L.A. cardinal deposed for 5 hours in abuse lawsuit By Drew Griffin, CNN

Topspin

Verified User
L.A. cardinal deposed for 5 hours in abuse lawsuit By Drew Griffin, CNN Special Investigations Unit
February 1, 2010 7:32 p.m. EST

Cardinal Roger Mahony was deposed in a civil suit focusing on a priest who was convicted of molestation, sources say.STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Cardinal Mahony, head of Archdiocese of Los Angeles, deposed in civil lawsuit
Sources: Lawsuit and grand jury probe focus on priest convicted of molestation
Priest confessed to Mahony, but Mahony didn't inform police, sources say
Archdiocese agreed to pay $660M to 508 people who claimed priests abused them

RELATED TOPICS
The Roman Catholic Church
Cardinal Roger Mahony
Sexual Offenses
(CNN) -- The head of the largest Catholic archdiocese in the United States faced a grueling five-hour deposition last month, answering questions about his knowledge of abusive priests and his attempts to prevent the information from reaching police.

A spokesman for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, California, would not answer further questions about Cardinal Roger Mahony's deposition in a civil lawsuit.

"A transcript has not been made available to the archdiocese," spokesman Tod Tamberg said. "When the transcript is made available to the public, you [CNN] may resubmit your questions."

CNN reported last year that the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles had launched a federal grand jury investigation to determine if Mahony violated the law in his response to the molestation of children by priests.

Tamberg said the archdiocese's attorneys "have been told that Cardinal Mahony is not a target of the investigation."

Sources close to the investigation said both the federal investigation and the civil lawsuit focus on one priest in particular -- Michael Baker, who was defrocked and is serving a 10-year prison term for molesting three children.

Baker, who confessed to Mahony in 1986, has twice appeared before the federal grand jury, sources tell CNN.

Mahony failed to disclose Baker's self-reported crimes to police on several occasions and instead allowed Baker to seek treatment options while moving him from parish to parish, sources close to the investigation said.

In a deposition released last year, Monsignor Richard Loomis, the former vicar of clergy for the archdiocese, said under oath that he wrote a memo in 2000 advocating that the archdiocese inform police about allegations of sexual abuse against Baker. Mahony, Loomis testified, directed him not to report the allegations.

The Archdiocese of Los Angeles released information about Baker to the police in March 2002. Baker was convicted in 2007.

The archdiocese, with 288 parishes in 120 cities throughout southern California, serves more than 4 million Catholics, according to its Web site.

Mahony has dealt with accusations he covered up sex-abuse cases for years. Three years ago, the archdiocese agreed to pay $660 million to 508 people who claimed they were victims of abuse by priests.
 
The bishops that transferred priests around and never reported them need to be purged and sent to pasture or prosecuted. They are responsible for what has gone on. Any workplace supervisor is required to report crimes committed by their subordinates, and the same is true for bishops in relation to priests/monsignors and deacons.
 
The bishops that transferred priests around and never reported them need to be purged and sent to pasture or prosecuted. They are responsible for what has gone on. Any workplace supervisor is required to report crimes committed by their subordinates, and the same is true for bishops in relation to priests/monsignors and deacons.
Wasn't that policy created by the current Pope (who was an Archbishop at time)?
 
Mahoney is another sleazy big liberal democrat child molester. Nothing will happen to him though because all the beaners in California think he walks on water.
 
the priest must do 50 hail mary's transfer parishes and promise to raise the age threshold of the alter boys he likes by a year.
 
i'm not catholic, but what are the rules when said crime is confessed in confession?

Penance is generally to turn yourself in for a serious crime, and so not going through with penance is considered nulling the confession. I'm not sure what the prudent confessor is expected to do when that happens.
 
Wasn't that policy created by the current Pope (who was an Archbishop at time)?

I've only heard about it from Soc, who is not exactly unbiased in all matters RCC. I'm tending to think this was a move by the college of American bishops, and possibly cardinals... Our bishops have a history of sucking.
 
Penance is generally to turn yourself in for a serious crime, and so not going through with penance is considered nulling the confession. I'm not sure what the prudent confessor is expected to do when that happens.

for the priest....is he required to report the crime? i believe he is not, and that the church holds the confession sacrosanct and iirc....a confession to a priest is treated exactly like a 'confession' to a shrink....private, unless great imminent bodily harm....depending on the state...i don't believe federal law covers this

i ask, because what was the priest's first duty? to turn this guy in or keep the confession confidential....

i don't see the priest lasting under state laws
 
for the priest....is he required to report the crime? i believe he is not, and that the church holds the confession sacrosanct and iirc....a confession to a priest is treated exactly like a 'confession' to a shrink....private, unless great imminent bodily harm....depending on the state...i don't believe federal law covers this

i ask, because what was the priest's first duty? to turn this guy in or keep the confession confidential....

i don't see the priest lasting under state laws

Yes, Confessions are protected confidentiality under law, but in most cases, bishops learned of abuses as administrators and not as confessors, where there was generally evidence of a crime. That is where they effed up royally.
 
Yes, Confessions are protected confidentiality under law, but in most cases, bishops learned of abuses as administrators and not as confessors, where there was generally evidence of a crime. That is where they effed up royally.

truly sad. i remember the pope saying something about this being an issue in the US, not other countries.....is this correct?
 
Back
Top