Sex Scandals Rock the Catholic Church - and the Role of Pat Rabbitte

Pat Rabbitte Chair of Child Protection Agency Tusla

According to the website of  the Child and Family Agency Tusla 

 "Mr. Pat Rabbitte has served as a public representative for 30 years. He is a former Irish Labour Party politician who served as Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources from 2011 to 2014, Leader of the Labour Party from 2002 to 2007 and Minister for State for Commerce, Science and Technology from 1994 to 1997."

Tusla go on to expand on Mr Rabbitte's career in more detail and mention that he "was appointed Chairperson of Tusla by the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Dr Katherine Zappone". Dr Zappone was a member of the Irish Human Rights Commission in 2004 when they declined to investigate the journalists and broadcasters who were making false allegations of child murder against the Christian Brothers. (This is the subject of my article "Blood Libel in Ireland...") Tusla do not however mention Pat Rabbitte's role in the fall of the coalition Government headed by Albert Reynolds in 1994, following a grotesque allegation made by Rabbitte in Dail Eireann that targeted Cardinal Cahal Daly and Attorney General Harry Whelehan as authors of a non-existent conspiracy to protect a paedophile priest.

As Minister for Communications in 2014, Pat Rabbitte reacted to RTE's libeling of John Waters and other members of the Iona Institute as follows :

Minister for Communications Pat Rabbitte is to relax the rules that require broadcasters to ensure nothing can be aired that can be regarded as “reasonably” causing offence.The move by Mr Rabbitte comes amid the continuing controversy over damages paid by RTÉ to six people including members of the Iona Institute and columnist John Waters.The payment of about €85,000 followed an interview on RTÉ’s The Saturday Night Show with performer Rory O’Neill, otherwise known as drag queen Panti Bliss, who accused certain named individuals of homophobia. 

While Mr Rabbitte said the defamation laws are outside his remit, he told the Dáil he intends to relax certain aspects of the Broadcasting Act.

Quoted in Irish Times article ‘I’ve been beaten, spat at, chased, harassed and mocked’ subheading Gay TDs tell Dáil of treatment as Rabbitte says broadcasting rules to be relaxed

So the then Government Minister's reaction to a successful libel action against the State Broadcasting Company was to try to make it more difficult to sue RTE in future. If RTE had libeled the above-mentioned Gay TD - Fine Gael's Jerry Buttimer - Pat Rabbitte's reaction would have been very different. It fact it would have been the opposite! 

The following discussion includes the views of the late UK cultural historian Richard Webster on Pat Rabbitte and his conspiracy theory concerning Cardinal Daly and Harry Whelehan. See Comment number 11.***  No Irish historian seems to have gone into that amount of detail concerning Rabbitte's antics - which is surprising because Webster didn't write that much about the affair!

*** It should have been number 1 but  the Moderators originally declined it. I was perhaps lucky that another person made a thuggish comment about the Church that was published and may have opened the door for me!

Rory Connor
9 June 2020

At the end of December 2009, BBC journalist and broadcaster William Crawley did a round up in his Blog of the Top Ten Religion Stories of the Year , the first of which was Sex scandals rock the Catholic church. He wrote:  

This was the most difficult year for the Irish Catholic Church for as long as anyone can remember. In May, the Ryan Report made headline news across the world when it revealed that rape and sexual molestation were "endemic" in schools and orphanages run by the Irish church over seven decades. Two months earlier, Bishop John Magee was forced to "stand aside" from the management of his Cloyne diocese, in county Cork, after an investigation, published the previous December, found that his diocese had put children at risk by failing to follow child protection guidelines.

Things got considerably worse for the church with the publication, in November, of the Murphy Report into the sexual abuse scandal in the archdiocese of Dublin. Judge Yvonne Murphy chronicled an organised cover-up of child abuse allegations in the diocese spanning a period of nearly four decades. In the wake of the report's publication, there were unprecedented calls for the Pope's diplomatic representative, the Papal Nuncio, to be expelled from Ireland, after it emerged that he failed to correspond directly with the Commission of Investigation. Four bishops named in the report resigned, many said belatedly. A fifth bishop, Martin Drennan of Galway, has so far resisted the growing clamour for him to also step down.

The archbishops of Armagh and Dublin visited Pope Benedict, who expressed his sense of shame and outrage at what was exposed in the report, and Ireland was promised an historic pastoral letter from the pontiff setting out in detail how the church proposed to deal with the crisis. At the end of the year, commentators were predicting the greatest organisational shake-up of the Irish Catholic church for centuries. 

COMMENTS: This is a selection from the 21 Comments the story attracted. I am Kilbarry1

Comment number 1. At 12:06 1st Jan 2009, Kilbarry1 wrote:
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.   [See Comments number 10 and 11]

Comment number 3. At 22:35 1st Jan 2009, LucyQ wrote:
.........   The #1 Irish story of last year and in fact the past few hundred is the ongoing, systemic abuse of children by Roman Catholic clergy. I simply cannot fathom how it is that anyone can so easily believe that gods, leprechauns, life after death or any aspects of magical enchantment that is the bases of religious belief is true other than in literary fiction. Any pope, priest or other clergy that claims to specific evidence of any of the above is lying. Reasonable, intelligent adults surely know better than to be emotionally bullied by such silly talk any longer.

Today is the day that the Irish Blasphemy Law comes into play. As if the cops don't have enough on their hands in dealing with serious crime now they have protect religious superstition from those who would shine the light of truth on the fantasies. Aren't people embarrassed by this? BTW it is impossible to blaspheme against something that doesn't exist.

Atheist Ireland Publishes 25 Blasphemous Quotes to counter the crazy new law.

Comment number 4. At 00:24 2nd Jan 2009, mccamleyc wrote:
Normally with petulant teenagers it's best to ignore them, but in Lucy's case I'll make an exception. Why do people who believe in nothing care so much what other people believe?

Except of course Lucy has her own little made up belief - "the ongoing, systemic abuse of children by Roman Catholic clergy", for which of course there is precisely no evidence.


Comment number 10. At 00:33 3rd Jan 2009, Kilbarry1 wrote:
There are now 9 comments. Mine was the first 2 days ago now but is still "referred to the moderators". In the meantime you published the patently ludicrous comment that there is "ongoing, systemic abuse of children by Roman Catholic clergy."

That is the kind of attitude dealt with by Richard Webster in "The Secret of Bryn Estyn: The Making of a Modern Witch-Hunt" which was shortlisted for the Orwell Prize in 2005. It is the kind of hysteria that enables people to conjure up child abuse conspiracies - and even use them to bring down a Government, as happened in Ireland in 1994.

Since the late Cardinal Daly figured in that conspiracy theory, this is a good time to consider how it could have happened.

Comment number 11. At 00:45 3rd Jan 2009, Kilbarry1 wrote:
Perhaps my original comment (no 1 above) was simply overlooked? If so here it is again:

The life and death of Cardinal Cahal Daly provide a link between your first and last stories of the year. In his article on child abuse panics "States of Fear, the Redress Board and Ireland's Folly" UK cultural historian Richard Webster also recognised the importance of the Cardinal's story. The following is an extract:

Another country which has developed a particularly intense and dangerous crusade against child abuse is the Republic of Ireland. Here, as in almost every modern instance, the collective fantasy which has been progressively developed has a core of reality. The beginnings of the story go back to 1994 when the authorities in Northern Ireland sought the extradition from the Republic of Father Brendan Smyth, a Catholic priest who was facing a number of counts of child sexual abuse to which he would eventually plead guilty. It would appear that he had previously been protected against allegations by his own Norbertine order, which had moved him from parish to parish as complaints arose, and failed to alert the police.

Perhaps because of the age of the allegations, which went back twenty years, there was a delay of several months during which the Irish attorney general took no action in relation to the extradition request. Unfounded reports began to circulate in Dublin that the process was being deliberately delayed in response to a request made at the highest level by the Catholic Church. An Irish opposition deputy, Pat Rabbitte, then referred in parliament to the possible existence of a document that would ‘rock the foundations of this society to its very roots’. He apparently had in mind the rumoured existence of a letter written by the Primate of All Ireland, Cardinal Cathal Daly, to the attorney general in Dublin. In this letter the Cardinal had supposedly interceded on behalf of Father Brendan Smyth and requested the delay in his extradition which had in fact taken place.

No evidence has been produced that any such letter ever existed. Yet, as a direct result of the rumours which now swept the country, confidence in the ruling establishment was undermined and the Fianna Fail government of Albert Reynolds fell, amidst talk of a dark conspiracy involving politicians, members of Opus Dei, the Knights of Columbus and others. This conspiracy was allegedly seeking to cover up the activities of paedophile priests.

Webster's essay is taken from his book "The Secret of Bryn Estyn" about a child abuse witch-hunt in North Wales in the 1990s. This was directed at LAY child care workers not religious. However Webster - who is probably an atheist - sees the connection with the anti-clerical hysteria that has torn this country apart since 1994 and of which the late Cardinal Daly was one of the first victims.

(Actually the consequences for Albert Reynolds and the then Attorney General Harry Whelehan were worse. In general the fact that someone could use false claims of a child abuse conspiracy to bring down a Government, set a ghastly precedent for our society).

Comment number 12. At 01:33 3rd Jan 2009, romejellybeen wrote:
LucyQ Please!!!

"The ongoing sytematic abuse of children by Roman Catholic clergy."

How dare you smear the good name of priests in this manner. You have absolutely no proof what so ever that the abuse is "ongoing." MCC and Kilbarry1 are absolutely correct to jump to the defence of poor, innocent clergy (in the exact same way that they didnt jump to the defence of victims of that abuse. In the same way that they didnt want fair play and a fair hearing for the abused.)
Please correct your statement to, "The ongoing systematic COVER UP of the abuse of children by Roman Catholic clergy."

You have absolutely no way of providing proof that sexual abuse by clergy is either 'ongoing' or 'systematic.' No one has.

However, the cover up by the Bishops and the Vatican is much easier to prove. You'll find plenty if you just google any combination of - abuse, Vatican, cover up. MCC and Kilbarry1's moral indignation may then be tempered.

I know what was whispered at Deanery and Diocesan meetings over the gin and tonics 20 years ago, 10 years ago and five years ago. I know how many priests knew.... and, through fear, said nothing. I was there. [My emphasis - RC]

They do not need apologists or self perceived Knights in shining armour to jump to their defence. They need to confess to their people that they share the guilt, to admit that they were frightened and to ask forgiveness FROM THEIR PEOPLE.

Their people WILL forgive, and then the Church can begin to be healed.


Comment number 16. At 03:03 5th Jan 2010, Kilbarry1 wrote:
romejellybean wrote: I know what was whispered at Deanery and Diocesan meetings over the gin and tonics 20 years ago, 10 years ago and five years ago. I know how many priests knew.... and, through fear, said nothing. I was there.

I was there myself 40 years ago in a religious congregation of Brothers that ran industrial schools. (Diocesan priests would rarely be involved in that work.) It is true I was only there for 3 years and not involved in residential institutions. However I lived in a few different houses of the congregation, including one very large one, and I was with Brothers who had been teaching all their lives in every type of institution. I can assure you that I never heard such conversations.

I have been out of touch with my former colleagues for a very long time now but I understand that the situation is similar to that of the Christian Brothers i.e. practically every Brother who ever worked in a residential institution was accused of child abuse. In Artane allegations were made against about 75 Brothers. After a 3 year investigation involving 10 Gardai, ONE prosecution was approved and one Brother was eventually convicted of indecent assault. (See article in Irish Independent on 4 September 2003
Ten gardai, a three-year inquiry . . . but only one prosecution )

Assuming the proportions were similar in my own congregation, it is hardly surprising that we did not whisper the stories over our gin and tonics, or even Guinness.

Comment number 17. At 09:29 5th Jan 2010, graham veale wrote:
I think it's important to remember that abusers wouldn't be uniformly distributed across the Church. That's like saying 3 in 100 people have Swine Flu, then assuming that there are 9 pupils in my School with Swine Flu as it has 300 pupils. Some groups of 100 will have more than the average, some less.

So Kilbarry and RJB's experiences are both noteworthy. But neither can extrapolate out to the whole Church from their own experience.

(It's also worth considering that abusers would be drawn to, and survive in, areas were their risks were low. That may mean that we are more likely to find them in certain diocese compared to others.)

Comment number 18. At 01:03 6th Jan 2010, mccamleyc wrote:
I only ever heard rumours about one priest and that was about a month before it became public and obviously the complainant was in legal discussions at that stage. Perhaps there were loads of people who knew about these things but the great majority of priests I know weren't aware of them. And RJB I'm not saying you are a liar before you conclude that - I'm just agreeing with Graham that it wasn't my experience.

As for "they didnt want fair play and a fair hearing for the abused" - you have no basis for that statement. If the abused had simply got "fair play and a fair hearing" then we wouldn't have heard about most them because the normal judicial process would have excluded the vast majority of these cases. The normal fair approach is you go to the police with your complaint, they investigate, assess the evidence, present to the DPP who decides whether to bring a prosecution. The great majority of victims whether in the Ryan Report, Ferns or Murphy would never have had a day in court. If the Church had simply dug in its heels and stuck with the sue me approach most of these victims would never have been heard.

Appendix 1

Author, journalist and somewhat unconventional feminist Victoria White wrote about Pat Rabbitte's antics - and their long-term consequences - in the Irish Examiner on 25 April 2013. This is an extract from her article Labour is Paying the Price for Unrealistic Coalition Expectations [emphasis is mine]

It was Nov 16, 1994, and I was so excited that I made an excuse to get off work and cycled home to watch telly. There was a motion of “no confidence” in Fianna Fáil Taoiseach Albert Reynolds amid controversy relating to his appointment of Harry Whelehan as President of the High Court.

There was an allegation that Whelehan had delayed the extradition of Fr Brendan Smyth to the North to face child sex abuse charges. In fact Whelehan had never been made aware of the case. It was further alleged that Cardinal Cathal Daly had put pressure on Whelehan to delay the extradition. Pat Rabbitte, then of Democratic Left, suggested in the Dáil that there could be a letter to this effect in the Attorney General’s office which would “rock the foundations of this society.”

No such letter has ever been found. We are talking George W Bush looking under the desk for the weapons of mass destruction here. But I didn’t really care if the allegation was true or not. It felt true. The Left was doing battle with a nasty conspiracy between Fianna Fáil and the Catholic Church, as far as I was concerned.

Wasn’t Whelehan as attorney general responsible for seeking the extradition of Ms X when she travelled to the UK for an abortion? Matter a damn that it was his job to defend the Constitution on which we, the people, had voted. He should have ignored the Constitution, that’s what he should have done, but word was out he was a practising Catholic.

I’ll never forget the speech Labour leader and Tánaiste Dick Spring gave that day. Well actually, I remember nothing about it except its oratorical structure, the build-up to the sudden explosion when he said his party was withdrawing from Government. It helped that Spring was tall and handsome. I was quite sick with excitement and I remember friends calling over so we could crow over it together.

I never stopped to think about the progressive Programme for Government which Labour had put together with Fianna Fáil: the establishment of the Department of Equality and Law Reform, of the Department of Arts and Culture, provision for decriminalising male homosexual acts, provision for a referendum on divorce. I only cared about the optics. Did the Labour leadership feel the same? They’d just had a bruising bye-election result and one of their candidates had lost to then-Democratic Left member, Kathleen Lynch. Were they looking for an out? Albert Reynolds mishandled the situation badly. But what was the point of Labour throwing the whole government down the swanney? Alright they entered a Rainbow Coalition with Fine Gael and DL, but their Spring Tide went right out in the election of 1997...........

 I neither understand nor accept Labour’s refusal to discuss Coalition with FF since Spring’s dramatic departure in 1994. I put it down to the fact that their vote is in the middle class just like Fine Gael’s. But a politician friend suggested it was because FF and Labour have so much in common that Labour would lose its identity in coalition with them. THESE are selfish reasons. What we need in politics now, and have needed since 1994, are courage and generosity.....

What the Labour Party is likely to get in the NEXT election is a Sinn Fein government with the Antifa thugs who attacked us as their street-fighters AND Labour (possibly) as a junior partner!

 Appendix 2

This is based on on an article on my old website (not Blog) entitled The Fall of the Government of Albert Reynolds (1994)  AND on Shane Coleman's book "Foot in Mouth" published in September 2006.

Historians have practically ignored the role of Pat Rabbitte in the fall of the Fianna Fail-Labour Coalition Government led by Albert Reynolds in November 1994. Yet it was the first time in the history of the State that a Government fell because of mindless hysteria. It was also the first Government to fall as a result of religious bigotry - involving a false claim that the head of the Catholic Church in Ireland had conspired with a Catholic Attorney General to block the extradition of a paedophile priest. Is this why historians don't like to deal with the issue?

Oddly enough you can get more useful information from journalistic fluff like Gene Kerrigan's satirical opus "This Great little Nation" (1999) and lately Shane Coleman's book on famous Irish political gaffes "Foot in Mouth" (Sept. 2006). It's not that these gentlemen are sticking their necks out and risking the wrath of their liberal colleagues. The books are aimed at the mass market of people who like silly stories. This defuses the effect of the scandals related but it also gets around the ideological blinkers worn by more "serious" writers.

The following is from the chapter in Coleman's book entitled ROCKING THE FOUNDATIONS - PAT RABBITTE

"It was the 16 November 1994 and the Dail [Parliament] was experiencing one of its most dramatic days since the Arms Trial almost a quarter of a century before. The Fianna Fail-Labour Government had been under strain for some weeks over Taoiseach [Prime Minister] Albert Reynolds move to appoint his Attorney General (AG) Harry Whelehan as President of the High Court, despite opposition from Labour. Now the Government was on the verge of collapse over the handling of the Father Brendan Smyth extradition case. there had been a delay of seven months in processing the extradition warrant in the office of the AG. Wild and unsubstantiated rumours swept through Leinster House as to the reasons behind that long delay. One of the unfounded rumours was that the AG's office had received a letter from a senior figure in the Catholic Church which contributed to the delay in the Smyth case.

THE GAFFE

"Pat Rabbitte, then a member of the Democratic Left Party, got up to speak in the Dail during a procedural discussion on the Order of Business. He asked: "Will the Taoiseach and the Tanaiste [Deputy PM] say if. in respect of the recent discovery of documents in the Attorney General's office, there is another document that ought to be before this house that will rock the foundations of this society to its very roots?" Rabbitte added: "If there is such a document its contents should be before this House before Deputy [John] Bruton moves his motion [of no confidence in the government] and we should know now whether the Labour Party has rowed in behind the Taoiseach following the discovery of this document".

THE IMPACT

"The effect on what was already a highly charged atmosphere was sensational. Rabbitte's dramatic use of vocabulary and the suggestion that the very foundations of society would be rocked, suggested scandal at an unprecedented level.

"Rabbitte's party leader Proinsias de Rossa also waded in. "It seems that we are dealing with one of the most sleazy events in Irish parliamentary history. Is it true that a memorandum has been found in the Attorney General's Office which indicates that there was outside interference in the decision by the Attorney General not to proceed with extradition for seven months?

The problem for Rabbitte and Democratic Left was that it quickly became apparent that there was no evidence that any such letter or document existed or had ever existed.

In his immediate response to Rabbitte in the Dail, Taoiseach Albert Reynolds said his efforts to get to the root of complaints about "documents that are supposed to exist in the Attorney General's office" had drawn a blank. " I understand that one of the stories doing the rounds - this is what I was told when I made inquiries- is that there is supposed to be in existence a certain letter which cannot be traced. I requested my office to contact Deputy Rabbitte to see if he could assist us in accelerating our inquiries and he was not in a position to give us much help......All the staff in the Attorney General's office available in the country have been interviewed about this matter and each and every one of them have said that they have no knowledge whatsoever in this regard...No member of the staff who have been interviewed can assist in this regard. They say they have no knowledge of any such letter."

"Such was the level of speculation sweeping Leinster House that day, that the Catholic Primate, Cardinal Daly, was moved to dismiss as "utterly absurd, untrue and a total fabrication" the rumours that he had made representations to the AGs office on behalf of Fr Smyth. "I can't speak for everyone but I am quite certain that nothing is known to me about any approach whatsoever to anyone connected with this case", he said adding: "It is incomprehensible to me how anyone could have invented such a story".

"The strength of Cardinal Daly's comments left little room for doubt and history has shown them to be entirely accurate....."

Shane Coleman goes on to describe the collapse of the Reynold's government  and concludes his article as follows:

"While Rabbitte unquestionably gaffed by going over the top in his comments, it did nothing to stop his rise in Irish politics. Within five years of his party merging with Labour, Rabbitte had become leader of the new party - his robust and colourful debating style [!!] was clearly a factor in his victory."

MY COMMENT in 2007:

This was the real beginning of the Child Abuse Witch-hunt in Ireland. It became clear, first that you could slander the head of the Catholic Church in Ireland with impunity and second that you could profit mightily from so doing. Pat Rabbitte has often claimed that the Catholic Church has not paid enough into the compensation scheme for "victims" of child abuse. For him nothing would be enough. He has helped to create a Compensation Culture that is fueled by a heady mixture of greed, anti-clerical bigotry and blind hatred. It is not only the Church that is suffering from this mania and it will long outlast Pat Rabbitte and his political ambitions.

And today 14 December 2020, I see no reason to change my views. After the next General Election we are likely to have a Government headed by Sinn Fein. The Labour Party may be junior partners in such a Government but they have gutted their integrity and are incapable of reining in their masters even if they want to.

Appendix 3 The Dismissal of Matt Russell

(from article on my old website  Pat Rabbitte and 'The Passion of Nora Wall' )

Matt Russell was the senior civil servant in the Attorney General's office who had the extradition warrants for Brendan Smyth on his desk for seven months. He later explained "I did not give it special priority because I did not identify it as a case which required that priority over other priority work". He told the Dail Committee on Legislation and Security: "In dealing with the volume of work priorities have to be applied.... I worked on the Smyth file at intervals when there was an opportunity to do so." He agreed that in retrospect his judgement was wrong but he did not offer to resign. "I was not made aware of any reason that I should." Matt Russell stayed in place when Harry Whelehan resigned.

What did for Matt Russell was his failure to respond to two letters written by a solicitor on behalf of the victims of Brendan Smyth. The letters were received in November 1994 and January 1995. On the face of it they were ridiculous. They demanded compensation for the victims because of the suffering caused by the original extradition delay. In the light of the reigning hysteria Matt Russell should have taken them more seriously but he favoured the logical approach.

"Furthermore...many more actions are threatened are threatened by solicitors letters than are commenced, and in view of the tenuous nature of the claim I thought this might well occur in this case."

Matt Russell was perfectly logical and perfectly correct in his view of this claim. However such considerations are irrelevant in a witch-hunt and he was forced to tender his resignation to Taoiseach John Bruton on 29 May 1995.

In the Dial on 31 May John Bruton gloated over his success in removing Matt Russell. "Compulsory retirement, although legally provided for has never been successfully achieved. Whereas Mr. Russell was not prepared to go quietly or otherwise under the previous administration, my actions have resulted in his immediate retirement from the civil service. That speaks for itself."

It certainly did. John Bruton, a decent and honourable man, was boasting about the results of a process that caused the fall of a Government, the resignation of a High Court President and the forced retirement of a senior civil servant. Unprecedented events caused by hysteria alone........

Since some people may still be reluctant to attribute these events to hysteria it is useful to check on how the authorities in the UK viewed the issue. After all, they were the ones who wanted to extradite Father Brendan Smyth. If there was a conspiracy between Church and State in Ireland, then the judicial authorities in the UK were the target of said conspiracy.

The following are extracts from the House of Commons Hansard Debates for 21 November 1994:

Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Attorney-General what representations his Department received from the Catholic Church in respect of Brendan Smyth; and if he will make a statement.

The Attorney-General: None.

..........

Opus Dei

Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Attorney-General what is his policy in relation to employing members of Opus Dei in his Department.

The Attorney-General: There is no specific policy in relation to the secondment of Opus Dei members to my Department. The civil service does not discriminate on grounds of religion.

If it were not so politically incorrect, one might imagine the Whitehall mandarins being quietly amused at the antics of their ridiculous ex-colonial subjects.

"New caught sullen peoples, half devil and half child" indeed - should they ever have let us go?

CONCLUSION:

This is an extract from an essay on my old website "The Passion of Nora Wall"

Epilogue: Harry Whelehan and Nora Wall

These extraordinary events have received rather cursory treatment from historians of modern Ireland. In particular the role of Pat Rabbitte has been air-brushed from the story. However in his book "The Transformation of Ireland 1900-2000" Diarmaid Ferriter makes this significant comment:

"Some became angry when that when Harry Whelehan was questioned and denied the existence of a Catholic conspiracy within the Attorney-General's office, he felt the need to defend his right to be a practicing Catholic."

This issue had never before arisen in Irish politics. The first President of Ireland was a Protestant. During the de Valera era, Jews played a prominent role in Fianna Fail (whose founder Dev, had been a close friend of John Charles McQuaid when the latter was President of Blackrock College) and there had been Jewish Lord Mayors of Dublin and Cork. The disgusting attacks on Harry Whelehan indicated that religious hatred was making its opening debut in Irish public life. The fact that it took the form of anti-clericalism rather than anti-Semitism made it acceptable to many liberals.

Cardinal Pell and Royal Commission Report: Myself and Ryan Commission Report [3]

"Abuse Survivor" John Kelly reading Ryan Commission Report May 2009

[1] Cardinal Pell - Acquitted by High Court, Denounced by Royal Commission

As per the Wikipedia article on Cardinal George Pell, on 7 April 2020, the High Court of Australia  on a unanimous verdict of 7 to 0, quashed Cardinal Pell's convictions for the sexual abuse of two boys and determined that judgments of acquittal be entered in their place. The court found that the jury, "acting rationally on the whole of the evidence, ought to have entertained a doubt as to the applicant's guilt with respect to each of the offences for which he was convicted".The court agreed with the minority judgment in the Court of Appeal, finding that the majority might have effectively reversed the burden of proof; the majority had been so impressed with the accuser's evidence that it had gone on to ask only whether, despite the testimonies of the "opportunity witnesses", there was a "possibility" that the alleged assaults had taken place and not, as was required by the test of reasonable doubt, whether there was a reasonable "possibility" that they had not. In their judgment, the judges said with respect to all five charges that, “Making full allowance for the advantages enjoyed by the jury, there is a significant possibility ... that an innocent person has been convicted.”

However on 7 May 2020 Australia's Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse revealed its findings on Cardinal  Pell concluding that he knew of child sexual abuse by clergy by the 1970s, but did not take adequate action to address it. The Cardinal responded that the commission's views "are not supported by evidence".

There seems to be a strong resemblance between the behaviour and attitude of Australia's Royal Commission and the Irish Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse ("Ryan Commission") that produced its report in May 2009. Both appear to have accepted as true any allegation that accused parties could not prove false and largely ignored the issue of false allegations. In Ireland these included claims of child murder made against the Christian Brothers and Sisters of Mercy - many relating to periods when no child died of any cause. (Accordingly I coined the phrases "Murder of the Undead" and "Victimless Murders"). Leaders of four "Victims'" Groups made the child-killing claims, all of which have long been discredited but the Report of the Ryan Commission drew no conclusions regarding the credibility of these leaders! 

Australia seems to have avoided the Blood Libel aspect of child abuse hysteria!  However as per Andrew Bolt: 
Bear this in mind, police have tried 26 times to jail George Pell using nine different alleged victims that it advertised for to come forward, a process that is highly suspect in itself. Every single one of those cases failed. And not because the organs of the state were defending Pell, they were against him, but because those allegations turned out to be so ludicrous, so poorly investigated, so weak that every one of them crumbled in the police’s hands.

As in Ireland, the Australian Royal Commission draws no conclusions from this farrago of anti-clerical lies!

The following are two letters published in the Irish Examiner in November 2011 regarding the Ryan Commission and the omission of many clearly false stories from its final Report. (Tom Hayes was then Secretary of the Alliance Victim Support Group).

[2a] Ryan Report Did Not Deal With False Allegations

Irish Examiner Monday, November 07, 2011

I REFER to the letter from Mr Tom Hayes published on November 2 regarding the Ryan Report on child abuse, and in particular the following:

Referring to “victims having been portrayed as guilty of exaggeration”, surely Mr Justice Ryan does not include those who gave evidence to the investigative part of the Child Abuse Commission and whose well-publicised, loud and exaggerated claims (so exaggerated as not to have been suitable for inclusion in his final report) were not proven when challenged under oath?

“What are we to make of these claims and those who made them? Can all survivors claim that ‘Ryan vindicated them’?... [Authorities] must be prepared to separate childhood abuse experiences, given confidentially and recorded within Mr Justice Ryan’s report, from some of the many clearly false stories that were omitted and which were challenged in the investigative part of the report.”

In the period 1996 to 2003, leading members of four victims’ groups made allegations that the Christian Brothers and the Sisters of Mercy were responsible for the deaths of children in their care. Some of these claims relate to periods when no child died of any cause.

Accordingly I coined the phrases “murder of the undead” and “victimless murders” to describe them.

I made representations to the Ryan Commission both personally and as a member of a delegation from Let Our Voices Emerge — a group representing those falsely accused of child abuse — during an official meeting with representatives of the Commission.

We requested them to investigate those allegations.

The report of the Ryan Commission published in May 2009 makes no reference to these claims of unlawful killing. Originally I thought that the commission had ignored them completely. It now appears that the commission did investigate the allegations in private session, found no evidence to support them and took a deliberate decision to omit them from its published report. I find this reprehensible.

Allegations of child abuse, made decades after the alleged events, cannot be properly investigated. Claims of unlawful killing can be investigated and their truth or falsehood determined. This is especially true when no child actually died at the time the accusation refers to.

When the people who made those claims also allege that they were sexually abused, then we can also judge the credibility of the latter allegations.

The Ryan Report is gravely deficient by failing to include the results of the Commission’s investigation of these claims.


Rory Connor
11 Lohunda Grove
Clonsilla
Dublin 15

[2b] Ryan Report Must Be Put to Real World Test

Irish Examiner, Wednesday, November 02, 2011

IN Mr Justice Sean Ryan’s address in Cork about the ‘Protection of Children Post-Ryan Report’, he talks about "knowledge of abuse". We have such knowledge of abuse again, this time in relation to HSE childcare.

What effective action is being taken? Having been subjected to all of the failures that brought about Mr Justice Ryan’s report, many of us today cannot be confident that the State, and its many agencies working in support of children, has fully grasped its responsibilities. Children are suffering, and will continue to suffer. A third generation of children from the institutions in all of the major cities, both here and in the UK and further afield, are subject to social services monitoring.

Our voluntary efforts working for survivors and our experiences within the institutions count for nothing among the professional bodies who regard academic qualifications as more important than life experiences.

Referring to "victims having been portrayed as guilty of exaggeration," surely Mr Justice Ryan does not include those who gave evidence to the investigative part of the Child Abuse Commission and whose well-publicised, loud and exaggerated claims (so exaggerated as not to have been suitable for inclusion in his final report) were not proven when challenged under oath?

What are we to make of these claims and those who made them? Can all survivors claim that "Ryan vindicated them"?

The Ryan Report has yet to be fully understood. Government, and other professional bodies, have yet to implement its main recommendations. Social scientists, religious scholars and other professionals and learned persons must be prepared to separate childhood abuse experiences, given confidentially and recorded within Mr Justice’s Ryan Report, from some of the many clearly false stories that were omitted and which were challenged in the investigative part of the report.

There is a need to challenge the Ryan Report if we are to fully benefit from its findings.

Tom Hayes
Richhill, Co Armagh

[3] Royal Commission and Journalist/Pell Critic Paul Bongiorno

In 2015 high profile  journalist Paul Bongiorno spoke to ABC Radio National presenter Fran Kelly about the Royal Commission in an interview published in The Standard on 22 May 2015 

Bongiorno related his shock and disgust over the actions of disgraced priest Gerald Ridsdale, whom he worked alongside in Warrnambool in the diocese of Ballarat . The Channel Ten personality served as a Catholic minister in Warrnambool during the early 1970s before leaving the priesthood to pursue a career in journalism.
 
Bongiorno outlined his memories of Ridsdale, who was moved to Warrnambool by then Ballarat Catholic bishop Ronald Mulkearns in the early 1970s.

 “I know Gerald Ridsdale, I lived in a presbytery with him in Warrnambool,” he said. “I’ve had the victims approach me to appear for them in court cases. Let me tell you this Fran, I had no idea what he (Ridsdale) was up to. And when people look at me quizzically, I say ‘let me tell you this — there are married men and women now that sleep with their husbands and wives that don’t know their husband or wife is having an affair’. “Let me tell you that Ridsdale never came into the presbytery in Warrnambool and said: ‘guess how many boys I’ve raped today.’ They (paedophiles) hide it, it was certainly hidden from me and when it came out after I left the priesthood, I was shocked and I was ashamed."

The Royal Commission found that Cardinal Pell was aware of general allegations that children were being abused in the Ballarat diocese from 1973. It also found that he was told that paedophile priest Gerard Ridsdale was being moved because of his alleged sexual abuse of children at a meeting with then Bishop Ronald Mulkearns in 1982 when Pell was one of the Bishop's advisors ("consultors"). The Cardinal denied that he was told any such thing and the other then advisors told the Commission the same. Nevertheless Paul Bongiorno has no problem in accepting the damning findings of the Royal Commission!

Witness to Royal Commission Said He Told Bongiorno about Ridsdale

On 10 May Andrew Bolt commented in an article in The Herald Sun If Pell knew, why not Paul?
 No one could understand better than Paul Bongiorno this blindness and culture of silence. That’s because he, as a priest, once shared a house with this same Gerald Ridsdale. What’s more, a witness to the royal commission claimed he’d told Father Bongiorno in 1970 or 1971 that Ridsdale had offered to watch him masturbating, but he’d done nothing. To be fair, Bongiorno said this alleged conversation did not happen because he’d have remembered it......"

Bolt goes on to say: Let me be clear: I believe Bongiorno. The royal commission believed Bongiorno. The ABC believes him. The media also believes he knew nothing. But why won’t they also believe George Pell? Is it because Bongiorno is of the Left and Pell of the Right? Because Bongiorno left the church, but Pell became a symbol of it?  

Bolt gave a more detailed account of this episode in a article in The Herald Sun 4 years ago (27 May 2016) entitled Why is Bongiorno not vilified as was Pell? Why is Pell the scapegoat?

Gerard Henderson and I accept the word of both Pell and Bongiorno that they had no idea of what Ridsdale was up to. Now, what I've said so far has been reported before, including on this blog. But now Henderson has uncovered an even more incredible example of double standards - of Pell being hounded for what seems excused in Bongiorno, and, moreover, not even reported.

Henderson: It’s a matter of record that the media has not reported some statements made to the Royal Commission with respect to Paul Bongiorno while, at the same time, covering George Pell’s appearances in extraordinary detail. 

On 29 October 2015 an anonymous victim of Ridsdale – given the title “BPL” by the Royal Commission – made a statement to the Royal Commission. It reads in part: 

9. I first came into contact with RIDSDALE on three or four occasions in 1970 and 1971 in or around Warrnambool. 
10.  I was sexually abused by RIDSDALE on three or four occasions in 1970 and 1971 in or around Warrnambool. 
11. Around the time of the abuse I went on a boys’ camp just outside of Warrnambool, to a little place I think was called Crossley. I went with some other boys from my class. It was organised though the school, I think as a sort of sex-education camp. They showed us a film about the birds and the bees. 
12. Father BONGIORNO, who was a priest in the parish at the time, came on the camp. There were also a couple of Christian Brothers at the camp, but I can’t remember which ones. 
13. When we were at the camp, I talked to Father BONGIORNO. It was only a brief conversation. I told him how RIDSDALE had approached me one afternoon in the bathroom of the presbytery after I had served at a wedding service. RIDSDALE had asked me how much I ejaculated and had said that he would get a teaspoon to measure it and check if it was “normal”. 
14. I also told Father BONGIORNO that I believed that similar things had happened with my younger brother Michael, who was also an altar server. Father BONGIORNO said, “Look, it’s a real problem. Me and Father BORPHY have talked to Monsignor FISCALINI about it and he is sorting it out with the Bishop”. Father BONGIORNO said he couldn’t do anything further and told me to talk to Monsignor FISCALINI about it. 
15. Father BONGIORNO was the first person I told about the abuse. He left the priesthood shortly after that camp…. 

On 24 November 2015, Paul Bongiorno made a statement to the Royal Commission.... Paul Bongiorno stated that he lived in the Warrnambool Presbytery with four other priests – one of whom was Ridsdale... Paul Bongiorno’s statement reads in parts: 

15. I have a vivid recollection of how shocked I was when I learned that Father Ridsdale had appeared in court and what he had been charged with. I had had no idea... 
19. I have been shown a statement made by BPL identified by the number [STAT.0738.001.0001">. The BPL name is vaguely familiar to me. There were BPLs in Warrnambool, however I cannot put a face to that name. 
20. At paragraphs 11-15 of that statement, Mr BPL sets out a conversation that he alleges he had with me in 1970 or 1971. The conversation did not happen with me. I would remember it. I would have been deeply shocked by the alleged substance of that conversation… 
26. At no time during my two years at Warrnambool did Monsignor FISCALINI discuss any allegations of RIDSDALE’s sexual abuse with me, and I never raised any issues of this nature with him... 
27. At no time during my three and a half years serving as a priest in the Ballarat Diocese did anyone make any report or complaint to me about the sexual abuse of minors by any priest or brother, and I was not in any other way made aware of these matters. I had no knowledge that these things were happening in the diocese at this time in my life...

Again, Henderson accepts Bongirono's word, as do I. Maybe BPL mistook him for another priest. Maybe he misremembered completely. Who knows? But why has one young priest of that time (Pell) been disbelieved, vilified and cross examined endlessly and denied - while another young priest of that time (Bongiorno) was not even required to appear as a witness to the royal commission, and has not had these claims against him reported? Different rules for conservatives?

ANNEX: 
STATEMENT  FROM  CARDINAL GEORGE PELL 
7 May 2020

Cardinal Pell said he was surprised by some of the views of the Royal Commission about his actions. These views are not supported by the evidence.

He is especially surprised by the statements in the report about the earlier transfers of Gerald Ridsdale discussed by the Ballarat Diocesan Consultors in 1977 and 1982.

The Consultors who gave evidence on the meetings in 1977 and 1982 either said they did not learn about Ridsdale's offending against children until much later or they had no recollection of what was discussed. None said they were made aware of Ridsdale's offending at these meetings. 

The then Fr Pell left the Diocese of Ballarat and therefore his position as a consultor at the end of 1984.

As an Auxiliary Bishop in Melbourne 1987-1996, Bishop Bell met with a delegation from Doveton Parish in 1989 which did not mention sexual assaults and did not ask for Searson's removal. 

Appointed Archbishop of Melbourne on 16 August 1996, Archbishop Pell placed Fr Searson on administrative leave in March 1997 and removed him from the parish on 15 May 1997.


ENDS.

quoted in George Pell 'surprised' by royal commission finding he was told of Ridsdale abuse ABC News

Cardinal George Pell - Acquittal and Continued Hysteria [2]

Cardinal George Pell during his interview with Andrew Bolt after Acquittal

This is a follow up to my article "Cardinal George Pell and His Accusers [1]"

[1] Andrew Bolt and Cardinal Pell

Andrew Bolt is described on Wikipedia as an Australian conservative social and political commentator and "a controversial public figure, who has frequently been criticised for his alleged abrasive demeanour and accused of inappropriate remarks on various political and social issues". 

In 2019, Bolt defended Cardinal George Pell, who had been convicted of child sexual abuse, saying that "I am not a Catholic or even a Christian. He is a scapegoat, not a child abuser." He also stated that "In my opinion, this is our own OJ Simpson case, but in reverse. A man was found guilty not on the facts but on prejudice. ... Cardinal George Pell has been falsely convicted of sexually abusing two boys in their early teens. That's my opinion, based on the evidence." He went on to say that the successful prosecutions case was "flimsy" and that the conviction was the result of a "vicious" smear that formed part of a "sinister" campaign against the cardinal, adding that Pell was being made to "pay for the sins made by his church". Bolt reiterated his support for Pell when the appeal against Pell's conviction was dismissed in Victoria's Court of Appeal. 

According to the Wikipedia article "Bolt was ultimately correct in his assessment of Pell's case; on 7 April 2020, the High Court of Australia quashed Pell's convictions and determined that verdicts of acquittal be entered in place of all previous verdicts. On 14 April 2020, Bolt exclusively interviewed Cardinal George Pell following his unanimous acquittal."

On 8 April 2020, the Herald Sun (Melbourne) published an article by Andrew Bolt: "When will this mob mentality end for George Pell?" with subheading: Many still refuse to accept the High Court’s ruling that cleared Cardinal George Pell of raping two boys in an open room in his busy cathedral, but a long list of previous allegations against Pell that painted him as evil were plainly false or incredible 

Bolt asks "How many claims against Cardinal George Pell must collapse before people realise a Salem-like group hysteria may be at work? Many still refuse to accept the High Court’s ruling on Tuesday that cleared Pell of raping two boys at once in a room in his busy cathedral. Never mind that one boy, now dead, said he wasn’t raped. Never mind that Pell couldn’t have got to the room at the only time it was empty."

He provides a list of previous allegations against Pell that were plainly false or incredible.

“A”
Police charged Pell with repeatedly raping A when the boy was at the St Joseph’s Children’s Home. A said Pell raped him during a screening of Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and no one in the cinema noticed when he screamed. He claimed Pell also took him from the home and raped him at a playground, on the altar of the school’s chapel and at Mt Buninyong. Pell allegedly caused bleeding which A’s foster mother had checked out by a GP.
In fact, records show A didn’t live at the home in one of the years relating to the allegations. The film had screened in September and October the year before, and his foster mother and GP remembered no blood or suggestion of rape. And Pell was not on the staff of the home. The charges were dismissed at the committal hearing.

“B”
B claimed Pell molested him at a Ballarat pool while throwing him from his shoulders. Milligan* devoted an entire 7.30 program to them. In a committal hearing, B said “I don’t remember saying that” when asked why Milligan recorded him saying Pell had touched his genitals when drying him, and also getting him to touch Pell’s. He agreed this would be a “lie”, but he might have said it because he’d had “massive mental health issues”, being “in the middle of a complete meltdown” involving “drink, drugs”. Prosecutors dropped the case before trial.

*[Louise Milligan investigative reporter for the ABC TV Four Corners program; covered the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse. Won awards for her exclusive stories for the ABC TV 7.30 program on the allegations against George Pell and for her 2017 book "Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell". "Milligan is Irish-born and was raised a devoted Catholic" ! 

On 30 June 2017 her publisher Melbourne University Press (MUP) issued a statement: MUP is taking all reasonable measures to withdraw Cardinal: the Rise and Fall of George Pell by Louise Milligan from sale in Victoria now that Cardinal Pell has been charged. The book had only been launched on 17 May 2017 by Martin Foley MP Minister for Housing in the Victorian Legislative Assembly who  "gave a passionate, heartfelt speech about the culture of the Catholic Church and the stories of human suffering and endurance in the book."  ]

“C”
C saw Milligan’s report on B and then said Pell also molested him at the pool. But when asked in court to explain what happened, C offered answers such as “whatever you think works” or “no comment”. The magistrate called C an “unsatisfactory witness” and dismissed the case.

“D”
A witness told the royal commission on child sex abuse he’d warned Pell in Ballarat of an abusive priest. Pell’s passport showed he was actually living and studying in Europe.

DAVID RIDSDALE
David Ridsdale, later revealed as a past child abuser himself, claimed Pell had tried to bribe him to stop him telling police he’d been abused by his uncle, notorious paedophile priest Gerald Ridsdale.
But counsel assisting the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse said it was “not likely” Pell would have thought it necessary to bribe Ridsdale to shut up since Ridsdale had already said he wanted a private process. Besides, Pell knew Ridsdale had already spoken to police.

“E”
One man claimed he’d been an altar boy at a funeral mass in Ballarat and overheard Pell joke about Gerald Ridsdale to a fellow priest: “Haha, I think Gerry’s been r..ting boys again.”
Counsel assisting the royal commission agreed there’d actually been no such Mass then, and the second priest, who denied all this happened, had been living in Horsham at the time.

“F”
F claimed Pell abused him while regularly supervising showers at Ballarat’s Nazareth House, where Pell also took religious services.
But Pell’s defence team told a committal hearing Pell was a chaplain at another home. The current regional superior of the Sisters of Nazareth says Pell had never been to that home at the time.

[2] New George Pell Child Abuse Allegations  'Stink to High Heaven' 

 Just before his interview with the Cardinal on 14 April  Sky News host Andrew Bolt said fresh allegations of sexual abuse levelled against Cardinal George Pell “stink to high heaven” as he called for an inquiry into Victoria Police. Victoria Police has launched a new investigation into child abuse allegations against Cardinal Pell dating back to the 1970s. Mr Bolt said police had tried to jail Cardinal Pell dozens of times in the past and failed because the allegations were “ludicrous” and “poorly investigated”. “Bear this in mind, police have tried 26 times to jail George Pell using nine different alleged victims that it advertised for to come forward, a process that is highly suspect in itself,” he said. “Every single one of those cases failed. “And not because the organs of the state were defending Pell, they were against him, but because those allegations turned out to be so ludicrous, so poorly investigated, so weak that every one of them crumbled in the police’s hands.” 

Mr Bolt said revelations of the fresh allegations were a “leak” from a police force under scrutiny for its failings. “This stinks to high heaven – there has to be an inquiry into Victoria police,” he said. “This was one of the most incredible witch hunts we’ve ever seen. “This is one of the great disgraces, great misjustices in our history and a moment of shame for many journalists who joined the pack, ignored the evidence, let their prejudice dictate their fidelity to the truth and were found wanting.” 

During the interview Cardinal Pell said. 'I believe in free speech. I acknowledge the right of those who differ from me to just state their views. But in a national broadcaster, to have an overwhelming presentation of one view and only one view, that's a betrayal of the national interest.' 

[3] George Pell: Fairness Trampled by Media Mob

The article by Gerald Henderson in the Weekend Australian (11 April 2020) is actually entitled Fairness Trampled by Social Media Mob However the term "social media"does not adequately describe the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and numerous main-stream journalists [AND famous Australian author (of Schindler's List) Thomas Keneally ]

Henderson writes:
The fact is that no defendant in modern Australia has been subjected to such a media pile-on as Pell. The attack included journalists, commentators and entertainers who were, in fact, Pell antagonists. The list includes (in alphabetical order) Richard Ackland, Paul Bongiorno, Barrie Cassidy, Richard Carleton, Peter FitzSimons, Ray Hadley, Derryn Hinch, David Marr, Louise Milligan, Tim Minchin, Lucie Morris-Marr, Jack Waterford and more besides.

The ABC led the campaign in programs such as 7.30, Four Corners, Lateline (as it then was), Q&A, News Breakfast and Radio National Breakfast.

There was also Nine’s 60 Minutes, Ten’s The Project, and Nine Entertainment newspapers The Age, and The Sydney Morning Herald, plus Guardian Australia, The New Daily and The Saturday Paper. Some of the papers occasionally contained articles by disinterested commentators.

There have been other media campaigns in contentious criminal cases, most notably in the case of Colin Campbell Ross, who was hanged in Melbourne Gaol in 1922 after he was found guilty of the rape and murder of a 12-year-old girl. He was pardoned posthumously in 2008. Then there is the trial and conviction in 1982 of Lindy Chamberlain for the murder of her baby daughter. Her conviction was quashed in 1988.

And then there’s the Pell case. The crusade against Australia’s most senior Catholic was accentuated by the fact his trial took place when media reportage and commentary had been amplified by social media. Jurors are no longer locked up during trials and they are allowed to retain their phones. No court can guarantee jurors will not follow a case online...

In view of this, there is a responsibility on the media to behave professionally while providing information to the public.

This did not happen with respect to Pell. In fact, Melbourne University Press brought forward the planned publication of ABC journalist Milligan’s book Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of ­George Pell to before his trial first began in June 2017. Milligan led the “Get Pell” cause when, in July 2016, 7.30 devoted an entire program to the issue. Today, the ABC is standing by Milligan and Milligan is standing by her book.

This despite the fact it essentially accuses Pell of two sets of offences that have never been established.

The first, concerning crimes that allegedly took place in Melbourne’s St Patrick’s Cathedral in 1996, was the subject of the High Court’s decision to free Pell on Tuesday. The court found that “there is a significant possibility … that an innocent person has been convicted”.

Milligan’s second essential claim, that Pell assaulted two boys in Ballarat’s Eureka Swimming Pool in the early 1970s, was withdrawn by the Victorian Director of Public Prosecutions. Yet Milligan’s book is essentially a case for the prosecution which, in the final analysis, failed.

The lesson seems to be: once a Pell antagonist, always a Pell ­antagonist. Some ABC operatives who attacked Pell before and after his trial appear determined not to change their minds after the High Court decision. On Tuesday, ABC One Plus One presenter Cassidy tweeted about Pell that “the High Court has found there was not enough evidence to convict; it did not find him innocent”.

In fact, ­appellant courts do not find individuals innocent. An acquittal is as far as the High Court goes in such cases......

Then there is the wider problem of media-inspired collective guilt. In his foreword to Cardinal, author Tom Keneally focused on Pell’s (alleged) responsibility for “the victims of churchmen”. 

Now, none of Pell’s supporters deny the crimes of some priests and brothers, especially since Pell was one of the first church leaders to take action against clerical child sexual abuse. The point is that Pell was not charged with the crimes of churchmen. He was charged with respect to two specific matters — and was acquitted by the highest court in the land.

The reality of the media pile-on and the concept of collective guilt threatens the criminal justice system, especially in Victoria where there is no right to trial by judge alone.

[4] Pell Conviction a Blow to Conservatives, says Thomas Keneally [of Schindler's List fame]

In March 2019, the UK  Anglican "Church Times" published an article regarding Australian author (and former seminarian) Tom Keneally's attitude to the conviction of Cardinal Pell, the previous December . The title is highly significant "Pell conviction a blow to conservatives, says Keneally"

The Roman Catholic Church in Australia will have to change in the wake of Cardinal George Pell’s conviction for child sexual abuse Thomas Keneally said. He questioned, however, whether its bishops are capable of initiating the change. Mr Keneally expressed doubt whether the Church was capable of empowering the “good men”, whom he defined as priests who were close to the people and who knew what to do.

“The Church can’t get by on the letter of the law any more — the idea that the Church is a fortress to be defended by warriors who have, at best, enabled [abuse], and, at worst, themselves abused children,” he said. The bishops “have to free up the good men, or else, because we can’t be peasants any more, bowing down to bishops”.

[Mr Keneally’s 2016 novel Crimes of the Father dealt with clerical abuse, its effects, and its subsequent cover-up and the Church Times article referred to their Interview with him on 16 June 2017 and their review of the book 23 June 2017].
He described Cardinal Pell as an arrogant and narcissistic warrior who had not evinced any sympathy for survivors of clergy sexual abuse, and spoke of being “profoundly shocked” by the Cardinal’s conviction on five counts of abusing two choirboys in the 1990s while holding office as Archbishop of Melbourne. 

Interestingly the article also quotes the Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, the Most Revd Anthony Fisher who urged the faithful not to be too quick to judge Cardinal Pell. “If we are too quick to judge, we can end up joining the demonisers or the apologists, those baying for blood or those in denial,” he said.

Mr Keneally remarks: “None of us knows enough to know whether he is actually guilty or innocent — but he did have the best trial that money could buy.” Mr Keneally was “amused” that “neo-conservatives are speaking as if this court decision is only temporary, and that the appeal will be the real trial.” These conservative commentators, “people who see mortal sins everywhere”, are “unwilling to move on what is a huge crime both in legal and theological terms”, he said.

If Cardinal Pell’s conviction is a blow for the conservative wing of the RC Church, it is also a blow for political and cultural conservatives in Australia, Mr Keneally said. “He has been a leading figure for the commentariat in the Murdoch press, at a time when neo-conservatism is going out of fashion in Australia, thank goodness.”
He “stood against gays, stem-cell research, the ordination of women, and divorcees”, and raised only a “muted” response to the Australian Government’s “heinous” asylum-seeker policies, besides supporting climate-change denial, Mr Keneally said.

Among the evidence presented to the court during the pre-sentence hearing were character references from two former Australian Liberal Party Prime Ministers, John Howard and Tony Abbott, both conservatives. In his reference, Mr Howard said that Cardinal Pell had “frequently displayed much courage, and held to his values and beliefs, irrespective of the prevailing wisdom of the time”. In his view, the Cardinal had “dedicated his life to his nation and his Church”. This reference, which has attracted much public criticism, showed that the Cardinal was seen by conservative forces as a national political figure, Mr Keneally said.

MY Comment: 
I note from the Church Times book review of "Crimes of the Father" that Thomas Keneally is  "of Irish-Australian Roman Catholic stock" and allegedly "is still a hard-hitting opponent of powerful systems, this time the Roman Catholic Church". Like Louise Milligan then! Both are  "opponents of powerful systems" in much the same way that critics of German Jews were, during the Weimar Republic!

Or alternatively this is Victor Serge in "Memoirs of a Revolutionary" describing his failed attempt to get the League for the Rights of Man to condemn Stalin's Show Trials in the 1930s:

And in every country of the civilized world, learned and “progressive” jurists were to be found who thought these proceedings to be correct and convincing.  It was turning into a tragic lapse of the whole modern conscience.  In France the League for the Rights of Man, with a reputation going back to Dreyfus, had a jurist of this variety in its midst.  The League’s executive was divided into a majority that opposed any investigation, and an outraged minority that eventually resigned.  The argument generally put forward amounted to:  “Russia is our ally…”  It was imbecilic reasoning – there is more than a hint of suicide about an international alliance that turns into moral and political servility – but it worked powerfully.

[5] Conclusion and Similarities with Ireland (& Dreyfus!)

In my previous article "Cardinal George Pell and His Accusers" I noted similarities between the witch-hunt against Cardinal Pell and the case of former Irish Sister of Mercy Nora Wall (and her co-accused Pablo McCabe) in Ireland. 

Nora Wall was accused of child rape in 1996 shortly after Irish State broadcast company RTE transmitted the bogus "documentary" Dear Daughter  containing the allegations of Christine Buckley against the Sisters. [UK cultural historian Richard Webster wrote about it here ]. Nora was convicted in 1999 shortly after RTE broadcast an equally bogus three-part documentary series produced by Mary Raftery that attacked Irish religious orders in general. [My 2005 correspondence with Irish Times editor Geraldine Kennedy regarding Mary Raftery is here ]. 

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) played a similar role in the witch-hunt against Cardinal Pell. Louise Milligan and Thomas Keneally could be regarded as the Australian equivalents of Christine Buckley and Mary Raftery! 

In December 2018 Cardinal Pell was convicted of sexually abusing two boys, one of whom had died in 2014, had never made a complaint of abuse and had specifically told his mother that the Cardinal had not abused him. Cardinal Pell was convicted on the word of the other boy who said both were abused together in St Patrick's Cathedral Melbourne in 1996. This ludicrous verdict mirrored that against Nora Wall and Pablo McCabe who faced two separate rape allegations at their 1999 trial. In relation to the first charge, the Defense were able to prove that McCabe could not have been there on the date in question - the 12th birthday of the accuser on 8 January 1990. Nothing deterred, the jury found the two accused Not Guilty on that count but Guilty on the second rape charge for which neither day nor year was specified (thus making an alibi impossible).

In both Ireland and Australia, politicians took the side of the false accusers - BUT the behaviour of the Australians was somewhat less vile than their Irish counterparts. As per a Daily Mail article on 7 April titled 'I believe you': Premier Dan Andrews issues a cutting statement after George Pell is acquitted of sexually assaulting two choirboys 
Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has issued a cutting statement after the High Court quashed Cardinal George Pell's conviction for sexually abusing two choirboys. ... Mr Andrews released his statement a short time later, it read: 'I make no comment about today's High Court decision. But I have a message for every single victim and survivor of child sex abuse: 'I see you. I hear you. I believe you.'   [ But last year:
Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said Cardinal George Pell had received a fair trial and questioned media commentators who said the jury had made an error in its decision. “The notion that if you don’t like a verdict, you can just say they got it wrong, that’s not how ours system works,” the Premier said. “What’s happened here … is that a victim has been believed. And that’s thrown a whole lot of people into absolute disarray,” he told ABC Melbourne’s Jon Faine.]

In Ireland the man who is currently Minister for Justice and Equality used Parliamentary Privilege in 2009 to again denounce Nora Wall - specifically by repeating a libel for which she had received an apology and damages from the Sunday World in 2002. She had also received a Certificate of Miscarriage of Justice from the Court of Criminal Appeal in December 2005 - but Charlie Flanagan knew he could not be sued for what he said in the Dail (Irish Parliament). I have written about Charlie Flanagan here. (He became Minister for Justice in June 2017. I don't think anyone actually believed his lies about Nora Wall but - as in Australia - Irish political culture is infinitely forgiving of politicians who libel the Catholic Church!)

The Dreyfus Affair

In section 4, I mentioned Victor Serge and his reference to the "Dreyfus Affair" - a famous late 19th century political and anti-Semitic scandal in France. I'm pleased to see that George Weigel makes a similar comparison in relation to Cardinal Pell (article "Justice, finally" in Catholic World Report:

As I have written before, the vicious public atmosphere surrounding Cardinal Pell, especially in his native State of Victoria, was analogous to the poisonous atmosphere that surrounded the Dreyfus Affair in late-nineteenth century France. In 1894, raw politics and ancient score-settling, corrupt officials, a rabid media, and gross religious prejudice combined to cashier an innocent French army officer of Jewish heritage, Captain Alfred Dreyfus, for treason, after which he was condemned to the hell of Devil’s Island.

The Melbourne Assessment Prison and Her Majesty’s Prison Barwon, the two facilities in which George Pell has been incarcerated, are not Devil’s Island, to be sure. But many of the same factors that led to the false conviction of Alfred Dreyfus were at play in the putrid public atmosphere of the State of Victoria during the past four years of the Pell witchhunt. The Victoria police, already under scrutiny for incompetence and corruption, conducted a fishing expedition that sought “evidence” for crimes that no one had previously alleged to have been committed; and by some accounts, the police saw the persecution of George Pell as a useful way to deflect attention from their own (to put it gently) problems.

With a few honorable exceptions, the local and national press bayed for Cardinal Pell’s blood. Someone paid for the professionally printed anti-Pell placards carried by the mob that surrounded the courthouse where the trials were conducted. And the Australian Broadcasting Corporation—a taxpayer-funded public institution—engaged in the crudest anti-Catholic propaganda and broadcast a stream of defamations of Cardinal Pell’s character (most recently in a series coinciding with the deliberations of the High Court).

And finally I'm going to repeat what Victor Serge wrote in "Memoirs of a Revolutionary" describing his failed attempt to get the League for the Rights of Man to condemn Stalin's Show Trials:

And in every country of the civilized world, learned and “progressive” jurists were to be found who thought these proceedings to be correct and convincing.  It was turning into a tragic lapse of the whole modern conscience.  In France the League for the Rights of Man, with a reputation going back to Dreyfus, had a jurist of this variety in its midst.  The League’s executive was divided into a majority that opposed any investigation, and an outraged minority that eventually resigned.  The argument generally put forward amounted to:  “Russia is our ally…”  It was imbecilic reasoning – there is more than a hint of suicide about an international alliance that turns into moral and political servility – but it worked powerfully.

Berlin To Compensate Victims of Paedophile Foster Scheme

Berlin To Compensate Victims of Paedophile Foster Scheme

The Times, Wednesday March 4, 2020 by Oliver Moody, Berlin

[ This is not a unique aberration. In the 1960s, 70s and indeed much later there were many "experiments" of this type by people so enamored of "liberation" and so devoured by hatred of "reactionaries" that they threw all caution to the winds. The liberal Establishment today are their lineal descendants and not very keen to expose the misdeeds of their own kind. I note without surprise that
 "Four years ago the Berlin Senate commissioned an inquiry into the scandal from experts at Göttingen University. Their final report has yet to be published."]

The social scientist Helmut Kentler argued that paedophilia could have “positive consequences”

Two victims of a bizarre social experiment in which Berlin’s city hall deliberately placed troubled children in the care of paedophiles are on the brink of winning compensation.

From 1969 to 2003 the authorities put at least nine boys in the hands of convicted sex offenders on the advice of a disgraced social scientist. The idea behind the Kentler experiment — named after Helmut Kentler, an academic who argued that paedophilia could have “positive consequences” — was that unruly and “feeble-minded” children would benefit from adult sexual attention. 

In the late 1960s Kentler persuaded West Berlin’s ruling Senate that the homeless boys would jump at the opportunity to be fostered by paedophiles and would be “head over heels in love” with their new father figures.

One of the boys, referred to in legal proceedings as Marco, had been taken into care after suffering physical abuse at the hands of his father. In 1989, aged six, he was placed with a convicted child abuser. A year later this foster father, Fritz H, began going into Marco’s room for a “cuddle”. Marco has claimed in an interview with Der Spiegel, a weekly news magazine, that for ten years he was repeatedly beaten and raped by Fritz H, until he reached the threshold of adulthood and fought back.

Another of Fritz H’s victims, given the cover name Sven, was abandoned by his parents at the age of seven and contracted hepatitis B on the streets of Berlin. In 1990 he was entrusted to the paedophile and suffered repeated sexual assaults.

Fritz H is alleged to have recorded the abuses on a video camera and kept the boys isolated from the outside world in his flat. From 1974 Fritz H, who has since died, fostered four other boys. One of them, who is referred to as Sascha, lived in the flat at the same time as Sven and Marco. Sascha was allegedly neglected and denied medical care, leading to his death in 2003 from pneumonia.

It is not known how many children were subjected to the Kentler experiment. Four years ago the Berlin Senate commissioned an inquiry into the scandal from experts at Göttingen University. Their final report has yet to be published. At the beginning of the experiment, Kentler, who died in 2008, was regarded as one of Germany’s foremost sexologists and often appeared as an expert witness in court cases. He boasted of having secured the acquittal of several alleged paedophiles.

In 1970 he urged the Bundestag to decriminalise sex between adults and children in West Germany, arguing that teenagers were “almost always more seriously damaged” by the prosecution of their abusers than by the abuse itself. Nine years later he published a book in which it was claimed that numerous scientific studies had produced no evidence of paedophilia’s negative effects.

Marco and Sven were so badly scarred by their ordeal that they have been unable to work. In 2016 they brought a formal complaint to the city authorities.The Senate has now agreed in principle to pay them compensation as part of an out-of-court settlement, according to Der Tagesspiegel, a daily newspaper, but there is a dispute over the extent of the damages.

One of the victims’ lawyers is said to have pressed for a lump sum of €100,000 and a monthly pension of €2,500, backdated to the end of the fostering arrangement in 2001. The city of Berlin has said that it is working on a “solution that would satisfy the interests of those affected”.


And this is a German report from 2016 when the Inquiry by the Berlin Senate commenced

Child Abuse Head of German 'Pedophilia Project' Believed Sex Was Beneficial for Street Kids

 16.12.2016  Sputnik Germany

The scandal surrounding the Berlin Senate's project, in which homeless teens were deliberately sent to pedophile men who were employed as their foster fathers and took care of them, is gaining more and more attention across Germany.

A study by the Institute for Democratic Research at the University of Göttingen is supposed to reveal further details about the scandal.In this regard, Sputnik Germany discussed the issue with the head member of the investigation team, Teresa Nentwig, who revealed shocking details about the project.

"Men who had been convicted of sexual contact with minors were appointed by the Berlin leadership as guardians. Children and young people, who lived on the street before that, had to "pay" for a warm bed, good food and clean clothes, engaging in sexual relationships with their caregivers," Nentwig said.

The initiator of this project was Helmut Kentler, psychologist and professor at the University of Hannover. His idea was that the sexual intercourse should have had a positive impact on the personal development of the neglected boys.

The project was aimed at the so-called "children of the Zoo station," involved in drug trafficking and prostitution. At that time, Nentwig said, the Berlin authorities were helpless and didn't know how they should behave toward these young people, and so were ready to carry out even such "experiments".

Such willingness can be "partly explained by the historical context," Nentvig stated.

"There are many things that must be considered as a complex issue. The 1960s were a time of sexual liberalization and educational breakthrough […]. There was also a striving for a full legalization of sexual relations between adolescents and adults, and Helmut Kentler was one of those who promoted this initiative in a special committee of the Bundestag," the expert said.

In 2013, the Senate started investigations into this experiment. However, according to Nentwig, a full-scale investigation proved to be impossible because not all relevant documents could be declassified.

"The fact is that access to them can be granted only after a certain period of time. There have been initiatives to reduce this period: some of the applications were approved, but others were rejected for reasons connected with the protection of personal information," the expert said.

Communication with the victims has also proven problematic. According to Nentwig, they do not want to describe their experiences and recall their terrible past.

However, the expert believes that it is necessary to continue the investigation and, in particular, examine the case of the Odenwald School, a boarding school where the Berlin Senate sent underage boys, many of whom are assumed to have later become subject to sexual abuse.