Mahony on witness stand June 11 sparks outbreak of objections; more Church Attorney Potts vs Judge transcript in LA cases re predator priests

***
By City of Angels Lady

Cardinal Roger Mahony is Number 17 on the Plaintiff’s Witness List filed May 25th for the Paul Kreutzer Cases going to jury trial June 11th. Defendants have Kreutzer as Witness Number 4, then 9 through 21 are monsignors and sisters, so just reading Defendants’ Witness List can be triggering for a survivor.

Mahony’s name as a witness caused some of the disarray in LA Superior Court last week, re the hearing that vanished from the May 30th calendar. Right up to the time court went into session plaintiffs still thought the hearing re Interrogatories 1 through 8 was to go forward. It had been “penned” onto the printed sheet of paper that is taped outside the courtroom listing the order of hearings that day.

Then Plaintiff Attorney Steven J. Brady of San Francisco subpoenaed the cardinal last week to testify on the witness stand in the Kreutzer Cases trial June 11th. While the Cardinal was wondering how to avoid answering written questions in Interrogatories 1 through 8, which he’d been avoiding since August, the man in robes got served.

The Mahony subpoena caused a stream of faxes and arc scar web posts last week as motions to object and statements to support the Mahony subpoena went between attorneys and the courts. As soon as City of Angels can get to Room 106 and read whatever documents are public, you can read a report here.

On the calendar taped outside court May 30th someone official had written in ink: #9, Motion to Compel, Bc307225. The motion had gone off calendar then gone back on, then apparently gone back off again and on again.

(I know from experience that this piece of paper is sacrosanct to the court. Once at the end of the day I took the sheet down and carried it inside to ask a clerk a question. As soon as I entered all three clerks stopped and stared at me mouths open. Then one said, “You took down my calendar,” with total East LA scolding tone. I learned. That sheet of paper taped outside is The Final Calendar For The Record and it’s pristine, to be written on by officials of the court only.)

So that hearing May 30th re Mahony was still on the calendar May 30th, taken off and put back on at the last minute, and no church attorney showed up for it, as apparently church attorneys knew in advance. . . .

================
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST FOR KREUTZER TRIAL:
POTENTIAL EXHIBITS listed for the Kreutzer Cases:

Filed May 25 by Baker Baker Fink et al Church Attorneys and Steven J. Brady Esquire of San Francisco for the Plaintiff, if even a portion of exhibits on the 15-page document get into court, the trial will be eye-opening and educational.

#34: Sentencing transcript for Case No. LA085861 dated March 5, 2002

Convicted of 11 counts of lewd acts with a child in February 2002, Kreutzer got two life terms for crimes committed between 1975 and 1996. The US Supreme Court Stogner Decision reduced Kreutzer’s sentence and he’s due to be released from prison in November 2008.

=======
Let me say that again.
Paul Kreutzer, pederast predator, will be released from prison November 2008

===============

More from Exhibit List

Lots of photographs of the plaintiff from childhood up.
Lots of news articles.

Plaintiff’s Exhibit #73 is “Impact of Sexual Abuse on Children: A review and Synthesis of Existing Literature.”

Exhibit #81 is “Written and Recorded Statement of Paul Kreutzer taken on June 27 2003 by Doug Blades and Harry Thielin (FBI Agents).

Kreutzer now claims he was lying to the FBI to protect one of his victims.

Exhibit #171 - Trauma Recovery Program Booklet

All the way up to #173 - Title re Eccles Property.

Plaintiff’s Exhibit #25 & 26 are photographs of Paul Kreutzer:

#27 Deposition of Paul Kreutzer from April 23 2007

#104 - Excerpts from Preliminary Hearing of (Plaintiff) testimony Pages 5 - 60.

Then “Plaintiff reserves her right to use any exhibits at trial identified or introduced by defendant and to appropriately supplement her exhibit list based on the evidence presented at trial.

-----------

MORE BANTER BETWEEN POTTS AND FROMHOLZ

Picture Potts, this short wiry guy with a face like a wrinkled Alfalfa. He rat-a-tats his words real fast in a kind of gossipy fem tone. For example read this quote like a woman gossiping:

“This opposition was never posted on Case Home Page, but even if it’s correct, they filed this in 2004.”

Potts spews out officious sentences re dates contradicting dates, spurious arguments so filled with obfuscating words probably even the judge misses some of it, but it’s all on the record once he says it. . .

(Transcribed by City of Angels Winging It Transcripts)

JUDGE: Going back to the demurrer what document sta
tes the June 8 order granted?

PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY: Plaintiff’s request to serve denied June 8.

JUDGE: I’m asking Mr. Potts as he says it was misrepresentation of the court.

POTTS: (digging through papers) Your tentative didn't address it one way or the other.

JUDGE: You're not appreciating what I’m saying.

POTTS: Yes sir filed June 11.

JUDGE: In compliance June 8.

=========
On to the next Clergy Case:

More Church Attorney Potts versus Judge Fromholz

JUDGE: Motion to strike and dismiss Archdiocese and St. Sebastian’s School and Parish. Tentative is to deny, overrule and deny. I’ve read all the papers anything to add?

POTTS: (Think of a wrinkled Alfalfa spewing words at fast forward speed) It is undisputed in this order blah-blah-blah certificate of merit before viable revivable window. Robertson versus insurance company “over a limited period over a specific class of person” time limit is of the essence created, time period is jurisdictional requirement --

JUDGE: What case are you reading?

POTTS: Roberts versus Title Insurance 1936

JUDGE: Is this in your paper

POTTS: Yes on Page 3. (goes right on talking)

POTTS: Statute creates right to file complaint within time period. Blah-blah-blah upon expiration of the time period. It’s not a provable defense it’s a waveable defense it’s -- Certificates filed April fifth court ordered that was, uh, uh, not acceptable.

POTTS: (Cont’d:) I’m not even sure about the court’s statement -- then I saw it attached to a motion in opposition to Mr. Baker’s motion. This opposition was never posted on Case Home Page, but even if it’s correct, they filed this in 2004

(Potts seems to have a death wish the way he’s carrying on with the Judge.)

POTTS: (repeating himself again) Certificates of merit filed four months late -

JUDGE: I don't think that's the case. The late filed certificates of merit were approved by another court. I’m sure you would have pointed it out --

POTTS: (read in catty gay-guy voice)Except it wasn’t an issue until now.

JUDGE: -- So thorough is your preparation.

POTTS: -- All I knew was certificate of merit was filed in 2004--

JUDGE: And approved by the court.

That was the tone in court May 3th.
========

To me it looks like Church Attorney Lee Potts is using ramrod tactics, arguing on and on until the opposition is worn down. It’s 20 minutes later and Potts is still talking about certificates of merit filed after filing deadline.

Then Phillip Baker, standing beside Potts, seems to realize he should say something.

More to Come. . .