In a first, judge orders archbishop to testify about clergy sex abuse

Nienstedt must testify under oath and the archdiocese must release a list of priests accused of abuse after 2004, judge ruled.

hide

Archbishop John Nienstedt

Photo: Richard Tsong-Taatarii, Star Tribune

CameraStar Tribune photo galleries

Cameraview larger

Judge John Van de North also ordered the archdiocese to create a list of all priests accused of sexually abusing minors since 2004. The list, which must be prepared by Feb. 18, is in addition to a list of clergy accused before 2004, which was released in December and would include all priests who had been the subject of abuse complaints, not just those church officials had determined were “credibly accused.”

He also said attorneys could begin reviewing internal church documents that shed light on how it handled clergy abuse complaints.

The case that led to the historic rulings was filed in 2013 on behalf of a man who claimed he had been abused decades earlier by the Rev. Thomas Adamson, who later left the priesthood. It contends that church officials here and in Winona put children and others at risk of abuse by failing to disclose information about priests who had been accused of abuse.

“This is a very important case … This has become a bellwether case,” said Van de North, referring to the demands that the archdiocese provide information.

A ‘giant move forward’

St. Paul attorney Jeff Anderson, lawyer for the alleged victim identified only as John Doe 1, called it a “giant move forward.”

He said it is the first time an archbishop in Minnesota has been required to submit to a deposition that was not limited to just one alleged abuser. It’s also the first time that a court has allowed such a range of internal church documents to be made available, he said.

“Today a door has been opened, light can shine in,” Anderson said.

Former Twin Cities Archbishops John Roach and Harry Flynn had been questioned under oath in other lawsuits, said Mike Finnegan, an attorney with Anderson’s law firm.

“But this is the first time the scope of the questions will not be limited to one individual perpetrator,” he said. “We’ll be able to ask about all the perpetrators that have worked in the archdiocese and the archbishop’s and Kevin McDonough’s role in covering up the abuse.”

According to the court order, the depositions must be taken within 30 days. Because of the volume of documents at issue as the case moves forward, Van de North also said he would seek a “special master” attorney to work with him on the case.

The archdiocese issued a written statement Tuesday after Van de North ruled.

“The archdiocese looks forward to working with the Court and all affected parties to promote the protection of children, the healing of victims and the restoration of trust of the faithful and our clergy who are serving our communities nobly and with honor,” the statement said.

The John Doe 1 lawsuit alleges that Adamson abused the boy from 1976 to 1977. The suit against the archdiocese and the Winona Diocese was the first filed since Minnesota temporarily lifted the statute of limitations on older abuse cases.

Archdiocesan attorney Daniel Haws argued that the scope of investigation — from decades-old church records to depositions of church leaders — was not relevant to the case of John Doe 1, whose reported abuse occurred more than 30 years ago.

Nienstedt has been archbishop since 2008, he said, and McDonough was new to his job as point person in the chancery on clergy misconduct complaints, Haws told the court. Judges typically limit the discovery of evidence on cases to the period during which the alleged problems occurred, he said.

But Anderson argued that the lawsuit sought to prove the church had created a public nuisance, and to do that, it would need to show a pattern of abuse.

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Who wins and loses in football this weekend?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT

 
Close