At age five, 1954, "the Bishop" (Chicago's Cardinal Stritch) stood over me and said, I had to "stop babbling" about what the priest did to me. It took me 40 years to talk about it again. Today, I babble.

Moving to City of Angels 8

In 2010, City of Angels will move to its next step: "Action" at City of Angels 8 We are on hiatus until January 15th.

Shop City of Angels

The City of Angels is Everywhere...
Also by Kay Ebeling: Read Sunset Boulevard, work in progress at City of Angels 2
This site is copyrighted by my statement. Kay Ebeling

Saturday, July 25, 2009

EXTRA: George Neville Rucker dating, Gus Krumm doing licensed rehab; plus: Ebeling to speak in Oregon, Aug 22- 23

The Catholic Church seems to think they can defrock these priests who are sex criminals, then wipe their hands of any responsibility. The accused priests' names never make it to sex registries, as the Church never admits guilt in pretrial settlements. Instead Lawyers for the Church refer to those cases as "dismissed" as in the 510 cases that settled in L.A. in 2007 for $660 million were all "dismissed." Ex-priests can leverage their skills as spiritual counselors and experts on Jesus. They end up in the community interacting, if not with children, with other vulnerable individuals.

We have it from a Very Reliable, documented source that George Neville Rucker, renowned pedophile priest for whom millions have been paid out in Los Angeles settlements, comes and goes freely and takes long expensive vacations from his residence, an apartment in an "Assisted Living" home for seniors, Nazareth House in Los Angeles. Rucker was identified as disabled and elderly by Church Attorneys in recent court sessions, but our source tells us he walks with a cane, and regularly goes out to lunch and to movies, often in the company of one of two elderly women he is dating. We will undoubtedly have more stories about Rucker in the near future.

ALSO: Gus Krumm has been working as an Alcohol and Drug Rehab Counselor registered in the state of California as recently as 2008. Krumm is a Franciscan friar whose acts resulted in at least two settlements from Santa Barbara and new accusations from Orange County in June of this year. See: where you can read Krumm, under license number RS3593 was "Registered With or Certified By CCBADC in 2005," and renewed his license September 30, 2007. That two-year license is now listed as expired.

Those two stories are enough to bring us back early from hiatus, but also, and you are seeing it here in print first: Kay Ebeling, producer of City of Angels Blog, is speaking next month at the Walk Across Oregon to End Child Abuse events in Portland, first at the Compassionate Listening session at Ascencion Church Saturday Aug. 22, (one of many parishes from which Gus Krumm was removed), then at the Interactive Fountain in Jameson Square Sunday the 23rd.

Come prepared to get wet. ... stay tuned.

Next new post July 27 will cover a few new L.A. cases. Below is a rerun.

The story below first ran at Examiner Dot Com in April. We removed it from Examiner when they fired us in May and are now reprinting it here to keep the information available to the public.

The illusive deposition of George Neville Rucker and other documents that may disappear in LA pedophile priest cases

Last week I tried to track down the rest of the documents from Clergy Cases 2007, so called the LA Superior Court media office, explained that the cases were moved from one courthouse to another, there were “30 bankers boxes” of documents released to the public. Will the remaining docs be scanned in with the rest of the JCCP docs, and will we ever again have easy access to civil case documents in Room 106 of Superior Court again? Asking the PIO got me no answer at all as well.

I'm learning, I have to be more aggressive, just come right out and ask everyone I see. So before the hearing April 20th in Department 308, I asked both Donald Steier defense attorney for the pedophile priests and Tony DeMarco plaintiff attorney for hundreds of the priests’ crime victims, “What is the deposition that the judge agreed to keep sealed? I think it’s with law enforcement, the deposition of George Neville Rucker.

The judge ordered it to be returned to the party who provided it. Who is that party?”

Deposition? Both attorneys seemed flummoxed. Which order?

Steier bombasts: “There are so many depositions in these cases, you think I remember one more than any other one?”

I'm trying to get Steier to stop running this tape by interrupting: “With Rucker, the only document the judge seems to agree with you needs to remain sealed. Who did the deposition?”

But Steier was going on and on, “I can’t remember everything I do, I can’t remember everything I write or say,” then from a foot higher than me he is in my face saying: “I don't remember a lot of things, I don't even remember who you are.”

Silence. Okay, there’s jocularity between opposing parties and then there’s arrogance. I went into the courtroom convinced the new mantra for american liars is “I don't remember, I don't recall,” we've heard it from Senate hearings to every time a Catholic Church hierarchy person goes under oath.

FYI, from Order of Judge Emilie Elias

3. Lodged Deposition transcript of Neville Rucker
Tentative Rulings: #3 is a lodged document and should be removed from the files and returned to the party who provided same to the Court.

(From: Tentative Ruling Re: Purportedly Sealed and Lodged Documents, February 24, 2009)

The 11 o'clock hearing began and rogue deposition of George Neville Rucker came up, who has it, where is it, what is in it, and how can the judge rule on whether it should be sealed if she doesn't even know what it is. Here is the gist of what was said in the hearing April 20th. (I do transcription for a living for TV production so I'm REAL fast and accurate. Most of the following lines would be found in the Hearing transcript if you could ever afford to buy one. )

JUDGE: I don't understand why a privilege log.

SEAN KNEAFSEY: Just categories of information such as nonparties including employees of the archbishop.

(Sean Kneafsey is one of several teams from several law firms that represent the L.A. Archdiocese corporation in these cases.)

(Judge Elias doesn't understand why it should be sealed.)

KNEAFSEY: For some reason it got put in the public court file, we believe it should remain sealed.

JUDGE: Okay the Miani one and then another one?

KNEAFSEY: The Miani one was filed under seal and there has been no argument over it. With the Rucker privilege log, that was erroneously filed in support of a motion to compel by a plaintiff’s lawyer. It has information such as names of individuals, it should have been lodged under seal with notice to all parties. I don't believe parties for Father Rucker realized until later that it hand’t been filed under seal when it should have been.

JUDGE: But you don’t represent the priests.

STEIER: He’s just articulating on my behalf, your honor, thank you. The only reason these documents were ever prepared was in response to motion to compel discovery. There would be no other reason for a privilege log to begin with.

JUDGE: What is the name of the priest again?

(ME: Oh no, the Judge does not even know the name of George Neville Rucker? It’s bad enough no one knows where the deposition transcript is)

JUDGE: I’ll consider putting them back under seal, if we can ever find them.

KNEAFSEY: We have a list of what box all the documents are in, and I can submit the location to you.

JUDGE: Oh this document is in one of the exhibit rooms. I don't know if there still is anything in the exhibit room. We don’t know, we're working on it now.

DEMARCO: There has to be good cause to keep them under seal. There still has to be good cause even if they're discovery. That said, these documents, the prior protective order pertained to specific information, if the opponent wants it sealed it should be only to that information.

JUDGE: Here’s the thing, I don't have them. What you've given me is a privilege log.

KNEAFSEY: I have copies of it in my officer, your honor. All the boxes were numbered and all the files were numbered so we can give directions to whoever has those documents as to where they're located.

JUDGE: The only person objecting is the one person whose name is in it. I need a copy of what was in the privilege logs. I don't have the privilege logs because they're over in those boxes. (OVERLAPPING DISCUSSION) Give me the box number and the location. I'm happy to look at them, but I don't believe I’ve ever even gotten them.

KNEAFSEY: Your honor has already ruled that discovery documents are sealed,

JUDGE: They don’t fall under two point five oh. Just get me a copy of them, as soon as I see them, I’ll rule. These seem to be the only documents left.

So, no one really knows where the Rucker deposition is, if I want to see it someone with a conscience reading this blog who knows where it is will get it to me. I could try calling the lawyers again, but which one?

THEN AFTER THE HEARING WAS OVER, the judge was talking casually to DeMarco and Kneafsey. The Court Reporter was not listening, but I was standing behind the barrier that keeps the public from coming through and strangling attorneys…. I was standing there, already packed up my Acer but grabbed some paper and started taking notes, obviously listening as Judge Emilie Elias talked over the problem with the remaining documents with the two attorneys.

Some of the paralegals are “not putting them in the right envelopes” or other mistakes, so the Clerks are rejecting them and turning them back.
JUDGE: The Clerks know this stuff. The Plaintiffs want some of these documents sealed too. They have personal information about employment, their names.
Apparently this is a logistics problem in civil court with a lot of cases and Judge Elias is on a committee of judges and others who are trying to resolve the problem.

JUDGE: we do an education program on sealing documents for everyone. Everyone who wants to do it right.

[OVERLAPPING CONVERSATION]: That creates a lot more work:

JUDGE: [INTERRUPTS] Following laws takes work.
She set up a breakfast meeting for their paralegals to meet with her in June.

The Wheels of Justice Grind Slo-o-o-o-owly…..
So frustrating to me coming to the Commonwealth courthouse to cover these little hearings. In the courtroom next door for a good two months now has been the Diet Doctor Jury Trial with cameras and a packed courtroom, lots and lots of testimony. I sat in on it for a few minutes last week and realized I was surrounded by angry plaintiffs, nudging each other, giving out collective harrumphs as the corporate side testified.

Why can’t people who were raped as children by priests and essentially got their innocence and understanding of sex destroyed - why do we so rarely get to experience justice?
Above Story is from April 2009 at Examiner Dot Com.

I removed this story from Examiner when they fired me as they would have then owned it, so I am rerunning it here is a reminder that this priest, George Neville Rucker, is living in L.A. free to come and go as he pleases from Nazareth House.

FYI: Nazareth Regional House
3333 Manning Avenue
Los Angeles CA 90064
Near the Santa Monica Freeway at the National Boulevard Exit, pretty ChiChi part of town, City of Angels can't afford it.
High Five me, Please to help pay our expenses to Oregon on Amtrak next month - Kay Ebeling

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"Assigning culpability is quite a difficult thing."

Roger Mahony

"One murder is indeed a tragedy, a thousand a statistic."

Joseph Stalin

"It is clear we are not the agressors."

Jong Il Kim, II

"I never influenced much outside of Beijing, but we certainly kicked some Imperialist Ass, and then our own."

Mao Tse Tung

"Infidel heads are required to defend Islam."

Osama bin Laden

"Convert or perish."

Cardinal de Torquemada,
Spanish Holy Inquisition

"What Killing Fields?"

Pol Pot

"National Socialism will benefit the world for 1,000 years after me."

Adolph Hitler

What do these quoted have in common? All have personally caused body counts in the many THOUSANDS to millions, and have thus far not been, or were not, held accountable, in their life times.

In the CORRECT translation of the Roman Latin, intentionally misquoted in the Roman Catholic Mass liturgy for political revisionism, from Christ's Passion, by Pontuis Pilate: "WHO'S TRUTH?!"