UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
CHERYL LINDSEY SEELHOFF,
a married woman,
Plaintiff, Tacoma, Washington
vs.
PAT and SUE WELCH,
husband and wife,
Defendants.
Docket No. C97-5383FDB
Tacoma, Washington
September 1, 1998
Trial
Volume 2
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE FRANKLIN D. BURGESS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE, and a Jury.
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiff:
BARBARA J. DUFFY
GWENDOLYN PAYTON KLEIN
Lane Powell Spears Lubersky
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4100
Seattle, Washington 98101-2338
For the Defendants:
RUDY R. LACHENMEIER
LORI DeDOBBELAERE
Lachenmeier, Enloe & Rall
9600 S.W. Capitol Highway
Portland, Oregon 97219
Court Reporter: Teri Hendrix
Union Station Courthouse, Room 3100
1717 Pacific Avenue
Tacoma, Washington 98402
(253) 593-6545
Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography, transcript
produced by Reporter on computer.
Excerpt from transcripts Volume 2 September 1, 1998 Pages 210-445
How to use these documents.
A complete copy of the transcript are availble on an independent web site.
http://members.aol.com/Hsingcase/index.html
(Link provide by permission)
Documents can be ordered by writing to:
US District Court
Western District of Washington
P.O. Box 1935
Tacoma, Washington 98401
360
1 THE COURT: Does that mean no objection?
2 MR. LACHENMEIER: No objection, Your honor.
3 THE COURT: All right, it is admitted.
4 (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 58 received in evidence.)
5 BY MS. DUFFY:
6 Q. Take a look at Exhibit 58 there in front of you.
7 Is that in your handwriting?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. That's a note you wrote to Sue Welch?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. If Sue Welch were to testify that it came in about the fall
12 of 1994, would you have any reason to disagree with that?
13 A. No.
14 Q. In this letter of this handwritten note to Sue Welch -- in
15 fact, why don't you just read that. It's in your handwriting
16 A. "Sue, thank you so much for your love gift. Joe was finally
17 able to pick up the church mail Saturday. Calvary will send you
18 a tax deductible receipt, probably in January of next year or
19 so. In turn, they will go ahead and handle our phone bill for
20 this month. Thank you so much for your giving heart and
21 sensitivity. May the Lord bless you abundantly, above all you
22 can ask or imagine.
23 "In His love, Joe and Irene Williams."
24 Q. What you were referring to is some money Sue Welch had given
25 you to reimburse for telephone calls; is that right?
361
1 A. It was a love gift she had given to the church.
2 Q. And you used that to reimburse for telephone calls,
3 long-distance calls that you incurred during the summer of 1994?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And you provided her -- and your intent was to provide her
6 with a tax deductible receipt?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And the calls that you used, that you were reimbursed, were
9 those related to this whole matter of Cheryl Lindsey; correct?
10 A. No, not at all of them.
11 Q. Mrs. Williams, has your church, Calvary Tacoma, ever been
12 involved in a situation where you've exposed -- your church,
13 when you and your husband Joe were at the helm, were you ever
14 involved in a situation where you exposed the extramarital
15 relationship of a member of your church, other than this
16 situation with Cheryl Lindsey?
17 A. No.
18 Q. In fact, this is the only instance -- well, up until, let's
19 say the first of this year, was the only instance that you
20 actually went to the extent of church discipline where you
21 exposed the sin to the Body; is that right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the Body of Christ, of course, is Christians; correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. By the way, when Sue Welch first contacted you, I think you
362
1 said it was out of the blue during the CHEO convention, did you
2 have any idea if she ever attended a Calvary Church?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Did you have any idea as to whether she and Cheryl ever
5 attended the same church?
6 A. No.
7 Q. You've circulated, you and your husband circulated the
8 letter of June 30, 1994 to less than 20 people; is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Included in those 20 people were the folks we talked about;
11 Michael Boutot, Gregg Harris and Sue Welch; correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. The others were members of your congregation, in general
14 terms, is that a fair statement?
15 A. Yes.
16 MS. DUFFY: I don't have anything else for you,
17 Mrs. Williams.
18 CROSS-EXAMINATION
19 BY MR. LACHENMEIER:
20 Q. Mrs. Williams, let's start with the question about how long
21 have you known Cheryl Lindsey and Claude?
22 A. We met Claude and Cheryl in 1981, and we knew them through
23 '94.
24 Q. Were you good friends?
25 A. Yes.
363
1 Q. Did you pray together?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you care a lot about them?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. From your discussions with Sue Welch, did she appear to care
6 about her also?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. The letter of discipline, she's been calling it a letter of
9 exposure.
10 What is the purpose of discipline?
11 A. The Bible says that church discipline is used for the
12 restoration and healing of the believer who strays and falls
13 into sin.
14 The Bible says God chastens those that he loves. And the
15 role of a pastor is to be that of a good shepherd who loves his
16 sheep and desires to bring them into obedience in the Lord and
17 back into the fold.
18 Q. And the purpose is not exposure, punishment, is it?
19 A. No.
20 MS. DUFFY: Objection, Your Honor.
21 THE COURT: She can answer why she did what she did.
22 I caution you, counsel, we don't want to get down the road
23 on the issue. Let's keep the issue as to, as it focuses on why
24 we are here.
25 MR. LACHENMEIER: Okay.