• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

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


Andrew49

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
6,046
Twitter
AndrewSB49
Cardinal Sean Brady has confirmed that he represented the Church at meetings when two teenage victims of Fr Brendan Smyth signed an oath of silence about their complaints.

Statement from Cardinal's office :
'In 1975, Fr Sean Brady, as he then was, was the part-time secretary to the then Bishop of Kilmore, the late Bishop Francis McKiernan. At the direction of Bishop McKiernan, Fr Brady attended two meetings: in the Dundalk meeting Fr Brady acted as recording secretary for the process involved and in the Ballyjamesduff meeting he asked the questions and recorded the answers given. At those meetings the complainants signed undertakings, on oath, to respect the confidentiality of the information gathering process. As instructed, and as a matter of urgency, Fr Brady passed both reports to Bishop McKiernan for his immediate action.'
[video=youtube;3v_DI8_yPQM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v_DI8_yPQM[/video]
Truly chilling ,,,, and the further obscenity is that this oath
was administered by a priest on child rape victims of a priest.
 
Last edited:

Christine Murray

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2008
Messages
635
Website
www.poethead.wordpress.com
just during the information gathering process or still now ? l think these info gatherings should have been attended by a legal rep/social worker - otherwise the process itself is entirely questionable.
 

cricket

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
14,029
These " oaths " would have no legal standing, I'm fairly certain. Brady needs to clarify this asap.
 

breakingnews

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
3,333
So Brady was aware of the existence of this sordid behaviour since 1975.

Wasn't he saying something about resigning if he felt he didn't do enough.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
31,978
That will be the spin alright.

I'll bet the two signatories thought they were signing an oath committing them to keep their respective mouths shut about the abuse they had suffered at the hands of Brendan Smyth.
In 1975, I suspect that was the intention - they probably thought it was their fault.
 

Toland

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
64,439
Website
www.aggressive-secularist.com

breakingnews

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
3,333
Until people stop going to mass and funding this peodofile ring, this kind of thing will continue.
 

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,630
Website
www.google.com
Cardinal Martin anyone ?

The only reason for Brady not to be toast over this... is that he should be toast

He should have admitted it himself

He didn't... thus toasting a red-hat is likely a step too far... though he could be pressured to go - people like Colm O'Gorman hold a lot of cards here...

cYp
 

Christine Murray

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2008
Messages
635
Website
www.poethead.wordpress.com
interestingly since we do not have adequate child/teen protections, the question of legal advocacy in settlement situations or 'information gathering' could be akin to 1975. The necessity for a referendum is still mostly shelved, thus this type of process could be repeated with little change, given lack of services.
 

Tomas Mor

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2010
Messages
10,389
Brady must go. All this secrecy bull was covered in Vatican Law Crimen solicitationis. This was part of what the infamous Des Connell of Dublin was on about, that canon law superceded the criminal law of the land, which is nonsence as canon law has just the same status as golf club rules.Mentasl reservations
 

sondagefaux

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
15,682
Obviously Brady knew that Symth was an abuser from at least the time of this meeting.

Apart from the utterly unethical stance of the church in pressuring children to take an oath of silence, failure to report a serious crime was misprision of felony in 1975, itself a criminal offence until 1998.

In the aftermath of the Murphy report the Irish Government has found itself under increasing pressure to amend the criminal law to ensure child protection. Raferty notes in particular how the offence of misprision of felony could have been employed against Bishop Donal O’Mahony in relation to specific evidence within the Murphy report that he was involved in covering up the abuse of children by priests within the Dublin Archdiocese. However, as she notes, misprision ‘was conveniently dropped from the statute books in 1998 when the felony laws changed. The effect was that no priest, bishop, or indeed lay person, could be charged with failing to report criminal activity of which they were aware.’
Murphy Commission Report and the Criminal Law Human Rights in Ireland

It's high time that it was brought back onto the statute books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misprision_of_felony
 
Last edited:
Top