Deposition of Priest Witness E - assigned with Kelly in the 1960s
Date of Deposition: February 8, 2007

 Depo of Witness E (2-8-07)

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 E was assigned with Father Kelly from 1960 to 1966. He testified he knew about Father Kelly's cabin, but was not aware of Kelly taking anyone to it. Depo page 35, line 16 to page 37, line 13. He never discussed with parish staff the trips Kelly took to the cabin because he was minding his own business. Depo page 38, line 24 to depo page 39, line 5. He never saw anyone in Kelly's car or bedroom. Depo page 40, line 20 to page 44, line 9. During his six years at the parish, he only recalled seeing one boy in Kelly's sitting area of his living quarters, and he never heard anyone at the parish complain about the boy being in Kelly's living quarters. Page 44, line 10 to page 47, line 3. Nor did he ever see any other boys under the age of 18 with Father Kelly inside or outside the rectory or around the garage. Page 73, line 23 to page 74, line 14; page 75, line 24 to page 76, line 4. He never was aware of or heard anyone say anything indicating Kelly had a drinking problem. Page 77, line 2 to page 80, line 23. He never heard the parish staff complain about Father Kelly, and never heard of anyone not getting along with Kelly. Page 91, lines 10-23; page 94, line 21 to page 95, line 8.

Priest Witness E's testimony regarding what life was like with Father Kelly, beginning on Page 35, should be contrasted with that of Former Priest Witness A's testimony regarding knowledge of Father Kelly taking boys to the cabin and to Kelly's room in the rectory, as well as regarding how Father Kelly was viewed by other priests and parish staff members. Former Priest Witness A also testified Priest Witness E told him he (Priest Witness E) could not stand Kelly because of Kelly's drinking and taking boys to the cabin and to Kelly's room in the rectory; however, Priest Witness E never acknowledged any such statements. It is difficult to understand how two men - Priest Witness E 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 some of the same time periods. The only reasonable conclusion is that one of them is not telling the truth.