Deposition of Priest Witness F - assigned with Kelly from 1966 to 1970
Date of Deposition: February 21, 2007

 Depo of Witness F Vol. 1 (2-21-07)

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 F was assigned with Father Kelly from 1966 to 1970. He testified he never heard the parish housekeeper or the parish secretary complain about Kelly. Depo page 63, line 12 to page 64, line 3. Compare this testimony to Former Priest Witness A's testimony that both the secretary and the housekeeper complained about Kelly taking boys to his room and to the cabin, and that the housekeeper described Kelly as "evil." He testified he knew about Father Kelly's cabin, but was not aware of Kelly taking anyone to it. Depo page 69, line 17 to page 72, line 9. He also testified that Kelly never appeared intoxicated to him. Depo page 81, line 24, to 82, line 1. Compare this testimony to Former Priest Witness A's testimony that Priest Witness F argued with Kelly about Kelly's drinking and about his taking boys to the cabin. Former Priest Witness A's depo page 122, line 9 to page 125, line 18. Conversely, Priest Witness F testified that he never spoke with Kelly about Kelly spending time with young men, and never had any conflicts with Kelly about Kelly's drinking. Depo page 134, lines 12 to 15, and depo page 143, line 23 to 25.

Priest Witness F could not recall ever seeing any boys in the rectory unless they were with their parents, nor could he recall ever seeing any boys with Kelly outside the rectory who appeared to be under the age of 18. Depo page 120, line 18 to page 122, line 6.

Priest Witness F's testimony regarding what life was like with Father Kelly 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, and regarding Priest Witness F's conflicts with Kelly (all of which were denied by Priest Witness F). It is difficult to understand how two men - Priest Witness F 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. It is also hard to imagine Priest Witness F forgetting about fighting with Kelly regarding his drinking and spending time with boys. The only reasonable conclusion is that one of these witnesses is not telling the truth.