The Irish Times – Thursday, December 3, 2009
THE BISHOPS named in the Dublin diocese report must be made accountable for their behaviour. There is, nevertheless, a danger that in focusing in particular on the position of Bishop Donal Murray, we may miss a central point. Ultimate responsibility for the way in which the safety of children was so recklessly ignored does not lie with any individual bishop. It does not lie even with the Irish hierarchy as a whole. It lies with the Vatican.
We know this because the approach to allegations of child abuse was consistent, not simply between bishops or across Irish dioceses, but around the world. There was a way of doing things – keeping the crimes secret and moving the abusers on to another parish until the whole pattern began to repeat itself. It does not absolve Donal Murray from personal responsibility to say that he was part of this system. Equally, however, the mindset behind the system would not be fundamentally altered by his resignation.
It is in the light of the primary role of the Vatican that we must see the unwillingness of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and of the papal nuncio to respond to requests for information from the Murphy commission. The Taoiseach, in a painfully deferential statement in the Dáil, has endorsed these refusals as acts of “good faith” consistent with diplomatic norms. This submissiveness is entirely inappropriate to the leader of a republic, some of whose most vulnerable citizens have been grievously harmed by the policies and practices of the Holy See. It also shows either an unwillingness or an inability to grasp the nature of the scandal with which his Government is supposed to be dealing.
The Vatican does not do things lightly. When it refused to deal with the commission except through diplomatic contacts at the level of one state to another, it was not being precious. It was asserting a claim that is crucial to its efforts to avoid the consequences of its own policies. The insistence on being treated as a state rather than as a church is the key to its claim of sovereign immunity. The context for this claim is a case in the US in which the circuit court of appeals ruled that the Vatican could be sued by victims of an Irish priest. The US supreme court is currently considering whether to hear an appeal from the Vatican, which is hoping to avoid a wave of lawsuits from victims in the US.
It is quite disgraceful that the Taoiseach should play along with this manoeuvre by endorsing the Vatican’s behaviour towards the commission. If the Vatican is indeed to be regarded simply as a foreign state, then it is a state that has colluded in the commission of vile crimes against Irish citizens. Those citizens have a right to expect their Government to mount at the very least a strong formal protest such as the withdrawal of our Ambassador to the Holy See. And if it is not to be regarded as a state, then it should be seen as an organisation with deep roots in this society and therefore answerable to the Irish people for its conduct. Either way, the Taoiseach’s humbly supine posture is as insulting to the victims as it is humiliating to the Republic.
Barry,
It is imperative you persist in this matter and persist to the bitter end. Despite what has emerged in the Murphy report the clergy show no sign of apology or remorse. They continuously lie and cover for the paedophiles (one was found in a nun’s convent in the UK when wanted over here for serious CSA) in their perverted efforts to thwart their victims. This won’t work because every case that is being mounted will be advertised and the church’s response will be advertised and the whole world can gauge for themselves the rights and wrongs in the case! Good to see the gumption Barry! Keep at it! You’ll get all the support you need. Time for the pussies to leave the building!
BURDEN OF PROOF
[An account of rough justice in Ireland]
On 25/07/2008, a generic report of a trial in Dublin was printed by all the mainstream news papers here in Ireland. Between the lines of that reporting lay a hidden truth and the mistrial of a guilty man that walked away free. By the very nature and burden of proof on that day lay an indictment of Irelands justice system and the confirmation by a leading academic in describing the Irish Police force as ‘one of the most secretive in the world.’ The banner headlines of the story screamed ‘Court hears of anticlerical social worker at alleged abuse school’. In retrospect I would have bowed my cynical head again except this time this story was about me too.
The court case carried with it hearsay evidence, suggestion, lies, innuendo, and outright perjury that was put forward as the police burden of proof, and with that they stained an innocent witnesses character, and condemned the others to the liars den. They let their one witness go forth knowing this mans statement only qualified him to need professional help and substance abuse counseling. He was one man that should not have been there and I was the one man that should have been. The following story is written around verbatim extracts from the mainstream media of testimony given on that day.
About one professional witness:
Former superintendent, Jim Sugrue, told the courts that social worker, Gerry Flanagan, on behalf of the Western Health Board, was extremely anticlerical and had left the Industrial School in Galway back in the 1970’s “under a cloud”.
Thirteen years previous in November 1995, Sugrue, in his pursuit of justice for alleged victims wrote to the Director of Public Prosecutions then that he felt that these plaintiffs were being “coached”, and that Mr. Flanagan trawled the country for complainants and was successful in finding many.
One year before that Sugrue stated Mr. Flanagan came and told him about five assailants and twelve victims and that there had been buggery on a large scale at this Industrial school, but would not name complainants. Mr. Sugrue did not consider this sinister but felt it was for confidentiality reasons. Later Gardai took 31 statements from former inmates but none mentioned “buggery or serious sexual abuse”. When Sugrue put this to Mr. Flanagan, said he had never made the buggery comment.
Sugrue, in fairness, did say inmates did allege instances of “fondling”, two attempts of oral sex but not buggery. The worst on the abuse scale I presume according to him. He went on to say witnesses came to Gardai after meeting with Mr. Flanagan and felt afterwards that he had counseled witnesses and warned him several times about coaching, with the need for witnesses to come forward voluntarily.
About another professional witness:
Mr. Gannon, on behalf of the western health board, was also accused of trawling the country for complainants and was also successful in finding many complainants..
Yet another professional witness:
Mr. Mansfield, on behalf of the Western Health Board, was accused by Sugrue of counselling witnesses before making their statements to the Gardai with two witnesses coming forward after meeting with him.
After this, Sugrue, relating other concerns on behalf of victims, was concerned about their mental health due to possible affliction of “false memory syndrome”, though this charge was not leveled at the defendant and felt the power of suggestion cannot be over looked. The “impertinent” Mr. Flannagan was finally was taken off the case and was not privy to any more information. Final testimony came from another retired detective, Mr. Paddy Heskin.
This proved even more bizarre for here he was given statements about an alleged victim, who by Heskins own admission, was not related to the charges in this case. This complainant had places, dates, details, and names, and probably his own as well upside down. This was not false memory syndrome, but I suspect years of drug abuse and he has yet to find who he really is. Heskin then suggests it may have been written on the complainants behalf anyway before signing it and given to the Gardai. Sound like he would have needed help.
Aftermath:
The trial was stopped very shortly after this, and the defendant walked free while setting the precedent for another similar trial to end in the same manner and justice died a little more that day.
Dark corridors:
I was to be a witness in the former trial and had waited thirteen unlucky years for it to happen. My testimony would have proved to be accurate, concise, articulate, and above all, truthful. Because of that I was seen to be a very hostile witness. I am told by one legal eagle that when you mount any defense you have to detect and act on weakness from whatever quarter, and use all the tricks in your arsenal whether they be legal or not to do it while morals are left out in the rain. You let through witnesses that you can easily dismantle and get rid of the ones you cannot. I was got rid of. It can prove to be surprisingly simple.
I was met by an active detective to let me know several weeks before the trial that I would be called as a witness.. I thought it was a sign from a higher divine power because the date the trial was to start was to be my birthday. Days before it was to begin I was informed over the phone that I was no longer needed as a witness. Forty eight hours before the trial ended I mounted a sustained campaign to find the proof of my dismissal from it and this campaign lasted for several months. Finally, it dawned on me that lower and less divine powers were at work and I was duped. At this writing I have yet to receive evidence of this dismissal though I am pursuing it further.
Over the years I had come to know Heskin well and berated him for having what I considered then and now to be an unhealthy relationship with defendants on serious child abuse charges. I should have seen it coming sooner in my case, but an equally unhealthy belief in the justice system that it might actually work let me down, and as it should be. I came to know Gerry Flanagan too and in him I found a man that continues to inspire.
I sought out him, he did not seek out me, and I never needed anyone yet to make my own statement. Gerry gave of himself everything that he had and has paid a heavy price in helping to carry the burden of victims of institutional abuse and of all others. He is the Serpico of what a health care worker should be and the moral template of their aspirations.
The trial speaks for itself though and just underscores the cosy relationship between police and clergy as reported in the Dublin diocese report. The judge even cites the move to call these retired police as an “unusual step” but done in “the interests of justice”.
It was in fact more ‘usual’ and done in the interests of a crucifixion, and like Jesus the wrong man was found guilty by innuendo of a similar crime in trying to help others. The trial also will prove to be a valuable historical document on how the word of retired policemen, giving skewed hearsay evidence without one document to show proof, and by itself was prejudiced beyond compare from their shared religious beliefs, can convict a man in the court of public opinion. The defendant walked free that day without freedom for he was neither found guilty or innocent and maybe that is the best God can do for now, but Ireland has a long, long way before it can stand proud among nations that lays its foundations on the principle of democracy and justice. Ireland has a shameful past in these matters and the light has not yet to shine for victims of clerical abuse and of the systems that helped to foster it.
Yours truly,
Barry Clifford
E mail: bgclifford@iol.ie