BishopAccountability.org
	"Documents Regarding Mary Grant Exist but Could Not Be Located," Per Oc Da, Case Cont'd to 10.11.07, Plus More Salesian Cases Released for Trial By Kay Ebeling City of Angels October 8, 2007 http://cityofangels3.blogspot.com/2007/10/status-more-salesian-cases-released-re.html About 27 attorneys waited for court to start and a gaggle more were in the hallway last Wednesday for a status conference on the clergy cases Los Angeles. Also on calendar that morning was a motion to enforce subpoenas on Orange County law enforcement agencies. In my corner seat I got boxed in by men's crossed legs and briefcases on the floor. Attorney behind me: "We got lucky 'cause not only do we represent 30 plaintiffs but we also get money from (names names with lots of zzi's on the end.) (That's plaintiff attorney humor.) Almost all 27 were attorneys I'd never seen before. "My name is [TOTALLY UNINTELLIGIBLE]" said the guy next to me and grinned. "A lot of us who've been around these cases a while like to keep an amount of anonymity." "What is the status conference about today?" I asked and the guy with the Italian clients said, "That's what a lot of us would like to know." "The order was vague," piped in another. Soon the court clerk called out and the room emptied as all 27 plus attorneys went into the judge's chambers, then 25 or so came out 30 seconds later. "They only want to meet with the liaisons," the attorney said and they all resumed their seats. I couldn't get out. . . An hour later the hearing on Clergy Cases Los Angeles status began, followed by the hearing on Motion to Enforce Subpoenas on the Orange County District Attorney. JUDGE FROMHOLZ: I spoke with liaison council in chambers and one thing we accomplished is cases we can release. He lists names of plaintiff cases that can't be released. JUDGE: Okay so other than those, 12 will be released. KATHERINE FREBERG: I represent (names) six victims of Jessie Rodriquez, and a January 28 trial date is already set. Currently it's at the Federal District Court for diocese of San Bernardino — JUDGE: This gets a little complicated. Those cases are released as of this morning. It's not necessary at this time to take action on any of the remaining cases so it's my intention not to. (ME: [shaking my head I make this note:] All they were able to sort out today was a few more Salesian cases.) (ME: At the July 16 hearing re the settlement all the parties agreed to turn into the court a summary of which cases remain and which have been settled. The summary document was due on July 31, 2007.) (ME: WHY IS IT TAKING SO LONG to sort things out???) Lots of grim mouths on faces of defense and plaintiff attorneys Documents have disappeared in Mary Grant's Case: After this: RE ORANGE COUNTY SUBPOENAS That's another question — what's going on there? On Aug 30 Freberg's office filed Motion to Enforce Subpoena served on Orange County district attorney. The documents in question are regarding Father John Lenihan. Freberg's office writes: "Father John Lenihan is a former priest and an admitted pedophile. Lenihan worked in parishes and schools within Orange County for the RC archdiocese of Los Angeles and the RC bishop of Orange when he molested Plaintiff Mary Catherine Grant and at least one other known minor sexual abuse victim (FEMALE NAME) in the 1970s and 1980s." Plaintiff served a subpoena on the OCDA for the Production of documents relating to the priest who sexually molested her and "Lenihan did not object to the production of these documents, however, the OCDA objected to Plaintiff's subpoena." Freberg continues: "On May 29 2007 plaintiff issued a deposition subpoena for production of business records to the OCDA. OCDA Objects to Plaintiffs Subpoena "On or about August 24, 2007 after nearly two months the OCDA objected on the following grounds: 1 Privacy 2 Penal Code Section 293 3 Documents regarding Mary Grant exist but could not be located. Here is what took place at the hearing last Wednesday: TOM RUTHERFORD (ATTORNEY FOR THE ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF ORANGE) KATHERINE FREBERG ON BEHALF OF MARY GRANT CHURCH ATTORNEY RUTHERFORD: We discussed in the hallway a variety of issues. Ms. Freberg has made a suggestion to work through this issue that will take a while for me to talk over with my client, so we want to come back on Thursday October 12. JUDGE: To report on the resolve of your issues, okay…. CHURCH ATTORNEY RUTHERFORD: Another problem wasn't addressed, would have been this week or late last week, maybe around last week of September— PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY KATHERINE FREBERG: We issued a subpoena in May of 2007. We've made a lot of efforts, held a lot of meet and confers, I'm hoping it can be resolved but we do want a definite hearing date. We've tried everything that we can, it may require a court order. JUDGE: A hearing was noticed for today, was the opposition timely? CHURCH ATTORNEY RUTHERFORD: We met and discussed and now have this proposal to work through it and now I need a few days to do that. JUDGE: Defense counsel needs further time to discuss with his client. CHURCH ATTORNEY RUTHERFORD: (interrupts) I'm Opposing counsel. I don't represent a defendant. (The whole room stops in silence a moment at that.) JUDGE: Alright, continued to October 11th 8:30 I have a feeling it's the documents regarding Mary Grant that exist but could not be located, that are holding things up. FINAL NOTE: You never know what direction this story is going to take: It's not the fact that priests raped children regularly and when priests were caught the bishops moved them somewhere else where they could continue raping children that is going to drive people away from the Catholic Church. It's that bishops have the audacity to ask parishioners to pay for it. Especially the wealthy residents of San Diego's hillsides. That the San Diego bishop would even consider asking parishioners to pay when the Vatican is sitting on all that wealth would be astounding. But what can you expect from Brom and his boy pals? They've been lubricating the green out of those hills of San Diego for decades.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.