Loomis Deposition: Quoted in depth at City of Angels today

.
(It's hot, I finally got AC, so why go out, when I can go through the Deposition of Monsignor Richard Loomis from Tuesday September 15th released around midnight last night. Here are the salient quotes:)

Q: Why are you on leave?
A: I was accused of abuse.
(Loomis claims he employs himself doing proofreading from home, and he lives alone… John Manly remarks that the Monsignor is wearing clerics.)
A: I have never been instructed not to wear clerics.
Q: Okay. Are you engaged in a canonical process on the accusations against you?
A: Yes.
Q: And where does that process stand today?
A: It’s in Rome.
Q: Was there a trial held in Los Angeles?
A: Yes.
(Donald Woods objects on the basis of “pontifical secrecy.”)
MANLY: Do you have a legal objection?
WOODS: The next one I mentioned was not relevant to this case.

(Manly explains that since Monsignor was once Vicar for Clergy in charge of handling sex abuse claims for the L.A. Archdiocese, and he also had accusations against himself, “It goes to procedures, it goes to the competency of the Archdiocese in terms of who they put in leadership positions, so is your legal objection relevance?)

WOODS: It’s not our purpose to argue these things out here. But not only is it not relevant to this case, but it is also collateral. And it would lead us to a 352 issue.

A PONTIFICAL ISSUE
MANLY: 352 may be an issue at trial. Not in discovery. Monsignor Loomis has testified extensively in a prior deposition that I have a copy of about the accusations against him. There was a trial here, as I understand it, a canonical trial. And there was an outcome, which is in Rome one way or the other. I want to know, there was a finding of fact. I'm certainly entitled to ask that question.
WOODS: It is considered a pontifical order, a pontifical secret within the church. And it leads to collateral, all kinds of collateral issues.
MANLY: You're asking me to take your word for it. You wouldn't take mine and I'm not going to take yours. I'm asking you, what is a pontifical secret. Do I get Dan Brown and look there? What is it?
WOODS: We'll take it up before the court.
DONALD STEIER: Record should reflect the term First Amendment. Later we can debate it, but the record should be noted.
MANLY: Pontifical secret, the First Amendment, relevancy and what else?
STEIER: Well. 352.

THE CHURCH STILL KEEPING SECRETS
MANLY: In that canonical trial, who was the advocate for the church, or what’s it called in civil parlance, the prosecutor? Who were the judges?
A: I have been told that I am not supposed to reveal that under the canonical process.
Q: Told by whom?
WOODS: Again within the church, it’s something that is maintained confidential

(CofA: We are talking here about allegations of sex crimes against a Monsignor, that were never made public. In the Twenty-First Century )

Woods: All the people involved in the process have taken an oath to keep it confidential and unless it’s absolutely relevant-
MANLY: Can I get a copy of that oath?
WOODS: - to a civil proceeding and we have an order from the court, we're not going to go into it. I am going to instruct him not to answer.
MANLY: Can I get a copy of this oath?
WOODS: No.

(Manly says he’s not going to ask every question about the trial, then, since they're going to object. Steier opines that by law Manly should say every question for them to object to each one individually. Manly goes back to deposing Monsignor Loomis.)

Q: Have you been restored? What is your current status at the Archdiocese, Monsignor?
A: I'm on leave.
Q: How long have you been on leave?
A: Approximately a little over five years, that's best I can say.
Q: Okay and are you being paid?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you still retain the title of pastor at your former parish?
A: No.
Q: In terms of admin, if you need, you know, to be reimbursed or something like that, who do you-
A: The Vicar for Clergy Office.
Q: Who is that today?
A: Monsignor Michael Meyers.
Q: What was the last time you saw Michael Baker?
A: In my office as Vicar for Clergy in the earlier part of 2000.
Q: When did you first meet Michael Baker?
A: In the fall of 1972, when I entered St. John’s Seminary.
Q: And in what capacity was he at St. John’s?
A: He was a student there, a deacon. I was a first year student.

(Baker was ordained, Loomis was a first year student, so they didn't know each other. Loomis says he never had contact with Baker again until he was Vicar for Clergy, “Other than we might have attended the same meetings. But I have no specific recollection of anything.”)

A: I know he and Monsignor Dyer were friends.
Q: Were they classmates?
A: Yes.
Q: How did you know that?
A: Monsignor Dyer told me. In the transition period.

(Dyer was Vicar for Clergy before Loomis.
Wonder what made him bring up Baker then?)

Q: What was the Archdiocese policy in or around 1996 regarding placement of priests who had offended children sexually in the ministry?

(There’s some argument over semantics then:)

THE WITNESS: I don't remember the specific policy. I don't think there was one that I remember even reading that talked specifically about people involved with minors being in or out of ministry.

(Whoa, Loomis must be studying answer evasion from Bill Clinton. So when did the future Vicar for Clergy, whose job was among other things handling sex abuse claims against priests, learn there was a policy about pedophiles? )

MANLY: When is the first time you can recall ever learning that there was a policy in place regarding the placement of priests who had sexually molested minors in the ministry?
WOODS: Hold on. I am going to object. Assumes facts not in evidence that there was a policy and it doesn't state the policy very clearly. But I’ll let him answer.
THE WITNESS: The only policy that I'm aware of was a policy that was put out approximately 1987 or so that dealt with sexual misconduct by clergy and outlined a process for addressing them.
Q: Okay. When did you first learn that Michael Baker had molested a child?
A: During the transition period, when I was coming into the Vicar for Clergy office.
Q: So sometime in 1996?
A: It would have been 95 I think.
MANLY: And who told you?
A: I was told by three people actually in different - I don't know if you call them briefings or not. But I asked to talk to different people. Monsignor Dyer, Bishop Thomas Curry, and Cardinal Mahony.
Q: When you learned this, were you surprised?
A: Yes I was. It wasn’t something that I was expecting to hear.
Q: What did Monsignor Dyer tell you?
A: He told me that because Michael Baker had self disclosed that his case had been handled somewhat differently than other cases.
Q: Okay. Wait. How many cases were there?
A: I don't know at that point.
Q: Did they give you a briefing on alleged perpetrators within the Archdiocese?
A: Not a briefing on - as such going down. There were all of the different people. I did take a period of time where I reviewed some of the files.

(Is it just me or do you hear a lie and then an attempt to recover in the above?)

Q: How did the Baker name come up?
A: I don't remember the specific situation.
Q: How old was the child that he abused?
A: I don't remember.
Q: I mean did you wonder why, if he did that, he wasn’t in jail?
WOODS: I'm going to object. Calls for speculation. I’ll let you answer.
MANLY: You can answer.
THE WITNESS: I don't think I can answer that. I don't know. I didn't specifically reflect on that.
Q: Did the thought ever occur to you? You know molesting a child was a crime, right?
A: Yes.

WHY WASN’T BAKER IN PRISON A LONG TIME AGO?

Q: And you're in charge of the priests and somebody tells you a priest molested a child. Did the thought ever cross your mind, why isn’t this guy in prison?
A: I was not in charge at that time.
Q: Did you ever ask the Cardinal or Bishop Curry or Monsignor Dyer?
A: No. Not in that time frame, no.
Q: Did you ever ask them?
A: There was- toward the end of my time as Vicar for Clergy there was- I made a suggestion that the police should be called.
Q: Did they do that?
A: No.
Q: Who did you suggest that to?
A: To the Cardinal.
Q: Did he tell you why he wouldn't do it?
A: I was told that Michael Baker had submitted a hand written letter asking for laicization that the Cardinal was to forward to Rome.

(CofA: All they care about is their own little insular world.)

TWO MEN FROM ARIZONA
LOOMIS: It was toward the end of my term as Vicar for Clergy after the lawsuit involving Arizona came.
MANLY: There were two boys in Tucson? You suggested calling the police regarding those two children, correct?
A: It was after that, while Michael Baker was on leave and out of the ministry, we discovered that he had performed three baptisms which he did not have permission to do. And at that point I said, you know, there is no cooperation here, we ought to take further action.
Q: Who else was present, if anyone, when you suggested that to the Cardinal?
A: The suggestion was made by memo.
Q: And did he respond?
A: Yes. He wrote on the memo. And initially his response was to proceed. But then through the General Counsel’s office I heard that he had received that letter from Baker and that we were going to wait.

IS THERE A GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION GOING ON IN LA?

Q: Have you been asked to testify in front of a grand jury?
A: No.
Q: At any time?
A: There was a grand jury on a totally different matter up in Ventura County.
Q: When Sister Judy told you the Cardinal's suggestion was rejected, did she do that by phone, mail, email?
A: Face-to-face. I went to her office and she told me. I went to tell her what I was going to do and she told me that she had received instructions that reverse that.
Q: You told her you were going to call the police?
A: That I asked the Cardinal and he had said proceed. And then I was instructed to wait.

'DON, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT NONSENSE'

STEIER: The record should reflect that a moment ago, John, you used the term children and we all know that at the point in time we're talking about that everybody was an adult, and there is no legal requirement to make reports. There may be moral issues but not legal issues.
MANLY: Don, you ask what you want. I don't believe that nonsense.
STEIER: I'm talking about what the law says.
MANLY: You want to interrupt my deposition, do it on your own time.

(Back to deposing Monsignor Loomis: )
Q: Did you ever hear that Monsignor Dyer and Father Baker would take road trips to Tucson?
A: No.
W: Did Dyer have some contact or connection in Tucson that caused him to go there on a regular basis?
A: I’ve already said that I don't know that they were doing those.
Q: Have you ever heard that he and Banker were traveling in a car together in Tucson?
A: No.
Q: From Los Angeles?
A: No.
Q: Did Dyer and Baker socialize?
A: I don't know.
Q: They lived in the same house at St. Columbkille?
A: Yes.
Q: Did it ever come to your attention while you were Vicar for Clergy or anytime thereafter that Baker had a boy living in the rectory with him?
A: No.
Q: That Michael Baker was associating with a youth who was from Nepal?
A: No.
Q: Have you ever heard that from anyplace?
A: No.
Q: What were the restrictions on Baker with regard to him being around children, from the time you got to the Vicar for Clergy until Baker was suspended from ministry?
A: He was not to be around minors.
Q: Did you ever receive reports that Baker was around minors when you were Vicar for Clergy?
A: Right at the beginning of my term.

BAKER WAS NOT TO BE AROUND MINORS, BUT HE WAS

Q: When you heard this, I take it you were concerned?
A: I was.
Q: And were you concerned because you knew he had molested a child before? And because it was very clear to Father Baker that he was not to be around kids, right.
A: Yes.
Q: Yet he had a kid in the rectory sitting on the landing of the stairs? Yes.
A: Something along those lines. Minors were not supposed to be in the living space in any rectory.
Q: Period?
A: Period.
Q: In your mind, was this a big deal?
A: It was of concern, yes. I reported it to the Cardinal and once we had heard back from the meeting with the young man that it was apparently what we now call a boundary issue, rather than an abuse issue, at that point it was taken to the Sexual Abuse Advisory Board for their input.

(CofA: On a boundary issue, not a sex abuse issue, you call the Sex Abuse Advisory Board?)

Q: Who was on the board at the time?
A: I'm not sure that I can name everybody. The Sexual Advisory Board didn't make decisions or recommendations. We simply took the advice that the individual people chose to give and that became part of what I would put together as a recommendation to the Cardinal, not in terms of ascribing specific comments to specific people or anything of that type.
Q: Did anybody on the board recommend somebody call the police?
A: No.

THE BIG 8
MANLY: Did you ever hear, Monsignor, when you were Vicar for Clergy or thereafter, the term “The Big 8” being used to discuss certain priests accused of sexual misconduct in the Archdiocese?
A: No.

TUCSON
Q: Were there any other boundary violations after 1996?
A: No, not until we came to the Tucson lawsuit.

TO BE CONTINUED:
If I forget to post the second part of this deposition in the next couple weeks, remind me…

New cases in L.A. re Father Michael Baker & Brother Modesto Leon going through court system; jury trial re Renato Lopez cancelled as case settled

*
By Kay Ebeling

With new lawsuits making their way through the courts in Los Angeles, the pedophile crisis in the Catholic Church is indeed not "behind us" as Cardinal Roger Mahony and other church heirarchy have claimed.

The L.A. Archdiocese's motion to strike the case concerning Michael Baker was going to be heard Tuesday, July 28th but it has been continued. This case concerns charges made by plaintiff “Luis C,” one of the victims whose accusations sent the pedophile priest Baker to prison last year. The hearing on Motion to Strike and three Demurrers filed by the church, originally continued from July 1st to the 28th, is now on calendar October 1st, 2009.

Another case we are watching is “Saul R versus Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles,” filed June 2, 2008. These charges concern Brother Modesto Leon at Camp Unity in the Angeles National Forest above LaCanada, a Catholic retreat for at risk teenage boys that was founded, organized, and supervised by Brother Leon, through his own nonprofit organization, Soledad Enrichment Action, Inc.

Jury trial in the Julie C case, which was on calendar for October 19, 2009, is now canceled as the case was settled early this month. Julie C concerns allegations against Renato “Ray” Lopez, Jr. Athletic Director and coach at Sacred Heart High School in L.A. Later in today's post are quotes from a document in the Julie C case. The formal dismissal hearing of Julie C is August 24th, but City of Angels will not be there to cover it. Because we will be in Portland speaking and taking part in the Walk Across Oregon.

The new set of allegations against Michael Baker, the Archdiocese, and Servants of the Paracletes in the Luis C case happened in 1995. “It occurred in different places, in the boy’s house, mainly in his home,” said Vince Finaldi of Manly & Stewart, who represent Luis C, in a recent phone conversation.

Brother Modesto Leon from the Saul R case first surfaced as a pedophile priest in the L.A. Archdiocese Report of 2004 on page 6, with one accusation: “Los Angeles. Leon, Modesto. Claretians C.M.F. 1995 - 1996.”

Following are quotes come from the original complaint in the Saul R case with new allegations against Brother Modesto Leon from 1996-1999. All charges and quotes here are from public documents:

****************
Following are
DIRECT QUOTES
FROM SAUL R
****************

Plaintiff Saul R alleges that he was a victim of childhood sexual abuse by Brother Modesto Leon, a Roman Catholic Brother in the religious order Claretian missionaries.

For decades certain Roman Catholic Church personnel have sexually preyed upon the children under their leadership and or supervision. All the while, Defendants knew such vile practices were occurring, yet failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of these children and to prevent the future acts of molestation.

Defendants’ despicable conduct has resulted in a legacy of pain and emotional devastation. This suit seeks compensation for sexual abuse.

Defendants use their position as religious instructors and counselors to gain the trust and confidence of sexual molestation victims. Thereafter, Defendants misrepresent, conceal, or fail to disclose information relating to the sexual misconduct of clergy members.

This suit seeks compensation relating to this breach of trust.

Plaintiff SAUL R brings this action as an individual.

Plaintiff Saul R alleges that the abuse occurred between 1995 and 1999 while he was a participant in youth retreats at Camp Unity in the Angeles National Forest - founded, organized, and supervised by Brother Leon.

**************
(There is as of now, one allegation concerning Modesto Leon at Bishop Accountability. The allegations in Saul R took place three years after the one case identified in the BA database regarding Brother Modesto Leon. The Saul R case is now going through pretrial motions in L.A. Superior Court with new allegations: )
*****************

On June 15th Church Attorney Lee Potts of the Hennigan Law Firm, the L.A. Archdiocese’s lead attorneys in the Clergy Cases, filed “Motion to Quash Second Amended Complaint and Motion to dismiss for lack of Personal Jurisdiction” in the Saul R. Case.

I don't think a hearing has yet been set regarding this motion in the Saul R case, but I might be mistaken. Will try to find that out this week as well.

This could be a hearing about Saul R: (From L.A. Superior Court website:)

08/05/2009 at 11:00 am in department 324 at 600 South Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90005
Motion to Strike (-DEMURRER)

Dawn Smith of CIFARELLI THOMAS A. ESQ in Santa Ana, CA, is the attorney in Saul R, currently appearing in pretrial hearings on motions in the Raul C case. I will try to contact her this week.

More about Brother Modesto Leon’s Camp Unity for at risk teenagers to come be put at risk of a Catholic priest predator pedophile in the woods:

Camp Unity is in the Angeles National Forest above LaCanada Flintridge, The place where Brother Leon apparently set up a whole non profit 501(c)3 organization where he could bring young boys and molest them.

DRIVING ROUTE 1 to Camp Unity, run by Soledad Enrichment Corporation

• From the intersection of I-210 and Angeles Crest Highway (SR 2), drive north on Angeles Crest Highway 9.5 miles to Angeles Forest Highway. Keep straight.

• Continue about 4.5 miles to the junction with the Mount Wilson Road at the Red Box Ranger Station.

• Continue on Angeles Crest Highway 3.7 miles farther to the Barley Flats Road (paved) on the left. Turn left.

Drive 2.5 miles to the gate of Camp Unity

OH AND ALSO:

One final lawsuit against the Salesian Religious Order, from Clergy Cases 2007 settlement in L.A, may finally be drawing to a close in the coming weeks.

A hearing regarding Las Encinas Medical Center and its liability in the one last Salesian case case was on calendar last week and parties may be about to finally reach a settlement. There were hearings in April, May, and June.

Las Encinas Medical Center has been trying to get their portion of the case dismissed.

Another hearing to dismiss the Las Encinas portion of the Salesian case (or settle it) will be in August:

From L.A. Superior Court website:

08/24/2009 at 11:00 am in department 324 at 600 South Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90005 - Motion (TO CONTEST GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENTOF LAS ENCINAS MEDICAL CENTER'SSETT. (RE: BC294323)AND MTN FOR PROTECTIVE ORDERRE: BC376766)

HOWEVER, City of Angels won’t be at the Aug 24th hearing in L.A. as we will be winding down in Portland, Oregon, getting ready to come back to L.A. on Amtrak.

*****************
Kay Ebeling, producer of City of Angels blog, is speaking in Portland Oregon at the Aug 23 and 24th venues of Walk Across Oregon to End Child Abuse, in that Pacific coastal clean water filled city that week.

Join me for a potluck picnic in Jameson Park Aug 23rd in Portland at the interactive fountain.
***********************

City of Angels also hopes to interview Kelly Clark, plaintiff attorney, on camera in his Portland, Oregon, offices while we are there, to talk about his lawfirm's battle to get the Portland Archdiocese to release documents from the 2006 settlement, a battle that is finally drawing to a close now, after three years.

**************

As one chapter ends, another one begins. We will try to track down documents on all these cases in the next 30-40 years, as City of Angels continues to cover Sex Crime Coverups in the Roman Catholic Church

I'll be covering these stories until I’m 90 years old or so, like Dominick Dunne.

I want to be the Dominick Dunne of Catholic priest sex crimes. What Dominick Dunne did for Wealthy People Who Get Away With Murder, I want to do with Catholic priests who get away with pedophilia and other sex crimes, - ke

Meanwhile

In that last final Salesian case, Las Encinas Medical Center was fighting to get out of its part of the 2007 settlement. Count the number of defense or Church Attorneys versus plaintiff attorneys.

(From L.A. Superior Court Website:)

PARTIES:

BOUCHER RAYMOND P. ESQ. - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

DON BOSCO TECH - Defendant

DUMMIT BUCHHOLZ & TRAPP - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

DUMMIT CRAIG S. ESQ. - Attorney for Deft/Respnt

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP - Attorney for Deft/Respnt

LAS ENCINAS MEDICAL CENTER - Defendant

LB - Plaintiff/Petitioner

LR - Plaintiff/Petitioner

MCFEELY STEPHEN A. ESQ. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

THE SALESIAN SOCIETY - Defendant

****************

We are still trying to track down the illusive deposition of George Neville Rucker from this hearing last February: 02/26/2009 Objection Document (OF ARCHDIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES' TO RELEASE OF INFORMATION FROM DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS PROHIBITED BY COURT ORDER ) Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

*******************

The Julie C case which was on calendar for a july trial October 19, 2009, settled out of court last week. The Julie C case involved Catholic School employee RENATO LOPEZ, JR, and was first filed February 4, 2008.

From a doc filed in the Julie C case:

Plaintiff Julie C alleges that she was a victim of childhood sexual abuse while a student at Sacred Heart High School in Los Angeles, owned by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. She alleges that the perpetrator of the abuse was Renato “Ray” Lopez, Jr. Athletic Director and coach at Sacred Heart in 2003-2004. The Complaint includes a negligence cause of action, and alleges that the Archdiocese either knew or strongly suspected that Lopez had engaged in prior romantic and sexual relations with Sacred Heart students.

The archdiocese negligently hired, supervised, retained, monitored, and otherwise employed Lopez, and negligently failed to ensure the safety of a minor student, Plaintiff Julie C, who was entrusted to the Archdiocese’s custody, care, and control.

Again the Julie C case settled last week, attorney was David Ring of Los Angeles. The hearing where the case will officially be dismissed will be August 24th, and City of Angels will still be in Portland, Oregon, on that date.

Reminder: Kay Ebeling will be speaking August 22nd and August 23rd, in Portland, as part of the Walk Across Oregon to End Child Abuse. On Sunday the 23rd, City of Angels is hosting a pot luck picnic in the park near the Interactive Fountain in Jameson Square.

Hope to see you there, or at the listening session at Ascension Church the day before.

CLICK MY PAYPAL, PLEASE
Help pay for this trip

Re Luis C Case against Michael Baker:
From Los Angeles Superior Court Website:

10/01/2009 at 02:30 pm in department 324 at 600 South Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90005 Motion to Strike (AND 3 DEMURRERS RE: BC376766LUIS CC/F 7-1-09)

Notice, this is a new courtroom, new judge too I believe, stay tuned for more. I plan to go to the courthouse one day this week and find out what's happening.

********************
Brother Modesto Leon, in the Saul R case, was founder and operator of Soledad Enrichment Action, Inc. and Camp Unity, where the two allegations against him so far took place.
.
IMPORTANT FINAL NOTE:

RE U.S. Supreme Court:

One of the first cases to come before the new session of the United States Supreme Court, which could begin as early as August 7, 2009, in Washington, D.C., will be the class action lawsuit filed against The Holy See from Portland, Oregon, by Jeff Anderson of Minnesota, which was passed forward by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, March 2009.

So it does matter that new Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor (not yet confirmed) would be a Roman Catholic with a passion for pure justice.
********

HIGH FIVE ME, please
.