your forgiveness or, for that matter, God's
20 forgiveness, does not necessarily eliminate the
21 possibility of future danger from that individual, does
23 A. No, it does not, sir. That does not guarantee
25 MR. PASTERNACK: I guess we better break
1 for lunch here, and what we propose to do is Mr. Bennett
2 will begin the examination after lunch.
3 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: So that -- I take it,
4 Mr. Pasternack, then, you're done with your
5 MR. PASTERNACK: No, I'm not.
6 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, the letter that
7 you wrote to me last week -- two weeks ago implied that
8 you were going to finish your portion of the deposition,
9 and then Mr. Bennett would continue or Mr. Tinkler
10 continue on behalf of their cases.
11 MR. PASTERNACK: Well, I guess we're just
12 going to conduct the deposition the way we want to.
13 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Why don't we perhaps, if
14 you're willing, we might discuss that over the lunch
15 I see by your shaking your head, you're not willing to
16 make those discussions. But let me suggest this, since
17 you are obviously in need of some sustenance. I will
18 consider that proposal over the next hour, and I'll let
19 you know when we get back on the record at 1:00, or
21 MR. PASTERNACK: Oh, no. No, no, no. I am
22 telling you the way this is going to work, since we are
23 now at the point of Sigler, is that Mr. Bennett is going
24 to take over the questioning. Judge Ashby's order
25 specifically provided that there would be no limitation
1 the scope of the deposition of the nature you proposed,
2 nor did he put any limitation on the manner in which it
3 would be conducted or the order it would be conducted.
4 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I'm not about to have a
5 revolving door of people questioning the Archbishop.
6 MR. PASTERNACK: And any efforts on your
7 part to interfere with this deposition in violation of
8 Judge Ashby's order will lead to a motion for contempt.
9 Now --
10 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, I hope you file it
12 MR. PASTERNACK: At the end of lunch -- be
13 quiet. At the end of lunch, Mr. Bennett will begin the
14 examination of the Archbishop, and I will pick up
16 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, while
17 you --
18 MR. PASTERNACK: We are now --
19 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: -- visit the salad bar
20 at the Pizza Hut, or wherever you happen to go,
21 the fact that I am not inclined to allow a revolving door
22 of people coming in and questioning the Archbishop on
23 matters of extreme sensitivity, and, I might add, not
24 recent history. And I will make the decision about what
25 we're going to do.
1 If Mr. Bennett is going to take your place to
2 question about Mr. Sigler, I suggest that perhaps our
3 position is going to be that you're not going to do any
4 questioning about Mr. Sigler. But I am not inclined to
5 let everybody here have a potshot, as they feel free, at
6 the Archbishop.
7 You finish your questioning, then Mr. Tinkler or
8 Mr. Bennett or whoever wants to question next can do
9 MR. PASTERNACK: Well, I'll tell you what,
10 Mr. Winterbottom, I'm going to call Judge Ashby now,
11 I'm going to tell him what you have done and the ways
12 which you have proposed to violate his order, and we'll
13 see whether he says you're in charge or he's in charge.
14 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Just make sure I'm a
15 party to that telephone conversation.
16 MR. PASTERNACK: I'm just going to call him
18 MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Well, then, inform him
19 that I'm not a party to the telephone conversation, so
20 knows that I'm being ex parte'd.
21 MR. GOFFE: The time is 12:11. We will go
22 off the record.
23 [The noon recess was taken.]