Deposition of Priest Witness D - assigned with Father Kelly in 1966-68
Date of Deposition: January 17, 2007

 Depo of Witness D Vol. 1 (1-17-07)

The deposition transcript redactions are necessitated by a protective order sought and obtained by the Archbishop and his lawyers during the coordination proceeding. The following summary identifies by page and line number key portions of deposition testimony that would have been utilized had the Father Kelly cases proceeded to trial.

Priest Witness D was assigned with Father Kelly from 1966 to 1968. He testified he did not recall ever seeing teenage boys in the rectory. Depo page 96, line 11 to line 15. Nor did he recall any boys under the age of 18 hanging out in front of the rectory, riding in a car with Father Kelly, or riding around on bikes with Kelly. Depo page 97, line 4 to line 22. Compare this testimony with that from Former Priest Witness A who testified it was common knowledge at the parish that Kelly was taking boys to the cabin, and that he regularly saw boys getting into Kelly's car. Former Priest Witness A depo page 91, line 6; page 237, line 23; depo page 236, line 9.

Priest Witness D could not recall Kelly ever taking a vacation or missing a mass. Depo page 114, line 19 to page 115, line 7. Nor was he aware of Kelly taking boys to the cabin. Depo page 144, line 6 to page 148, line 11. Compare this testimony with that from Kelly's neighbors who saw Kelly at the cabin at least once every 10 days (Lay Witness G depo page 10, line 11; Lay Witness H, depo page 9, line 19), and that from Former Priest Witness A who regularly saw Kelly taking boys to the cabin beginning as early as 1958 (Depo Page 85, line 10; page 91, line 6; page 132, line 17).

Priest Witness D also testified his experiences with Father Kelly were positive. Depo page 123, line 12-21. He did not recall discussing with Former Priest Witness A life with Father Kelly, or thinking Kelly had a drinking problem (see Depo page 131, line 15 to page 132, line 4); he adamantly denied ever telling anyone he had a problem with Kelly, or that he left the parish because of Kelly, or that he ever complained to anyone about anything related to Kelly and the cabin or Kelly spending time with boys under the age of 18 (depo page 132, line 18 to page 133, line 19; page 148, lines 3-10). He also testified he had no reason to believe Former Priest Witness A would want to lie about something Priest Witness D told him. Depo page 134, line 1 to page 135, line 2.

Compare this testimony to Former Priest Witness A's testimony that before leaving the parish Priest Witness D told Priest Witness A he had problems with Kelly because Kelly was a drunk and was taking boys to the cabin and to Kelly's room in the rectory. Former Priest Witness A Depo page 111, line 3. Priest Witness D also told Priest Witness A he had complained to Cardinal Manning about Kelly. Former Priest Witness A Depo page 167, line 12.

It is difficult to understand how two men - Priest Witness D and Former Priest Witness A - could have such dramatically different recollections and observations of what life was like with Father Kelly at Our Lady of Guadalupe, particularly where both men were in residence at the parish during roughly the same time period. It is even more difficult to reconcile Former Priest Witness A's testimony about Priest Witness D's complaints to him about and issues with Kelly, to Priest Witness D's adamant denials of any such problems, his denials of the discussions testified to by Former Priest Witness A, and his testimony regarding how positive his time was with Kelly. The only reasonable conclusion is that one of these witnesses is not telling the truth.