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 8, 1998
Trial
Volume 6
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 6, September 8, 1998 Pages 1091-1317
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
1152
1 they were concerned about. It was Richard Seelhoff.
2 I had also gotten, I believe from Claude, the name of the
3 town where he lived, where he had evidently caught Cheryl with
4 him in an embrace.
5 So with those two pieces of information, his name and the
6 city where he resided, I called information, I believe is how I
7 got the phone number, and simply -- well, I thought it through
8 and decided this was the way that I could get the information I
9 needed.
10 I called him and said, is this Richard Seelhoff? And he
11 said yes. And I said, is it possible, Mr. Seelhoff, that you
12 might have lost your credit card at this hotel in Columbus, Ohio
13 this weekend? And he said yes. I said, well, don't worry about
14 it, we will take care of it. And then I hung up.
15 Q. Were you being very careful to try to avoid directly lying
16 to him?
17 A. Yes, I decided before I dialed the phone that I was not
18 going to lie to him. If he asked any probative questions, 1
19 would answer it, but he didn't.
20 Q. Did you share this information then with Mr. Williams?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Why?
23 A. Because I knew that as a pastor they would need to know that
24 the person that they were watching -- the pastor's
25responsibility is to watch for the souls of their congregation.
1153
1 And in order for them to do that, as one, I believe, as a
2 member of the Body of Christ, I needed to tell them.
3 MS. DUFFY: Objection.
4 THE COURT: Sustained. Get to the issue.
5 BY MR. LACHENMEIER:
6 Q. Did you tell Sue Welch?
7 A. Well, after I had talked to the Williamses I realized that
8 Sue and The Teaching Home magazine were perhaps doing
9 advertising and announcing conferences and even publ.ishing
10 articles by Cheryl. And I wanted them to have the information
11 so that they could avoid anything that would be embarrassing in
12 the future.
13 The magazines are usually going to bed, as they call it, or
14 going to press up to two months before they are issued. So it
15 was important --
16 MS. DUFFY: Objection, Your Honor, foundation.
17 A. -- to call --
18 THE COURT: Sustained. Counsel, let's maybe just get
19 the answer to the question.
20 A. I am sorry.
21 BY MR. LACHEINMEIER:
22 Q. The specific question is: Why did you feel the need to tell
23 Sue Welch?
24 MS. DUFFY: Asked and answered, Your Honor.
25 THE COURT: Counsel, ask the question. Again.
1154
1 BY MR. LACHENMEIER:
2. Q. Just why did you feel obligated to tell Sue Welch?
3 THE COURT: You may answer.
4 A. In order for her to protect the interests of The Teaching
5 Home from being used in this scandal.
6 BY MR. LACHENMEIER:
7 Q. Did you give Sue Welch Reverend Williams' number?
8 A. Yes, I believe I did.
9 Q. Did you talk to the Williamses about church discipline in
10 general?
11 A. Yes, I remember encouraging them to remember that the
12 purpose of church discipline is restoration and that there
13 should never be a tone of punishment involved.
14 Q. Reconciliation, in other words?
15 A. Yes, to restore the marriage and reconcile the couple.
16 Q. You didn't tell them to do church discipline; right?
17 A. No. I simply offered my opinion on the spirit of it.
18 Q. So if they were doing it they needed to be mindful of the
19 purpose?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you see eventually the letter they did produce and read
22 to the congregation?
23 A. Yes, but not until after this suit was coming into
24 existence. I didn't -- I had asked not to be dragged into this,
25 since I didn't receive a lot of material. Even things I