US: Testifying under oath for the first time about events surrounding paedophile priest Father John Geoghan, Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston claimed he left dealing with allegations entirely to his subordinates. He said he did not follow up to find out what they had done.
He also repeatedly insisted that he could not recall seeing documents warning of the priest's role which he admits have notes in his writing.
Cardinal Law was swearing a deposition in Suffolk Superior Courthouse in Boston at a hearing on Wednesday.
The hearing has been sought by lawyers for 86 victims of alleged abuse at Geoghan's hands following the repudiation last week by the archdiocese of a financial package for the victims which could have cost up to $30 million.
The hearing, which lasted 5½ hours, was granted by Judge Constance Sweeney. She said she was concerned that the Vatican might reassign the cardinal to Rome and give him diplomatic immunity. The cardinal is expected to testify for two more days.
His testimony, most specifically his inability to recall events in the mid-1980s, provoked scepticism among victims and their lawyers.
One lawyer, Mr Mitchell Garabedian, said it was "astounding" the cardinal did not recall the warnings about Geoghan. "He just seemed very, very sad but yet he wouldn't admit what I believe is the truth; in that he knew what was going on," said Mr Garabedian.
"I found that the cardinal had some selective amnesia," said Mr Mark Keane, the only alleged victim allowed to attend the restricted hearing.
Cardinal Law said he did not remember a 1984 letter from Ms Margaret Gallant, a relative of seven alleged Geoghan victims, who was upset that the Church gave the priest another chance at a parish in Boston. Nor did he recall Bishop John D'Arcy's letter saying Geoghan was unfit to be reassigned.
However, the cardinal said he recognised his handwriting on a note forwarding one of Ms Gallant's letters to Bishop Thomas Daily, one of his subordinates and now Bishop of Brooklyn, with the instructions: "Urgent, please follow through."
He said he followed the judgment of his deputy and doctors when he allowed Geoghan to be assigned to a parish in 1984, less than two months after he had been removed from another parish because of complaints that he was associating with boys. He was unaware one of the doctors had been accused of sexual misconduct.
At the start of the hearing, one of the cardinal's lawyers claimed "the inquiry into the inner workings of the Church was inappropriate" as it violated the Constitution's First Amendment, specifically the right to practise religion freely. The issue will be decided when the case comes to trial.
Transcripts were released after the court session: http://wire.ap.org/APpackages/catholicflash/law.html.
