BRADY AND QUESTIONS
DEFENDERS of Sean Brady have been saying on this blog that he was only the "note taker" when Brendan Boland and another were quizzed about their sexual abuse by Father Brendan Smyth.
They also want to stress that Sean Brady did not ask the majority of the questions - questions like:
|BRENDAN BOLAND AT ABUSE AGE|
"DID YOU ENJOY BEING ABUSED IN ANY WAY"
"WAS THERE ANY MALE SEED SPILT DURING THE ABUSE".
What were two adult men - priests - doing locking themselves into a room with two boys - keeping their parents outside - talking about enjoying sexual abuse and the spilling of semen?
To me that smacks of co-abuse - or abuse after the abuse.
And if Brady was only there as a "note taker" why was he the one who drew up the vow of silencing the boys in his own hand - and signed it below the boy as per below.
Brady was an integral part of that weird interview and it does not matter whether those other "Father Donnelly" asked more of the questions than Brady did.
Brendan Boland in his book says that "Brady asked the odd question". All the questions were "odd" in my mind.
Surely the act of abusing a child is extremely serious. What is all this preoccupation about "spilling the seed". Is abuse less serious if semen is not spilt! I hardly think so.
Whether people like it or not Brady was part of the cover up of Brendan Boland's abuse and the abuse of the other boy interviewed.
AND - Brendan Boland says he gave Brady a list of other children abused by Smyth. What happened that list?
Does Brady still have that list in his safe?
Brady was unfit to be a priest. He was unfit to be a seminary rector. He was unfit to be a bishop and a cardinal.
AND NOW - he is unfit to be parading around Rome and Ireland in flowing red robes as if nothing had happened.
He should be living a low profile life preparing himself for his meeting with Christ who will ask him:
WHAT DID YOU DO TO THESE LITTLE ONES"
If you are still not convinced - watch this 58 minute film: