Bishop Grahmann Testimony from Transcripts
of Rudy Kos Liability Trial
7-1-97 and 7-2-97
The identities of the victims have been removed from this document with the same "John Doe" number designations then inserted as were used for those victims in other parts of the court transcript. John Doe numbers above 11 are for victims not included in this original lawsuit. Questions and comments are welcome in an effort to make this document more useful and to change our Catholic Church so children are never again placed, and/or allowed to remain, in such danger.
Following is an index of some of the more striking testimony. It is strongly recommended you read the original testimony before and after the sections cited, especially if you have questions about the conclusions drawn.
Again, your ideas are welcome!
Bill Betzen
bbetzen@wearethechurch.org
Index (last updated 7-5-03)
Bishop Grahmann claimed under oath that he never read the Diocesan Kos Personnel file. He admitted that after the Diocese had received no fewer than 10 reports reflecting possible sexual abuse by Rudy Kos, including reports by two priests, one of whom had taken concerns directly to Bishop Grahmann twice, and after victims had come forward and lawsuits had been filed, he still had never taken the time to read the Diocesan Rudy Kos Personnel file to be familiar with the record. With this lack of detailed information he then refused to follow the recommendations of a child abuse expert in early April 1992 and allowed Kos to continue to have access to his parish and the victims. The Diocesan record that he did not read ultimately helped document the abuse of many young men and cost the Diocese millions of dollars. - Page 7610, line 13 and Page 7618 line 17
Bishop Grahmann,
speaking about his third meeting in July 1992 with
Fr. Rudy Kos following multiple complaints,
stated that he said to Fr. Kos: "Stop. Don't have little boys overnight......"I'll
move you if you do."
Note: Bishop Grahmann still had not taken time to read Kos personnel file.
We must ask:
"What
parish and which of our sons may have been
ultimately victimized if "John Doe #1" had not come forward
that next
September to file the first lawsuit?" - Page 7616, lines 16-19
Bishop Grahmann states, "I was appointed Coadjutor Bishop of the Diocese of Dallas in view of the fact that the present bishop was going to retire." - Page 7816, lines 9-11
Bishop Grahmann says he does not consider it necessary to
tell Catholic
parents and children in the diocese that it is against diocesan policy for
children to spend the night in the rectory or to go on overnight trips with a
priest unaccompanied.
Page 7854, line 25 to
Page 7856, line 20
There are many typing errors in the following document including errors in dates such as 1996 when the date should be 1986. This is the condition of the court transcript document as received:
7598 [Note: These transcript page numbers appear every 25 lines. This testimony started on page 7598 - BB]
11 THE COURT: Please state your full, legal name
12 for the record.
13 BISHOP GRAHMANN: Charles Victor Grahmann.
14 THE COURT: Okay. You may proceed.
15 MR. TURLEY: Thank you, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: You're welcome.
17
18 MOST REVEREND BISHOP CHARLES VICTOR GRAHMANN,
19 the witness, having been duly sworn and cautioned to tell
20 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,
21 testified on his oath as follows:
22 DIRECT EXAMINATION
23 BY MR. TURLEY:
24 Q. Good afternoon, Bishop.
25 A. Good afternoon.
7599
01 Q. Bishop, unfortunately, this is the first day
02 I have been short of voice. And I will do my very best to
03 keep it up, but it is going away a little bit on me here.
04 Bishop, tell the jury what your present
05 duties are here with the Dallas Catholic Diocese.
06 A. I'm the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of
07 Dallas.
08 Q. You are the supervisor, the employer, the
09 in-charge man for all of the priests within this Dallas
10 Diocese?
11 A. I am the pastoral shepherd of all other
12 people and priests of the Diocese.
13 Q. You manage them; do you not?
14 A. Within the boundaries of the law.
15 Q. You're the supervisor.
16 A. Within the boundaries of the Code of Canon
17 law.
18 Q. And you assign them to their tasks.
19 A. Within the boundaries degrees of Code of
20 Canon law.
21 Q. Bishop, when you came here, I understand it
22 was in 1990 that you assumed command of this Diocese?
23 A. That's right. I was appointed as the
24 Bishop of the Diocese.
25 Q. When I -- when you came here, it's my
7600
01 understanding from your deposition, that no one briefed you
02 at that time on the Father Rudy Kos problems.
03 A. No.
04 Q. And the person who, I guess, who most
05 likely, most reasonably should have given that you briefing
06 was Monsignor Rehkemper, your Vicar General.
07 A. Possibly.
08 Q. Do I understand that at the time you came
09 here, you did not have presented to you a file, even a file
10 on the Kos/boy problem?
11 A. No files were presented to me.
12 Q. And you had arrived just a few months after
13 a lady by the name of Allen, from Ennis, testified earlier
14 in this case that she had sent you or sent to Bishop
15 Tschoepe and Monsignor Rehkemper a letter in which she
16 contained a paragraph saying the boys are continuing -- are
17 saying overnight, on a regular basis, in the rectory, with
18 Father Kos over in Ennis. That letter was not on your desk
19 or anyplace around when you arrived, I guess.
20 A. Not aware of that letter.
21 Q. Father, when you gave your sworn deposition
22 testimony, you testified under oath that Father Williams
23 had not told you and didn't -- you didn't know that boys
24 were staying overnight when you talked to Father Williams
25 that first time.
7601
01 A. I don't remember him telling me they were
02 spending the night. He told me they were hanging around
03 the rectory.
04 Q. And you also testified that you didn't even
05 know when you first learned that they were staying
06 overnight; do you remember that?
07 A. When -- when Williams came to see me, that's
08 correct.
09 Q. Well, I understood you to say, on page 59 of
10 your deposition, that Father Williams did not tell you that
11 the boys were staying overnight.
12 A. I'm not aware that he told me that. He told
13 me they were hanging around the rectory.
14 Q. Okay. But, Bishop, there came a time when
15 you sat down and made some notes about this matter, didn't
16 you?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Have you reviewed those notes before you've
19 come here to testimony today?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Actually, contrary to your sworn testimony,
22 Bishop, in your notes, when Father Williams came to talk to
23 you in September of '91, he told you they were spending the
24 night, in that very first number one meeting you had when
25 Father Kos' problem was called to your a deposition.
7602
01 A. Okay, I wasn't aware. His emphasis was
02 that the kids were spending -- were hanging around the
03 rectory.
04 Q. Well, you made these notes. That
05 (indicating) is your handwriting, isn't it?
06 A. That's correct.
07 Q. And you made these notes on your
08 recollection of what Father Williams told you. And you
09 remember having a meeting in 1991. Late September or early
10 October Father Williams expresses his concern that a group
11 of boys are always hanging around the rectory. And he said
12 -- you said, you wrote, "even spending the night."
13 The reason I wanted to ask you about that --
14 that is what you wrote, isn't it --
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. -- Bishop?
17 The reason I wanted to ask you about that,
18 I wanted to get straight at the very start here that from
19 the very first time you heard anybody say anything to you
20 that there is a Rudy Kos boy problem, you were informed
21 that that boy problem included boys spending the night in
22 the rectory.
23 A. That's what he said to me.
24 Q. And not only did you learn that from Father
25 Williams in September of 1991, but you also, right after
7603
01 that, had a meeting with Monsignor Rehkemper, didn't you?
02 A. That is correct.
03 Q. And in that meeting with Monsignor
04 Rehkemper, he briefed you a little bit on this issue,
05 didn't he?
06 A. He did.
07 Q. And he told you that boys spending the night
08 in the rectory had been a continuing problem.
09 A. Concerns were raised in the past, correct.
10 Q. So, Bishop, even though this outgoing
11 administration had not briefed you fully on this when you
12 took over in -- what was is it, July of 1990 --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- when you came here, you certainly had the
15 issue in your hands in the fall of 1991.
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. And at that time it's my understanding you
18 did not say to Monsignor Rehkemper, "In view of all of
19 this, bring me the file. I want to look at the entire
20 file. I want to see everything the Diocese has on Rudy
21 Kos"?
22 A. No, I didn't -- did not see an opportunity
23 to do that.
24 Q. Bishop, have you given any estimate since
25 that time to the number of sexual violations of boys that
7604
01 were committed from September of 1991 until September of
02 1992 when Rudy Kos was made public?
03 A. No.
04 Q. Bishop, can you hear me okay?
05 A. Yes, I'm doing okay.
06 Q. So after Father Williams came to you in
07 September of 1991, it's my understanding you had a little
08 sit-down with Father Kos.
09 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. In other words, you called him in for a
11 meeting.
12 A. That's right.
13 Q. And you told him that he should stop having
14 boys spend the night.
15 A. I told him what Father Williams had told me.
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. And he verified and said, yes, that was
18 true. So, therefore, I gave him a simple, strong
19 directive, no more, absolutely no more.
20 Q. Absolutely don't do it again --
21 A. That's right.
22 Q. -- no more boys overnight.
23 A. Or at the rectory.
24 Q. You even went a little further and said,
25 "Don't even have boys in the rectory".
7605
01 A. At the rectory, that's right.
02 Q. Daytime or any time.
03 And I asked you, when you told us that in
04 your deposition, if you were not suspicious at that time
05 that he might be a threat, a sexual threat to these young
06 men, young boys. And do you remember what he told me?
07 A. No, I don't.
08 Q. You said, "No suspicion at that time."
09 And do you remember I -- I asked you then if
10 you asked Rudy Kos if he had been in any way conducting
11 himself in an inappropriate sexual way with these boys.
12 Do you remember me asking you that?
13 A. Yes, I do.
14 Q. And what did you tell me?
15 A. I said "No, I did not feel it opportune to
16 do that".
17 Q. And those of us around the table there, at
18 least for myself, were puzzled. Do you remember I had kind
19 of puzzled look on my face?
20 A. No, I don't remember.
21 Q. Bishop, you said you didn't feel that there
22 was any need to do that at that time. Was that not because
23 you really had never been briefed on the issue, you didn't
24 have all of the information that had gone before?
25 A. Oh, I was briefly very much on the issue of
7606
01 pedophilia and the awareness of pedophilia.
02 Q. But I'm asking -- I'm asking you, Bishop, if
03 you had been briefed on what had happened here in this
04 Diocese with Father Kos?
05 A. No, I was not believed on -- on that
06 particular issue.
07 Q. Let me ask you: If you had had this
08 information made available to you for -- it should be on
09 are monitor. Can you see it there, Bishop?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. For example, in the file of Rudy Kos here at
12 this Diocese are written the words by Father Duesman when
13 he investigated his annulment, which he said, "Something is
14 fishy. Petitioner should level with us."
15 Skipping the next item, where his ex-wife
16 said in her deposition that he was gay and he has problems
17 with boys, those words didn't get in the file, but that is
18 what she testified she told Duesman. So skip that for just
19 a moment. But in the file would you have scene where
20 Rector Hughes, when he applied for admission to the
21 seminary, said, "There is some instability here. I'm
22 rejecting him this year and maybe next year maybe he should
23 never get in."
24 And then in 1981, it is probably not
25 reflected in the file, was the reported sexual advance on a
7607
01 student. Disregard that for just a moment.
02 And then we come up from '81 to '85 if you
03 -- in the file would have been reflected letters from
04 Clayton and others that would have indicated that as far
05 back as '81 and into '85 the Chancellor and Monsignor Kamel
06 knew that Kos had boys overnight in his room at All Saints.
07 And then starting in December of '85 the
08 alerts would have been more specific. You would have seen
09 in the file, Bishop, that Clayton -- Father Clayton had met
10 with Bishop Tschoepe and Sister Maureen, and the results of
11 that decision about Father Kos was, "Be alert to sexual
12 misconduct by Kos."
13 And then you would have seen in the file,
14 wouldn't you, in January of 1986, that Monsignor Rehkemper
15 suspects Kos is either homosexual or child abuser, said "We
16 don't have hard evidence, but we suspect it", and noted
17 that boys were spending the night overnight, staying
18 overnight.
19 And then in 1988, '86, still, 1986 Father
20 Clayton again warned the Diocese, Rehkemper, "Kos is a
21 danger" -- "is a danger to the church at large and to
22 St. Luke's", sees him that way. And then in May of 1988
23 Father Clayton sends a second set of warnings and logs to
24 the Diocese.
25 All of that you would have seen in the file,
7608
01 Bishop. And you would have also seen --
02 MR. MATHIS: Your Honor, to that extent, I object
03 to the characterization of these. These are Mr. Turley's
04 characterization of those, and those may or may not be
05 consistent with what the witness has actually said when
06 they were explaining each of those matters --
07 THE COURT: Okay. So I'm unclear --
08 MR. MATHIS: -- there has been lengthy testimony
09 with respect to these. This little blips that he puts up
10 there may or may not be right what the evidence is.
11 THE COURT: So I'm unclear as to your evidentiary
12 objection.
13 MR. MATHIS: Well, to extent it is tried to be
14 made part of the question, and I'm still waiting on a
15 question as part of all of this, it is improper
16 characterization of prior evidence.
17 THE COURT: Okay.
18 Response.
19 MR. TURLEY: Your Honor, we've been all through
20 this, each of the witnesses over whom -- who helped us
21 prepare these notes that summarize their testimony on those
22 points, said that is a fair summary of what I have said.
23 THE COURT: Okay, the objection is overruled.
24 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) Continuing, Bishop, with
25 us, that if you had looked in the file and Father Clayton's
7609
01 report, would you have seen the words that one of the
02 parishioners reports there is an ugly rumor that Kos likes
03 little boys. And in the file you would have seen,
04 advancing to June of 1986, that the Diocese -- Diocese's
05 office learned that Father Kos had been shaken by a child
06 abuse seminar that he attended in 1986.
07 You also would have see in that same memo,
08 although it is not reflected on the red flag chart here,
09 that twenty-four hours later he had a ten or eleven year
10 old boy spend the night with him. You would have seen in
11 the file, Bishop, that in August of 1986 Father Clayton is
12 saying to the Bishop, about the overnights, "Grave concern
13 for all concerned. Instincts say to act", and that in
14 August of 1986 Rehkemper again warns, "Kos of overnight
15 guests, imprudent. Can jeopardize the Diocese". And
16 would you have seen, also, if -- if it was in the file, it
17 is not in the file now, but if it had been in the file at
18 that time, you would have seen in -- in June of 1989 that
19 Mr. and Mrs. Allen from Ennis informed the Dallas that for
20 several months boys had have been spending the nights at
21 the rectory. All of those things you would have found in
22 file.
23 Now, Bishop, my question is: If you had
24 pulled out the file and looked at it, I submit to you -- I
25 know you haven't been here for all of the evidence that has
7610
01 been offered in this case, but I submit to you that every
02 one of these things have been referenced, in one way or the
03 another, in the Diocese's file. I is my understanding
04 that you did not ask Rudy Kos, in 1990, if he was sexually
05 abusing boys, because you had never seen this material; is
06 that correct?
07 A. That is correct.
08 Q. And when I took your deposition, even, in
09 1994, two years after Rudy Kos has been exposed, a year
10 after the lawsuit has been filed, more than a year after
11 the lawsuit has been filed, you still had not read --
12 opened the file and read this material.
14 Q. In the 1990 meeting that you had with Father
15 Kos after you met -- when you met with him after Father
16 Williams --
17 A. 1991.
18 Q. Yes, '91. Thank you, sir.
19 In the September/October 1991 meeting
20 Father Kos admitted to you, did he not, that he knew of the
21 policy that he was not supposed to have boys in the rectory
22 overnight; he admitted that, didn't he?
23 A. I'm not sure of that.
24 Q. Okay. And he admitted also that -- that he
25 had been violating that policy.
7611
01 A. I'm not sure that he admitted it to me. I
02 asked Monsignor Rehkemper and he informed me of the policy.
03 And I used that information, then, in my talk to Kos.
04 Q. When you gave him that warning, though, you
05 were aware that he had already been previously warned.
06 A. No, I was not.
07 Q. And you don't recall telling me in your
08 deposition that Father -- that Father Kos admitted that he
09 knew of the policy against overnight boys and that he had
10 -- he knew that he had been violated that policy.
11 A. I don't remember that.
12 Q. Well, let's look at line 13, page 66. I
13 think it's in here, Father -- Bishop.
14 You answered:
15 "Q. Well, I verify that Father Williams --
16 what Father Williams said".
17 This is in your meeting with Father Kos.
18 "I wanted to have that verified. I wanted
19 to know myself. And he said, yes, the boys were hanging
20 out, occasionally spending the night. And I reminded him a
21 policy was in-place and asked him if he knew of the policy.
22 yes, he knew of it. He wasn't observing it."
23 So in 1991, in September, the very first
24 time you were confronted with this issue, you knew at the
25 get-go that Father Kos had a long-standing problem of
7612
01 having boys in the rectory.
02 A. I did not know that at the time --
03 Q. Monsignor Rehkemper --
04 A. -- when he came to see me.
05 Q. -- Monsignor Rehkemper didn't tell you that
06 this had been an ongoing problem?
07 A. After I saw Father Kos, not before.
08 Q. Within a few days --
09 A. Okay.
10 Q. -- you knew that this had been a
11 long-standing problem, you knew that Rudy Kos knew he was
12 violating the policy --
13 A. Yeah.
14 Q. -- you knew that the issue was continuing.
15 So you gave him another warning, if I understand correctly.
16 A. A very strong warning.
17 Q. And you told him if he continued to violate
18 the policy, something might be done.
19 A. No.
20 Q. You gave him a strong warning indicating
21 that you would not tolerate any violation of the policy.
22 A. That's right. He would cease and desist
23 having the youth at the rectory.
24 Q. You didn't put anything to him in writing.
25 A. No, I did not. I spoke to him directly.
7613
01 Q. And I'm correct, am I not, Bishop, that
02 during this entire ten years that the Dallas Diocese was
03 dealing with Rudy Kos' continuing problem of violating the
04 policy, of boys overnight, not one time, not one time did
05 the Diocese ever put in writing to him, "You're violating
06 the policy. Stop it now"?
07 A. I'm not aware of that.
08 Q. Do you agree me, Father, that -- Bishop,
09 that a minimum -- at a minimum, prudent and careful action
10 at that time would have dictated that the administrator in
11 charge of this institution at least open this suspect's
12 file to see what is in it?
13 A. No, because I did not have that background
14 information. The information I had was there was a policy
15 of anyone staying at the rectory.
16 Q. I guess that until you open the file, you're
17 not likely to ever get that background --
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. -- information, are you?
20 A. But there was no reason for me to look in
21 the file.
22 Q. Even when Monsignor Rehkemper said to you --
23 even when Monsignor Rehkemper said to you, "This has been
24 an ongoing problem".
25 A. He said there was a policy against this and
7614
01 there were concerns raised in the past.
02 Q. All right. Still didn't open the file?
03 A. That's correct.
04 Q. Now, come March of 1992, Father Williams
05 contacts you again. He reports the boys are back; do you
06 remember that?
07 A. He didn't say the boys were back, he said he
08 is seeing the boys in their homes. But he said, "There
09 were some back last week --
10 Q. Well --
11 A. And that raised my eyebrow, because I said,
12 "I have instructed him firmly not to have these boys there
13 again. Is it true that some of them were back?"
14 Q. So he says, "The boys -- some of the boys
15 are back, last week, whenever", so you called Father Kos in
16 again.
17 A. Immediately.
18 Q. And you say to him, "Stop that". And you
19 said --
20 A. No, I didn't. I asked him whether it was
21 true.
22 Q. And you also said to him, "Stop that. I
23 forbid it from happening again".
24 A. I'm not sure if I used that language, but I
25 did ask him at that time, when he violated my directive, I
7615
01 asked him at the time, "Is there something sexual going on
02 here?", and he denied it. I think I used the word
03 pedophilia, and he denied it.
04 But then I said, "Okay, you disobeyed me.
05 I'm going to send you for a second opinion to St. Luke's
06 Institute".
07 Q. And do you know how many warnings that made,
08 in total, that Rudy Kos had been given by the Dallas
09 Diocese and its officers, managers, since this matter came
10 up? By March of 1992, do you know, Bishop, how many times
11 he has been warned?
12 A. This wasn't a warning. This was action. He
13 was going to St. Luke's Institute.
14 Q. Well, you said -- you also said, "Stop doing
15 that. I forbid to it happen again".
16 A. Well, I don't know if I used those worlds.
17 Q. Those are the words you said you used, on
18 page 71 of your deposition, Bishop.
19 A. Okay. I accept that.
20 Q. If you went back and looked at the file,
21 would you agree with me that we would find that
22 Father Clayton, when he was Rudy Kos' pastor and Rudy was
23 the assistant out at St. Luke's, had warned him at least
24 twice, that Monsignor Rehkemper warned him in January of
25 1986 and again a couple of years later when he called him
7616
01 in and warned him, instead of giving him a written letter,
02 one time the Personnel Board said, "Stop showing favoritism
03 to little boys", before they transferred him to Ennis, you
04 yourself have warned him twice now already, you're going to
05 warn him a third time, subsequently, we know, and I think
06 the record will show that Bishop Tschoepe warned him once
07 or twice.
08 All totaled, do you realize that March of
09 1992 Father Kos has been warned, "Stop the overnight
10 visits", eight or ten times; do you realize that?
11 A. I'm not aware of that.
12 Q. And then July did come, of 1992. You have
13 him back in your office, and we'll come back to how he got
14 there in July of 1992, but you have him back in there again
15 for your third meeting with him, and isn't it true that you
16 tell him, one more time, "Stop. Don't have the little boys
17 overnight"?
18 A. That's correct, and "I'll move you if you
19 do".
20 Q. And that makes nine or eleven times,
21 depending on how many times Bishop Tschoepe warned him.
22 Bishop, in 1992, when Father Duffy came to
23 you to speak to you about "John Doe #1"; you remember that,
24 do you not?
25 A. Yes, I do.
7617
01 Q. That was in September of 1992. Tell the
02 jury, please, what Father Duffy told you about "John Doe #1"
03 and Father Kos.
04 A. Well, he told me that, "A victim has come
05 forward with an accusation, an allegations against Rudy
06 Kos".
07 Q. And?
08 A. That's it.
09 Q. And you told us in your deposition that he
10 told you it happened ten years earlier.
11 A. I think so, yes.
12 Q. Is that your --
13 A. That's my -- that's recollection of it.
14 Q. That it happened ten years earlier?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And you swore in your deposition that you
17 ordered immediate and aggressive help for "John Doe #1",
18 right then.
19 A. I told Father Duffy that.
20 Q. And you know, Bishop, now, do you not, that
21 there was no immediate or aggressive help.
22 A. I'm not aware that there wasn't.
23 Q. Well, you know that there was -- January
24 nothing happened or January of 1993 on into May of 1993
25 when this lawsuit was filed, there was no aggressive or
7618
01 immediate help for "John Doe #1". All of those months
02 passed; are you aware of that?
03 A. No.
04 Q. Did -- did that command just get lost in the
05 priorities of the Dallas Catholic Diocese?
06 A. No, because Father Duffy was in charge of
07 that and I respected him judgment.
08 Q. But someplace in your command for immediate
09 aggressive help for "John Doe #1" just got lost in the
10 priorities; is that what happened?
11 A. No, it did not.
12 Q. Well, it didn't happened.
13 A. I turned it --
14 Well, for a reason.
15 Q. Bishop, when I took your deposition, you
16 told me you had never looked at the file on Rudy Kos.
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. Even when I took your deposition. Even
19 after Monsignor Rehkemper told you there had been these
20 other problems, you still didn't look at the file.
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Do I understand correctly that one of the
23 things you were interested in, however, was tending to the
24 victims, the possible victims --
25 A. That's correct. I learned that.
7619
01 Q. -- because you knew -- you knew -- you knew
02 by 1992 that if there is a pedophile out there infecting
03 people, it is probably -- it is probable that there is not
04 just one victim.
05 A. I didn't know that.
06 Q. You didn't know that in 1992?
07 A. I'm not aware.
08 Q. Bishop, if you were interested in finding
09 other names of other boys, you know, all had to do was open
10 the file and there would have been listed six for Father
11 Clayton, of boys that had been spending time and overnights
12 in the rectory and there would have been referenced three
13 or four more whose names weren't attached, but clear
14 references to specific individuals by Father Williams in
15 his June of 1992 memo. So there would have been about ten
16 names right there to start with, right in the file; do you
17 know that?
18 A. No, I turned that over to Father Duffy as
19 designated person.
20 Q. And, Bishop, if you had gone to those ten
21 individuals, don't you know that they could have revealed
22 another ten or twenty young men who were habitual, regular
23 young boys that stayed overnight in the rectory?
24 A. I don't know that.
25 Q. Now, Bishop, a few days after Kos -- Kos'
7620
01 abuse was admitted at the end of September, you received a
02 letter, didn't you, from the Allens, in Ennis, about Father
03 Kos?
04 A. I'm not aware of that. I'm not aware of
05 that.
06 Q. You know Mrs. Allen came here and testified
07 that on June -- on September 27th, 1992, a Sunday, she
08 typed a letter, sent a copy to you, sent one to Father Kos
09 and sent one to the Vicar General, Duffy Gardner. And in
10 that letter she complained about Father Kos and she also
11 attached a copy -- she testified, attached a copy of her
12 earlier 1989, June of '89 letter. Is it your testimony
13 today that you didn't get that letter, Bishop?
14 A. No, I didn't.
15 Q. Would someone else in your office have
16 opened that mail and acted on it --
17 A. No.
18 Q. -- for you?
19 A. No, no. I'm not aware of the letter.
20 Q. Have you been told that she so testified?
21 A. No.
22 Q. And -- and you don't think the Vicar General
23 would have opened that letter and acted on it for you?
24 A. I don't know.
25 Q. That letter should be in the file if it was
7621
01 sent to the Diocese, shouldn't it?
02 A. Should be.
03 Q. Now we know, Bishop, that -- what was your
04 address there in 1992, in October of 1992? What street was
05 the Chancellery Office on?
06 A. I think it was Lemmon Avenue.
07 Q. All right. Was it 3515 or something?
08 A. I don't know that. I don't know that.
09 Q. Bishop, let me ask you about something else
10 here. Did you sign -- cosign a note for Father Kos to
11 borrow $45,000 from the Knights of Columbus?
12 A. I'm not aware of that.
13 Q. There has been testimony in this case that
14 about a year and-a-half -- a year or a year and-a-half
15 before Father Kos gave up and admitted what he was doing,
16 in September of '92, that a note for $45,000 had been
17 cosigned by the Dallas Diocese with the Knights of
18 Columbus, for Father Kos. You would have been in charge at
19 that time, would you not?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. Was there anyone else in the Diocese who had
22 the authority to make a $45,000 note for Rudy Kos?
23 A. Not that I know of.
24 Q. You -- and you're saying to the jury you
25 never signed anything like that?
7622
01 A. I don't know. I'm not aware of it. I'm
02 not aware of having signed that note if I signed it.
03 MR. MATHIS: Mr. Turley, if it will help, that
04 is Bishop Tschoepe. It's -- it's just the wrong Bishop.
05 You're just confused on time.
06 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) Then that was -- then this
07 note was made even more than a year and-a-half before Rudy
08 Kos went to the Paracletes.
09 A. I'm not aware of it.
10 Q. If Bishop Tschoepe did it, it would have had
11 to have been done before 1990, wouldn't it?
12 A. Possibly.
13 Q. So maybe in '89 the note was done, because
14 that would mean in 1989 the Diocese knew that Rudy Kos had
15 a bill for $45,000 worth of stuff that he needed to pay.
16 A. That would be hearsay.
17 Q. Well, the Diocese would have had that
18 hearsay, wouldn't it, --
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. -- Bishop. And did anybody bother to
21 investigate, in 1989, this priest that has been previously
22 suspected of possibly being a child abuser, did anybody
23 bother to investigate what he had done with -- or why he
24 had a need for $45,000?
25 A. I don't know that. I wasn't here.
7623
01 Q. And if they had investigated, they might
02 have determined whether he had a drug problem or whether he
03 had some kind of sexual addiction.
04 MR. MATHIS: Objection, Your Honor. It is
05 outside of his area of knowledge, that he already said he
06 wasn't here then. That is Bishop Tschoepe.
07 THE COURT: Okay.
08 MR. TURLEY: It doesn't take knowledge to answer
09 this question.
10 MR. MATHIS: Well, the first question it didn't,
11 but the second it did.
12 MR. TURLEY: He said he wasn't here.
13 Let me rephrase it.
14 THE COURT: Okay.
15 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) Bishop, you know, as an
16 administrator, that if somebody who makes a modest salary
17 and suddenly comes up needing $45,000 to pay for their
18 stuff, that they have spent it on various things, that it
19 might be prudent, as an administrator, if you're asked to
20 cover that note, to try to figure out what this man is
21 doing with his money.
22 A. I wouldn't cover the note.
23 Q. You wouldn't have done that, would you?
24 A. Oh, no, not at all.
25 Q. But certainly, if that matter came to your
7624
01 attention, whether you covered the note or not, one of the
02 things you would want to know was: Does this person have a
03 drug addiction or a sexual addiction problem? What is he
04 doing with all of that money? You would want to know
05 that, wouldn't you?
06 A. I would probably inquire.
07 Q. As far as you know, no such inquiry is
08 reflected in the file ever took place in the Dallas
09 Diocese.
10 A. It was before my time.
11 Q. Now, Father -- Bishop, excuse me, sir.
12 Bishop, when you made the decision to ignore
13 the recommendation of Brenda Keller, the sex expert who
14 talked to Monsignor Rehkemper about Father Kos and said,
15 "Remove him from access to children immediately. Looks
16 like a textbook pedophile" --
17 MR. MATHIS: I object to that characterization
18 of her testimony. That is not an accurate
19 characterization of Brenda Keller's testimony.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and Gentlemen of the
21 Jury, please recall the evidence and the testimony to the
22 best of your ability.
23 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) Father, I may have
24 misplaced a comma or two, but I think that is pretty close.
25 When she recommended something of that
7625
01 nature, "It sounds like a textbook pedophile. You should
02 remove him from access to children immediately", when you
03 got that information from Monsignor Rehkemper, you didn't
04 remove him, did you?
05 A. No, because I had made a firm decision to
06 send him to St. Luke's Institute and I wanted St. Luke's
07 Institute to give him a good evaluation and I would prefer
08 a doctor who sees the patient than to one who just reads a
09 statement.
10 Q. You had never read his file at the time you
11 made the decision to ignore Brenda Keller's recommendation.
12 A. I didn't ignore it, I just said she -- he is
13 going to go St. Luke's Institute. I didn't even address
14 it.
15 Q. Well, I call that ignoring it --
16 A. Well --
17 Q. -- you didn't address it whatever.
18 A. -- Whatever --
19 Q. -- you didn't address her recommendation,
20 you didn't even open his file to look in it, did you?
21 A. No, because I had made my decision already,
22 to send him to Dr. Jaeckle and then a second opinion at
23 t. Luke's Institute.
24 Q. And, Bishop, when you chose to ignore the
25 advice of your Personnel Board in the spring of 1992, which
7626
01 for several years had followed this Kos matter and they
02 recommended to you on two or three occasions in April of
03 1992 that you should remove Father Kos, and specifically
04 have him removed by June 1st, you didn't open his file when
05 you ignored that advice, did you?
06 A. I'm not aware of that advice --
07 Q. You don't -- you're not aware --
08 A. -- of the Personnel Board.
09 Q. That your Personnel Board said to you on
10 three occasions --
11 A. That's right.
12 Q. -- in April of 1992, "Father Kos should be
13 out of there by June 1st"?
14 A. Yes, because I had made a decision to send
15 him to St. Luke's Institute by June 1st.
16 Q. They told you, "Tell Father Kos he won't be
17 returning to the pastorate in Ennis".
18 A. Well, he knew what I had on the agenda.
19 Q. And you ignored that advice, didn't you?
20 A. No --
21 Q. You sent --
22 A. -- I sent him away.
23 Q. And then you came back and you returned him
24 to Ennis.
25 A. Only because of --
7627
01 Q. Bishop, just answer my question.
02 A. No.
03 MR. MATHIS: He needs to be given a chance to
04 answer --
05 MR. TURLEY: Nonresponsive.
06 MR. MATHIS: -- that one first.
07 COURT: Go ahead and finish. Go ahead. Go ahead
08 and finish.
09 THE WITNESS: Well, I don't know the question
10 now.
11 THE COURT: Okay. That's fair.
12 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) The question was -- the
13 question was, Bishop, you ignored the advice of your
14 Personnel Committee, Personnel Board when they said, "Tell
15 Father Kos he will not be returning to Ennis, to St.
16 John's", you ignored that and you put him back in there
17 where he continued to serve until the end of September --
18 A. Not exactly
19 Q. -- isn't that right?
20 A. Not exactly.
21 Q. Isn't that correct?
22 A. Not exactly.
23 Q. Did you not ignore their advice?
24 A. No, I didn't ignore their advice.
25 Q. You sent him back and he continued to serve
7628
01 until the end of September.
02 A. Only because of --
03 Q. Isn't that correct?
04 A. Only because -- yes, only because of
05 St. Luke's Institute --
06 MR. TURLEY: Nonresponsive.
07 THE WITNESS: Right.
08 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) Isn't that correct?
09 A. Yes.
10 Q. And -- and Father -- Bishop, when you acted
11 to cancel the plethysmograph test that St. Luke's Institute
12 had recommended, even then you never opened Rudy Kos' file
13 to see what was in it, did you?
14 A. No, I did not.
15 Q. Now, Bishop, I wanted to ask you about a
16 couple of other things here.
17 Did you have a chance to meet -- you had a
18 chance to meet, didn't you, with your lawyers, before you
19 gave your deposition in this case?
20 A. In 1994 or '3?
21 Q. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
22 A. Well, they met with me to inform me of
23 the -- of the deposition.
24 Q. They came and met with you?
25 A. I don't remember.
7629
01 Q. They talked to you about the case, didn't
02 they, Bishop?
03 A. That I had to give a deposition.
04 Q. Yes.
05 And they talked to you about what the
06 deposition was, didn't they?
07 A. Well, they told me what a deposition was.
08 Q. Because you had never given one.
09 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Have you ever testified in court before?
11 A. No, I have not.
12 Q. And -- and they told you some of the areas
13 that we would be talking about in the deposition, didn't
14 they?
15 A. I don't remember that.
16 Q. And how many times did you meet with them?
17 MR. MATHIS: Your Honor, this is not appropriate
18 area of inquiry, --
19 MR. TURLEY: Yes, it is.
20 MR. MATHIS: -- these meetings with his legal
21 counsel.
22 MR. TURLEY: It is.
23 MR. MATHIS: No, it is not. With all due
24 respect, it is not.
25 THE COURT: May I see the attorneys over here,
7630
01 just a moment, please?
02
03 (Whereupon there was a sidebar conference, out of
04 the hearing of the jury, and thereafter the following was
05 had, in the hearing of the jury, as follows:).
06
07 MR. MATHIS: For the record, my objection is
08 sustained?
09 THE COURT: Mr. Mathis, I don't recall your
10 objection. What was your evidentiary objection?
11 MR. MATHIS: That is an area of Attorney/Client
12 Privilege and not appropriate.
13 THE COURT: That's sustained.
14 Q. (BY MR. TURLEY) You say you've never given
15 a deposition before, Bishop; is that correct?
16 A. I don't remember giving a deposition before.
17 Q. You made some notes, you told us, before
18 your deposition, didn't you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Said you made these notes the day before
21 your deposition.
22 A. No, I wrote them on this piece of paper the
23 day before.
24 Q. You wrote those notes on this piece -- on
25 these pieces of paper the day before your deposition. And
7631
01 one of them was what we looked at a moment ago when you
02 made the note about your 1991 meeting with Father
03 Williams, --
04 A. Correct.
05 Q. -- and then you've got some others in here
06 that we may come back to hear in just a moment.
07 But on page 5 of your notes, you wrote the
08 following, did you not? Let's start down here (indicating)
09 where you said, "Do not speculate". Now do I understand
10 that all by yourself, the day before, you sat down, alone,
11 and wrote, "Do not speculate". You had never given a
12 deposition before and you had never testified in court
13 before?
14 A. That's correct. But for twenty years, I've
15 dealt with lawyers.
16 (laughter in the courtroom)
17 Q. Bishop, I'm real sorry for you.
18 A. Yes, it's a plague.
19 Q. A little rain must fall into everyone's
20 live.
21 A. That's right. Not a little rain, a plague.
22 Q. Sometimes it takes that to make people
23 change the way they live.
24 Bishop, look at the next item. What do you
25 say there? What do you say right there, the next
7632
01 item under --
02 A. I can't read it.
03 Q. -- "Do not speculate"?
04 A. I can't read it.
05 Q. Don't you remember saying -- don't you
06 remember writing, "If it predates me, say so".
07 A. That's right, because I don't believe in
08 hearsay and picking up, listening to someone else talking
09 about --
10 Q. And then you wrote, "Hypothetical cases.
11 Hypothetical case. Can't answer" -- what is the rest of
12 it? I can't read it. "Can't answer without having more
13 information".
14 A. That's what. I have learned that from
15 lawyers.
16 Q. So your testimony today is you put all of
17 this down, of your own volition, without any help from
18 anybody, just because you have learned a lot from lawyers.
19 You've never given a deposition, never testified in court.
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And you also wrote, on that same page, up
22 there at the top, "requirement for entry into seminary";
23 do you see that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. One of the things under that, by the way,
7633
01 you say, "Psychological testing". Do you see that,
02 "psychological testing"?
03 A. Yes.
04 Q. You understand that Rudy Kos did not get a
05 psychological test before he entered your seminary.
06 A. Perhaps in those days they didn't give them.
07 Q. All right.
08 And on down here (indicating) you've written
09 the words, "Someone has to be a psychopath to avoid being
10 caught".
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. You know, that sounds an awful lot like
13 Randy Mathis. Did he get that from you?
14 A. I really didn't know Randy that well.
15 Q. Did Mr. Mathis get those words from you?
16 A. No. Because of my experience in the
17 seminary.
18 Q. It's your testimony, Bishop, that you made
19 those notes up all by yourself, strictly from your memory,
20 by the way?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. You didn't go by any notes?
23 A. Well, previous notes that I had. And I put
24 them altogether on one page.
25 Q. Those are your notes from your calender?
7634
01 A. That's right.
02 Q. You didn't have any letters or documents or
03 anything like that.
04 A. None at all.
05 Q. And you made those notes -- you made those
06 notes for your deposition after you knew that a lawsuit had
07 been filed and you were going to have to give sworn
08 testimony.
09 A. That is correct.
10 Q. One other thing you said here, Bishop. You
11 said, did you go not, "Not critical of the past". Did you
12 anticipate that somebody was going to try to get you to
13 criticize your -- your predecessor?
14 A. No, I don't believe in being a Monday
15 morning quarterback.
16 Q. And then you said in your notes here that
17 you made up all by yourself the day before you gave your
18 deposition, "Diocese move quickly on national -- as
19 national policies were prepared", you said that, didn't
20 you?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Of course, you couldn't know that, because
23 you weren't here.
24 A. Oh, but this was taken in 1994. The
25 deposition was 1994.
7635
01 Q. And -- and the wrongdoing happened before
02 1992 and you came in 1990.
03 A. That's correct, but the deposition was taken
04 in 1994. And what I'm saying is the Diocese move quickly,
05 as national policies were prepared.
06 I have been here four years now.
07 Q. You understand, Bishop, all of those
08 national policies came out in 1985, 1988, 1989, 1992.
09 A. And they're still coming out.
10 Q. Bishop, I wanted to ask you about an article
11 you wrote in the National Catholic in August of 1994.
12 You write articles in that publication, from
13 time to time; do you not?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. Do you see that (indicating) better?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. All right.
18 A. I can't read it, though.
19 Q. Do you remember this article? I represent
20 to you it's the Texas Catholic, August 26, 1994. There was
21 -- you wrote a little article, Policy on Abuse Being
22 Updated; do you remember that?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And you talk in here about coming in from
25 out-of-town and learning that another -- an additional
7636
01 lawsuit has been filed alleging additional victims. And
02 you talk about what you want to do about this issue.
03 You came down here to this paragraph. You
04 express your concerned that -- problems not limited to
05 Catholic Church and Catholic clergy, that the Dallas
06 Diocese will take all possible reasonable steps to address
07 this issue. And then you said, "For many years, written
08 policies have been in-place to deal with this situation".
09 A. That's correct.
10 Q. I want to ask you about that, Bishop, and
11 that representation that you made in 1994.
12 Isn't it true that in 1994 the only
13 reference -- and Duffy Gardner testified yesterday, the
14 only reference to sexual abuse in any written policy in the
15 Dallas Diocese was one policy, one reference, that was 1988
16 when Bishop Tschoepe said to the priests, "You must report
17 allegations of sexual abuse, and here is the reporting form
18 to do it with"?
19 A. I wasn't referring to the Diocese of Dallas
20 in the sentence. I was referring to the United States.
21 Q. When you say --
22 A. "Many years written policies have been
23 in-place to deal with the situation across the country".
24 Q. You're correct, Bishop. There were lots of
25 policies to deal with sexual abuse across the country,
7637
01 there wasn't one in the Dallas Diocese, even when you wrote
02 this in 1994, was there?
03 A. You -- you just mentioned there was one in
04 1988.
05 Q. The one in 1988 was Bishop Tcshoepe sending
06 a note out to all of the priests, saying, "You have to
07 report sexual abuse."
08 Do you know of any other?
09 A. No.
10 Q. That was the only one, wasn't it?
11 A. I don't know.
12 Q. And that wasn't even a policy, was it? It
13 wasn't a procedure, it wasn't a comprehensive program to
14 prevent sexual abuse or really to even deal with it once it
15 occurs, it was just to same to the priests, "You've got to
16 comply with the state law"; isn't that correct, sir?
17 A. I don't know. Policy possibly set that.
18 Q. No question but that the Dallas Diocese did
19 not have, "written policies", plural, "have been in place
20 with" -- "with this situation"?
21 A. I'm not referring to the Dallas Diocese.
22 Q. Now, Bishop, you know, you were a Bishop in
23 '85, down in Victoria; were you not?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. The Victoria Diocese?
7638
01 And '88/'89 you were down there as a Bishop?
02 A. Yes.
03 Q. You received, did you not, during those
04 years, from the National Conference of Bishops and the
05 United States Catholic Conferences various recommendations
06 about dealing with sexual abuse?
07 A. Over the years, yes; specifically, I can't
08 say any one.
09 Q. One of the things that you would have
10 received -- I ask you if you remember this, was the
11 statement on child sexual abuse issued by the National
12 Conference of Catholic Bishops in November 1989. We've
13 looked at this before. This is Exhibit 178. And the
14 Conference reports down there -- let's see if you agree
15 with this. "Even a signal case is one too many, which is
16 why the church views even a rumor of such an occurrence
17 with intense concern. Church leaders are advised to
18 investigate immediately, to remove a priest rapidly, where
19 the evidence warrants it, to seek appropriate treatment for
20 the offender and to extend pastoral help to the victim of
21 such a tragedy and to the victim's family."
22 Did you agree with and adopt that policy
23 when you were the Bishop in Victoria?
24 A. They were working on policies while I was
25 down there.
7639
01 Q. And do you agree with that policy, that this
02 is a prudent, careful policy that should have been executed
03 in the Dallas Diocese in 1989 when it was sent to
04 Bishop Tschoepe?
05 A. I don't know whether it was or wasn't.
06 Q. You don't know whether this is a prudent
07 policy?
08 A. Yes.
09 Q. What is imprudent about it, Bishop?
10 A. No, I said, yes, it is a prudent policy.
11 Q. You agree. I thought you did. Good.
12 And you agree with this part over here
13 (indicating), Bishop, that says, "The hint of such a case
14 is viewed by a Bishop with alarm"?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. And when you view something with alarm
17 because it could cause injury or death to an innocent
18 child, that calls for immediate action, doesn't it?
19 A. Possibly.
20 Q. And then in 1992 you were did Bishop here in
21 Dallas and you received this memo from the National
22 Conference. This actually is a -- may be part of the
23 press release from the United States Catholic Conference.
24 But you received this, did you not? And it says, "When
25 there is even a hint of such an incident, investigate
7640
01 immediately, remove the priest, whenever the evidence
02 warrants it, follow the reporting obligations of civil <