Oaths of Silence Forced On Fr. Brendan Smyth's Victims

[wombat]

So???

Isn't that were one of the meetings took place. The station is very close by.
Could have called in, on his way home.

Sorry, it was a bit too subtle for me, I put 2 & 2 together and got 5

[Andrew49]

Sorry, it was a bit too subtle for me, I put 2 & 2 together and got 5

flesem sdrawkcab dna pu dexim sgniht teg I ,smelborp oN

[Catalpa]

Yes. Have you not read today's Sunday Independent?

Cardinal Brady is sued by victim of serial abuse priest - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie

No I don't buy that rag but thanks for the Link...


I think she might have an excellent chance of suing the Church but Cardinal Brady in a personal capacity?

That's unlikely unless she was also abused by Smyth after these interviews took place.

Now I don't know all the circumstances but she alleges she was abused right up until she was 20...

Unless she is physically incapitated (in a wheelchair like) surely she would have had the ability to avoid him on church outings if she so wanted to?

Does a case last for over 13 years in the High Court?

[sondagefaux]

Well found sondagefaux. Maybe the old law would have been of no use then? I don't recall any priests or religious being accused of rape (as narrowly defined under the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981) or buggery.

Smyth was accused of rape in this case. The 1981 Act wouldn't have applied since the accusation was made in 1975.

[Hound]

We should all prey for the bishop in his hour of need....

[milipod]

Believe me, I am no apologist for the Church, but I do believe there is a place for it....(NOT IN IT'S PRESEN FORM) in society.

I'm talking about getting back to basics.....love thy neighbour, as thyself. I'm talking about cutting away all the pomp, all the money, all the 'palaces' and getting back to true and real humility.

The Church needs reform, on a massive scale. But Brady isn't helping with his attitude of 'It wasn't my job to report'.

He is a disgrace and should have gone.

Maybe in your society

[rubensni]

Smyth was accused of rape in this case. The 1981 Act wouldn't have applied since the accusation was made in 1975.

Yeah, but how rape was defined in the 1981 act was a carry over from the common law position of rape which strictly defined rape as only acts involving penile penetration of the vagina without consent. That's what I meant by invoking the 1981 act's definition.

I don't think Smith was ever accused of rape as defined as such, and thus the old law wouldn't apply. And if he ever was I've a feeling it would have been reported by the bishops when they'd had their legal advice, of which they'd had plenty.

[sondagefaux]

Yeah, but how rape was defined in the 1981 act was a carry over from the common law position of rape which strictly defined rape as only acts involving penile penetration of the vagina without consent. That's what I meant by invoking the 1981 act's definition.

I don't think Smith was ever accused of rape as defined as such, and thus the old law wouldn't apply. And if he ever was I've a feeling it would have been reported by the bishops when they'd had their legal advice, of which they'd had plenty.

Buggery was also one of the offences that was reportable under the misprision of felony provisions.

AFAIK, Smyth was accused of anal rape (which would have been covered by the buggery provisions) in 1975.

[breakingnews]

He said that Brendan Smith was removed from giving confession, as if this was enough. It's ridiculous.

[Newsy]

He said that Brendan Smith was removed from giving confession, as if this was enough. It's ridiculous.

I know. Just goes to show that he just doesn't get it.

He made a big deal about having his priestly licence removed......but absolutely nothing about the fact that Smyth was a free man to continue abusing.

Brady, just doesn't get it. That isn't an excuse. The fact is, he doesn't know that he doesn't get it.

He needs to go, without delay.