Breaking... Who Pressured The Irish Times To Make * Revisions * Herein To Justice Sean Ryan's Inconvenient Truth?


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010

The Irish Times Self-Censorship leaves a bad taste in my mouth (n)(n)(n)

Below is the ORIGINAL version of Patsy McGarry's article that was captured by international news agency - The World News, My grateful thanks to (y)(y)(y)

Original Version herein:

'Justice Seán Ryan on the report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse'

I was busy, so I quickly read the original article. ^^^ I noted, among other things, that Justice Sean Ryan said the 3 highest judges in the courts Number 1, 2 & 3 were old boys of the Christian Brothers middle-class secondary schools. A nice old boys clique on the bench (which also included Justice Sean Ryan among the esteemed 3 judges).

When I returned later to read the article at my leisure, I realised Justice Ryan's above comments referencing the 3 judges had been completely edited out of McGarry's article. Curiouser and curiouser

Important EVIDENCE was revised post publication, such as, Justice Sean Ryan saying that Christian Brother X who had an affair with a boy was *NOW* teaching at a secondary school in the West.

Read below from the original (unrevised) article:

Justice Sean Ryan speaking about the Christian Brother ('Salthill)' who is now teaching at a secondary school in the West! ~~~

I remember certainly there was a case where they’d be writing off to the... the Rosminians would be writing to the superior in Italy and he’d be writing back about ‘the usual problem’... there was a sort of code it’s clear.​
There’s an example in the report on Salthill [Co Galway], because that’s where this problem first manifested itself… first came to notice of the Congregation...way back.​
This Br began his career in Salthill. A kid woke up in the dark, recognised his voice. Unusually the kid went to the resident manager, very unusually. And he said he recognised his voice and the Br said, the classic, ‘I was just checking under the bedclothes to see if he had wet the bed’. That was an old one. He [the manager] records this, all this is quite unusual. And when the Visitor [from head quarters] comes down that year he interviews your man. Then he writes his report and said ‘I’m not very convinced about this from Br X. I think we have a problem here’.​
He’s quite candid about his thoughts and so on. As I say, very unusual. So they shift him and a whole succession of events now takes place and the guy ends up many years later after a career that we get episodically, having what he’s pleased to call an affair with a boy.​
He’s now teaching in a secondary school in the West.
This came out in public at some stage. There was a family who protested and the Christian Brothers treated them shamefully. They said ‘how dare they?’, and thought they had gone to the press.​
Everywhere you went with this story … it was very complicated to get the story down, and what it showed was that the man had abused left, right and centre, all over maybe a career of 40 years, and these are only the bits we knew about, and it progressed from one level up to actually his having an affair with a boy. The Brothers didn’t tell the parents this was the story. They pretended they were investigating.​

The above highlighted text (see strike through) has now completely vanished from The Irish Times revised article.

Lumpy, fortunately, I was able to find the original version of the article when I Googled the headline. The article had been captured by (see above link). So there are now two versions of "Justice Seán Ryan on the report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse" on the Internet.

I asked these two questions on this thread:

(1) WHY is The Irish Times NOT being transparent about the post publication revisions being made to "Justice Seán Ryan on the report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse" article by Patsy McGarry?

(2) WHY didn't The Irish Times simply publish a FULL TRANSCRIPT of the interview with Justice Sean Ryan?

I've performed my DUE DILIGENCE, however, Journalist Patsy McGarry must speak out and demand to know the reason why his article "Justice Seán Ryan on the report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse " was pulled and whitewashed. I expect nothing less than a full transcript to be published of McGarry's interview with Justice Sean Ryan.

Edit: The Christian Brothers ran St Joseph’s Industrial School, Salthill ('Salthill'), Galway. See my following post for more details on 'Salthill'... These same Christian Brothers also managed Letterfrack Industrial School.


The world news platform ~ The World News captured original version of Patsy McGarry's article is an international news agency registered in the EU and Ukraine (Licence Number 585-447P), and it is managed by the “World News LLC”.

NB: BTW, The Guardian newspaper transparently publishes full transcripts of their interviews all the time!

Last edited:


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
10 Years OnThis is the complex case of a Christian Brother serial sexual abuser whom Justice Sean Ryan just can't forget.

It involves SERIAL SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINORS OFFENDER Christian Brother BROTHER DACIAN (a pseudonym] who got away with his crimes scot-free

* According to Justice Sean Ryan, Br Dacain [pseudonym] is presently teaching at a secondary school in the West… *

Br Dacian (a pseudonym)

All the names used here are pseudonyms

Paragraphs 12.63 - 12.111 ~~ involve CHRISTIAN BROTHER Br Dacian

12.63 This complicated and difficult story of repeated sexual abuse is recounted here because the perpetrator’s behaviour was first recorded in the Christian Brothers’ records relating to Salthill. The Brother’s history reveals a pattern of abuse extending over a period of 25 years in different schools. It illustrates the recidivist nature of sexual abuse, and the difficulties of reporting it.

12.64 Br Dacian had spent only four months in Salthill in the early 1960s when he was transferred in great haste to a day school in Dublin. A Visitor at that time noted:

Br Dacian has been guilty of a grave indiscretion with one of the boys and I’m afraid he will have to be changed. He was otherwise most suited to this place and an ardent worker.

12.65 In a letter to the Superior General following his Visitation, the Visitor elaborated on Br Dacian’s indiscretion. A pupil reported to the Superior that one night he had been awakened by somebody who had his hand inside his pyjamas touching his genitals. He could only make out an outline of the man but, by his shape and the sound of his voice, he recognised him as Br Dacian. When the boy awoke, the man had said to him that this was a serious matter and that he should not tell anyone.

12.66 The Visitor confronted Br Dacian about the allegation and he confessed that he was the person involved. However, he offered the explanation that he had merely been checking to see whether the boy had wet the bed, as he was a regular bed-wetter. But, as the Visitor noted, ‘it is apparent that this does not explain everything’. Br Dacian assured the Visitor that he did not have any ‘inclination this way’ and that this was the first time anything like that had happened.

The Visitor was ‘inclined to believe him’ but thought that a transfer was necessary, as other boys were aware of Br Dacian’s lapse. The Visitor lamented that this change was necessary as ‘he was a very good choice for that school where self-sacrificing men are so necessary’.

12.67 ——> ——> This experienced Visitor described the incident as a lapse and an indiscretion, and he was not satisfied with the Brother’s explanation. Nevertheless, he left the matter unresolved and uncertain, which implied that he did not consider the allegation to be very grave.

12.68 The Brother later spent a year in Letterfrack in the early 1970s, where a Visitation Report noted that he slept adjacent to the boys’ dormitory and was involved in a good deal of supervision.

Late 1980s

12.69 ——>——> The next occasion of a documented complaint against Br Dacian was some 25 years later, when he was Principal of a primary school in the west of Ireland.

12.70 The Archbishop of the area sent for Br Tyeis,15 [pseudonym] the Superior of Br Dacian’s Community, and told him that he had received a formal complaint that Br Dacian was interfering sexually with a boy in the School. The prelate gave the boy’s Christian name but said that he could not remember the surname. The Superior undertook to investigate the matter.

12.71 Br Tyeis did not have enough information so he telephoned the Archbishop’s secretary for more details. The boy was Tom Murphy,16 [pseduonym] a first year pupil in the secondary school, and his parents had gone some days previously to the Vice-Principal of the primary school to report what had happened. He sent them to the school chaplain because, as he later explained, he was too shocked by the allegations to do anything about them. The chaplain was unavailable so they spoke to another Curate, who in turn referred them to the Archbishop’s secretary.

——>——> They made their complaint to him that Br Dacian was sexually interfering with their son and that they believed that Br Dacian had also interfered with other boys whom they named.

12.72 The Superior, Br Tyeis, now had the details of the complaint against Br Dacian. He went to him on the same day as he had met the Archbishop and spoken to the secretary.

——>——> Br Dacian admitted that he had interfered with Tom Murphy and said that ‘the relationship’ had been going on for two years. <——<—— :mad:

12.73 Br Tyeis spoke to the Vice-Principal, who confirmed the parents’ visit to him at his home on the previous Sunday. Br Tyeis met the Provincial, Br Travis,17 [pseudonym] and reported what had happened.

12.74 Br Tyeis met the parents shortly afterwards in the Brothers’ residence. Mr Murphy was angry, and he and his wife were seeking an apology in writing from Br Dacian. They did not propose to take legal action because they feared that the publicity would not be good for their son. They were unclear as to the details of the abuse but they suspected that anal intercourse might have taken place.

12.75 ——>——> The Superior talked the matter over in confidence with two Brothers in the Community, and decided that Br Dacian would have to leave the Community ‘for the present’. Br Dacian agreed and went [to] the Cistercian Monastery in Roscrea.

12.76 The Superior reported to the Provincial that Br Dacian told him that he (Br Dacian) would have to leave the Congregation and that the Superior had responded that that might seem like the easy way out, i.e. to flee, but that there was no reason why he should have to leave.

He also reported that a Brother (Br Peppin18) [pseudonym], a friend of the Murphys who stayed with them when he was in the West, had recounted to him that the Murphys had recently said that they were suspicious that something in the nature of sexual interference was going on and that Br Dacian was involved, but Br Peppin said he had discounted the possibility.

Continues below 2/…
Last edited:


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
2/… Continues ...

12.77 The Provincial then visited Br Dacian in Roscrea and had a full discussion with him. There is no record of this conversation in the discovered documentation. Two weeks later, another meeting took place at Cluain Mhuire, the provincial house for the St Mary’s Province in Dublin, when Br Dacian maintained that he had nothing new to tell.

12.78 The Provincial did not meet the Murphys until some five weeks after the matter was originally reported. At this meeting with the Provincial, Br Travis, and the Superior, Br Tyeis, Mr Murphy complained about the delay, and expressed his annoyance at Br Travis’s failure to contact them. He had found it very hard to get the Provincial’s phone number. Br Travis explained that the Provincial headquarters in Marino was undergoing major renovations, which was why they had got no response from someone who could help them. He then explained that he himself had not contacted them because he had been told that Mr Murphy had stated that he did not trust the Brothers and was certain that they would want to cover up for Br Dacian and do nothing about the allegations.

12.79 Br Travis told the Murphys that he appreciated that they were very upset, as were the Brothers.They were shocked by the allegations. He said that Br Dacian was very upset. Mrs Murphy became angry at the mention of Br Dacian being upset and said that he was ‘cute and intelligent’ in the way he operated.

The Provincial pointed out that he had interrupted his schedule and postponed appointments to come to the meeting and that he wanted to hear the allegations from them first hand. The Brothers questioned the Murphys about the origins of rumours in the locality and also about media coverage, following which the Provincial sought details about the complaints. The Murphys related how the matter came to their attention. They said that they still did not have an admission from Tom that Br Dacian had had anal intercourse with him, and they explained why they were suspicious that that had happened.

12.80 The Provincial expressed his concern regarding the allegations and said that he had full trust in the inquiries that the Superior was making. He said that he himself had taken the allegations most seriously and was carrying out a thorough, professional, private investigation. He said that he was aware that there was an independent inquiry being conducted by the Health Board. He could not reveal who he had been contacting, and the Murphys appreciated this. He said he wanted to get the truth regarding Tom and Br Dacian. In the light of his findings and those of the Health Board, he would take whatever action was required, ‘but we must have the truth first’.

12.81 Mr Murphy said that he and his wife wanted three things immediately and they did not want the inquiry dragging on.

They were:

(1) a written apology from Br Dacian;

(2) an assurance that Br Dacian would not return to the area and would not be in a position to deal with children; and

(3) payment for psychological and psychiatric treatment for Tom. Mr Murphy proposed to send the bills to the Brothers, mentioning that he was at that time out of pocket in the amount of £100.

The Provincial reiterated that the investigation would have to move to its conclusion before these points could be considered.

12.81 ——>——> Neither Brother mentioned to the Murphys that Br Dacian had admitted sexually interfering with Tom over a period of two years. :mad:

Nor did they give any indication that they were aware of his past record or even that they were investigating it, although they had had ample opportunity to do so during the preceding five weeks. :mad: <——<-----

12.83 ——>——> The meeting as recorded in the Provincial’s memorandum was entirely directed to getting information from the family and seeking admissions from them to bolster suspicions by the Brothers that the Murphys were involved in publicising the allegations. :mad:

The memorandum did not indicate any sympathy having been expressed or any expression of regret or responsibility by the Congregation for what had happened.

——>——> Although the precise nature of the abuse was uncertain at that point, the essential facts had, as the Brothers knew already, been established, namely, that Br Dacian had, by his own admission, been sexually abusing the pupil over a period of two years.:mad: <——<-----

12.84 Two days later, Mr Murphy had another conversation with Br Tyeis, at which he reported information that he had received from a friend in Dublin, that there was a serious complaint about Br Dacian’s involvement with a boy at a primary school where the Brother had previously been Principal.

He also referred to other suspicions.

The Superior elicited from Mr Murphy his evaluation of the meeting two days previously. Mr Murphy repeated that he did not want to make a formal complaint to the Gardaı ́.

The Superior elicited from Mr Murphy his evaluation of the meeting two days previously. Mr Murphy repeated that he did not want to make a formal complaint to the Gardaı ́.

The Superior emphasised that the Brothers wished justice to be done for both Tom and Br Dacian, and that there would not be a cover-up. He commented that the investigations would take time to complete.

Mr Murphy asked whether Br Dacian would be back in the School and the Superior replied that, while it was not for him to say, ‘Given the serious nature of the rumours and allegations I didn’t think that the Provincial would ask him to return
’. Again, the Superior withheld the information about Br Dacian’s admissions, and treated the case as involving ‘rumours and allegations’. :mad:

12.85 The Superior recorded his general observations. He thought it was obvious that the Murphys were being tutored, but not necessarily by legal people. He claimed to have detected anxiety on the Murphys’ part about the possible revelations that might emerge from the investigations. He wondered whether a desire to claim monetary compensation might explain Mr Murphy’s unwillingness to press charges. He recommended that communities and individual Brothers in them where Br Dacian had taught should be instructed not to comment on this matter in any way. This recommendation showed that Br Tyeis was aware of how a proper investigation should proceed, namely by inquiry in the schools where Br Dacian had worked previously.

12.86 The Superior’s record of this meeting concluded with a note directed to the Provincial, in which he made three points.

He referred to one of the Brothers in his Community whom he had consulted on the day that he received the complaint, and recorded that that Brother confirmed that Br Dacian frequently inquired about Tom Murphy’s attendance at school.

The other points recorded a teacher’s denial that he had spoken about Br Dacian’s activities, as Mr Murphy had alleged, and the Primary School Vice-Principal’s statement that the Murphys were out to get money. Br Tyeis had a later meeting on the same day with the Gardaı ́who were endeavouring to investigate, notwithstanding the reluctance of the Murphys to press formal charges. They gave him a report of the progress of their investigation, which he noted and supplied to the Provincial.

Continues below 3/…


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
3/… Continues

Early 1970s to early 1980s

12.87 Some months after the incident involving Tom Murphy, a Brother in the Community, Br Rique,19 was able to give some further information about Br Dacian’s time in the Dublin school, which he recorded in a note entitled ‘To Whom It May Concern’.

There had been press publicity about the case, which was of great concern to the Christian Brothers and to the Murphys. When the story was published, Br Rique’s sister appeared to know more about it than he did. Her source was another relation, Patrick Walsh,20 a teacher in the Dublin school where Br Dacian had been Principal.

——>——> This teacher had expressed surprise to the Brother’s sister some two years previously, on learning that Br Dacian had been appointed Principal of a primary school, because of allegations made against him in Dublin that he had molested a boy and also because of other rumours about him. Br Rique asked Mr Walsh about these allegations. He said that the Vice-Principal of that school had spoken to each of the teachers individually about the matter. One of the teachers became aware of allegations against Br Dacian, who admitted to the teacher and one boy’s mother that he had sexually abused the boy. Had he not done so, they told him, the matter would go public. Confirmation of what happened at the time appeared in a letter written by the teacher in the mid-1990s, seeking reassurance that the Brother was no longer involved with children. He wrote:

A few years ago [Br Dacian] was involved in an assault of a sexual nature on a child. As a result of this he was taken out for treatment etc. This was done with the agreement of the family.

12.89 ——>——> Br Dacian’s personnel card recorded a break in service of approximately 10 months between his time in the Dublin school and his appointment to the school where he abused Tom Murphy.

12.90 ——>——> During this intermission, Br Dacian spent time in the Cistercian Abbey in Roscrea, the retreat centre to which he again moved when the events regarding Tom Murphy came to light.

* He had in fact spent time on retreat there even before this, although the circumstances of that first retreat are not known
. *

12.91 During his second stay in the Cistercian Abbey (after leaving the Dublin school), he was referred to a Jesuit Priest for assistance with his problems and, it would seem, for assessment on behalf of the Congregation.

The senior Brother who arranged the referral included in his letter to the Priest some background information about Br Dacian:

——>——> I believe his present problem may have had a bit of a history. There certainly was an incident some twenty years ago. What has happened in the intervening years I just don’t know. I just fear that there may be more than two isolated incidents separated by twenty years or more. Perhaps my fears and feelings arise from being too long in office!

12.92 The Jesuit Priest gave a reassuring opinion about Br Dacian in a letter to Br Agrican21 at CluainMhuire :

I am confident that there is no risk of a recurrence of such an event in the near future –by which I mean over the next few years – he has had a severe shock. If the measures suggested are taken I am confident that there is no serious danger of a recurrence especially as a Director would enable him to recognise warning signs and take remedial action.

12.93 There is no record available of the measures that were suggested or of what the ‘Director’ was to do.

Early 1980s – incident in Gaelteach

12.94 Further information about Br Dacian had emerged some four months before the Murphys made their complaint about his conduct. A memorandum in the records of the Brothers contains an account of information given by a father as to Br Dacian’s offensive sexual activities with his son, Peter Brady,22 when the boy was in the Gaelteacht one summer in the mid-1980s. The matter came to light when the Principal of a Christian Brothers primary school in Dublin contacted Br Agrican and then another senior Brother, whose note recorded the information. The Principal heard the allegations from Mr Brady and thought it was important to notify the Congregation at senior level. He said that he was concerned about recommending groups of boys to go to the Gaelteacht in view of what Mr Brady had reported to him. He arranged for a meeting between Mr Brady and the senior Brother at Cluain Mhuire.

12.95 Mr Brady [Peter's father] complained that, after Peter’s first two days in the Gaelteacht, Br Dacian, who was teaching there, brought him to his room every night and sat him on his lap and fondled and kissed him and stroked his penis. Br Dacian would arrive when all were asleep and shine a torch in Peter’s face and bring him to his room. One night, Peter tried to evade him by going to another bunk, but he was located by Br Dacian and brought away. Peter said that he was ‘scared stiff’ all during the holiday.

Mr Brady had suggested to Peter that Br Dacian was very friendly and maybe that Peter was exaggerating, but Peter insisted on the details as described, and recalled another particular incident when boys were waiting for presents they had ordered and Peter asked Br Dacian when they were coming. The Brother brought him outside and asked him if he really wanted to see him about the presents or did he want to see him himself.

Mr Brady said that Peter had written to the family saying that he wanted to go home. The Bradys visited him on two weekends and found Br Dacian very helpful and friendly, and Mr Brady brought cigarettes as apresent for Br Dacian but Peter objected, which struck Mr Brady as strange, but he did not follow it up.

12.96 When Peter came home, he received a letter from Br Dacian inviting him to visit the Brother at his Dublin school, enclosing a map showing how to get there. His parents thought that Peter should accept the invitation, but he would only go if he was accompanied, and his mother went with him but Br Dacian was not there.

12.97 Mr Brady did not wish to press charges, nor did he want Br Dacian to know the details or the source of the information. He was concerned that other boys might have been affected. Mr Brady made a favourable impression on the senior Brother who made the record.

4/… Continues below….


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
Continues 4/…

12.98 After his second time on retreat in the monastery (following the allegations made in respect of Tom Murphy), Br Dacian went to a Residential Therapy Centre for Religious Clergy in England. The Provincial, Br Travis, wrote to him there with information about the progress of the investigations. Br Travis apologised for the delay in writing and expressed the hope that Br Dacian was finding his stay helpful and looked forward to visiting in a few weeks’ time when ‘I will be able to have a chat with you then’.

-----> He went on to describe the state of the inquiries:

——> ——> I have had two further meetings with the Western Health Board and they have now concluded the investigations. They will not be following through with any proceedings, thank God.

——>——> :mad::devilish: I have now to meet Mr and Mrs Murphy ... I hope this will be the final meeting. They still require an apology in writing which, on reading, they will immediately destroy in my presence. It should be brief and to the point.:mad::devilish:

——>——> On the basis of legal advice I enclose a draft. I also enclose some of our own Cluain Mhuire notepaper on which you can write the apology in your own handwriting. However, write this apology only if you feel you should. I would need it to hand by Wednesday, [two days prior to my meeting with the Murphys] at the latest. When I meet you on ... I will bring you up to date on what has happened at all of these meetings. I am confident that it will all die down now with the help of God.

12.99 Br Dacian wrote the apology as requested by Br Travis :

——>——> Dear Mr and Mrs Murphy,

My purpose in writing to you is to apologise for my behaviour with Tom and any upset I may have caused to you, his parents. I regret it sincerely. I am pleased to hear that Tom is back at school and faring well.

Yours sincerely,

12.100 ——>——> Br Dacian wrote to the Provincial expressing his gratitude and appreciation that ‘the whole affair is coming to a satisfactory conclusion’, which he thought was due to the Provincial’s ‘delicate dealing of the matter’. :mad:

12.101 The documents in this case revealed, incidentally, other *unrelated* instances of sexual abuse by religious and lay teachers.

12.102 In his first meeting with the Provincial and the Superior, Mr Murphy stated that interference with boys was going on in the School for many years, going back 25 or 30 years, and mentioned a Br Nathaniel.23 :mad:

The Provincial recorded that he and the Superior said they knew nothing about it, and noted that Br Nathaniel was a Christian Brother in the Community in the early 1950s who had later left the Congregation. The story of Br Nathaniel, as revealed in the Congregation’s Rome Files, was that, in the mid-1960s, he sought and obtained a dispensation from his vows because of his trouble with the vow of chastity, although the record did not confirm that his sexual interest was in boys. The Brother had informed his Superiors that he had not been able to keep the vow of chastity for years. He was proposing to seek a job as a teacher in England. The authorities were keen to facilitate the Brother and, because ‘it would make matters too pointed if he was now taken off’ a course that he was to do, it was proposed to move him to the O’Brien Institute and have the dispensation executed from there.

12.103 The psychologist whom the Murphy family consulted reported to a senior social worker that the father of another child with whom he was dealing had himself, when he was a schoolboy, witnessed his Principal teacher, a religious Brother, sexually abusing a boy in front of the class on frequent occasions.

12.104 The story of Peter Brady emerged for the first time in that family when Peter’s brother had an unpleasant experience of a sexual nature with a teacher in his school and warned Peter about him, whereupon Peter revealed to his mother and brother the abuse that he had suffered at Br Dacian’s hands.:mad:

12.105 ——>——> In none of the Br Dacian cases was there a prosecution or even a formal report to the Gardaı ́. None of the victims wished to pursue the matter by way of Garda investigation. In the Murphy case, the parents were fearful of the damage that might be done to their son by the publicity. The same was almost certainly true for the incidental cases mentioned above. These features of the responses of victims and their families to cases of abuse have important implications for abuse and the investigation of abuse, and often make it easier for perpetrators to avoid being required to answer for their actions.

12.106 The teacher who confronted Br Dacian in the Dublin school was the Principal, in the mid-1990s,when he wrote to Br Travis seeking confirmation that Br Dacian was no longer working withchildren. He wrote:

We have to be absolutely certain that no other children are at risk. If we do not get that guarantee we will have to get legal advice.

12.107 Br Travis furnished the required confirmation in his reply:

I wish to confirm that he is engaged in ministry with adults in England. His work does notentail any involvement or contact with children or young people.

12.108 In its Opening Statement on Letterfrack, the Congregation dealt with Br Dacian, who is referred To as Br R, as follows:



8. In ... Brother R, during his appointment to Salthill Industrial School was accused of touching a boy’s private parts in the dormitory.
(a) He admitted that there was some truth in the allegation.
(b) Unfortunately, he was subsequently sent to Letterfrack [in the early 1970s], having spent the previous years in day schools.


*Details of the complaint were found in the Generalate Archives, which had been * transferred to Rome * in the mid-60s while only a short reference was made in the Salthill visitation report

*The Provincial Council who had been in office [at that time] were replaced by a new Council who had no knowledge of the original complaint when R was sent to Letterfrack.

*Hence, Brother R was sent to Letterfrack without any knowledge of the previous complaint on the part of the new Council.

12.109 These Submissions are included here for completeness. The Christian Brothers did not address the issues raised by the fuller account of Br Dacian’s career of abuse contained in other parts of their own extensive documentation.



12.110 The case of Br Dacian is recounted in detail because it has significance beyond the story of sexual abuse in Salthill and other industrial schools. The later episodes illustrate some of the difficulties that confront persons reporting abuse and why they might be reluctant to prosecute it. These events happened relatively recently, at a time thought to be enlightened and in conditions that should have been conducive to proper investigation and sensitive treatment of victims and their families. It must be remembered that this account only contains what is recorded in documents and that there may be other instances that did not come to light.

12.111 In conclusion:

*The Brothers’ assurances to Tom Murphy’s family that they would carry out a proper investigation, take action and not cover up were hollow: they did not investigate, they withheld information, and they supported the perpetrator.

*The Murphys were treated shamefully: the parents were in turn passed on from one person in authority to another; their case was treated with indifference; they were delayed a meeting with the senior Brother; and when the meeting did eventually take place, they were patronised, cross-examined and misled.

*The need for proper procedures and protocols is highlighted by these cases, but they are of little value if those in authority are working to their own agenda.

*The failure to deal with this abuser led to other children being victimised, and the Congregation bears responsibility.

*The danger perceived by the Christian Brothers was the revelation of sexual abuse rather than the fact of abuse.

*Victims’ families were unwilling to prosecute this abuser in three separate cases, which would tend to suggest substantial under-reporting of sexual abuse.

*This perpetrator was able to exploit the reluctance of his victims to charge him and the complacency of his brethren.

Last edited:


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010

12.110 The case of Br Dacian is recounted in detail because it has significance beyond the story of sexual abuse in Salthill and other industrial schools. The later episodes illustrate some of the difficulties that confront persons reporting abuse and why they might be reluctant to prosecute it. These events happened relatively recently, at a time thought to be enlightened and in conditions that should have been conducive to proper investigation and sensitive treatment of victims and their families. It must be remembered that this account only contains what is recorded in documents and that there may be other instances that did not come to light.



Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
3.109 This lack of investigation and reporting may reflect the absence of interest in this subject by the public. As regards the personal attitude of journalists, a journalist who was the educational correspondent of one of the NATIONAL DAILIES in the 1960s recalls:

We saw educational issues as involving middle class concerns like curriculum development or Church and State, not ‘the lesser breeds without the Law’ in the Industrial Schools. After Kennedy, there was some improvement but we didn’t push as hard as we should have done.

The Ryan Report ~ Vol IV Chapter 3


^^^ Was this The Irish Times education correspondent back in the 1960s describing the poor as "lesser breeds without the law" [not worthy of protection from violence or sexual abuse)?

Roll on 2019, and nothing has changed.


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
Commission into clerical sex abuse in France opens

Updated / Monday, 3 Jun 2019 11:31

An independent commission set up by the French Catholic Church to look at allegations of sexual abuse by clerics began its work by launching an appeal for witness statements.

France's Catholic bishops set up the commission last year in response to a number of scandals that shook the church in the country and also worldwide.

It now has the task to shed light on sexual abuse committed by French clerics on minors or vulnerable individuals going right back to the 1950s.


French cardinal Philippe Barbarin was handed a six-month suspended jail sentence in March for failing to report sex abuse by a priest under his authority.


Well-known member
Nov 13, 2010
Exhibition by survivors of child sexual abuse has been curated to mark 10 years since the Ryan Report

Sunday, May 12, 2019 - 12:03 PM

The exhibition, and accompanying report I Am One In Four, uses an approach called photo-voice in which 10 people present their personal testimonies through a combination of narrative and photographs.

Sociologist Dr Maria Quinlan, who collated the testimonies with visual artist Patrick Bolger said:

The project highlights most strongly the theme of silence. People’s experiences are hidden in plain sight of their families and communities – and they themselves are silenced by shame, stigma and fear.

The first silence is victims’ own silence enforced through grooming, befriending, asserting power and control. There is also internalised guilt, shame and stigma which serves to keep victims’ silence.”​

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies