Back to homepage Arts | Entertainment Boston Globe Online BostonWorks Real Estate Sports digitalMass Travel The Boston Globe Documents Abuse in the Catholic Church
HomePredator priestsScandal and coverupThe victimsThe financial costOpinion
Cardinal Law and the laityThe church's responseThe clergyInvestigations and lawsuits
Interactive2002 scandal overviewParish mapExtrasArchivesDocumentsAbout this site
2014 update

Crux, a Catholic news site

A new site from the Boston Globe includes news updates on clergy abuse and other Catholic issues.
Globe coverage of the scandal has been divided into nine categories:

More documents:

Deposition of Cardinal Bernard Law
May 8, 2002, Suffolk County Superior Court

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8
Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15

Q. Okay. We'll move on to the next issue. There is a pastoral council, is there not, that you met with -- not a pastoral, finance council?

A. Yes.

Q. And, are you the president of the finance council?

A. I chair the meetings.

Q. And so you only vote if there's a tie?

A. I don't vote.

Q. So you just chair?

A. I just chair. I receive the counsel of the council. In this case a decision of the council.

Q. Bishop Edyvean?

A. Edyvean.

Q. He's on it also?

A. He is.

Q. Where does he reside?

A. He resides at 2121 Commonwealth Avenue, Brighton.

Q. And what is his position in the archdiocese right now?

A. He's vicar general, Moderator of the Curia.

Q. Did he offer any statements about the Geoghan plaintiff -- the Geoghan 86 settlement?

MR. ROGERS: I'm sorry, did he --

Q. Did he offer any comments or recommendations about the settlement?

MR. ROGERS: During the finance council?

MR. GORDON: During the finance council, I'm sorry.

A. He was favorable to the settlement.

Q. So he spoke in favor?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. How about Regina Caines, who is she? She's a member of the council?

A. She's a lay person of the archdiocese.

MR. MURPHY: Regina?

MR. GORDON: Caines, C-A-I-N-E-S.

Q. She's a member, right?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you know where she lives?

A. I don't know her address.

Q. Do you know what town she lives in?

A. I don't know the town.

Q. Do you know what her occupation is?

A. She's a retired business woman.

Q. Now, the finance council, are they all appointed by you as Archbishop?

A. They are.

Q. And what are the criteria they use to decide who gets appointed to the finance council?

A. Some expertise in the matters that are going to come before the council.

Q. Finance issues?

A. Finance issues. Other issues as well. Mrs. Regina Caines' interests were in terms of personnel. She would have had an interest in the social justice issues that need to be present in the deliberations of such a council.

MR. ROGERS: Mr. Gordon, would this be an appropriate time? We talked about taking a break at 2:00.

MR. GORDON: Do you want to take a break?

MR. ROGERS: Yeah. I think we need.

MR. MURPHY: Am I correct we're leaving at 3:00 today?

MR. ROGERS: Yes. We'll come back and start at ten past.


VIDEO OPERATOR: The time is --

MR. ROGERS: Let me look at a date.

VIDEO OPERATOR: The time is 1:59. We'll stop the video and go off the record. (Video off.) (Brief recess.) (Video on.)

VIDEO OPERATOR: We're back on the record. The time is 2:16 p.m. BY MR. GORDON:

Q. Your Eminence, you indicated that Regina Caines is retired. Do you know where she worked before she retired?

A. I want to say Polaroid, but I'm not absolutely certain.

Q. And she was in charge of personnel there?

A. She was in human resources.

Q. She was an executive, though, at Polaroid?

A. Yes.

Q. How long has she been on the council?

A. She's been on the council for a long time. I can't, I can't give you -- I wouldn't know by memory the length of time that the various members were on the council.

Q. Has there been a finance council for the Archdiocese of Boston since you've arrived here as Archbishop?

A. Yes, I -- yes.

Q. Did Mrs. Caines talk at all -- it is Mrs. Caines; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Did Mrs. Caines talk at all about the settlement agreements or whether she was in favor of the settlement or not?

MR. ROGERS: You mean at the meeting on Friday?

MR. GORDON: At the meeting on Friday.

A. I would not be able to give you a recap of the meeting in terms of who said what. I can give you a sense of that. I can tell you that the, that it was a near unanimous rejection of my request, and -- but I think it's also very important to say that in the course of discussion, as I have tried to reflect in my subsequent statements on this issue, that the council was not opposed to settlement, but the council felt that given the large number of new cases that had come forward, and it would be -- it would vary -- at the time that we began the settlement, as I understood it, there were 86 cases involved in the settlement, and there were approximately 30 other cases that we would have to deal with in some way or the other. My hope was that having settled the 86, we would then be able construct a mechanism that would have been equitable to try in a nonlitigous way to settle the remaining 30. By the time that this matter came to the finance council, because of the large number of cases that had occurred, because of the publicity attendant to the issue, that number was 150, and the council felt that it would be irresponsible to move forward with the settlement as it had been worked out for 86 when you had 150 other potential claimants there. And their recommendation was that we needed to go back to the drawing boards and to develop a global settlement that would be able to embrace not only the 150, but the 86. My position in that council was in support of the settlement. I, I recognized, and I recognize the logic of the council's position, but it did seem to me that given the efforts, the good-faith efforts that had gone in to the construction of the settlement which was then placed before the signatories, it seemed to me that it would be better to move forward with that, even in the face of the 150 others, and then try to deal with that. Obviously neither my words nor counsel's words urging the settlement were persuasive enough to overturn that principal concern. But what I would want to underscore, and I think is necessary to do, is that the issue was not whether a settlement was a good thing or not, but it was whether this settlement, given what the council reasonably could argue was a totally new situation in terms of the number of new claims, whether this settlement was prudent and wise and fair.

Q. Okay. So in sum, you don't remember if Mrs. Caines said anything?

A. I think she, I think she probably spoke, but she did not speak in favor of the settlement. No lay member of the board spoke in favor of the settlement.

Q. John Cunningham, was he at the council meeting?

A. He was.

Q. And do you know where Mr. Cunningham lives?

A. I believe now his residence is principally in Florida.

Q. And does he have a residence in Massachusetts also?

A. He does, but I don't know where it is.

Q. Do you know what town or city?

A. It was in Weston.

Q. Did he express any anger about the assignment of Father Geoghan to Weston?

A. No.

Q. Okay. Did Mr. Cunningham speak about the proposal?

MR. ROGERS: All of these questions are directed towards Friday at the finance council?

MR. GORDON: Towards Friday at the finance council.

A. I must say to you that I don't have the ability to give you, from memory, the minutes of that meeting.

Q. Your Eminence, I'm not asking you to give me blow by blow. To the extent you remember what any particular person said, I will ask you, and if you don't recall, it's fine. Okay? So do you remember if Mr. Cunningham said anything?

A. I remember his saying something.

Q. And what did he say?

A. I'm not sure.

Q. Okay. Do you know if what he said was favorable or unfavorable to the agreement?

A. As I said, all the lay members of the council spoke unfavorably with regard to the agreement, so he would have spoken unfavorably.

Q. Okay. Did he speak -- was there passion or was it just a reluctant dissent to what you were recommending?

MR. ROGERS: Objection to the form.

A. I would find it difficult to characterize it from that perspective.

Q. Okay. Okay. Were there any members who expressed anger, any of the lay members? Was there some loud emotional statements about the settlement agreement?

A. No, it was a civil discussion. There were strong feelings expressed and some were perhaps more impassioned than others, but within the rubric of a civil discussion.

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8
Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15

© Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
Advertise | Contact us | Privacy policy