If he served in San Diego in 1967 he can’t testify about any job he ever held anywhere in the US because of 2007 bankruptcy, Catholic Church claims

American Catholic Church uses secular law to evade secular law.

By Kay Ebeling
A hearing July 10 will display another scene where the Archdiocese in Los Angeles is obstructing discovery in the clergy cases. Plaintiffs have been trying for months to depose Monsignor Lawrence Purcell specifically for pretrial discovery regarding Efrain Rozo Rincon, jury trial on calendar for September 10.

The church’s barriers to Purcell’s testimony bring the parties now before the judge Tuesday to argue plaintiffs’ motion to compel testimony. Purcell served in the Apostolic Delegation*, which means he was a Pope’s ambassador to the US, so plaintiffs seek his testimony on several cases where pedophile priests from other countries turned up in Southern California parishes and pursued their predations. Rozo Rincon came here from Colombia.

Since Purcell has this direct connection to the Vatican, the church is fighting his deposition with every string they can pull. The latest ploy is to use the San Diego bankruptcy as an excuse for Purcell not to answer any questions -- about anything he thought or did since the 1960s when he served as an assistant pastor in San Diego.

When asked about his job as a counselor at a seminary in the 1970s a church attorney intervened: “Objection, bankruptcy stay, instruction not to answer.”

As plaintiffs tried to ask what his responsibilities were in 1967 as assistant pastor at St. Therese Church in San Diego, his job 1974 to 1977 as a rector, or any responsibilities he had in any job he ever held,

The church attorney chimed in:

MS LANDERS: Based on the bankruptcy stay, objection. I will be instructing my client not to answer any questions that go into the duties he performed under each of the titles. He can describe what -- what -- the title that he did, but going into what he did under those titles would be objected to and instructed not to answer.”

That's the church’s objection to questions about any job Monsignor Lawrence Purcell held anywhere in the United States from 1970 to 1995, because he served for a time in one parish in San Diego.

Once again the LA Archdiocese turns to the pages of Alice in Wonderland for its defense strategy from the trial in Chapter 12.

The Hatter went on, looking anxiously round…but the Dormouse denied nothing, being fast asleep. After that, continued the Hatter, I cut some more bread- and-butter--

But what did the Dormouse say? one of the jury asked.
That I can't remember, said the Hatter.

You MUST remember, remarked the King, or I'll have you executed.

The miserable Hatter dropped his teacup and bread-and-butter, and went down on one knee. I'm a poor man, your Majesty, he began.

Back to reality(?):

Church Attorney Landers adds sovereign immunity in with bankruptcy with her obstruction of justice on the part of the archdiocese:

When Plaintiffs asked Purcell:

“Were any reports submitted to the Apostolic Delegation re sexual abuse of minors by Roman Catholic priests,”

CHURCH ATTORNEY LANDERS: “Objection sovereign immunity and bankruptcy stay”

Did she drop her teacup and get down on her knees first?

More on Donald Steier’s defense tactics that are causing his July 10 hearing on Sanctions against Donald Steier after this:

*****COMMERCIAL BREAK
I hope you enjoy reading this blog. It’s time for me to pass the Internet Hat. Please put a high five or more on my Pay-Pal Account. The more I make from the blog, the less hours I have to spend on my wage-slave job. So for More Coverage of Clergy Cases 2007 hit the Donate button in the top left column.
THANK YOU
END COMMERCIAL BREAK*****
======

I can’t resist adding this quote from Donald Steier’s brief requesting “bifurcation” of the Passionists from the Vetter jury trial coming up August 20th. As reported here, Steier is facing a sanctions hearing for the way he’s blocked depositions in this case on July 10.

Here Steier explains how he’s doing the court a favor, since the Passionists will probably not even be considered liable in the cases they should be “bifurcated” to save the court time and money:

“Undoubtedly, plaintiffs’ testimony regarding the alleged multi-faceted negative impact of the alleged molestation on their lives will not only be seriously disturbing, but extremely time consuming.

“To support their case, plaintiff will undoubtedly call nemerous experts addressing the issue of damages, including psychologistsand /or psychiatrists, economists, and rehabilitation experts.

IS HE REVEALING HIS OWN DEFENSE STRATEGY ONCE THE TRIALS BEGIN
As he’s planning to call all these witnesses himself?

More from Steier’s Bifurcation motion:

“Additionally plaintiffs will likely call friends, family members and possibly even present and or former employers to testify

“Each of the multiple defendants in this case will likely then want the opportunity to cross examine these witnesses and all the defendants will additionally need to put on their own damages experts.”

SEE: The truth comes out, it’s the church attorneys causing all these delays, saying it’s because they anticipate delays from plaintiffs.

“Accordingly, bifurcating the trial will likely result in a time savings of several weeks of court time. . . .

“Thus there stands the chance of a huge time savings if liability is not found.”

Blah-blah-blah

A very merry unbirthday to YOUUUUUUUUU

“Trial of liability and damages issues together would likely confuse the jury and distract it from a clear and logical presentation of the evidence,” says Steier.

It sure will if Steier has anything to do with it. . .

“Evidence of how the molestation of plaintiffs as children has affected plaintiffs will emotionally impact the jury. “Accordingly we need bifurcation--

“To avoid the risk that jurors’ sympathetic reaction to plaintiffs will sway their findings on the issues of liability.”

More Document Diving: After this:

*****COMMERCIAL BREAK
I hope you enjoy reading this blog. It’s time for me to pass the Internet Hat. Please put a high five or more on my Pay-Pal Account. The more I make from the blog, the less hours I have to spend on my wage-slave job. So for More Coverage of Clergy Cases 2007 hit the Donate button in the top left column.
THANK YOU
END COMMERCIAL BREAK*****

DOCUMENT DIVING
The ArcScanWeb was up and running Thursday so I did some document diving and found:

8 associations of new counsel adding Bonne Bridges on May 21 to 8 more cases.

Bonne Bridges is the firm that wrote that brilliant brief about First Amendment Rights as reported here June 18.
-----

HEARING AUGUST 14
Motion to enforce subpoena served on City of Long Beach records division
Re BC307685

Here plaintiffs are having to use the power of a court order to get “documents describing allegations, investigations, and charges of sexual misconduct and molestation” regarding Theodore Llanos whose plaintiffs’ cases are on calendar for January 7 2008.

Recently the City of Long Beach objected to the production of records saying that “the subpoena seeks personal victim information exempt from disclosure” and I wonder whose palm was greased in the City of Long Beach to get that assertion from law enforcement?

Plaintiffs have to point out with help from Haley Fromhonz that as with previous court orders: “The records at issue here should be produced to the Court for an in camera determination of the relevant privacy interests balanced against the need for discovery.

“This court has ruled that a perpetrator’s right to privacy does not prevent the disclosure of records subpoenaed from law enforcement agencies.” (referring to a previous order re Lynn Caffoe’s police records.)

August 14 hearing on this.

OH NO HERE COMES ALICE IN WONDERLAND AGAIN:

"The trial is coming Chorus again! cried the Gryphon, and the Mock Turtle had just begun to repeat it, when a cry of The trial's beginning! was heard in the distance.

"Come on! cried the Gryphon, and, taking Alice by the hand, it hurried off, without waiting for the end of the song.

"What trial is it? Alice panted as she ran; but the Gryphon only answered Come on! and ran the faster

*****COMMERCIAL BREAK
I hope you enjoy reading this blog. It’s time for me to pass the Internet Hat. Please put a high five or more on my Pay-Pal Account. The more I make from the blog, the less hours I have to spend on my wage-slave job. So for More Coverage of Clergy Cases 2007 hit the Donate button in the top left column.
THANK YOU
END COMMERCIAL BREAK*****

From New Catholic Dictionary:

* THE APOSTOLIC DELEGATION is not a tribunal of justice, but the delegate may decide conflicts in competence, as specified by church law (canon 1612, 2). The Roman pontiff's right to send representatives to any part of the world flows from the constitution of the Church, i.e., from the papal primacy of jurisdiction. Since the pope himself cannot personally fulfill the office of vigilance over the condition of the Church in the various countries of the globe, it is logical that he should have representatives who perform this duty for him and forward to him the necessary information. Hence we find the exercise of this right contemporary with the freedom and spread of Christianity.

More to Come. . .