In 2011 CofA is at CofA11

... Not Just L.A., The City of Angels Is Everywhere...

I was age five when the bishop stood over me and said, "Stop babbling about what the priest did to you." Then, forty years later... I started babbling.
Re Missing Link collection below: Email editor Jay Nelson of Albuquerque at CLICK IMAGES to enlarge

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

CMOB: In sex crimes reported to L.A. Archdiocese board, priests were all named Father Fred, and later Father X to protect any priests named Fred

Clergy Misconduct Oversight Board only heard hypothetical cases, while touted in the press as advisors to L.A. Archbishop Roger Mahony

Even John Manly seems astounded to hear the name of a lay committee in Los Angeles assigned to oversee sexual "misconduct" of Catholic priests. The news reported that CMOB advised the Archbishop on how to handle pedophile and other priest sex crimes. Manly, representing plaintiff Luis C., asked at the January 25, 2010, deposition of Cardinal Roger Mahony:

*MANLY: There were two boards, SAAB and then another board after 2002, is that right?
A: Correct.
Q: So the SAAB Board and its follow on board is CMORE?
MR. MANLY: Okay. I don't know how you put that on the record but fine.
MR. MANLY: CMOB. Is that C-MOB? Okay…

Manly (right) released transcripts of depositions of Judge Richard Byrne and Bishop Thomas Curry, as well as the L.A. Archbishop in June 2010, from the case of Luis C vs. Doe 1 et al. In that case, Father Michael Baker had gotten away with pedophilia for so long, he was barely hiding it by the time he met altar boy Luis C, whose charges were recent enough to fall within the statute of limitations and helped put the priest in prison.

Manly did not finish deposing the Cardinal last January 25th:

MR. MANLY: This will conclude Volume I of the deposition of the Cardinal.
MR. HENNIGAN: The final volume.
MR. MANLY: No, I'm not going to agree to conclude the deposition.
MR. HENNIGAN: And I'm not going to agree to continue it.
MR. MANLY: I have a stack of documents here-
MR. HENNIGAN: Then you should have gotten to them. My point, your honor-
MR. MANLY: What is this, Judge? Who does he think he is?
THE COURT: Everybody calm down.
MR. HENNIGAN: We will review the transcript and make a record on the repetitiveness, the dilatory nature of this interrogation. If [the judge decides] that we have got to come back for another day, then we will.
MR. MANLY: That's fine but, Judge, there's a variety of documents I haven't gotten to.
THE COURT: I understand but- it's got to go in at a faster pace… So three hours really ought to be able to-
MR. MANLY: That's absolutely fine with me.
THE COURT: Can you agree to three hours?
MR. HENNIGAN: Avoid making a motion and we'll do it for three hours.

(But then the Luis C. Case was settled, or “dismissed” as it is called legally, on March 25, 2010, two months after the deposition of Mahony was interrupted.)

(Note, quotes in this blog post are copy and pasted directly from transcripts, with excess verbiage removed for sake of story, but no facts or details are changed.)

Read the depositions in full at Bishop Accountability

Cases of Priest Misconduct Went to the Clergy Misconduct Oversight Board As Hypothetical Cases
CMOB Never Heard Names of Priests
or any Details of the Crimes.

CMOB never even knew if the crimes were real.

Manly asks Judge Byrne how the CMOB, Clergy Misconduct Oversight Board operated, from deposition on October 29, 2009:

Q: After hearing about all these hypothetical cases, did you see a larger problem that needed to be addressed between 1992 and 2002 with sexual abuse?”
Q: Were you under the impression based on these hypothetical cases that you learned about that there were priests serving in the archdiocese that had previously molested children and were allowed to return to ministry?
BYRNE: I had no idea.


JUDGE BYRNE: I don't have a recollection about any of these cases.
Q You don't ever remember Monsignor Loomis or Dire or Cox telling you that Father Fred or Father X had sodomized a child?
A No. I don't recall.
Q: Okay. Judge, when they were talking about Father Fred, would they say, ‘Hypothetically Father Fred had sodomized altar boy Jim” or how did that work?

(THEY DIDN'T EVEN KNOW if it was the same Father Fred or several different Father Freds:)

Q So it could have been the same father -- it could have been the same priest the whole time, you had no way to know; right?
A Well, the facts were different, so the hypothetical that was presented was different. It sounded -- but it could be like it was the same person.
Q But you're not sure as you sit here today?
A Not today.

As you read these depositions, you realize almost everything the Church does to make the public think it’s taking care of its pedophile epidemic is more public relations than real news:)

Manly enters Exhibit 2, an online article from a Tidings article: February 17, 2006.

Q Does that look familiar to you?
A I may have read this particular article, I'm not sure, but the substance is familiar.
Q Okay. And it quotes you in the article several times. Did you notice that?
A Yes.
Q Are those quotes accurate?
A I assume so.
Q You're quoted in the second paragraph the article, Your Honor "Our mission is to make sure all allegations of misconduct by priests are investigated." Is that accurate?
A Yes.
Q And is that the board’s mission?
A That's one of the things we do.

Q Have you ever had a conversation with the cardinal about Michael Baker?
A No. I don't talk and haven't talked with the cardinal very much.
Q Well, the reason I ask is that according to the report in The Tidings your role is to advise the cardinal, and so I mean, have you ever talked to the cardinal about sexual abuse?
A Oh, yes.
Q Does the cardinal come to the board meetings now?
A From time to time.
Q How many different conversations have you had with him regarding sexual abuse and sexual abuse of children?
A It would be hard to say over the years.

(CofA: What were they doing at those Oversight Committee Meetings besides eating pastry?

Adults who were raped as children by Catholic priests want to know.)

Q: Judge, do you remember a time where a case was presented to you involving the Father Fred between '92 and 2002 where you learned that father -- this hypothetical priest had previously admitted to molesting children, had gone to treatment and been placed back in ministry and then had boundary violations where he was found alone with children? Do you ever remember a case like that coming in front of you?
A No.
Q: were there ever any type of written materials distributed to board members between '92 and 2002?
A I don't believe so

(CofA: INSTEAD THE BOARD WAS KEPT IN THE DARK: given hypothetical cases that were mild:)

Q: Say you have a situation where a priest has previously sodomized a little boy or little girl. Can you think of an instance where it would be appropriate to ever place that priest in a parish setting?
MR. WOODS: Calls for a hypothetical set of facts. Calls for an opinion for the designation of experts. Calls for speculation.

(Well of course it’s all “hypothetical facts” since that's all this oversight committee was ever given. Then years later a Church Attorney can object because it's all "hypothetical facts."

This Mob Takes Care Of Its Own....)

THE WITNESS: Well, it is speculation based upon a hypothetical. I can't think of a situation
MR. MANLY: Did you know that was occurring in '92 -- did you know whether that was occurring between '92 and 2002 when you were on the SAAB Board?
A: No.
Q Would you expect if that was occurring as a member of the board you would have been told?
A If that was one of the Father Freds, I would think so.
Q And why would you believe that?
A Well, we were -- well, how the cases were selected that were presented to us we had no knowledge of. We didn't know what the universe was that existed. If a case carne before us I assumed it was something that the vicar and the cardinal would want to have some input on from the board. So if a case was really very clear cut as to what to, I don't know that would even come -- it would surprise me if it would even come before the board. Our role was to advise, and I would think on very clear-cut cases there would be no need for advice.

SEEMS THIS MOB WAS KEPT IN THE DARK, if Judge Richard Byrne is telling the truth, and I mean, he’s under oath, and a judge:

Q: Do you have any recollection of being told by the vicar for clergy that the cardinal would periodically send p people like Father Baker to a treatment facility to be treated for pedophilia or ephebophilia?
A I have no recollection of that.
Q: Even though presented as hypotheticals, the board members must have known the cases presented were felony crimes, so why didn't any of these fine archdiocese advisory members ever suggest someone call the police?
BYRNE: I don't know. Didn't occur to me. I assumed that the -- by virtue of the fact that this was a committee that was established by the archdiocese they were interested in trying to learn about these things that- and do something about it that they were doing what they were supposed to do and we were not an oversight board, we were an advisory board


Q: Did you ever personally wonder given the amount of Father Freds that were being presented to the committee why there weren't more arrests?
MR. WOODS: I'm going to object to the form of the question. It assumes facts in evidence -- that are not in evidence and calls for speculation.
A: No.
Q And that issue never carne up?
A Correct.


Q: Do you recall any instances involving a Father Fred case where the board was upset at the action the cardinal had taken?
A We didn't know what the action was that was taken.
Q Do you ever remember an instance where Monsignor Loomis came to discuss the Father Baker case with the board?
A No.
Q At any time?
A No.
Q: In the Clergy Misconduct Oversight Board were there priest names [ever] used?
A On occasion if the priest was known. For instance, if there were articles in the newspaper 10 identifying the priest, then the name would be used.
Q What about if there were not?
A Then they were Father X. We changed from Father Fred because we didn't know whether there might at some point be a Father Fred.
Q Okay. Why didn't they just use the names? You're advising the cardinal on it. I mean, did you ever suggest to them that they should just use the names?
A No, not really. The -- it's a matter of great sensitivity to the victims that their names not be known, to the priests. We didn't feel it was essential for us to know who the priests were in order for us to do what we needed to do, and an allegation of child sexual abuse once made is very, very serious and hard to change. It's like the unringing the bell.

(Gee, Judge, how nice of you to show concern about the victims, by keeping their identities secret. Why not try unringing the bell of being a sodomized six-year-old, or would that be too much reality for you?)

JUDGE BYRNE: The vicar and maybe others made the decision as to what was to be brought before the board, so I wasn't trying to second-guess that. We weren't involved in saying every case has to come before the board.
Q If Father Baker was found with a little boy alone in the rectory, is that something that you would expect would have been brought to the board, given his history, based on what you know, how the vicar for clergy operated?
A Not necessarily.

(THESE MEETINGS OF THE CMOB WERE apparently just an excuse to eat pastry.)

(What they finally did about Michael Baker: from Judge Byrne:)

BYRNE: I don't know what number we had gotten up to by February 12th, 2003, but we decided that we would like to be dealing with the universe of cases, and so those that had been identified in the Los Angeles Times article we gave numbers to, although in many cases such as in Michael Baker's case there was no action that was ever taken by the CMOB, but we got a report.
Q All right. So in this narrative it says, "Monsignor Cox discussed the possibility of going back to the parishes after a conviction or guilty plea and making announcements regarding the status to make sure there's closure in the community. It was suggested this type of closure announcement be made in The Tidings or Los Angeles Times to show the church actively following through."

(CofA: Yep just tell it to the news media and it’s as good as true.

That's a Catholic Church tactic we observe a lot at City of Angels)

Q: Do you remember that occurring, that discussion?
A Well, I see it here. I remember that that -- I assume that that's what was happening. I have no independent recollection of who said what, Monsignor Cox or others or who may have made the suggestion.
Q If Monsignor Cox was aware that there was more to the Baker case than he gave you here, in other words there were other pertinent facts, would you have expected him to disclose those?
A Not necessarily. I think at that point Father Baker had been removed from ministry, he had been laicized and the only thing that we would be concerned with as suggested there or stated here is that people be made aware of the fact that he was an abusive priest so they could make a claim.
Q Well, did -- did anybody -- did any -- did Monsignor Cox tell you that the cardinal had decided to conceal Baker's identity from the police at any point?
A No.
Q If that was true, was that something the board wanted to know?
A At this point in this case I don't think the board was really attempting to exercise any kind of oversight function.

(BAKER’S NOT A PRIEST ANYMORE, DUMP HIM OUT ON THE REST OF THE world, let the government and private sector deal with him, thanks Church. )

Q: If the cardinal had instructed his staff not to call the police on Father Baker, isn't that something you'd want to know, sir?
A; Not necessarily
Q: It says, "Recommendation, it was the consensus of the board that based upon the information presented there is no need to take further action. The board suggests that the archdiocese explore the possibility of taking legal action against Michael Baker." Do you recall that?
A It's written here. I don't recall it apart from the minutes.
Q Did anybody at that meeting of the board suggest that it might be a good idea to go try to find other victims of Father Baker to see if they could be helped?
A I think that's why the suggestion was made about making announcements.
Q Did you ever wonder why the cardinal didn't do that in 1986 when Baker first reported to him that he orally copulated a little boy or a little girl?
MR. WOODS: I'm going to object to the form of the question as assuming facts not in evidence.

Q "During a priest retreat in June of 1986 Cardinal Mahony issued a invitation to anyone struggling with sexual misconduct issues could come forward and obtain help. Five months later Michael Baker came forward and admitted involvement with two young men who were then in Mexico." It says, "The archdiocese had no pastoral outreach at that time." Do you know what that means?
A No, not specifically.

(CofA: No pastoral outreach?

What about fifteen hundred years of being the most dominant religion in the world?)

(The Board was told Baker had been in treatment so now he could be returned to ministry, as long as he wasn’t around children, then of course he immediately was around children. Manly asks Judge Byrne about treatment that Baker got for his pedophilia?)

Q: Do you know what the treatment is?
A I'm not really entirely sure, but I believe it has something to do with the psychologists and
psychiatrists working with the person in order to help them resolve their problem.
Q Are you of the belief now or have you been in the past, Your Honor, that pedophilia can be cured?
A There was a point when I thought it could be.
Q When was that, sir?
A I think I alluded earlier to the fact that my father's involvement when he was a parole officer for the California youth authority.
Q When you were on the board from '92 to 2002, did you believe pedophilia could be cured?
A I don't believe I had a fixed opinion one way or the other at that time.

(This man in his seventies who was once a DA and Judge in L.A. says the only thing he knew about pedophilia in 2003 was what his dad told him when he was a little boy?


Law and Order SVU had been on Cable TV for four years by then. Everybody in the country knew about pedophiles by then, but not this retired judge, who ran the oversight committee for the Catholic Church handling pedophile priests in Los Angeles?

Do you see a pattern here?

Start reading something besides Catholic publications, Judge.)

Q: Between '92 and 2002, did any victim, was any victim ever interviewed by the board?
A Not to my knowledge. I did not. I don't know whether other board members may have.
Q Did the board ever receive any training or insight on what happens to children who are molested by adults, specifically priests?
A I don't believe so.
Q Judge, in retrospect do you wish you'd called the police?
(AFTER SEVERAL OBJECTIONS, the Judge answered:)
A: The short answer would be no simply because I didn't feel it was my role to do that, and I felt whatever was required was being done.
And just to be clear, no member of the board not once ever discussed the possibility of calling child protective services or law enforcement when a priest molestation case of a child was presented; is that correct?
A As far as I can recall, yes.
Q And Your Honor, did that ever occur to you that that might be a good idea to help these children?
A No.
MR. MANLY: Thank you, Your Honor. No further questions.

More to come soon including quotes from these depositions about Monsignor Richard Loomis, who is still hiding in points unknown, and about Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, who is currently running for State Attorney General, and may be one of the reasons Cardinal Roger Mahony never got indicted.

Stay Tuned To City of Angels.

What I get from reading these deposition transcripts:

Victims of pedophile priests like me and my sister never got even a “how do you do” from the Archdiocese after reporting crimes against us committed by Father Thomas Barry Horne of Chicago Archdiocese 1949-1955.

So when I listen to Church hierarchy and lay Catholic “leaders” like Judge Richard Byrne here, all I hear, all the way from the Pope to the lowliest committee member is:

None Of Them Have A Used Vestment Of Concern About The Victims

We are just an irritant to them, something that gets in the way of this religion they are convinced puts them in a place above the rest of us.

Every archdiocese in American has a committee full of pillars of the community like CMOB.

Their purpose is to assure parishioners that the Catholic Church is doing everything it can to help the victims, when in reality, they're just talking, comparing notes, and eating pastry.


Something I’ve noticed lately on comments posted by Catholics on stories about priest sex crimes around the internet:

Since their religion tells them that forgiving is this important spiritual act, a lot of active Catholics think all they have to do is this spiritual act of forgiveness and everything else is taken care of.

Catholics use their religion to boast of their spiritual superiority to victims of their pedophile priests.

I've seen comments on stories all over the country like:

“We Catholics have been able to forgive our bishops, why can’t the rest of the world be as spiritually attained as we are?”


Going to take a swim in the Gulf of Mexico now.

By Kay Ebeling, Producer, The City of Angels Is Everywhere

The Players:

Attorneys at Law
4220 Von Karman, Suite 200
Newport Beach, California 92660
(949) 252-9990
Attorney at Law
15233 Sherman Way, Suite H
Van Nuys, California 91406
(818) 225-1694

Attorneys at Law
865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, California 90017
(213) 694-1200

Attorney at Law
500 Sansome Street, Eighth
San Francisco, California
(415) 433-1400

Attorney at Law
4525 Wilshire Boulevard,
Los Angeles, California
(323) 932-1600

Attorney at Law
6255 W. Sunset Boulevard, Suite 1021
Los Angeles, California 90028
(323) 467-5800



Don't forget Kay Ebeling needs FUEL to keep City of Angels going.

So click any PayPal button on the left with cash, lot of cash, to keep us flowing...

Copy and pasted here:

I called my friend Cindy, who survived years of rapes by Fr. George Neville Rucker from when she was a toddler to third grade in El Segundo in the 1960s.

When I told her CMOB was the name of the committee assigned to oversee misconduct by pedophiles and other sexually deviant priests in L.A., she chimed in over our laughter:

“Reminds me of the Oblate nursing home that has nine pedophile priests staying there. It’s in Childs, Maryland on Blue Ball Road.”
The City of Angels Is Everywhere

So Click My PayPal, Please!
kay ebeling

Monday, July 26, 2010

Not sick anymore

UPDATE: Tuesday July 27
Story coming this afteroon


Priest Has Gay Sex then Gets Ready to Say Mass

This made me laugh out loud this morning...

The Panorama Magazine video from Rome, with graphic sex scenes deleted... "Il video continua con scene di sesso esplicito," but that scene is cut...

Then the priest gets dressed to say Mass.

'nuff said. I can't help it. When he dons his vestments I just burst out laughing, every time I see it.

HOW MUCH MORE EVIDENCE do people need to see the hypocrisy and lies all over this church?

Friday, July 23, 2010

In a True New Testament Church there are No Priests

In Christ's own words, there should be no priests. From the Book of Matthew 23 "Jesus Criticizes the Religious Leaders":

8-9 “Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters. And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. - New Living Translation

8-9 "Don't let people do that to you, put you on a pedestal like that. You all have a single Teacher, and you are all classmates. Don't set people up as experts over your life, letting them tell you what to do. Save that authority for God; let him tell you what to do. No one else should carry the title of 'Father'; you have only one Father, and he's in heaven. -The Message

"Christ took that veil away."
Re: people still in Old Ways

2 Corinth 3:14

Eph. 1:22-23

"If you just read these verses, it's amazing. People act like these verses are not there."

Ends with: Eph 1:18
Doesn't it sound like Christ is talking to today's Catholic priests in Matthew 23? (The Message translation:) "Religious Fashion Shows"

1-3 Now Jesus turned to address his disciples, along with the crowd that had gathered with them. "The religion scholars and Pharisees are competent teachers in God's Law. You won't go wrong in following their teachings on Moses. But be careful about following them. They talk a good line, but they don't live it. They don't take it into their hearts and live it out in their behavior. It's all spit-and-polish veneer.

4-7"Instead of giving you God's Law as food and drink by which you can banquet on God, they package it in bundles of rules, loading you down like pack animals. They seem to take pleasure in watching you stagger under these loads, and wouldn't think of lifting a finger to help. Their lives are perpetual fashion shows, embroidered prayer shawls one day and flowery prayers the next. They love to sit at the head table at church dinners, basking in the most prominent positions, preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary degrees, and getting called 'Doctor' and 'Reverend.'

8-10"Don't let people do that to you, put you on a pedestal like that. You all have a single Teacher, and you are all classmates. Don't set people up as experts over your life, letting them tell you what to do. Save that authority for God; let him tell you what to do. No one else should carry the title of 'Father'; you have only one Father, and he's in heaven. And don't let people maneuver you into taking charge of them. There is only one Life-Leader for you and them—Christ.

11-12"Do you want to stand out? Then step down. Be a servant. If you puff yourself up, you'll get the wind knocked out of you. But if you're content to simply be yourself, your life will count for plenty.


13"I've had it with you! You're hopeless, you religion scholars, you Pharisees! Frauds! Your lives are roadblocks to God's kingdom. You refuse to enter, and won't let anyone else in either.
15"You're hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You go halfway around the world to make a convert, but once you get him you make him into a replica of yourselves, double-damned.

16-22"You're hopeless! What arrogant stupidity! You say, 'If someone makes a promise with his fingers crossed, that's nothing; but if he swears with his hand on the Bible, that's serious.' What ignorance! Does the leather on the Bible carry more weight than the skin on your hands? And what about this piece of trivia: 'If you shake hands on a promise, that's nothing; but if you raise your hand that God is your witness, that's serious'? What ridiculous hairsplitting! What difference does it make whether you shake hands or raise hands? A promise is a promise. What difference does it make if you make your promise inside or outside a house of worship? A promise is a promise. God is present, watching and holding you to account regardless.

23-24"You're hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You keep meticulous account books, tithing on every nickel and dime you get, but on the meat of God's Law, things like fairness and compassion and commitment—the absolute basics!—you carelessly take it or leave it. Careful bookkeeping is commendable, but the basics are required. Do you have any idea how silly you look, writing a life story that's wrong from start to finish, nitpicking over commas and semicolons?

25-26"You're hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You burnish the surface of your cups and bowls so they sparkle in the sun, while the insides are maggoty with your greed and gluttony. Stupid Pharisee! Scour the insides, and then the gleaming surface will mean something.

27-28"You're hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You're like manicured grave plots, grass clipped and the flowers bright, but six feet down it's all rotting bones and worm-eaten flesh. People look at you and think you're saints, but beneath the skin you're total frauds.

29-32"You're hopeless, you religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! You build granite tombs for your prophets and marble monuments for your saints. And you say that if you had lived in the days of your ancestors, no blood would have been on your hands. You protest too much! You're cut from the same cloth as those murderers, and daily add to the death count.

Jesus got really angry about men setting themselves up as priests: here is Matthew 23 from the beginning:

Jesus Criticizes the Religious Leaders

1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The teachers of religious law and the Pharisees are the official interpreters of the law of Moses.[a] 3 So practice and obey whatever they tell you, but don’t follow their example. For they don’t practice what they teach. 4 They crush people with unbearable religious demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden.
5 “Everything they do is for show. On their arms they wear extra wide prayer boxes with Scripture verses inside, and they wear robes with extra long tassels.[b] 6 And they love to sit at the head table at banquets and in the seats of honor in the synagogues. 7 They love to receive respectful greetings as they walk in the marketplaces, and to be called ‘Rabbi.’[c]

8 “Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters.[d] 9 And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. 10 And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you must be a servant. 12 But those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

13 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you shut the door of the Kingdom of Heaven in people’s faces. You won’t go in yourselves, and you don’t let others enter either.[e]

15 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you cross land and sea to make one convert, and then you turn that person into twice the child of hell[f] you yourselves are

16 “Blind guides! What sorrow awaits you! For you say that it means nothing to swear ‘by God’s Temple,’ but that it is binding to swear ‘by the gold in the Temple.’ 17 Blind fools! Which is more important—the gold or the Temple that makes the gold sacred? 18 And you say that to swear ‘by the altar’ is not binding, but to swear ‘by the gifts on the altar’ is binding. 19 How blind! For which is more important—the gift on the altar or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 When you swear ‘by the altar,’ you are swearing by it and by everything on it. 21 And when you swear ‘by the Temple,’ you are swearing by it and by God, who lives in it. 22 And when you swear ‘by heaven,’ you are swearing by the throne of God and by God, who sits on the throne.

23 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens,[g] but you ignore the more important aspects of the law—justice, mercy, and faith. You should tithe, yes, but do not neglect the more important things. 24 Blind guides! You strain your water so you won’t accidentally swallow a gnat, but you swallow a camel![h]

25 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are so careful to clean the outside of the cup and the dish, but inside you are filthy—full of greed and self-indulgence! 26 You blind Pharisee! First wash the inside of the cup and the dish,[i] and then the outside will become clean, too.

27 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people’s bones and all sorts of impurity. 28 Outwardly you look like righteous people, but inwardly your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness.

29 “What sorrow awaits you teachers of religious law and you Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed, and you decorate the monuments of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. 30 Then you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would never have joined them in killing the prophets.’

"Christ took that veil away."
Re: people still in Old Ways

2 Corinth 3:14

Eph. 1:22-23

"If you just read these verses, it's amazing. People act like these verses are not there."

Ends with: Eph 1:18

Monday, July 12, 2010

Kay Ebeling took a couple of sick days, CofA will be back July 27th.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

OILY RAIN: People Post Evidence on YouTube from Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia...

(Off Topic, Sort of. Not when you consider corporate greed created an atmosphere that enabled both disasters, the BP Oil Eruption and the Pedophile Priest Epidemic. Posted Friday at City of Angels on Alternet:)

OILY RAIN: People Are Posting Evidece on YouTube from Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia

POSTED:6:55 pm, July 9, 2010 1 COMMENT
People are picking up cameras and reporting the real stories of the the BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Disaster on YouTube. Images you have never seen, elements that have never existed before, plants dying in several states with same burn marks on leaves, all shot with hand held cameras by ordinary people recording the disaster literally from the ground. Here are links to videos:

After three days of rain, plants are dying in Miami reports FederalJackTube2 channel on YouTube in this video: HEALTH ALERT: Toxic Rain In Miami From Gulf Oil Leak, Plants & Trees Dying

On Coast to Coast Radio show callers talk about Oil in Rain in South Carolina second half of this video is home movie quality footage of oil falling in the rain against a window in South Carolina July 7, 2010

From Russian TV Oily Rain In Louisiana “It is literally raining oil right here in River Ridge.”


From Georgie, URGENT: TOXIC RAIN OIL SPILL in my grass, woman shows dead vegetables in her garden Woman says, ‘It might not even be healthy for me to be out here in this grass looking at this.” Plants have same burn marks as found in South Carolina, Louisiana and Florida. She says same thing, the plants are dying “after three days of rain."

AFTER THE RAIN, the plants die…

Is it raining BP Oil in Mississippi?


Possible Oily Rain in Panama City

Thank God for the Internet, We Won’t Get Fooled Again, posted by Kay Ebeling, The City of Angels Is Everywhere

Thursday, July 8, 2010

ROUNDUP: Music, News, Video You Will Not Find in Mainstream Media Re Pedophile Epidemic in Catholic Church

"We hope to depose officials who know how things have operated there for a long time, like Bertone and Sodano*" Jeff Anderson 7/6/2010

In one video at CofA today a bishop says, "It was wrong taking comfort from children," and an ex-Catholic who is now a street minister in England responds in outrage on YouTube. Also in ROUNDUP this week, a music video of "There's No End" by Magdalen Graal, which may leave you feeling prickly.
First, City of Angels had a quick conversation by phone with Jeff Anderson, asking what are next steps the St. Paul MN attorney will take in pursuit of deposing the Pope and Vatican officials in Doe v. Holy See:
CofA: Who will you try to depose first, as you work your way up to the Pope? What is the first step?
Anderson: We go back now to the trial court in Oregon, with a discovery plan. We have yet to propose that to the Court, we're formulating it now. We'll work up the line and we hope to get depositions from high ranking officials in the Vatican, the ones who know how things have operated there for a long time, like [Tarcisio] Bertone and [Angelo] Sodano.*

(Pictured left Bush, Benedict, and Bertone 2008 AP.)

Conversation with

Depending on how those depositions go and what position the Vatican takes in court, we'll have battles to fight.
Many of these depositions we'll be taking in Rome. The first persons we'll go after will be in Rome.
The judge will decide the pace, in hearings in Federal Court, what depositions we can and can’t take, what documents are discoverable and which aren’t.
Q: Will transcripts of the depositions end up on your website?
A: I will do everything I can to get as much information as we can out there publicly, but we have to be very prudent.
Doe v. Holy See hearings take place in Federal District Court in Portland, Oregon. Judge is Michael W. Mosman. Case #CV-02-00430

(Warning, May Offend or Trigger)
Like it or not, it happened and we all have to reel in the residual effects.
The Image of Catholic Priests raping children is now inevitably fusing into our arts and culture, so City of Angels is running There's No End video / song by Magdalen Graal who gives away her music for free at that site and here.

Video Above is especially hard for adult victims like me, in my "category," sexualized by a priest as pre-adolescent females to watch, as believe it or not, the video makes me excited, as in sexually aroused, horny. I publish this very personal information here only to let the world see just how sick the pedophile epidemic in the Catholic Church made some of us.
PLUS: The music, Graal's voice, is amazing:
More Music Video
New video of Roger Mahony hymn:

Background on this song: (From YouTube:) "I wrote tһіѕ song іח reaction tο tһе ongoing horrors tһаt continue tο surface аbουt molestations οf children bу priests. I аm particularly bewildered аѕ tο wһу Roger Mahony іѕ still a man οf ɡrеаt power іח tһе Catholic Church аחԁ I welcome explanations аѕ tο wһу frοm anyone wһο mіɡһt share tһеіr opinion οr insight. Wе consider tһіѕ nightmare tο bе tһе mοѕt evil betrayal οf children’s Ɩονе аחԁ trust іח ουr history." Read more:
Unusual News:
From Jamaica Observer, July 4, 2010
Hypocrisy Much?
By Sharon Leach
All in all, I'd say the past couple of weeks have been bad for the church. Well, their PR machinery. First, we had to be subjected to a preening Al Miller ... Then, as if that wasn't enough, the report of the pope raising holy hell about the Belgian police raiding the cathedral and chancery of the Brussels archdiocese in response to another round of sex abuse allegations and cover-ups...
What horrifies me is the fine lather the Church has worked itself into about the, well, violation of its rights by the police. Hello? What about the violation of the rights of all the victims who've been coming forward over the past years to voice the abuse they've had to suffer at the hands of certain paedophiles disguising themselves as priests? The scandals simply refuse to die. You'd have thought the Holy Father would be relieved at the intervention of civil law since canon law, with all due respect, seems to be hurting more than it is helping. Where was his righteous indignation when the allegations of those abominations were coming fast and furious?
Apparently, it was a stealth raid. (The best kind, really.) The Belgian bishops were pounced on, so to speak, and basically sequestered within the building, deprived of their cell phones, etc. (A Greg Christie move, basically, so no paper shredding could take place or sensitive files removed to someone's home for 'safekeeping'.) Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State voiced the Vatican's shock and outrage at the incident, saying "there are not precedents — not even under the old Communist regimes". And a spokesman for the archdiocese has suggested that there may be grounds for a lawsuit against the police. Are these people for real?
This is why organised religion is losing much of its relevance today
From Politics Daily July 8, 2010
Vatican's New Rules Against Child Sex Abusers to Maintain Status Quo
The Vatican is expected to slightly enhance its rules for punishing clergy who sexually abuse children, but the new policies, likely to be announced within days, will still fall short of what victim advocates say is necessary to protect minors. Moreover, the changes are seen as fairly minor concessions in a decades-long battle to push Rome to act forcefully against abusers. In addition, the new policy, which has reportedly been signed by Pope Benedict XVI, still has no provision for dealing with bishops who cover up for molesting priests and it is unlikely to clarify whether or how bishops should report abusers to civil authorities.
From Ex Catholics for Christ in England:

Ex Catholics for Christ is an open air father and son ministry, based on Romans 10, here from NIV translation:
10:3 "Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. 4Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone."
Better expressing how City of Angels feels about it, THE MESSAGE Translation of Romans 10:3:
"They are doing everything exactly backward. They don't seem to realize that this comprehensive setting-things-right that is salvation is God's business. Right across the street they set up their own salvation shops and noisily hawk their wares. After all these years of refusing to really deal with God on his terms, insisting instead on making their own deals, they have nothing to show for it."
Look at all this coverage over embezzlement Compared to sex crimes of one priest in one town: WHO CARES about One Million Dollars? Hundreds of thousands of lives were destroyed at an early age!!!

Catholic priest Kevin Gray stole $1M and spent it on male escorts: police - New York Daily News - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎ - A disgruntled Catholic priest was charged Tuesday with raiding church coffers to finance a double life befitting a mogul - and to pay for male escorts. ...

Waterbury priest charged with stealing $1M - Part 1 - WTNH - ‎Jul 6, 2010‎ - A former pastor of a Roman Catholic parish in Waterbury is facing larceny charges. 64-year-old Rev. Kevin J. Gray is accused of stealing over $1 million of ...

Waterbury priest charged with stealing $1M - Part 2 - WTNH - ‎Jul 6, 2010‎ - A Waterbury priest is accused of stealing more than $1million to pay for a lavish lifestyle faced a judge. Kevin Grey, the former pastor at Sacred Heart ...

Priest 'steals $1.5m to pay male escorts' - Herald Sun - ‎Jul 6, 2010‎ - A ROMAN Catholic Priest was charged with stealing $1.3 million from his parish over seven years to pay for male escorts, hotels, meals and clothing. ...

Catholic priest in America 'stole church funds to pay for male escorts' - The Guardian - ‎Jul 6, 2010‎ A Roman Catholic priest has been arrested over claims he stole $1.3m (£750000) in church money over seven years. He allegedly spent it on male escorts, ...

Catholic priest stole $1.3 million to pay for male prostitutes - Times LIVE (blog) - ‎A Roman Catholic priest has been arrested on charges he stole $1.3 million in church money over seven years to use for male prostitutes, expensive clothing, ...

Priest Confesses To Shocking Use Of Embezzled Church Funds - (blog) - On Tuesday morning 64 year old Roman, Catholic priest, Kevin Gray, turned himself into the Waterbury, Mass Police department after having learned of a ...

Connecticut priest used $1.3 million from the church's money to lead a double ... - Aishwarya Bhatt - Connecticut, July 8 (THAINDIAN NEWS) A Connecticut priest was discovered to have led a flamboyant double life that even included male escorts.

barely evokes a media ripple:

New Haven Man Files Lawsuit Against Seymour Priest - Valley Independent Sentinel - Eugene Driscoll - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎ - A New Haven man filed a civil lawsuit Wednesday against a Seymour priest, claiming the Rev. ...

Man Accuses Seymour Priest Of Abusing Him When He Was An Altar Boy - Hartford Courant - Dave Altimari - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎
A 34-year-old man filed a lawsuit Wednesday accusing the current pastor at a Roman Catholic Church in Seymour of ...

New Clergy Sex Abuse Lawsuit Filed Against Diocese of Orlando and Indiana Bishop - PR Newswire (press release) - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎ - ORLANDO, Fla., July 7 /PRNewswire/ -- The Miami law firm of Mermelstein & Horowitz, PA, announces the filing of a new lawsuit alleging that a Roman Catholic ...

Lawsuit: Conn. priest bribed sexual abuse victim - The Associated Press - John Christoffersen - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎ - NEW HAVEN, Con. — A Connecticut man filed a lawsuit Wednesday accusing a Roman Catholic pastor of sexually abusing him when he was a boy and trying to buy ...

Lawsuit accuses Conn. priest of sexual abuse - Newsday (subscription) - John Christoffersen - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎ - (AP) — A Connecticut man has filed a lawsuit accusing the pastor of a Roman Catholic church in Seymour of sexually abusing him when he was a boy and trying ...

Former altar boy accuses Seymour priest of abuse Read the lawsuit complaint here - Waterbury Republican American - Quannah Leonard - ‎July 8, 2010 - SEYMOUR -- A New Haven man has filed a lawsuit against a local Roman Catholic priest, accusing the pastor of ...

Seymour priest accused of sex abuse in lawsuit - Middletown Press - Lauren Garrison - July 8, 2010 - William Dotson never told anyone about the sexual abuse he says he suffered at the hands of a priest when ...

Suit accuses Seymour priest of sex abuse at New Haven church (document) - New Haven Register (subscription) - Lauren Garrison - ‎Jul 7, 2010‎ - The priest at St. Augustine Church in Seymour is accused of sexually abusing an altar boy while serving at St. Francis ...

That's only a sampling, this story of a million dollars embezzled by a priest is running everywhere, and when another one rapes a kid it almost gets buried...

City of Angels Blog is Posted by Kay Ebeling, The City of Angels Is Everywhere Please credit and link back to this blog when copy and pasting

RE Future Depositions by Anderson Advocates in Rome: *Tarcisio Bertone is Vatican Secretary of State, Angelo Sodano is the Italian Cardinal at The Vatican who said: "The people of God [are] not impressed by the petty gossip of the moment," -in his address as Dean of the College of Cardinals to Pope Benedict XVI at Easter 2010, always to be remembered as the cardinal who referred to the pedophile epidemic in the Catholic Church as petty gossip... petty gossip... petty gossip!!!!!

Don't forget to send PayPal clicks, or we all might end up just flacking for cliques...

Do you believe it? A typo in paragraph 3 or so and I did not notice it until three days later... sigh

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Pedophile Priest Lives by Park, Schools, and Church Even After 2008 Settlements Plus Current Vatican Lawsuit for His Crimes

Google Satellite Map of 3700 Sutter Street, Stockton CA, where activist found Titian Miani, pedophile priest with numerous credible charges, living with easy access to children.

The old man actually cried. He said, "My grand kids have been playing with him."

When pedophile priests are removed from ministry for their crimes, they can end up living in any community, usually with no monitoring, even though they are credibly accused sex offenders, as the AP reported earlier this week followed by yesterday's story at Politics Daily When civil lawsuits settle without going to trial, sex crimes of the priests remain "alleged." As a result there could be thousands of pedophile priests, who have or have not been removed from ministry for child sex crimes, now living anywhere in the United States, with free and easy access to children.

A lawsuit filed including the Vatican as a defendant June 30th in Norwalk, California, concerns Father Titian Miani, who was the subject of several cases that were part of the 2007-2008 settlements against the L.A. Archdiocese, and his religious order, The Salesians. Miani has accusations of serial child rape from Italy, Brazil, Canada, and California.

After hearing about the new lawsuit June 30th that goes all the way to the Vatican, activist Joey Piscitelli of Martinez tracked down the priest and was alarmed to find that Miani's current apartment in Stockton, CA, is between St. Luke's Church, where Miani is apparently still serving as a priest, and a park with a skating area for children. The Stockton Diocese as recently as June 30th still listed Miani as a "Priest (Retired)" although his name has since been removed. (See Anderson Advocates site link below.)

We talked to Joey by Phone yesterday, here is what he had to say in his own words, taken down verbatim as he reported:


They have Miani stationed at St. Luke's Church, and there's a grammar school on either side of where he lives.

When I went there, he wasn’t in his apartment, the landlady said he was at the park.

I looked and a school is just a couple blocks away and there's a park across the street.

Titian Miani is the poster boy for international child rape and here he wasn’t in his room, the woman says on a recent weekday afternoon, she says, "I think he’s at the park next door."

His address is 3700 Sutter St. Apartment 1 Stockton, (the apartment building across street from Oak Park).

Local TV news from Channel 3 came out to cover the story of us leafletting Miani's neighborhood, but they never ran a story.

There's one park on each side of his building and a grammar school two blocks away.

The church has the audacity to put him there.

I'm going back again with fifteen hundred fliers.

I gave fliers to some of the other tenants in his building. It’s a retirement home, there were some older men on the porch playing checkers.

I told them about Titian Miani in Apartment 101 and one man said, "I have the apartment next door, my grand kids are around all the time, what are you saying?"

I said, look this guy is a serial child rapist.

The old man actually cried. He said, "My grand kids have been playing with him."

Then the woman, I think she was the landlady, came out and took the flier out of his hands. She was working there at the apartments and I think she got on the phone, made a call, then came out and took fliers out of the hands of the tenants.

3700 Sutter Street in Stockton is a square building built in the thirties or forties. Everyone living there is over age 55, not priests, regular people.

Titian Miani is still a priest

I told them he’s listed as a priest retired not defrocked.

I said just look up Jim Miani on the internet, on bishop accountability.

Why wasn’t he convicted, the neighbors asked, and I said, the statute of limitations.

He’s living between two parks and across from a grammar school.

Laicizing priests just turns them loose on the community where they are unmonitored, because even when parties reach multi-million dollar settlements concerning Catholic priest sex crimes, there is no legally proven guilt, so the priests do not go on sex offender registries.

This battle is not anywhere near over.

Check out info on the current lawsuit from Norwalk concerning Titian Miani at Anderson Advocates Website:
Lawsuit claims church protected abusive Salesian priest with transfers to 3 continents
A California man who alleges he was abused in the 1960s by a priest who belonged to the Salesian order of the Roman Catholic church filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the order and the Vatican, claiming officials covered for the cleric by shuffling him between three continents over three decades.

6/30/10 Press Conference Announcing Lawsuit Naming Vatican and Salesian Defendants Involving Sexual Abuse by Fr. Jim “Titian” Miani.

Video of Press conference held 6/30/10 in California

Press Release - California man first to sue Vatican after U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Foreign Sovereign Immunity case against Holy See
Miani Timeline
Miani locations Map
Miani Picture
Miani listed as a priest in 2010
Miani Complaint

Here is some of our previous coverage of Titian Miani in 2008 at City of Angels: Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Salesians admit today Fr. Titian Miani DID molest plaintiffs, ending global cases in LA re pedophile priests from 2003 SOL window. More to come

AND Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Miani came out covering his face, the boy was pulling up his pants, witness from Canada tells what he would have testified in Salesian trial
Here is Politics Daily story based on the Associated Press report earlier this week:
Priest-Molesters Often Aren't Monitored, Despite Church Promise


Blog Posted by Kay Ebeling, The City of Angels Is Everywhere and don't forget we need PayPal Clicks to Keep CofA Energized (hit Donate buttons on the left)

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Mahony Redux: Archbishop of Los Angeles Deposition Deconstruction Continued:

(Analyzing Cardinal Roger Mahony's statements under oath in deposition January 25, 2010 in the case of Luis C v. Doe, continued from from Part 1 and Part 2 . )

So Much For Pastoral Care. Since the July 2007 settlements in L.A. every mainstream news group has quoted the Archbishop saying he approaches the matter of pedophile priests in a pastoral way. He apologized on camera and says he is truly concerned about the victims who are struggling today. Yet this is what he said about two former altar boys in the deposition released to the public last month:

Q: Did the issue of reporting this to the police ever enter your mind [in 2000] when the Cadigan* matter carne up?
MR. HENNIGAN: Purely argumentative.
THE WITNESS: I answered that. I told you, these were adults. They were angry. They were furious at Baker. They had an attorney that was furious at Baker. They were in a different state. seemed to me if they really wanted to get him, they would have reported it in Arizona.
(Then 30 pages of transcript later, Mahony says about those same victims:)

MANLY: So the reason you didn't tell the parishes about Michael Baker molesting children is because you were worried about a [2000] confidentiality agreement?
10 MAHONY: I was worried- not worried. I wanted to get that lawsuit settled.
12 Q Why?
13 A For the sake of these men, these victims.
*"Cadigan" refers to Lynne Cadigan, the Arizona attorney representing this set of victims; John Manly is the Orange County attorney representing Luis C. Hennigan is the L.A. attorney who represents Mahony.

Around page 146 of transcript, Manly queries why the story of the illegal alien victims who went back to Mexico is nowhere in the "Report to the People of God" released in 2004. When Mahony's asked again why not call police, his laywers object: Not again, "It's argumentative and it's offensive." Manly says, "Yeah, especially if you were molested by Father Baker." Another question never really answered: Where did Father Baker get the $500,000 he apparently gave to one of his victims to make him go away?

(Wasn't that little graphic fun? Here is the deposition deconstructed, starting from the beginning:)

Q: When you were bishop of Stockton, did you have a policy of where you kept files with allegations of sex molestation by priests against children?
A: There was a confidential section in the files.
Q: Did a confidential section for files exist when you came to Los Angeles?
A: I don't recall.

[Okay, He Right Away Remembers the Confidential Section Of Files In Stockton Where He’d Been 20 Years Earlier, But He Can't Remember For Los Angeles Where He Is Today? That Just Does Not Sound True. Look at Any Deposition, You See, Church Hierarchy Believe They Can Say Anything Under Oath, And Since No One Can Verify It, They Can Say Anything They Want Even Under Oath. ]


Q: If a priest says to you, “I molested children,” don't you think it’s appropriate at that point to call the police, be it in 1985 or now?
A: If you want to review the suspected child abuse form, you'll see that the very top little section says, name of mandated reporter, title of mandated reporter, category of mandated reporter, the agency to which it is sent.
And the rest of it is a big section about each victim and the victim’s parents. So you-- obviously, if you can’t fill out the form you can’t send it.
Q: I see. What about just picking up the phone as Bishop and calling for example, you knew Chief Gates, right?
A: Yes.
Q: You knew him personally, right?
A: Yes.
Q: He came to the Red Mass, right?
A: I think possibly.
Q: Couldn't you cal up Chief Gates and say, “Hello, Chief, this is Cardinal Mahony. I have a priest here who has violated a child. I am not sure who it is. Could you please get somebody over here and begin an investigation?”
Wouldn't that be the right thing to do?
A: Well today it would, but back then that isn’t the way these matters were approached.
Q: I see. When did that change, you know, when in your mind do you think it would have been appropriate to call the police? What was the year that changed?
A: Well my first approach is always the pastoral one. That is, if there is a suspicion of wrongdoing, regardless what it is, to get the priest away from ministry, to find out what is going on, and then to take whatever steps seem appropriate.
Q: How many priests admitted to you in Los Angeles they had molested children?
A: Over what time period?
Q: The entire time you've been here.
A: One. Michael Baker.
Q: What did he tell you?
A: He told me that they were two families of illegal aliens and they had left the Los Angeles area.

[As City of Angels posted July 3rd in Part 2, no one used the term "illegal aliens" in 1985, making this testimony appear more coached than responsive.]

Q: And you naturally took notes on that?
A: I don't think I took written notes.
Q; The first thing you would want to do if that were true is make sure somebody found those families and got help, right/
A: Well I asked him names. He said he did to know the last names and that he had no idea where they were, no idea they could be found, that they had moved multiple times.
Q: What did you do to find those children?
A: Well asked him where this happened and he said it did not happen at the parish.
Q: Okay and you believed him?
A: Unfortunately I believed everything he said.
Q: I take it at that point you directed your staff to find the kids?
A: no I did not.
Q: Did you call the pastor where he served?
A: Well since he told me this had nothing to do with the parish, I did not call the pastor.
Q: What did he tell you he did to the kids?
A: Interesting. He said he had some touching with them.
Q: What does that mean?
A: I have no idea.

Did you then notify the parish in Los Angeles where he was serving?
A: I told you that he said this did not happen in the parish, it happened someplace else.
Q: What does that matter?
A: It did not occur to me at the time that there were other victims in the parish, because these were not people that belonged to the parish.
Q: According to the pedophile?
A: Yes.
Q: Did you think it to prudent to go to the parish ad make an announcement that Father Baker had hurt these kids?
A: well, the challenge is trying to look at 1986 through the lenses of 2010.

(Oh come on, when was forcing sex on a child ever okay?)

Q: I want to know, in 1986, did it occur to you that it would be a good idea, sir, to make a announcement to the parish?
A: Let me explain. It is impossible to talk about 1986 without understanding all that has gone on since…I can’t disassociate what we have accomplished over the years to protect children. . . .
I think if he (the pedophile) had said these children had anything to do with the parish, I may have. But I don't recall that as an idea.

Q: how many other priests other than Father Baker have you asked your staff to delay reporting to the parishes on?
A: I don't think it’s a matter of delay. We have to be able to announce what we know is accurate.
Q: Where did you send Father Baker immediately after he told you he had molested kids?
A: He was sent to the center in Jemez Springs, New Mexico, operated by the Paracletes.
Q: Didn't you send him to Big Sur first, the monastery?
A: I don't recall.

(Yeah right)

Q: Did you ever send him to Big Sur for a retreat?
A: I honestly don't recall.
Q: What was Jemez Springs?
A: It is a location where the Paraclete priests and brothers operated a, a, kind of a psychological treatment center for priests with a variety of problems.
Q: Did they treat pedophilia there?
A: I'm sorry?

(Oh? You're Going To Ask Me About That? How Innocent Of Me To Forget.)

Q: Did they treat pedophilia there?
A: I believe so.
Q: Do you recall seeing an article where Father Baker describes a meeting, and he admitted he molested these two boys? Did such a meeting take place with you, Mr. Baker, and another individual?
A: I don't believe one word Michael Baker says.
Q: Have you seen where Michael Baker has told the media that occurred?
A: Michael Baker has said a lot of things and I don't believe any of it.

(Hmm, The Doyle and Mouton Delivered Their Report at the Bishops Meeting 1985 in Collegeville, Minnesota)

[Says when he came back set up a policy in September 1985]

Q: Why did you think written guidelines were important?
A: So that we could educate priests and people in ministry about what their duties and responsibilities are with children:
Q: Like calling the police?
A: All of them.
Q: If a priest admits he’s molested children, isn’t the first thing you do to call the police?
A: Not necessarily.
Q: Can you think of an instance it would not be appropriate to call the police?
A: In my experience, you only call the police when you've got victims that you can talk to. … If you want to review the Suspected Child Abuse form, you'll see that the very top little section says, Name of mandated reporter, title, and there’s a big section about each victim and the victim’s parents. So-- obviously if you can’t fill out the form, you can’t send it in.
I always viewed the psychologist and psychiatrists whole language I could never learn to understand, as a therapy level, and that information primarily is for them. so I've always looked at it in my role as the pastoral role. How is he doing pastorally/ Is he making progress spiritually?

(ME: Monsignor Curry got the reports, says the Archbishop, and the Court says, well then we'll have to go onto another subject, Buck Passing Achieved.

MAHONY CLAIMS the Servants of the Paraclete did not send him a report on Baker after he went there for treatment of pedophilia. Manly says all the priests came out of Servants with a release document saying whether or not they could return to ministry. Then Mahony buck passes saying, oh well then Monsignor Curry would have gotten it.

Then comes the conversation where they name several priests who also have been accused, but their names are all REDACTED out, which resulted in our previous post “REDACTED” and here are some sample pages.

These redacted priest names with known priest names remaining in the transcript shows that sex crimes are still being kept secret in the Los Angeles Archdiocese.


Q: Okay, 1985 or 86 he [REDACTED NAME OF PRIEST] was arrested and charged with child molestation, does that sound right?
A: Somewhere in that time frame?
Q: Does it help refresh your recollection if I represent to you he was accused of putting his hands and touching the genitals of high school seminarians while they were in bed at Our Lady Queen of Angels Seminary?
A: Yes.
Q: So he was accused of touching and did go to jail?
A: I don't recall.
Q: If you saw Michael Baker in the 1990s with altar boys or altar girls in the mid nineties, you would have viewed that as a violation of his aftercare contract and done something about it, right?
A: No. Those contacts were minimal in a public setting. He was not alone with a minor, he was there in a church with minors. My experience is the sacristy area at churches, especially on Sundays, are very busy places. People coming and going, lectors, ministers of eucharist. People constantly. It’s a public situation, it’s not a private place.

[Hmm, I Think There Are A Few Former Altar Servers Around The Country Who Can Contradict That.]

Mr. HENNIGAN: Let me say that the way you are using the phrase, I think it’s misleading. When you say dress, it would sound as though there is some moment where there is undressing, which is typically not the case.
Mr. MANLY: Unless you're Michael Baker.
Q: You ever heard of a child molested in a sacristy, Eminence?
A: No.
Q: [In the 1990s] was Father Baker allowed to dress with the altar boys and altar girls at the parishes he was serving at?
A: I don't know the configuration. Most of the sacristies that I'm aware of, they have kind of a work sacristy, then they have just near it the priest sacristy where all the vestments are.
[RE: One of the priests with name redacted on page 60]
Father BLANK was retired in Nazareth House. The Los Angeles County Jail was looking for somebody to be a half time chaplain to the men’s jail, so he lived in residence at the St. Vibiana’s Cathedral and went over to the jail, ministered, and came back.

To A Church Attorney: Rape is too argumentative a word?

Mr. MANLY: Re not wanting this to be public, this being priests raping little boys and little girls, did the concept of that being public ever influence your decision not to call law enforcement?
Mr. HENNIGAN: The use of the term raping is argumentative and inconsistent with most of the allegations. So I think it’s offensive.
Mr. MANLY: I'm not going to withdraw it. I think there’s substantial evidence to indicate many of these priests, including Michael Wempe, raped kids.
THE COURT: The way you're wording it is argumentative.
Q: Cardinal, did the idea of a public scandal ever enter your mind and influence you not to call the police?
A: No.
Q: That's your testimony?
A: Yes.

Q: Did you ever have a conversation with Chief Bernard Parks about the Baker matter?
A: Not to my recollection.
Q: If you learned that Michael Baker was in the private area of the rectory with children, what would have been your response based on your policy?
Mr. HENNIGAN: Do you have a time period?
THE WITNESS: I'm not sure what you mean by private area.
Q: If you learned that Michael Baker was upstairs with a child, would that have been a violation of his aftercare contract?
A: In a bedroom?
Q: Anywhere in the area.
A: Certainly in the bedroom. I don't know the specifics of what happened. If he was found in the bedroom with Michael Baker, yes.
Q: Did you ever learn that Michael Baker had been found with a child in the rectory?
A: Yes. The first thing we did, we asked that the young person be interviewed.

[Okay Here’s a Blatant Contradiction where he then goes back and covers for himself:]

Q: Did you tell the priests at the 1986 retreat that if you have done this [molested a child], I'm going to call the police on you?
A: No.
Q: And why didn't you do that?
A: First of all, those days, the custom was the parents were the ones who would make contact with police, or those who were mandated reporters at that time.
Q: You didn't have a policy in Stockton to call the police?
A: Oh, I said, yes, if we had victims we did.
Q: So as Archbishop, every time you found victims, you always called the police, is that your testimony?
A: Well let me say it wasn’t always myself who called the police.

Q: Did it matter to you before 1997 whether someone who worked for you was a mandated reporter in terms of calling the police?
A: No, the point is that the mandated reporters were the first line people who normally found out about these matters.
Q: Okay, but if a priest found out a priest had molested a child, it was your expectation that they would call the police, right?
A: That who would call the police?
Q: The brother priest?
A: I'm just not aware of a case like that.
Q: Would you call the police?
A: We weren’t mandated to do it.
Q: I understand that's your position but did it matter to you whether you were mandated or not, without calling the police be the right thing to do?
A: In virtually every case I was not the first one to find out.
Q: The only case you found out directly about was Baker, right?
A: Yes.
Q: And you didn't report?
A: No.
[Discussion: In the People of God Report for Baker it reads that the priest met with “Cardinal Mahony and vicar for Clergy to discuss his relationship with two boys from 1978 to 1985.]
Q: So he told you he touched REDACTED on the genitals for seven years?
A: No.
Q: Well this says 1978 to 1985, that strikes me as an extraordinarily long period of time.
A: When he met with me, he gave me the impression that this may have happened once or twice.
Q: Do you know where these dates come from?
A: The 1978 date, I have no idea.
Q: I'm just curious because you said he told you they were illegal aliens. They were certainly here for a long time, if that was the case, if it was 1978 to 1985.
Mr. HENNIGAN: He has just testified that 78 is not his recollection.
Mr. MANLY: This is in the People of God Report, the Addendum.
Q: Do you have any idea where these dates came from?
Mr. HENNIGAN: He has already said he did not.
Mr. MANLY: Okay, just bear with me. You can answer.
THE WITNESS: I don't know where it came from.
Q: Is this at odds with your memory of the incident?
A: This summary was done by a number of people looking at a number of things, and I don't know exactly where that date came from.

(Oh, Come On, You Expect Us To Believe The Cardinal Did Not Look Over Every Punctuation Point On The People Of God Report, Released At The Height Of L.A. Archdiocese’s Several Hundred Lawsuits Being Filed?)

Q: Okay, just to make sure I've got this clear, you have no idea as you sit here today where the information comes from in this line we've been talking about?
Mr. HENNIGAN: You mean his memory hasn’t been refreshed in the last ten minutes?
Mr. MANLY: Yeah, because you haven’t given me the documents. If you would give me the documents, maybe we could do that.
Mr. HENNIGAN: He is not going to answer the question again.

Q: Let me read it verbatim, Mr. Woods.
Mr. WOODS: Good.
Q: “1-1-87. Placed on sick leave through 8-31-87. Is that what it says?
Mr. WOODS: Yes.
Q: Is that accurate?
THE WITNESS: I did not personally draw up these documents.
Q: Does that comport with your memory, Cardinal?
A: Approximately.
Q: Who placed him on sick leave?
A: I did.
Q: What was wrong with him?
A: Well again, the word sick leaves is not my word. This was back in 1986.
Q: Okay, 1-2-87, it says “He leaves for evaluation by Servants of the Paraclete Foundation House in Jemez Springs, New Mexico. Do you see that?
A: Yes.
Q: What was Father Baker’s problem as you understood it that caused you to send him to the Paraclete?
A: Well, his volunteering that he had had inappropriate touches with two boys.
Q: 1-23-87, it says, “Evaluation report from Servants of the Paraclete re Baker.” Did you ever see that report, Cardinal?
A: I don't recall.
Q: Was it addressed to you?
A: I don't recall.
Q: Over the years have you seen reports from this facility?
A: Possibly yes.
Q: Alright, it says May 3rd 1987, “Vicar for Clergy Curry meets with Baker and staff at Servants of the Paraclete in New Mexico.” Was it customary for somebody from the Archdiocese to meet with the Paracletes at the conclusion of treatment or during treatment?
A: We would send the Vicar for Clergy from time to time to obtain a progress report.
Q: Okay, June 4, 1987, it says, “fourth and final report from Servants of the Paraclete, do you see that?
A: I do.
Q: Then it says June 22nd 1987 “he returned to the Archdiocese.
A: I see that yes.
Q: Who assigned him then to St. Elizabeth in Van Nuys?
A: I imagine it would have been Monsignor Curry.
Q: And who has the authority to assign priests in the Archdiocese?
A: Myself and the Vicar’s General and specialized Vicars like Vicar for Clergy. The authority to appoint them is totally mine, but I can delegate them for associate pastors o for administrators.
Q: Did Baker go to counseling for the entire time he remained in ministry as far as you know?
A: As far as I know, but again, I don't believe anything he said.
Q: Do you have any understanding as to why none of these counselors ever reported Michael Baker to the police or Child Protective Services?
A: No, I don't.
Q: It says “9=1=87, assigned to residence at St. Thomas the Apostle.” Do you see that?
A: Yes.
Q: Does St. Thomas the Apostle have a school attached to the parish?
A: Yes.
Q: And did y\he live there?
A: He lived at the rectory.
Q: Did anybody think it was not a good idea to assign Father Baker to a parish that had a school given that he had molested children?
A: Well, being in residence, his only contact would probably be on Sunday mass or confessional maybe. But he had no relationship with the school.
Q: I take it the parishioners at St. Thomas the Apostle were alerted that he had previously molested kids?
A: Not that I know of.

(YIKES. That Cavalier Attitude, Shows What's Been Wrong With the Church from the Start. Just Brush It Off with a, "Not That I Know Of," Like What's the Big Deal, Man?)****************

Q: There was nothing in Father Baker’s restrictions that prevented him from having a face-to-face confession with a child, is that accurate?
A: I think that's accurate.
Q: Did you think of Father Baker as a sex offender, Cardinal, when you brought him back?
A: I did but as somebody who I felt was really trying to change his life.
Q: And what was it about father Baker that made you believe that?
A: The fact that he came in to self report.

(As we reported July 3, Mahony was a masters level social worker before becoming a bishop. Yet he claims to have known so little about sex offenders? It begs credibility)

[Back from Lunch, Discussion: Baker had numerous parish assignments from 1987 to 2000]
Q: What does that mean?
A: Basically the short term assignments mean somebody who can come in and sign the checks and leave, basically.
Q: But he’s the pastor until he’s replaced, right?
A: Well not really. These pro tem assignments for a few months, couple months, two three months are primarily to facilitate signing checks.
Q: So he didn't say mass there?
A: I don't know. I expect each of these [assignments] was a little different, but I don't know exactly what he did there.


(Baker was sent to St. Linus, no need to warn parishioners, because, "[After his return from the Paracletes, he was fulfilling his aftercare agreement and there were no suspicions.”)


Q: Was there a policy in the Archdiocese that priests accused of abuse were not presented to the Priest Personnel Board for assignment?
A: Not that I'm aware of.
Q: The Board’s job is to review a priest’s file and make recommendations to you for assignments for priests, is that correct?
Mr. WOODS: I'm going to object as compound.
THE WITNESS: (Buck Passing Begins The job of the clergy Personnel Board is almost always full time assignments, full year long or more administrators, full time pastors, not these temporary brief assignments.
Q: Cardinal, who in the Archdiocese was aware that Michael Baker was a child molester prior to 2000?
A: I really don't know.
Q: How about [when Baker was sent to] St. Gerard Majella, was anybody advised?
A: Not that I'm aware of.
Q: How about St. Mary’s?
A: I simply do not know.
Q: Was it the custom or practice of your office to advise that he had previously offended with a child?
A: Again, most of these, he did not reside at the place and I don't know exactly what the Vicar for Clergy told them.
Q: Was it custom and practice to advise other priests?
A: I know they would have been told something, but it was not- not my job.
Q: Is there a reason you didn't advise the parishes?
A: Well, remember these years that we're looking at here. During this specific time that Michael Baker would have had those temporary assignments.
Q: Cardinal, did it ever occur to you [to notify parents] in order to keep kids safe from a child molester in the early 1990s?
A: Well, keep in mind, we deal with these case by case. In the case of Michael Baker, he was not put into a regular parish.
Mr. MANLY: Your honor, can I get an answer to my question?
Mr. WOODS: I’ll object, it’s a hypothetical.
MANLY: You can answer, Cardinal.
THE WITNESS: As I said, he was not assigned to a parish.
Q: Okay let’s change the question and say serving in a parish. [He does]
A: As I said, in this time frame, that was not our normal practice because that kind of priest would never be put full time into a parish.
Q: Respectfully, my question is different-
Mr. HENNIGAN: I think at this point he’s answered.
Q: So your testimony is that at no point did you ever consider that it would be prudent to let people in the parish know that he had molested kids?
A: I'm not sure if I thought about that or not.

(NOTE: Church hierarchy guys only admit what they realize they have to admit, because the questioner has evidence:)

Q: Did you ever go to a confirmation service at St. Columbkille while Baker served there?
A: I don't think so.
Q: So if my client and his family recall you being there with him while this boy was serving mass, do you take issue with that?
A: I just don't remember.
Q: Let me show you the next document. [Exhibit 3] Have you had a chance to read it?
A: I can’t make out all the words.
Q: Let me tell you what I think it says. It says, “Roger. Thank you so much for blessing our priest council area meeting at St. Hilary’s. Appreciate mucho being a member of ‘your parish.’ Thought you might be interested in any of the handouts at today’s meeting. Thank you, Mike.” Does that look about right?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you recall going to a meeting at St. Hillary’s?
A: No.
Q: And do you know why he would address you as roger?
Mr. HENNIGAN: Who’s he?
Mr. MANLY: Mike Baker.
H: any evident that this is Mike Baker?
M: Uh-huh. Go ahead.
H: I'm sorry there is no foundation.
M: That's that it’s been presented to us as. It was presented and produced as a Cardinal correspondence, am I wrong about that?
Mr. STEIER: I doubt if I have ever produced that.
Q: Let me read the Bates label number as CIVBAKE 000107. Whose Bates number is that.
STEIER: I believe that's the personnel file.
MANLY: That's what I think.
THE COURT: Why don't you go on with the questions.
MANLY: So do you know why he would address you as Roger?
HENNIGAN: Again there is no foundation.
Q: I mean, it was in his personnel file,
H: You can answer the question.
THE COURT: The question is, does he address you by your first name?
MANLY: Did he address you by your first name, Cardinal/
A: I don't remember.


(We will pick this up again on page 119 as we begin the dialogue about Monsignor Dyer.)

AT THIS POINT CITY OF ANGELS got a copy of the deposition that can be copy and pasted, so I can finally stop copy typing. From here on quotes will (thank god) be different with the hard returns and page and line numbers included, starting with part 3 of Deconstructing the Deposition of Cardinal Roger Mahony.

Then stay close b, as we still have William Levada’s deposition to complete, plus the judge and other bishop deposed in the Luis C case that produced this deposition of the L.A. Archbishop.

Plus a deposition of Cardinal George that landed in my lap last month

Plus more stuff as it comes up.

By Kay Ebeling,

The City of Angels is Everywhere


Q: Did you know Bishop Ward and Archbishop Levada before you came to Los Angeles?
A: Yes, I was actually a classmate of Bishop Levada. And Bishop Ward and I met over the years because I have family here...

Dear Old L.A., where the Arhbishop grew up, just blocks from where I live today in Hollywood... I'll probly see him bicycling around after he retires. Lucky me


Background: Tuesday, June 29, 2010

REDACTED: Sex Offender Priest Names Blacked Out in Transcript of Cardinal Mahony Deposition

AND Saturday, July 3, 2010

Mahony Redux: Deconstructing the Deposition of the Archbishop of Los Angeles, Part 1


(When we criticize the Church for letting thousands of Catholic priests rape little children in the USA, there is No Anti-Catholic agenda, Believe me. I don't care one way or the other about this religion. I also know it doesn't matter if one bishop replaces another one, they're all dedicated to the Church first and foremost, even over the wellbeing of children, that's been proved. But I will be standing on the sidelines when people are buying old churches at repossessed real estate auctions if that happens, because the fall of the church is not on my agenda at all. I just wake up and do what is right in front of me.

Since everything in my life got skewered, starting with that priest who took advantage of my father being gone on business trips most weekdays and my mom, the former atheist flapper flirting with him, then her thinking Father Horne was such a great guy to take care of the kids and give her some free time, because all that happened and now all I can do is what is right in front of me, this is City of Angels.


This is Part 3, Part 4 will be posted soon. (I accidentally called Part 2, Part 1 last week... seriously need a proofreader.

Don't Forget we need PayPal clicks to keep going