Return to Transcripts main page
Breaking News
Law Testifies about Settlement Collapse
Aired August 02, 2002 - 09:35 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: We are going to go back to Boston right now where Cardinal Bernard Law is testifying about why a deal collapsed with dozens of victims who were expected to end up with a reported $30 million settlement. There appears to be a short break in the proceedings here. You might remember that the archdiocese pulled out of the deal in May after its finance counsel refused to fund it, saying it was too expensive in light of other pending and anticipated lawsuits over clergy abuse.
We are going to pause here for a moment. We are trying to anticipate whether Cardinal Law will continue his testimony. We should mention against this backdrop that the archdiocese is considering filing for bankruptcy if it is forced to pay such large amounts.
Let's listen.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
MITCHELL GARABEDIAN, ATTORNEY: ... and did you believe those allegations to be true?
CARDINAL BERNARD LAW, ARCHBISHOP OF BOSTON: (OFF-MIKE)
GARABEDIAN: May I approach the witness, your honor?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
GARABEDIAN: Cardinal, I would like to show you a document that is entitled "The Pilot." Do you recognize that document?
LAW: I do. It's a very good diocesan paper.
GARABEDIAN: Directing your attention to page two, I would ask you to just tell the court who the publisher is of "The Pilot."
LAW: I am the publisher.
GARABEDIAN: OK. And as publisher, what are your job duties -- what are your duties?
LAW: I appoint the editor.
GARABEDIAN: Who is the editor -- who was the editor at that time?
LAW: At this time, the executive editor was my Monsignor Peter Connolly (ph) and the editor was Antonio Enrique (ph).
GARABEDIAN: Thank you. Directing your attention to the inner page four, I would ask you to read the title of the article.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Excuse me, Mr. Garabedian, you haven't given me a date on this.
GARABEDIAN: I'm sorry. It is dated March 15, 2002.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you.
GARABEDIAN: Please read the title of the article, sir.
LAW: The headline reads, "Settlement Reached with Geoghan Victims."
GARABEDIAN: Thank you, sir. Now, can you please read the first paragraph.
LAW: "After 11 months of litigation, the archdiocese of Boston has reached a settlement with sexual abuse victims of defrocked priest John Geoghan. The settlement could total $30 million."
GARABEDIAN: Now, that paragraph is not in quotes, correct?
LAW: That paragraph is not in quotes. It's an article written by a staff person, Lisa Gentez (ph).
GARABEDIAN: Now, is she in the courtroom today?
LAW: I don't know.
GARABEDIAN: Do you know her?
LAW: I have met Lisa, but I wouldn't -- I hate to say that I wouldn't recognize her.
GARABEDIAN: Now, will you please read out loud the fourth paragraph of that article.
LAW: "'This settlement is an important step in reaching closure for these victims who have done -- who have long endured the damage done to them by John Geoghan,' Cardinal Bernard Law, Archbishop of Boston said in a statement March 12."
GARABEDIAN: Do you recall making that statement, cardinal?
LAW: I recall making the statement, and I also recall that...
GARABEDIAN: Thank you, cardinal. You've answered the question.
LAW: Your honor, may I amplify my answer? UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Cardinal, if you would stick to the form of approach (ph) and answer. Mr. Todd (ph) and Mr. Rogers (ph) will be able to recall (UNINTELLIGIBLE) shortly.
LAW: Thank you, your honor.
GARABEDIAN: Now, in referring to that paragraph, "this settlement is an important step in reaching closure for these victims who have long endured the damage done to them by John Geoghan," when you made that statement, was it is true statement?
LAW: Well obviously, it's what I felt, however...
GARABEDIAN: Is it what you believed?
LAW: I believed this to be a proposed settlement.
GARABEDIAN: Now, do you see anywhere in that sentence, and you can read it as many times as you need, the word "proposed"?
LAW: No, I do not see it there, Mr Garabedian, nor did I see in your statement previous to that, to which this statement was a response.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Move to retract the...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Charge (ph) and response I haven't heard, Mr. Garabedian. You may finish your answer, Cardinal.
GARABEDIAN: I'm sorry?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You may finish your answer, Cardinal. I didn't -- the last word is dropped because he overspoke you.
LAW: Excuse me?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The last words of your answer dropped because he overspoke you.
LAW: Did you want me to say those again?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Please.
LAW: What I said was, that I did not use the term "proposed settlement," nor was that used in previous statements made -- in a previous statement made by Mr. Garabedian to which this statement was a response on our part.
I believe that the word -- that my understanding, and I think the context out of which this sentence comes would indicate that the understanding was that this was a proposed settlement that wouldn't be in effect until there were 86 signatures on the side of the -- of the plaintiffs, and 16 signatures on the part of the 16 individual defendants of which I am one.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (OFF-MIKE) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
ZAHN: We just wanted to give you a sample of what's going on in the Boston courtroom right now, where the plaintiff, Mitchell Garabedian, who is representing dozens of victims who allege they were abused by a priest, John Geoghan, calling into questions a statement that the cardinal had released back in March where he said the settlement is an important step in reaching closure for these victims who have long endured the damage done to them by John Geoghan. Basically trying to get him to defend why it was the church's deal has now collapsed, and the cardinal making the point that although the word "proposed settlement," was never in there, proposed was a salient part of what was implied in this article that was, in fact, published by the Boston archdiocese.
So, this testimony is supposed to continue for some time. Once again, what will be decided here is whether the archdiocese will, in fact, be able to say that it can't afford this settlement. It is now saying it is considering filing for bankruptcy if it forced to pay such large amounts. Of course, the victims are saying, Hey, wait a minute. We negotiated this deal with you, and you said so yourself in your own statement that this is important in our reaching closure for what has happened to us. So we will keep you posted. This is going to drag on for a while, and just wanted to bring you up to date on what had transpired so far.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
