Tuesday, 25 July 2017

CARDINAL PELL - AUSTRALIA - CHILD ABUSE

Cardinal Pell in court today in Australia to face charges that he abused boys when he was a priest in Ballarat.
Image result for cardinal pell
These days, the Roman Catholic Church is synonymous with child sexual abuse. We owe nobody an apology for saying this. It’s the truth.
Australian Catholic Church paid $213 million to 4000+ abused children.

Cases of child sexual abuse and subsequent cover-ups committed during the 20th and 21st centuries by Catholic priests, nuns, and members of the Roman Catholic Order have led to numerous allegations, investigations, trials and convictions.

The abused include boys and girls, so
“Catholic Church authorities made total payments of [AU]$276.1 million [US$213million] in response to claims of child sexual abuse received between 1 January 1980 and 28 February 2015, including monetary compensation, treatment, legal and other costs.”
Of the 4,445 cases the church received between January 1980 and February 2015 in the country, the report said the church managed to identify 1,880 alleged perpetrators, who included 597 (32% ‘religious brothers,’ 572 (30%) priests, 543 (29%) lay people, and 96 (5%) religious sisters or nuns. According to the report, 90% of abusers were male while the abused were also mostly boys.
According to the commission, sex abuse victims received AU$91,000 in compensation. The report by the commission also stated that the Christian Brothers group admitted during the hearing that both the highest total payment and the largest number of total payments is $48.5 million. It was paid in relation to 763 payments at an average of approximately $64,000 per payment. The Christian Brothers is a worldwide religious community within the Catholic Church.

Furthermore, the commission said the Jesuits had the highest average total payment at an average of approximately $257,000 per payment (of those Catholic Church authorities who made at least 10 payments). The Jesuit is an order of religious men in the Roman Catholic Church.

Critics, including those in the Catholic Church who want justice for the victims, say the system of payments is unfair and not all victims receive the same opportunities or compensation.
The Church’s Truth Justice and Healing Council chief executive, Francis Sullivan candidly admitted to local media that not all victims have equal opportunities or compensation.

“Even though the church has paid $270 million and it took a long time to get its act together to do that, there’s no doubt the system of paying people and compensating them is best done independently of the church through a national redress scheme. Some congregations pay far more than others. Some dioceses pay far more than others. It’s still not a fair system,” he added.

“It’s a picture of great unfairness and inequity between survivors across Australia depending on where they placed their claim,” Helen Last, Chief Executive Officer of In Good Faith Foundation, which represents 460 abuse victims also told the Reuters news agency in an interview.

This article was originally written by Amanda Flavio at Anonymous.

PAT SAYS:

Pell's trial begins today. 

Legally he must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Having watched his victims I came to the conclusion that there was a case to answer.

I hope that the Australian authorities will not succumb to the pressures the Vatican and the RC Church throughout the world will seek to exert to get Pell cleared.

4500 innocent children have suffered in Australia at the hands of bishops, priests, brothers, and nuns.

$213 million will not heal their wounds. Its an average of $47,000 each.

What price on a broken life and an innocent childhood?

48 comments:

  1. You say 'innocent until proven guilty' but then say you hope the authorities won't bow to internal and external diplomatic pressure.

    Which one is it then? If he's guilty he's another filthy Vatican dredge - but if he's proven innocent, you will cry foul that the Vatican have influenced the case. I'm interested to hear what you have to say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm simply expressing the hope that no outside influence will be brought to bear on the proceedings.

      Delete
    2. I'm simply expressing the hope that no outside influence will be brought to bear on the proceedings.

      Delete
    3. What about the powerful secularist forces in Australia who hate the Cardinal and everything he stands for? They seem quite determined that he is guilty and they want his head.

      Don't get me wrong, if he is guilty of what he is accused, then he belongs in jail.

      But the "outside influence" might not just be from the Church! Let justice be served.

      Delete
    4. Secularist or not, let us allow the Courts to deal with this.

      Delete
  2. "There are questions over whether Pope Francis can leave [Pell's] important position open for so long, if this case in Australia goes on for years," said Al Jazeera's Yaara Bou Melhem."

    Years? I find that hard to believe considering the cost of all the lawyers and barristers involved.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's 76. Time for retirement?

      Delete
    2. I suppose the length of the trial depends on the number of charges brought against the alleged nonce.

      Delete
  3. Only fair that civil law should take it's course

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MourneManMichael26 July 2017 at 09:03

      "Civil law?"
      I think it's a criminal trial case Sean.
      The difference is that in a civil trial, a finding of guilt may be based on the balance of probability, whereas in a criminal trial, the finding of guilt must be based on "beyond reasonable doubt". The latter is, of course, a much higher requirement standard.
      In trials like this, of old historic alleged crimes, it is usually impossible to have incontrovertible evidence produced such as semen samples, and the like, and in the end often comes down to verbal evidential statements from the alleged victim. The finding of guilt is more likely when a distinctive pattern of similar abuse emerges from the evidence of separate unconnected informants.

      This is my understanding, and I know we have some 'legal beagles' occasionally contributing so perhaps one of them might like to comment and correct any misunderstanding on my part.
      MMM

      Delete
  4. You're right Pat, the Cardinal is innocent until proven guilty. I think you should afford Irish clergy that same privilege.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The media crowd hemming him in as he went to court had the hallmarks of a show trial.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Im sure he is getting good advice from his old buddy 'The Wounded Healer'.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Magistrate would not disclose to the media the specific charges being levelled at Pell ..... I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They'll be read out at his next court appearance sometime in September.

      Delete
    2. It would be very wrong for the Magistrate to say one word to the media about a case that isn't even tried yet.!

      Delete
  8. I make no judgement on Pell's innocence or guilt. I suspect there are many layers at work here which have to do with his ministry in Australia and his work in the Vatican, which have upset a lot of people, Or, it may be that there is some truth to the accusations. The legal process will come to some judgement on that.

    What I find baffling is that Pell is being treated by the Church in a completely different way to the way you or I would be treated. If the same level of accusation were to be made against me, I would have been suspended from ministry and sidelined long ago. Pell has been given a leave of absence to go back to Australia to defend himself. He does not seem to have been suspended until the whole matter is resolved. Why is he being treated differently to the priests that I know who have at the first credible accusation been removed from their parishes and homes ? Surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander ? I think there are double standards going on here.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The hoopla over Cardinal George Pell's first day in court, July 26, rivals the media hysteria over OJ. There is one important difference: unlike OJ, the hyperventilation over Pell is confined to select quarters.

    At the Melbourne courthouse there will be dozens of professional victims, men and women — mostly men — who claim to have been molested decades ago. Though Pell has never been found guilty of anything — and God knows rapacious lawyers have tried to nail him several times — he is being treated by victims' advocates as if he were Jack the Ripper. Journalists are having a field day.

    One reporter who is basking in the limelight is Barney Zwartz. The Australian journalist has a piece in the National Catholic Reporter, a media outlet that rejects the Church's teachings on sexuality, that smacks of bias.

    "Even if he [Pell] is exonerated," writes Zwartz, "mutterings from Rome suggest the 76-year-old will not return to his secretariat post. His credibility seems destroyed — largely self-inflicted in a series of appearances before official inquiries into how the church handled child sexual abuse."

    In other words, in the circles that Zwartz runs in, Pell is damaged goods, undone by his own behavior. But if Pell is finished, Zwartz needs to explain why he is the third highest cleric in the Vatican, a close confidant of Pope Francis. Moreover, it is not Pell's credibility that is shot — it is Zwartz's.

    Proof: In 2002, Zwartz wrote that "an independent investigation by a retired non-Catholic judge cleared him [Pell]," yet in 2013, he wrote that Pell's name has never been cleared. His duplicity undermines his credibility.

    One more thing. It is inaccurate to say that the Church has been embroiled in a "child sexual abuse" scandal. In Australia, as I recently pointed out, as in the United States, 8 in 10 of the victims were post-pubescent males, meaning that the Church experienced a homosexual-driven scandal. It's been homosexuality, not pedophilia, that accounts for the problem in both nations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are all victims "professional"?

      Are there genuine victims?

      Delete
    2. There ARE bona fide victims and then there are the people who make it even harder for those genuine victims to be believed... Who are they?...They are the 'professional' victims, the opportunists who spot a chance to get on the bandwagon. They waste our time and contaminate the evidence with lies making it even less likely that the real victims will get justice. This is a genuine concern, as it was in Ireland.

      Delete
    3. Do we not have an obligation to treat all allegations seriously and allow the courts to separate the "wheat" from the "chaff"?

      Delete
    4. That's a disgraceful claim to make about homosexuality and sexual abuse. It is as fallacious as is the claim that because of all the sexual abuse of women by men the root problem is heterosexuality.

      Your swipe at the National Catholic Reporter reveals your bias and reinforces your conservative partisanship.

      Delete
    5. I agree that the connection is shameful.

      Most homosexual men have no interest in under age.

      A man who abused a minor is simply a pedohile.

      Delete
    6. Re/"all allegations taken seriously" Absolutely yes, 100%! But that's precisely the point I intended at my post 14.28. We hear EVERYONE's case equally without prejudice but after some days of hearing, the case against the accused becomes more and more difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence is conflicting and all over the place by then.... I am telling it as it is, which is not simplistic and probably not what some people want to hear.. Why do you think cases go on for weeks and even months?

      Delete
  10. Extract of an article by Samuel Brebner a fourth year Law Student in Australia

    Less than a week ago, Robin Speed, president of the Australian Rule of Law Institute, cautioned against prosecutors acting against Cardinal Pell “in response to the baying of a section of the mob.”
    Speed, who is a qualified attorney, has also warned that if the Cardinal is found innocent, the long, drawn-out conduct of the two-year investigation could well warrant a judicial inquiry.
    Back in May, Amanda Vanstone, an Australian politician who has held several ministerial portfolios, confessed that she was “no fan of organised religion” but that “George Pell’s trial by media has to stop.”
    “What we are seeing is no better than a lynch mob from the dark ages,” she wrote, “… The public arena is being used to trash a reputation and probably prevent a fair trial.”
    Like anyone facing criminal charges, Cardinal Pell is also entitled to the presumption of innocence, until proven guilty. It’s a presumption that all too often gets done away with in the arena of public opinion, especially in cases like this one.
    Catholic priests are uniquely stigmatised as sexual abusers, despite the reality that most other professions (teachers, coaches, counsellors, physicians, etc.) have similar, if not higher rates of sexual abuse. The temptation, when hearing about cases such as this, is to think here we go again, another paedophile priest.
    Yet, we should not allow the rage we quite rightly feel against the sexual abuse of minors to weigh against the presumption of innocence, in this case or any other. To permit such a tipping of the scales would only serve to prevent the very justice we seek.
    The Cardinal, for his part, has done nothing that would displace the presumption of innocence. He has given his full co-operation in the investigation up until this point; has supported the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors; and as a bishop in Australia, he introduced systems for the protection of minors and to provide assistance to victims of abuse.
    Soon after news of the charges broke, Cardinal Pell announced that he would return to Australia to have his day in court, stating: “I am innocent of these charges. They are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me.”
    It will be the burden of the prosecution to prove otherwise.
    As we watch this case unfold, I’ll be praying — for truth and justice to win out, for the Cardinal, and for all those affected by sexual abuse. I hope you’ll join me.
    Samuel Brebner is a 23-year-old Catholic from New Zealand, who is in his fourth year of studying towards a Bachelor of Laws.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe when the fourth year student actually graduates , we'll listen to him

      Delete
    2. Pat, I don't mean to take from Cardinal Pell story on the blog and distract with more mundane national matters. But is there any hope of an update on the Deacons from Kerry, Dublin and the last one that cancelled his ordination in the West. Also, have you fully dealt with Meath or is there more to come? You've certainly answered some questions in the past few days. But just wondering if there is more?

      Delete
    3. Gorgeous, Puck and Tuam deacons in "hold" position.

      There is much more in Meath.

      You will be interested in tomorrow's blog from another diocese. Will publish tonight at 11.30 on.

      Delete
    4. What's the constant obsession about Deacons.. all old hat at this stage and maybe might be "Fake news "anyway

      Delete
    5. It's about seminarians begining a very active sex life that follows on in priesthood.

      There is much more real news than fake news.

      It's all coming out and the ship is well holes below the waterline.

      Delete
    6. ... O'Brien was still at it when he was a Cardinal.

      Delete
  11. The media frenzy is reminiscent of the effects if the show trials and viscious sentences of the nazi judge Roland Freisler.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Puck is on the 2016 Maynooth class piece, it must have been the intention to ordain him a priest last year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He has since been put in a holding pen. Will more join him tonight? I wonder.

      Delete
  13. Has Phonsie replied yet to the Fr Shirley Bassey debacle - what has he had to say for himself?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Pat your recent revelations on Meath has caused mayhem in the diocese. A priest of that diocese told me their were some priests who weren't internet savvy having to ask secretaries to look it up. Llocal Meath businesses should advertise with you this week to get bang for their buck with all the publicity your blog is getting in the county (and Westmeath of course)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For the first time since the Blog began this week we had 2000 more visits in the Republic than we did in the UK.

      Of course your comment made me smile.

      But in reality the situation is very sad.

      Delete
    2. Pat why is it sad?

      Delete
    3. So tragic.

      Delete
    4. Sad that the clerics are bringing the church down?

      Delete
    5. Well, they should stop pulling their pants down.

      Delete
  15. Pat, is your latest revelations to be published tonight concerning the tranny Priest from Waterford or another drug using Priest in Dromore Diocese. Just wondering, if it is I will wait to read further at around 11.30pm. Keep up the good work Pat.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The Meath diocese didn't implode the last time there was a sexual scandal involving a priest and I think it made it to the Sunday World or one of those papers. It was about 20 years ago and the priest was sent to various other smaller parishes and reemerged to a fairly significant role within the diocese. Another priest left a few years ago after striking up a relationship with a woman. So it seems the diocese might attract a few straights or at least bisexuals at a push.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It doesn't matter what sexual orientation any priest or any male is.
    What matters is that " being a priest " a man embraces celibacy.

    ReplyDelete
  18. It doesn't matter what sexual orientation any priest or any male is.
    What matters is that " being a priest " a man embraces celibacy.

    ReplyDelete