Deposition of New Mexico
Archbishop Robert F. Sanchez

January 1994

Part 1

COUNTY OF BERNALILLO, STATE OF NEW MEXICO

JOHN DOES I THROUGH III, Plaintiffs, vs. CV?91?11688

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC.,
a New Mexico corporation,

JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER,

BISHOP ARTHUR TAFOYA and CLARENCE GALLI,

Defendants.

JOHN DOE, 9 Plaintiff, vs. CV?93?07186

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation,

JASON E. SIGLER a/k/a JAY B. SIGLER,

BISHOP ROBERT SANCHEZ and SERVANTS OF THE PARACLETE,
a New Mexico non-profit corporation,

Defendants.

ELAINE MONTOYA and PAUL MONTOYA, Plaintiffs,

vs. CV?92?08933

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC.,
a New Mexico corporation,

and FATHER ARTHUR J. PERRAULT,

Defendants.

MICHAEL D. HARRIS, DANA KAINZ, PETER D. ST. CYR, CONRAD L. JIRON,
and ED TRUJILLO, Plaintiffs,

vs. CV?92?10319

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SANTA FE, INC., a New Mexico corporation,
and FATHER ARTHUR J. PERRAULT, Defendants.

DEPOSITION OF ROBERT F. SANCHEZ

VOLUME I

January 12, 1994 11:28 AM

5625 Isleta Boulevard, SW Albuquerque, NM

TAKEN BY: BRUCE PASTERNACK, ESQ.

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS

REPORTED BY: Jenifer L. Russin, RPR?CM, NM CCR #182

Russin Reporting 317 Commercial, NE, Suite 200?G Albuquerque, NM 87102

APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiffs:

BRUCE E. PASTERNACK, P.C.

Two Woodward Center 700 Lomas, NE, Suite 100, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
BY: BRUCE E. PASTERNACK and NEIL R. BLAKE

STEPHEN E. TINKLER MERIT BENNETT
425 Sandoval 8 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504

REESE - MATHEY
160 E. Flaming Gorge Green River, Wyoming 82935
BY: ROBERT J. REESE

For the Witness:

3 STOUT - WINTERBOTTOM Attorneys at Law
14 718 Central, SW Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
BY: RICHARD A. WINTERBOTTOM

For the Defendant Archdiocese of Santa Fe:

SIMONS, CUDDY - FRIEDMAN
6400 Uptown Blvd, NE, Suite 630E, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110
BY: KAREN C. KENNEDY

KELEHER - McLEOD, P.A.
414 Silver Avenue, SW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
BY: ARTHUR O. BEACH

EAVES, BARDACKE - BAUGH, P.A.
6400 Uptown Blvd., NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110
BY: PAUL BARDACKE

SHEEHAN, SHEEHAN - STELZNER
707 Broadway, NE Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
BY: LUIS STELZNER

For the Servants of the Paraclete:

MILLER, STRATVERT, TORGERSON - SCHLENKER, P.A.
500 Marquette, NW, Suite 1100, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
BY: ALAN KONRAD, JILL BURTRAM

Also Present:
Jerry Goffe

I N D E X

EXAMINATION OF ROBERT F. SANCHEZ
By Mr. Pasternack

EXHIBITS FORMALLY MARKED/IDENTIFIED
1. Order on Motion for Protective Order

MR. GOFFE: The time, as indicated on the screen, is 11:32 AM. Today is January 12th, 1994. We are on the record. Could the court reporter please swear the deponent in.

ROBERT F. SANCHEZ

After having been first duly sworn under oath, was questioned and testified as follows:

EXAMINATION BY MR. PASTERNACK:

Q. Please state your name.
A. Archbishop Robert F. Sanchez.

Q. And will it be acceptable to you, sir, if I refer to you during the deposition as Archbishop?
A. Yes, it is.

Q. Thank you. Archbishop, as you know, we have sought to take your deposition today, and Judge Ashby has entered his own order, which I'll attach as Exhibit to the deposition, and that will guide the course and scope of the deposition. I'm sure you've been made familiar with it by now. [Exhibit was marked for identification.]

MS. KENNEDY: Do you wish him to read that?
MR. PASTERNACK: I assume he's aware of it. Do you have any ??
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: No, we can continue. If we need to look at it over the lunch hour, we can, unless we come to an issue that requires reference to the order.
MR. PASTERNACK: Okay, fine.

Q. Sir, are you currently under any medication?
A. No, sir, I'm not.

Q. Have you been under any medication within the last 30 days?
A. No, sir.
Q. Where do you currently consider your residence to be?
A. For the sake of this deposition, it would be the same address as my attorney here.

Q. When you're not here in Albuquerque, where do you physically reside?

MR. WINTERBOTTOM: We'll object to that, Mr. Pasternack. That matter was broached during the course of our hearing on Wednesday. The Court has not made a specific order with regard to Exhibit, but it was clear during the course of that hearing that the Archbishop was not revealing his current location. If you'd like togo to the judge over the lunch hour with regard to that question, we don't have any problem with that.

Q. Are you declining to answer, Archbishop?
A. Yes.

Q. What is your current status with the Archidocese of Santa Fe?
A. I'm retired, retired archbishop.

Q. Do you have priestly faculties still?
A. An archbishop has, in his capacity, has faculties to function anywhere in the world, unless they are limited by the local ordinary. My function at this time is simply the celebration of Mass.

Q. Do you continue to celebrate Mass on occasion?
A. Oh, yes, daily.

Q. And do you celebrate only privately or publicly, as well?
A. Privately, actually.

Q. Are you permitted to celebrate Mass publicly?
A. I have not sought that permission, but I would be permitted, yes.

Q. Are there any restrictions on your priestly functions which have been imposed by any diocese or archidocese?
A. None.

Q. And none by Rome?
A. None.

Q. Have you met with the Pope in the past months?
A. No, I have not.

Q. Have you communicated with him by telephone in the past year?
A. No, I have not.

Q. You will recall, sir, that when your deposition was taken before, there was discussion about a softball backstop falling on your head and a car wreck in 1983?
A. Yes.

Q. Within the past year, have you received any sort of medical, psychological or neuropsychological treatment or counseling for any injuries resulting ?? any deficits resulting from those injuries?
A. No.

Q. Do you feel that your memory is functioning at its normal level today?
A. I would have to assume that it is, yes.

Q. Have you had any sort of psychometric testing within the past year?
A. No.

Q. Have you received within the past year any psychological or psychiatric care or counseling?
A. Counseling.

Q. Was it a psychiatrist or a psychologist?
A. It is a psychiatrist.

Q. Can you tell me that person's name?
A. No, I would prefer not to, simply because it is also concerned with the location of where I'm at, and I've been assured that we do not have to reveal that.

Q. So you're declining to answer?
A. I'm declining to answer, yes, sir.

Q. Did this psychiatrist ever place you on any medication?
A. No.

Q. Did the psychiatrist refer you for any sort of testing whatsoever, MMPI, Beck, any of them?
A. No.

Q. How frequently do you see the psychiatrist?
A. Oh, probably on an average of twice a week. The type of information that we share with is also spiritual. It is not what you'd call typical therapeutic care. It's ??

Q. I know there are some psychiatrists and psychologists who are priests.
A. Yes.

Q. Would this happen to be a priest?
A. The psychiatrist is a religious.

Q. So that would be a member of some order?
A. Yes.

Q. Do you feel you can tell me what order he is a member of?
A. No, I cannot.

Q. Would you be willing, Archbishop, to allow us to examine the medical records pertaining to your injury in '96 and your injury in 1983?

MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, I think we've stated, as Archbishop's attorneys, that we are not willing to offer you those records.

Q. Because we are taking this deposition in some cases where I believe your deposition has not been taken before, perhaps we could run through your, briefly, through your background. Would you just give us a narrative of when and where trained, ordained, etc.
A. I was born in Socorro, New Mexico. The date was March 10th, 1934. My parents were Julius and Priscilla Sanchez. I have two others, both live in this community: Rozier, who is a retired district judge, and Julius, who is a pharmacist, works for the Veterans Hospital. My education was received at Mount Carmel School elementary school for eight years. I attended the public high school in Socorro for one year. I attended St. Mary's High School in Phoenix, Arizona, for one year, and then entered the seminary, Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary in Santa Fe, to begin my training and formation hopefully for priesthood. I spent four years at the minor seminary in Santa Fe, and then was asked to complete my studies and preparation for the priesthood at the North American College in Rome, Italy. That is a college where seminarians from throughout America stay, at the North American College, but classes were actually studied or taken at the Gregorian University in Rome. I completed my studies in1960, but I was ordained on December 10th, 1959 at the North American College in Rome. Upon completion of my studies in July 1960, then I returned to the Archidocese of Santa Fe for assignment.

Q. And would you describe what those assignments were?
A. My first assignment was to be an associate pastor or an assistant pastor, as some people call them, at Anunciation Parish here in Albuquerque. And I was asked at the same time to be one of the staff members, a teacher, at St. Pius X High School in Albuquerque. I taught and remained in that position for one year; and then at the conclusion of that year, I was asked by the archbishop at that time, Archbishop Edwin V. Byrne, to plan to attend studies in canon law at Catholic University in Washington, D.C. I entered the Catholic University, then, in the fall, and was there for one year. At the conclusion of that year of study, the Archbishop asked me again if I would then return to St. Pius as a staff member and assist in their programs, which I did. I remained at St. Pius, then, until 1968, at which time the next archbishop, who was James Peter Davis, asked me to accept the position of pastor in a northeastern area of New Mexico. It was a pastorship of two communities of Roy and Mosquero, and they were combined into one parish for my purposes. I remained there for three years, after which time I was asked by the archbishop to then assume another position, back here in Albuquerque, and I moved back to Albuquerque, then, in September of 1971, and I assumed a position of pastor of San Felipe Parish in Old Town, Albuquerque. I remained there for three years until my ??I was named as the archbishop. I was named archbishop. The announcement took place June 4th of that year, 1974, and I was formally ordained and installed in that position on July 5th, 1974.

Q. And you served in that position continuously until what date?
A. Until my resignation was accepted. And I was notified of that acceptance in early April of 1993. I cannot recall the date, but it was on Monday of Holy Week. I would have to go to a calendar to see what the actual date was. It was early April of 1993.

Q. Are the things that you have just recited about your personal history, education and work experience contained on a written resume, or did you just recall all those things?
A. I recalled all of those things, but they are written down in resume form, surely.

Q. Have you reviewed your resume in the past few months?
A. No, I have not. I haven't had a chance to.

Q. And you didn't review it today?
A. No, I did not review it today.

Q. When you indicate that you are retired from the Santa Fe Archidocese, are you receiving a pension from the archidocese?
A. The Archidocese of Santa Fe has a retirement fund which had been worked on to help it become adequate for priests for many years, and it is a separately incorporated body with its own constitution that governs its activities. And when I submitted my resignation or my resignation was accepted, then petition was made to the governing board of the retirement board of the archidocese toconsider myself for retirement. And I understand that that was granted and made effective in early July 1993.

Q. Does the current archbishop, Archbishop Sheehan, communicate in any fashion with your psychiatrist?
A. Not that I know of.

Q. Have you authorized your psychiatrist to release or reveal information to the current archbishop?
A. No.

Q. Is there any person to whom you have authorized your psychiatrist to reveal information about your mental status?
A. No.

Q. Is the Archidocese of Santa Fe paying for the bills that are incurred in the therapy with the psychiatrist?
A. No.

Q. Are you at liberty to tell me how that's being paid?
A. The insurance under which I was covered was able to cover 50 percent of the bills, up to when they reach a limit, and they no longer contribute to it. I tried to contribute to that payment myself, when I was able, but I was informed by that community that whatever was available was fine. If I could not pay anything, there would be no obligation. So in a sense, it is a service that is offered to me.

Q. Have you been given any projections on how long you will need to remain in this therapy?
A. No, no projections at all. It's ?? we simply go from, I guess, meeting to meeting, and it's helped me look at my own life and my own spiritual life, and I'm grateful for that opportunity.

Q. You do not have any plans to terminate this therapy in the near future; is that right?
A. I would have to discuss that with the therapist, actually. But from my point of view, I don't see it terminating in a very near future, no.

Q. Has the therapist, to your knowledge, discussed your psychiatric condition with any other members of the religious community from which he works?
A. No, not to my knowledge.

Q. And have you discussed your spiritual and psychiatric needs with any other members of that community?
A. Not really, no. How are you feeling," "Feeling fine," this type of thing. But no in?depth discussion.

Q. Have you been hospitalized at any time since April of '93?
A. No, I have not been.

Q. Other than with your attorney, Mr. Winterbottom, did you have any conversations with any other attorneys before coming here today for this deposition?
A. Most of my conversation was with Mr. Winterbottom. I had opportunity to speak with Karen Kennedy for about an hour two nights ago.

Q. Was that in Albuquerque or by phone?
A. That was here in Albuquerque.

Q. Have you spoken with Father Wolf about the deposition?
A. Other than for him to tell me that he's taking care of the arrangements.

Q. Have you spoken to Archbishop Sheehan about the deposition?
A. No.

Q. Anyone else?
A. No, no one.

Q. At the time of your conversation with Ms.Kennedy, did you consider her to be your lawyer?
MS. KENNEDY: Mr. Pasternack, you are well aware that I'm counsel of record for the Archidocese. In my meetings with the Archbishop, it has been attorney?client privilege, and I will not allow him to answer any questions about those meetings.
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I join in that Mr. Pasternack. During all the conversations that the Archbishop has described of two nights ago, I was present with Ms. Kennedy.
Q. (By Mr. Pasternack) Just to make sure the record is clear, Archbishop, I didn't ask the content of the conversation. I asked if you considered her to be your lawyer.
A. Mr. Winterbottom is my lawyer. Karen Kennedy has been the lawyer associated with the Archidocese of Santa Fe. She is not considered my personal lawyer.

Q. And would it be correct to say, you are no longer an official of the Archidocese of Santa Fe?
A. That is right.

Q. And now the question is, are you declining to discuss what you discussed with Ms. Kennedy during that meeting?
MS. KENNEDY: I'm instructing him not to answer, Mr. Pasternack, because, as you know, it is attorney/client privilege.
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I join in that.

Q. While those of us here may know what precipitated your resignation as archbishop, those who may be viewing this videotape as jurors in the future may not know what precipitated your resignation. Could you describe in your own words what motivated you to tender your resignation?
A. Yes, sir. I reached the decision to tender my resignation due to the fact that three women had come to yourself and had offered information to you and subsequently went to "60 Minutes," a national television program, where they stated that we had had a relationship in the 1970s, and they felt that this should be published. Once that became public knowledge, I felt that it would become an issue with the people of the archidocese, that there would be those who would feel that they could still accept me as their archbishop, but there would be others who would probably feel they couldn't. And I have always felt that unity within any church group is essential, just as unity within a country is essential. And if I could no longer effectively lead the church as their archbishop, uniting them together, then it would be best for me to submit my resignation and allow another person to be appointed in my place. So I felt that that would be the proper action to take, which I did take.

Q. I understand that you've fairly recently had an opportunity to review or watch the "60 Minutes" program; is that right?
A. I have not watched the "60 Minutes" program at all.

Q. The reason I ask the question was I believe that Father Wolf indicated to the newspapers that you had watched it, but I'm glad we're clarified that.
A. No, I have not watched it.

Q. Has anyone told you what the allegations of the women were?
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: At this time, I'll object to the extent that that inquires into the attorney/client relationship. Aside from conversations with attorneys, I'll allow him to answer the question.
A. No one could really tell me specifically or, you know, in detail what was contained. They mentioned general allegations that the young women had made. And that was about the extent of it.? (deleted)

Q. In the general philosophy of the Catholic Church ?? I'd like to ask you a few questions about that ?? is lying a sin?
A. Lying is considered a sin, yes. And if it's in a serious case, it's considered more serious.

Q. Is there ever a justification for lying in the philosophy of the Church, as you understand it?
A. No. Lying is considered a falsification of the truth, and it is considered sinful. A person might lie to save their life. For instance, during the Second World War when, say, the Nazis were trying to round up many of our others of the Jewish faith, they may have lied so as to save their own children or their lives. That might be considered ?? the circumstances might be prevailing for them to be able to do that, because the evil that they were avoiding would be greater than the act of lying. So there are occasions when lying of that nature would be permissible.

Q. Is that type of lying referred to with any special appellation in canon law or Church doctrine?
A. I don't recall it myself. It probably has a technical reference, a technical expression, but I don't recall that expression.

Q. Is it a mental reservation?
A. Possibly. It could be possibly called that. The example I used would be obviously more than a mental reservation. It would simply be saying that they were not in order to save their life. Maybe the mental reservation would be that if they told the truth, their life would be taken, and that's a greater good that they have an obligation to preserve. So possibly a mental reservation.

Q. Can you give us any guidance on where the line is. I think it's clear when you say that one can lie to save their life, that's acceptable in Church doctrine. Can one lie to save their reputation?
A. No, that would not be acceptable.

Q. Can one lie to save the reputation of the Church or of the diocese or archidocese?
A. That would not be acceptable either.

Q. Can one lie to save the reputation of another priest?
A. No, that would not be acceptable either. I'm not a moralist, an expert in moral theology, but these examples that you have cited seem to me to fall under the concept that lying itself is wrong.

Q. In your extensive education for the priesthood, were you required to receive instruction in the promises of chastity and celibacy?
A. Yes.

Q. Can you generally explain what chastity and celibacy are in the views of the Church?
A. Yes. Celibacy is a state, a single state, or a promise to live a life as a single person without the privilege of marriage; and it includes, then, a promise to refrain from those circumstances that might tend to break that promise or that state of celibacy. Chastity is a moral virtue, as looked at by the Roman Catholic Church, and it includes the avoidance of all actions or circumstances that might lead to sins against the virtue of chastity which surround the Sixth Commandment, that of sexuality. The virtue of chastity, as the Roman Catholic Church observes it, looks at it, is incumbent upon all people within the Church. Married couples are obliged to live a chaste life within their own vows of marriage. Single individuals, whether they are religious or simply single without vows, are also obliged to live a chaste life to the best of their ability. So chastity is a virtue. Celibacy is a state of life.

Q. When you say chastity is a virtue, does that mean that when a priest takes a promise or a vow of chastity, it's a goal rather than a necessity to comply with that vow or promise?
A. It's not a vow of chastity that the diocesan priests take, but let's use the word "promise." I think that would be easy to understand. Whenever a promise is taken, it is taken, looking at chastity, as the goal, as the ideal. And we strive to live a chaste life as perfectly as possible, and that living out of a chaste life is encouraged by surrounding yourself with what we call a spiritual life, a spiritual structure, which involves regular prayer, which involves frequent confession, which involves a support group of other individuals who can talk with you and share encouragement to be faithful to your life of chastity or religious.

Q. There may be people seeing this tape at some point in a trial, for example, who are not Catholic. And when you use words like "encourage" and "goal," that suggests to me ?? and I'd like to ask you if my interpretation is wrong ?? that a breach of the promise of chastity is sort of optional if you find it too difficult to comply with?
A. No, I am not trying to indicate that. I'm saying that given human nature, the vow of chastity or just the life ?? a chaste life for any individual will be fraught with difficulties throughout their life because of human nature, just as the promise or the virtue of honesty is difficult throughout a person's life. But we're obliged to live those virtues as perfectly as we can.

Q. Is it considered by the Church, as you interpret Church law and doctrine, to be a sin for a priest to breach the promise of chastity?
A. It is.

Q. Is there a degree of sin that you could classify it as?
A. Yes. There is what we call venial sin or mortal sin. That is a less serious offense against that virtue, or a more serious offense against that virtue. Generally speaking, in dealing with actions in reference to the Sixth Commandment, or the vow of chastity, they would be considered serious, unless there are circumstances which might affect the full willful action by that individual. Just to give you an example ?? would an example be in order?

Q. I was getting ready to ask for one, so yes, I'd appreciate it.
A. I've anticipated your request.

Q. Thank you.
A. I think the easiest example that I could use for a general understanding would be a person who's intoxicated. A person who is intoxicated, I think even civilly, is considered not to be in full control of their own faculties or their full will. And therefore, actions committed under those circumstances would have to be looked at individually and perhaps differently than from similar actions committed by someone else. Objectively, they're the same actions, but subjectively, there's been a change for the individual because he was not in total possession of his faculties of mind or of will. The same thing pertains to a contract. We know that if two people are to get married, they're entering into a contract. If one feels forced, then the free will of that individual has been impeded, and he's not entering or she's not entering into the will totally free. And so subjectively, it's not the same. So I'm saying that there are circumstances for any situation, any moral situation, which can mitigate the culpability of an individual regarding whatever action it may be that he has taken.

Q. Would you refer to that as situation ethics?
A. To a degree, but it's not really what situation ethics is. This is a technical expression that the Church has actually not approved of, because it was a movement by some theologians saying that every ethical question really does not have objective guilt to it, that it all depends upon the situation, and the situation can mitigate things. And it was a denial of objective truth or objective morality, and so that was never approved by the Roman Catholic Church, even though some theologians held that. But I'd say it's akin to that inasmuch as there are some circumstances which do affect the subjective guilt or less guilt of an individual because of the presence of that circumstance, mitigating circumstance.

Q. Does the Church take the position, as you interpret its rules, that there is objective evil?
A. Oh, yes, yes. The Church, in fact, just recently, within the last year, the Holy Father has come out with a document on ethics, on morality, in which he stresses that objective evil and objective truth, once again, because of a tendency within the world community, not just within one area or one country, to deny objective truth or objective right or wrong. ? (deleted)

Q. Once you became archbishop, did you feel a greater responsibility to comply with all priestly promises to set an example thereby for the priests who served under you?
A. I don't know whether I could characterize it as a feeling of having a greater responsibility. And I say that because I believe that every priest feels a sense of responsibility within themselves to live out their own promises before God as perfectly as they are able. And I don't recall ?? I did sense a greater responsibility because the number of people who I would have to minister to was much greater. And I think that that was the overwhelming feeling that I felt at that time.

Q. Did the fact that you had succumbed on occasion to the temptations of the flesh give you a greater sensitivity to similar failings by your other priests?
A. What do you mean by "sensitivity"?

Q. When you found out that other priests had violated their promises of chastity, did it occur to you, "I too have known the temptations of the flesh. I too have been weak," and did you thereby tend to be more forgiving of them than you otherwise would have been?
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, could you, for a matter of clarification, describe exactly what temptations of the flesh you're discussing with regard to other priests, so the archbishop can phrase his response in terms of ones that were, for instance, heterosexual, homosexual or pedophilia?

Q. Do you understand the question, Archbishop?
A. Yes, I think I do.

Q. Go ahead.
A. What are you talking specifically to?

Q. What I'm asking you is that because you had known the temptations of the flesh and apparently, on occasion, given in to them, when you were advised ?? which we will discuss later we're going to contend was on numerous occasions. . . .
A. Surely.

Q. ?? that other priests had similarly fallen to the temptations of the flesh, did your own failings make you more sensitive and more understanding?

MR. KONRAD: I have an objection to the form of the question, the "numerous times" reference not necessarily being in evidence.

Q. Go ahead.
A. I would say offhand that I have always been a compassionate person, and that aside from any personal failures. And I think I've learned my compassion both from the example of my family, friends, as well as seminary training, because part of the Church's training, our theology, is to follow the compassion of the Christ. Christ did not come into the world to save those who were saints but, in his own words, to save those who are in need of the physician, those who have sinned. And he even spoke to the woman caught in adultery to those who surrounded her, "Let those who are without sin cast the first stone." And he said this not to justify evil or to justify sin, but rather to emphasize the need for compassion, because, "There for but the grace of God go I." I had always been steeped in that concept of compassion. I cannot say honestly whether I was more compassionate to any man who admitted guilt to me because of my own sin. I would like to believe that I would have been as compassionate if I had never sinned, because that is how I was trained, and that is part of my character. I would say this, that knowing my own failure, I would have been able to speak directly to them perhaps with more serious admonition about the care for their own spirituality and their spiritual life, how to improve their own life and to be honest before God. I suppose it would be like ?? well, maybe like a parent, a parent who was imperfect and recognizes their own failure as a parent, and then they catch their son or their daughter in whatever, and they have to correct them. And they are sensitive to the failure of the son or daughter, but I think that they would probably correct them just as sternly to encourage them not to repeat that in the future. I think they would show sensitivity ?? or compassion is the word that I would use. At the same time, I don't think they would be approving of the sin, in other words, of the son or the daughter, and that's why I use the example of Christ.

Q. Would it be correct to say, Archbishop, that substance abuse by priests is not permitted in your understanding of Catholic moral teachings?
A. I think substance abuse by any human being is really against the law of God, because it's the destruction of the human person, our life. Life is God's gift to us, and when we abuse it in any form, then we are going against the Commandment that says, "Thou shalt not kill," which is yourself, and so substance abuse would be violating that.

Q. And would your view be the same ?? I'm sure it would ?? as to matters of child pornography? Is it impermissible for a priest, or indeed any Catholic, to engage in the production of child pornography?
A. Absolutely not. That would be, again, very sinful and very wrong against society, as well, certainly.

Q. Do you know other bishops or archbishops from throughout the country and the world who have been sexually active?
A. There was one bishop who resigned years ago, and I can't even recall his name. He was from Minnesota, but he resigned as a bishop in order to marry a woman, and so I would have to presume that he was active. In fact, he lived in Santa Fe for a while. I don't recall his name. It was a little bit before my time. There was another archbishop from Atlanta who resigned his position because of allegations. There was another that I heard about ?? and I don't know the particulars on it ?? that was from Ireland, perhaps three or four years ago, five years ago, I don't know the particulars, that he also resigned because of allegations.

Q. Those were the stories that were rather public. Do you know of any bishops or archbishops who have been sexually active where it has not been publicly revealed?
A. No, sir, I do not.

Q. I apologize for asking this question. Have you ever had any children?
A. No, sir, I have never had any children. Now, I want to repeat that, so that it's very clear. I have never had any children. And I understand it's difficult to ask a question like that.

Q. During your service as a priest of the archidocese and then as archbishop of the Archidocese of Santa Fe, were there priests whom you knew to be sexually active?
A. As an archbishop, I had occasion to meet with a priest, actually with two, over my tenure of nearly 9 years, that had in fact fathered children. And it was brought to my attention, and so we had to take those steps that were necessary for those occasions.

Q. One of those was Roger Martinez, I'm sure?
A. Yes, it was Father Roger Martinez, exactly.

Q. Who is the other one?
A. Father John Esquivel.

Q. Now, you say that certain steps were taken?
A. Yes.

Q. Both men remained as parish priests. What steps were taken?
A. They were sent to therapy. They were obliged to provide for the child. So that their human obligations were cared for, as well. And they were removed from their positions until therapy had been completed and recommendations for any future assignment would be given.

Q. Now, my question had been intended to be a little more broad, not just the priests who had fathered children, but the priests who had in fact been sexually active. Were there priests of the Archidocese of Santa Fe during your tenure as archbishop whom you learned to be sexually active with boys, men, women, sexually active in any way?
A. Cases were ought to my attention or allegations regarding priests during my 9 years; and in some instances, admissions took place of their sexual activity. In other cases, there was no admission. And soI did have occasion to meet with priests about whom sexual activity was alleged.

Q. Please give us the names of some of those priests whose names you recall as being presented to you under such circumstances.
A. The name of (deleted) was one name. (deleted) was another name. (deleted) was another name. (deleted) was another name. Then I would add to that (deleted) was another name. I've just referred to him. (deleted)was another name. (deleted) was another name. (deleted) was another name. I'm going flat on my trying to recall others.

Q. (deleted)?
A. Yes, oh, yes, .

Q.(deleted) ?
A. Those were allegations ?? right, (deleted), I recall that name. (deleted) Yes, that name ??

Q. ?
A. It requires a special spelling. Have you a list that maybe I could ??

Q. I'll just go down them one by one.
A. Okay.

Q. (deleted) Is he one that you had heard of as being involved in sexual activity?
A. Yes, this occurred just about the time I was leaving, I believe.? (deleted)

Q. Anthony Gallegos, whom I believe was raised with you in Socorro?
A. No, he was not.

Q. Wasn't he?
A. No. Anthony Gallegos left very shortly after he was ordained a priest for this archidocese, and he left to California. We never saw him again. I am unaware of any allegations that were raised against him. I was not the archbishop when he was ordained. (deleted)

Q. Barney Bissanette?
A. Yes.

Q. Were you aware of such allegations when you were archbishop?
A. Not allegations. There was talk, but not allegations. I think allegations came about, again ?? I'm not certain when, actually, but not while I was the archbishop. ? (deleted)

Q. (Deleted) ?
A. That case became a public case. It was never Page One, taken to trial or completed, but the allegations were made during my tenure. 3? (deleted)

Q. (Deleted) ?
A. Yes. Some statement was made ?? I don't know the person. I did not handle that at all. Father Wolf informed me that some allegation had been made after his retirement.

Q. Robert Kirsch?
A. The case was handled by yourself.

Q. Had you heard any such allegations of sexual impropriety against Father Vincent Lipinski before he was arrested?
A. Before he was arrested, there was one notice brought to me thirdhand, but no allegation. ? (deleted) ? (deleted)

Q. (Deleted) ?
A. One allegation, yes.

Q. Charlie Martinez?
A. No, nothing. ? (deleted)

Q. Father Luis Martinez?
A. No, sir.

Q. Father (deleted) ?
A. One allegation was made, yes.

Q. Was that before or after you became archbishop?
A. After I became archbishop, yes. I can't really recall much about it, but the name rings a bell.

Q. Did you relieve him from his duties at (deleted) for sexually molesting young girls there?
A. Your statement is a very accusing one. He was not accused of molesting young girls at (deleted). That was not the allegation.

Q. What was the allegation?
A. I could be mistaken, and so I don't want to be held to it, because my memory is not accurate. I did not handle that individual case. He belongs to a religious community, and so it was placed in their hands, the entire thing. So I didn't do the investigation, but the community did.

Q. What do you recall the allegations to have been?
A. I think it was solicitation, but there was no actual contact with people.

Q. Solicitation of girls or boys?
A. Of a lady. ? (deleted)

Q. Were there any allegations of sexual impropriety brought up during your tenure as archbishop against Father (deleted) ?
A. One. ? (deleted) (deleted)

Q. Father Ron Roth?
A. I don't know who Father Ron Roth was.

Q. Father Edward Rutowski?
A. Once, one occasion. ? (deleted)

Q. Okay. Father Ignacio Tafoya?
A. Nothing was ought to my attention directly, sir.

Q. How about indirectly?
A. Indirectly this way: Father Tafoya himself said, "Archbishop, someone has made a statement to Sister ?? about me," and, he said, "it's a lie. I just wanted you to know that a statement has been made." So no statement was made directly to me. It was from the priest himself.

Q. Father (deleted) ?
A. No, no allegations were made to me against him either.

Q. Did you know whether or not Father (deleted) was gay?
A. I was never certain. I was never certain. He never gave me any indications that he was gay, never did anything overtly that you might associate with a gay individual. On one occasion, you indicated to me that he had been seen at a gay bar, and that concerned me. That put the question mark in my mind.

Q. Did you ever talk to him about that?
A. Yes.

Q. What did he say?
A. He said he had been there, but he had not gone there for pick?ups or anything of this nature. He had gone there for a drink.

Q. Did you believe him?
A. I had no other choice but to accept his reply. But I also had a few things to say.

Q. What?
A. My own personal feelings about anyone visiting a gay bar.

Q. Were you opposed to that?
A. Absolutely.

Q. Okay.
A. That's what I mean.
Q. Were you responsible for his departure as the (deleted) for the Santa Fe Archidocese?
A. No, I was not. He was the (deleted) when I left the archidocese.

Q.Father (deleted) ?
A. . No, no allegations were ever brought against him .

Q. Did you know whether or not he was gay?
A. I did not know that he was gay, and I don't know that for a fact even at this moment. I'm trying to recall whether he was one of those on that list that you had. I think his name was there, and I think he was one that we contacted and confronted with that.

Q. Do you recall what me said?
A. Denial. The same thing as Father (deleted) had said, pretty much the same thing.

Q. Did Father (deleted) admit that he frequented the Ranch but just say that he'd gone there for a drink?
A. He said he had been to ?? I don't know the name of the place, but he'd been to this so?called gay bar, and he had gone there for a drink and wondered why that was so wrong, if people go to other bars. I said, "It's not the same, and you will not visit that again, because it's not the place for any Roman Catholic priest, period."

Q. Did you ever, Archbishop, issue a memo or letter to the priests of the archidocese telling them not to frequent gay bars?
A. To the best of my recollection, I never issued any memo. I can't recall that. I was very strong in voicing my opinion after confronting these men. And I took occasion to mention it to a meeting of one ?? I think it was a personnel board meeting, and I was quite upset over it. But I don't recall issuing a memo.

Q. Were there any other priests beyond (deleted) and (deleted) whom you personally confronted and said, "Don't go to gay bars anymore"?
A. I confronted about four or five that you had on that list, and Father Richard Olona was confronting others at the same time. I think Father (deleted), I think, was one that I had confronted, and Father (deleted), I think, was another. Those four, I remember.

Q. And do you know who Father Olona extended the same message to?
A. I don't recall the rest of the list right offhand. I just don't recall. If you have a list or something that would help to remind me, but I just don't recall it.

Q. Father Olona at that time was your chancellor, I take it?
A. Yes, he was.

Q. Did the allegation that there were or may have been gay priests in this archidocese come as a surprise to you?
A. It came as surprise in reference to the number that you have indicated. I had heard references by priests, just chit?chat, but no allegations or no definite statements. But I had heard a reference to priests that way in the past.

Q. There is a book that has been out for a while called, Gay Priests. Have you ever read that?
A. No, I have not.

Q. What was your policy when you found out that a priest of your archidocese was gay? Was it just to simply tell them to stay out of gay bars or was it more strong than that?
A. Well, I think to understand any reaction on my part towards any person accused of being a homosexual, the Church looks at homosexuality from a double point of view. The first point is that people who are homosexual in their orientation, you cannot blame them. In some instances, this is part of their own nature. It's not an acquired orientation. But if that individual is acting on his orientation, acting out his homosexuality, those actions are forbidden as contrary to the virtue of the chastity. And considered immoral. So my reaction to these men was to bring this to their attention. I did not ask them directly if they were a homosexual or not, but I used the occasion to make it clear to them what their responsibility is before God.

Q. Have you reviewed your prior depositions recently?
A. I tried to. We were very verbose in those depositions, Mr. Pasternack, and they went on for hours.

Q. Was it both of us that were?
A. Well, I guess I talk too much.

Q. The reason I ask, sir, is that in your prior deposition ?? and that's what I'm thumbing for now. If you don't recall it, I'll find it for you. I believe you indicated that the number of priest sex offenders who had been brought to your attention was more than one, but you could easily count them on one hand?
A. Sex offenders?

CHECK NUMBERS HERE

Q. Yes.
A. Are you talking about homosexuals or ??
MR. PASTERNACK: Let's take a break, and I'll find it. Why don't we take a break.
THE WITNESS: Sure.
MR. GOFFE: The time is :0 , and we will go off the record. [A recess was taken.] MR. GOFFE: The time, as indicated on the screen, is :37, and we are back on the record. ? (deleted)

Q. When your previous deposition was taken in the case, on April , 9, you were asked beginning on Page 40, beginning at line 10, "On how many occasions have you received reports or complaints of sexual abuse by a diocesan priest of the archidocese since you've been archbishop?" And your answer, beginning at line 3 was, "I'm trying to go back. It's been almost ??? years and ?? let's see if I can ?? allegations, I suppose that would be the proper word, were probably made, I would say, four or five times that I can recall offhand." The list that you've given us today, depending on how one counts, was more like around ??? 0. Can you offer any explanation for this apparent discrepancy in the testimony?

MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I might add, for the completeness of the record, the Archbishop's testimony ended, "I would say, four or five times that I can recall right offhand, and that's just trying to make a quick scan of my memory."
A. I remember the deposition, on that occasion, and your question ?? it caught me right offhand as in a sense. I don't recall either yourself or myself having any list, such as we went through today. I was asked to recall from my memory, and I think what I was zeroing in on, Mr Pasternack, were any cases that we had dealt with formally, not just allegations or accusations, but, you know, things that had resulted in some type of action. The list that we dealt with today is actually quite extensive. I don't know how many names you had. Many I said yes to; many I said no to. But it seems to me that many of these people whose names that were included on there actually were not brought to my attention as the archbishop but have since surfaced during all of these investigations that have been taking place in the last couple of years. My estimate of approximately four or six was probably close to accurate as to the number of cases that we have been involved in, but certainly not close to the total number that we know now or that had been brought to light since that time that we're dealing with at this time.

Q. So do you mean to say that some of the people to whom you indicated affirmatively a little while ago were people that you've only learned about since the lawsuits started to be filed?
A. Right, yes.

Q. A little later on, we'll go into each of those people in some detail and see.
A. Okay.

Q. Now that we've taken a little break, have you had an opportunity to reflect and see if there are any other names that perhaps I didn't mention, but that you now recall?
A. No, I didn't reflect in that direction, Mr. Pasternack. But none came to my mind as you went through an alphabetical list.

Q. Okay. Well, perhaps it would be appropriate to spend a little time trying to break down how many occurred before the lawsuits started being filed and after. As you have previously testified, I'm sure that Jason Sigler, as an offender, had come to your attention
A. Yes, surely.

Q. From the personnel file, I'm sure I can conclude that Arthur Perrault had come to your attention as a sex offender before the lawsuits?
A. No. The memory that I had of Art Perrault was that no formal allegation had been made against him until it came to my attention a year ago in December, I believe it was, by a instance. And I was brought into that situation, and that is what formally brought to my mind, to my memory, Art Perrault. I was unaware of any former or previous allegation, although I know that in an interview with one of the TV commentators, he had a woman on who said that she had come to me, and I'm not denying that she may have come to me, but I simply could not recall, and actually right now, I do not recall that. But that's not to say that she did not come to me.
Q. Archbishop, yesterday, counsel for the Archidocese faxed to us letters that had been written from Dr. Joseph VanDenHeuvel to you about Arthur Perrault's sexual disorder in 1984, in 1985. Does that help you recall that you did, in fact, know of his sexual disorder in those times?
A. It does. It helps to this degree: That I had asked Arthur Perrault to see Dr. VanDenHeuvel and to continue maintenance therapy with him. And I honestly cannot recall why I had asked him to begin at that time what incident had happened either in his life or in a surrounding area. But I had not ?? at the time that we had this interview, I could not recall anyone coming in and alleging Art Perrault having violated that.

Q. Archbishop, do you recall even students at St. Pius when you were a teacher there approaching you and telling you that Arthur Perrault had molested them?
A. Students did not approach me at St. Pius, Mr. Pasternack. I was at St. Pius simultaneously with Arthur Perrault for about a year to a year and a half at most, and then I left the school. He remained. But students did not come to me personally to complain about him.

Q. Is that something you recall and adamantly deny or you simply don't remember?
A. Both. I have no recall of anything of that nature. I don't know why they would have come to me to begin with. I was not the principal or anyone in authority to have been able to act in that direction. So I just don't think that would have happened. Unless you have some information from people who said they came. But I do not recall anything.

MR. WINTERBOTTOM: Mr. Pasternack, in the interest of completeness in this deposition, if you do have such information, we'd urge you at this time to share it with the archbishop, so that he can use that information to perhaps refresh his recollection of events that occurred years and years ago, and maybe we can be more complete and more accurate and assist you in finding the complete and accurate truth here. And he's willing to do that, if you have any documents you care to share with us at this time as to this issue or any other issue in the deposition. The archbishop is happy to read those carefully and review them.

Q. Archbishop, the Clive Lynn matter had been brought to your attention before the lawsuits, hadn't it?
A. Yes.

Q. And the Ed Donnollan matter had been ought to your attention before the lawsuits?
A. Except ?? the Ed Donnollan matter was not an allegation or an accusation. There was ?? the biggest dispute that took place, at least that I can recall regarding that issue was a ranch for boys that he was operating at that time. And if I recall correctly, it was the ??

Q. Hacienda De Los Muchachos in Farley, New Mexico?
A. You've got it. Hacienda De Los Muchachos in Farley, New Mexico, and I believe it was the ?? or at least a branch of the New Mexico Health and Social Services, whatever it was called at that time, that had contacted me about what they felt were serious administrative shortcomings in the Ranch. I had received some communication from people I believe who worked with him at that time. I can't recall all of the contents. But I know they were disturbed over the Ranch, and I had to take serious steps, and I closed the Ranch, in fact, and moved him out of that situation, so that whatever shortcomings were occurring would not continue.

Q. And did part of those shortcomings include allegations of sexual contact between Ed Donnollan and the inmate boys at Hacienda De Los Muchachos?
A. There was no specific allegation regarding any individual boys that I can recall. I don't recall there was ever any names given to me regarding that. There may have been, and I would have to see the documents.

Q. Do you remember generally allegations having been made about sexual contact between Father Ed and the boys?
A. There may have been general allegations made. I would have to say that, yes.

Q. And that was before lawsuits started being filed?
A. Yes.

Q. Because you closed down Father Ed's by about 1970 ?? excuse me 1976, didn't you?
A. '76, I think that's about the time it was. I don't recall exactly when, but I think it was around '76. But Father Ed Donnollan would not have been one I would have put in that category when I was trying to think back as to the number of people. He just did not occur to me.

Q. The events with Roger Martinez, fathering the child, that would have been before the lawsuits started being filed?
A. Yes.

Q. And I presume that you made sure that he acknowledged paternity and paid child support?
A. Yes.

Q. The events with John Esquivel would have occurred before the lawsuits and these cases started being filed, wouldn't they?
A. Yes.

Q. And did John Esquivel, also at your direction, acknowledge paternity and pay child support?
A. Yes.

Q. You know he's under indictment now, don't you?
A. No.

Q. Yes. All right. And Sabine Griego, you knew about those allegations long before lawsuits started being filed, didn't you?
A. Not before this took place, no.

Q. Well, didn't you, in fact, visit him at Southdown in 1991?
A. Those allegations were ought to my attention in about September of '91, I guess it was, September of '91. And he was removed from his pastorship immediately, and he went to Southdown, then, for his therapy, and I visited there for the exit interview, which they always ask the superior to come for an exit interview of their candidates, and I went there for that, it must have been in March of '92.

Q. The first of these lawsuits was filed in August of '91. So you're saying that after the first of the lawsuits was filed, but before the majority of them, was when you learned about these allegations with regard to Sabine Griego?
A. The information came to our attention in ?? I'm almost certain it was September of '91.

Q. Okay. In fact, hadn't you removed Sabine Griego from Our Lady of Sorrows in Las Vegas and put him down at Queen of Heaven in Albuquerque because of similar allegations?
A. No. Oh, no. No, that was a personnel board action. It is customary to transfer our priests every six to10 years. They have that right. If they're assigned as pastors, they may continue in that pastorship for a minimum of six years, or longer if it's judged that they should remain. But it's not that they're going to remain in any one parish forever. So his transfer that took place in our personnel board was like all the other pastors' transfers. "You've been in that one area long enough. We need you and your administrative abilities in another parish that's larger now, and we're going to move to you this parish." And that is what took place when he was transferred from Our Lady of Sorrows.

Q. Did you learn about Bob Smith before or after these lawsuits started to be filed in August of '91?
A. In effect, I had learned of Father Bob Smith ??an allegation had been made in the ?? I think mid '80s, around 1986 or so. And I did remove him from his parish and asked him to go for treatment. He never returned to parish work after that. In fact, it led to him being placed in a nursing home, and eventually he died. He had been suffering from severe sugar diabetes and other chronic illnesses, and so he died that way. He had been dead for a number of years, I think, when you asked this question, and his ?? I wasn't able to recall him to mind at that time.

Q. Did you learn about (deleted) before or after August of '91?
A. The allegations that led to my removing him from his parish took place in the fall of '91.

Q. And you had heard no allegations about sexual impropriety involving Father ?? before fall of '91; is that right?
A. There had been one general statement made by a lady, and I had that investigated by a team, I guess I would call it, or a committee of three of our priests. They met with the family, and then they met with the priest and confronted him. And the final result was that there had been, I guess, indiscretions. He had acted foolishly, but they did not feel that there was enough evidence to say that any violation of the individual had occurred. And so he was not removed from his pastorship lacking that information.

Q. Were these findings of foolishness made before August of '91?
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: I believe it was indiscretion.
A. Oh, yes, those that occurred, like I said, in 19 ?? in the mid '80s. I don't exactly recall.

Q. And who was the three?man team who investigated these allegations?
MR. WINTERBOTTOM: If you remember, Archbishop.
A. You may have documents on that. I'm sure that it was probably in documents. I don't remember the team right offhand.

Q. All right. Did you first learn of any allegations of sexual impropriety by before or after August of '91?
A. Before August of '91.

Q. (deleted)?
A. Not until ?? in fact, the allegations came against him after I had left in '93.

Q. Barney Bissonette?
A. No formal allegations had been ought to me prior to that time.

Q. Any informal allegations?
A. Just general statements. He was no longer a priest of the archidocese, had not been a priest of our archidocese since 1983, and so I simply did not include him in my own reflection either. He belonged to the Diocese of Las Cruces.

Q. But had you been advised in any fashion prior toAugust of '91 that he may have been a sex offender?
A. Yes.

MR. PASTERNACK: Do you want to change the tape, Mr. Goffe?
MR. GOFFE: The time is 2:45. This will be the end of tape in the deposition of Archbishop Sanchez. Page 8 [A recess was taken.]

Continued on next page