Those brave men and the pope
The BBC has just reported that Pope Benedict, speaking to the crowd at St Peter’s as usual this morning, said that he shared the suffering of child abuse victims and mentioned in particular the men he met in Malta.
I think that was his first face-to-face conversation with the grown victims of abuse by priests. If they described to him their ordeal in the same way that some of them described it to me, I am not surprised he cried, as was reported, because I did too.
I cried all the way home and I still don’t know how I am going to write about it without going into pornographic detail and yet still convey the full horror of what happened to those boys on a regular basis.
The fact is that until you hear a description from the victims themselves, the full extent of the ugliness just doesn’t get through. I have no doubt that the men in Malta left a deep impression on the pope and have informed his thinking in a way that no number of impersonal ‘reports’ from churches all over the world ever could.
Those men did well in their insistence that they meet the pope. They have a put a human face to the suffering of many thousands worldwide.
And in meeting the Archbishop and the President here in Malta too, they have continued to break through the wall of silence that has surrounded this nastiness for so long.
They are to be admired for their courage and determination. If only you knew what they have had to endure in court, as a result of the ‘behind closed doors’ order that has given the paedophiles’ defence lawyers, Giannella Caruana Curran and Labour Business Forum’s Manuel Mallia, free rein to attack the credibility of the men who were abused when they were boys, without themselves being exposed to the disapproval and opprobrium of the public through newspaper reporting and commentary.
It is an acceptable tactic for defence lawyers to attack the credibility of victims and witnesses and to try to throw them into confusion, so no bones about that. But when these victims are men who endured horrendous abuse as boys, who have had to overcome tremendous psychological hurdles to take the case to court, then the defence lawyers know there will be no public sympathy for them as lawyers who are just doing their job if the details are reported in the media.
The whole thing is shameful. I am glad the men have decided to draw attention to the fact that the case is still dragging through the courts seven years down the line. They were worried that the whole thing could have dropped into a black hole and that would be the last we’ve heard of it.
Seven years ago, when Giannella Caruana Curran and Manuel Mallia asked for the case to be heard behind closed doors, with no reporting at all and no extraneous persons present in the court, I objected most strenuously in a newspaper column, pointing out that the only people who would be protected by this were the paedophiles and their defence lawyers, who might understandably feel uncomfortable at being cast in the public role of defending men who had sexually abused young boys entrusted to their care.
But one of the consequences of agreeing to take up such an unpleasant brief is dealing with the distaste of the public as you try to attack the credibility of the victims and their testimony.
‘Behind closed doors’ doesn’t only mean a ban on reporting. It means that no people are allowed in court except the magistrate, the accused, the prosecuting officer, the defence lawyers and one representative of the victims, in this case Lawrence Grech who is their spokesperson.
59 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Well done Daphne! Really like this post! I agree with you 100% – these men are really brave and courageous, and well done as well to Pope Benedict for, like Lawrence Grech said, almost humiliated himself instead of the priests in question!
Why is only one of the victims allowed in court? I don’t understand. Aren’t all the victims party to the court case?
[Daphne – I don’t understand either.]
The fewer witnesses to the proceedings, the better protected the accused.
dont be stupid. Hide your true colors.
?
Well, it USED to be the case that since the victim was also a witness, they could not hear proceedings, BUT I thought that ridiculous situation was corrected some years ago.
To speed up the case.
I believe that if testimony is not taken behind closed doors it will be more credible.
It’s not just a belief. It’s a fact. That’s why court cases are public.
That is NOT why court cases are public, or at least that’s just a part of it!
You think so? Well then let’s do away with all the courts of justice. since only you are credible according to your good self.
That’s a non-sequitur. Hearing cases in an open court means the hearings themselves are open to public scrutiny. I never said that only I am credible but it’s telling that that’s your interpretation of what I said.
Oh boy, Daphne. You’ve just opened a bigger can of legal worms than that wriggling in Miss Piggy’s cupboard. Well done.
Has Miss Piggy resigned yet? I have not been hearing a lot about her lately….or is her case being heard behind closed doors?
[Daphne – There was a hearing a couple of weeks ago in which she claimed that she had suffered severe emotional distress as a result of her daughter not being allowed to upload pictures of mummy on Facebook, thanks to the evil Daphne. It’s my turn to speak on 3 May.]
I am not missing her pictures.
I admire their courage. I hope they found the peace they deserve, and I would like to thank them for stepping forward.
Li ma nistax nifhem hu ghala damu daqshekk biex hargu fil berah dawn il vitmi. Ghala hallew kollox mistur ghal snien twal biex tkelmu. Kellu jkun pajjiz iehor li qajjem ghal l-ewwel darba dawn li fatti, biex kellhom jitkelmu.
[Daphne – It’s enough that they got together at all and organised it. Let’s leave it at that. It’s easy to speak from the standpoint of somebody who didn’t go through what they went through.]
It could have taken them years to even admit to themselves that they were abused; even longer for them to confide in others.
Two decades ago I was out at supper with a small group of people then in their twenties. One of the men present mentioned in passing about how one particular “Brother” used to fondle him in the school dormitory. Aged 12, he thought it better to pretend he was asleep, and never spoke about it till that day, some ten years down the line.
The victim’s own brother happened to be at table that day, and on hearing his brother say what happened, said “X’hiex? Kien jaghmilha lilek ukoll?”
Now, if these two (macho, I must add) brothers – who, despite being roughly the same age and being seemingly close – never spoke about such incidents to anyone at all, until blurting it out some ten years later, it must be harder still for children at the mercy of their carers in a children’s home to gain the trust of anyone else.
I never quite understood it myself, till I watched this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7745088455537169028#
Jerry, tista’ ghal mument timmaginak tifel, li diga ghaddejt minn trawma ta’ separazzjoni tieghek mill-familja, li int suppost qieghed f’post fejn joffrilek kenn, support, imhabba u ghajnuna, tigi abbuzat minn min suppost qieghed jghinek?
Kif tahseb li thossok?
Tinsiex li sa ftit taz zmien ilu l knisja kienet ‘untouchable’.
F’dawk iz zminijiet, is sacerdot kien jigi emmnut u mhux it tifel, li aktar iva milli le kien jigi ttimbrat bhala ‘problem child’.
Jien nghid li dawn l-irgiel veru ghandhom karattru sod, biex ghaddew milli ghaddew u xorta sabu l-GUTS u l hila jitkellmu.
Tinsiex li fil-qorti dawn iridu jirrakkontaw min xiex ghaddew minnu, cioe iridu jergghu jiftakru, dawk iz zminijiet koroh.
Tifhem issa ghaliex?
Ghaziza Dephne, bir-rispett kollu lanqas int ma tista tispjega sew dak li qed jallegaw dawn il-persuni, sa kemm qatt ma kellek esperjenza li tghix f’dar tat-tfal. Jien nifhem l-ugieh; il-misthija u l-problemi ta’ kull xorta, l-aktar psikologici w emozzjonali, li min gie abbuzat ihoss, pero wiehed irid jara realta ferm usa min x’qed jghidu l-ex tfal tal-istitut.
Din id-dar ilha miftuha aktar min 100 sena u fiha dahlu eluf ta’ tfal b’kull xorta ta’ problemi. Jien aktar milli cert, li fil-parti l-kbira taghhom, dawk li kienu hemm ma jiefqux jirringrazzjaw lil dawk li fethulhom il-bieb tad-dar u hadu hsibhom ghal ftit jew hafna snin. Min hemm hargu hafna nies professjonisti; esperti ta’ diversi snajja, fosthom tellara u dawk li jahdmu fi stamperiji. Hafna ghadhom irabbu familja sabieha u kuntenti fil-hajja.
Jien ma naqbel xejn li kulhadd gie mitfuh f’keffa wahda, anke dawk li qed jallegaw li gew abbuzati, tajjeb li ma jkunux kollha esposti fil-qorti minhabba l-privatezza tal-familjari taghhom, ghaliex fis-socjeta’ maghluqa taghna, aktar ikunilhom ta’ deni milli gid.
Madana kollu, mhux qed ngid li ma kienx hemm abbuzi. Abbuzi kien hemm zgur, almenu fi zmien li qed jissemmew il-kazi.
Well done Daphne. You truly are a great journalist.
The vivid description of the torment to which victims of sex abuse are liable in the civil courts of law is the real reason why in many cases the victims and their families avoid lodging a report with the police and why they more often choose to report in confidence to the Church response team. They have every right to expect that their desire for confidentiality should be respected. This is the main difficulty obstructing the Church response team from taking the initiative in reporting to the police, and not any official tolerance of, or any selfish disregard of, the needs of the victims of clerical sex abusers of children.
I doubt very much that in this case the victims themselves asked for the proceedings to be held behind closed doors. These brave gentlemen strike me as having chosen to confront, head-on, the demons that haunt them. Moreover, the State should have a keen interest in raising public awareness about the harm inflicted upon our young and upon society as a whole by paedophiles.
The “star chamber” approach adopted by the Maltese courts in this case (presumably with the support of the Attorney General’s office) suggests that their primary and overriding concern is to preserve the reputation of the Church. Understandable, I suppose, in the world’s oldest surviving theocracy.
From the coverage of the international media on Sunday and Monday, the focus of the Pope’s visit was essentially seen to be his meeting with the victims of the alleged sex abuse.
I admire their courage to fight on. I also admire the Pope for meeting with them and offering them an apology.
I would like to repeat a statement I made on another post here that I am now hoping that the President of the Republic, who TVM news reported today, will be meeting with the abuse victims later this week, and who is the Chairman of the Commission for the Administration of Justice, will now press on to have the court cases on the subject concluded.
[Daphne – Of course he can’t do that.]
Yesterday, Fr. Gouder, Pro-Vicar to the Bishop, made a statement on NET that abusers normally have a history of having been abused themselves. So I think one has to see the whole picture, since abuse can never be condoned.
Daphne, I believe that the President has the moral authority to make statements, either in meetings of the CAJ, or if need be in public, to deliver a message to the Courts to process these cases efficiently, especially now that the Pope himself has stepped into the matter. As he told the Pope on Saturday, justice must be seen to be done.
The way I see it is that in this case, it is not only the justice with the victims that is taking long, but even the Church is having its reputation tarnished over an extended period of time. If the cases were dealt with and closed in 2003, we would not be here in 2010 still dragging with this story.
In any case, while I do not purport to interpret the Constitution, Article 101A, 11(f), gives the following power to the CAJ:
“to draw the attention of any judge or magistrate on any matter, in any court in which he sits, which may not be conducive to an efficient and proper functioning of such court, and to draw the attention of any judge or magistrate to any conduct which could affect the trust conferred by their appointment or to any failure on his part to abide by any code or codes of ethics relating to him.”
Is this Gouder’s idea of winning sympathy for the perpetrators of these horrendous crimes? These are the people who claim to know what God wants and likes. Jaqqqq. Probably they told their victims it was all part of God’s plan. U Gouder jaqbez ghalihom. X’irid ighid, li l-qassisin kienu l-vittmi, msieken?
I have absolutely no problem with Catholicism. I really believe that the church does a lot of good even though I don’t believe that anyone can claim to understand God’s mind.
It’s the hypocrisy that turns my stomach.
Whoa, whoa, slowly. These men were abused, yes, they have had their pound of flesh, glorified almost, but let’s put the whole picture in. I do not condone anybody, let the court do that, but he who is without sin let him throw the first stone . Who is behind all this, forces of evil, perhaps ? why do we see the bits thrown at us, bringing up cases that happened 30, 40, 50 years ago ? Can’t we see the good that the church does for a change ? Even Christ was betrayed by one of his disciples,.do we have to abhor the other eleven ? I do some voluntary work at one of the boys’ home, the stories that some of them recount makes your hair stand on edge, when these boys are sent home for the weekend or for their holidays, some fathers come home dead drunk, and belts up their mother that these children have to hide themselves, some boys are locked in a room on the roof as , some of them were literally thrown in these homes as their parents don’t want them and the home has to provide for their upbringing, their education, and their well being, the many personal sacrifices that the nuns and priests go through, and, oh boy, aren’t these children glad when they come back to the home ? OK, these priests and nuns did wrong, but who are we to judge ? When I go to mass and receive Communion from his consecrated hands, do I look at the man in the frock or at his ministry ?,after all, we are all human beings and very fragile, surrounded with propaganda all our waking lives, lets pray for the well being of these boys and pity them, may they have a decent future with their families, on the other hand, let’s not put all in one basket and remember and pray for the other priests and nuns that they can carry on their ministry. I end here, but, all that loose talk, why don’t we all pay a visit to one of these homes and see for ourselves the good that’s being done, only recently, a man in his seventies came to the Home and asked to see the director, he started saying that he’s on holiday from Australia and he had to thank profoundly the director for the work done by his predecessors for giving him all the care when he was still at the Home when young.
Thanks for bringing this up and doing it so well. Can you make two sections to your website? One posted with such fine pieces and another with social commentary on your least favourite tribe?
[Daphne – No.]
How criminal lawyers manage to sleep easily at night when defending paedophiles never ceases to defy my imagination.
Here are two more such lawyers in another notorious case – Joe Giglio and Stephen Tonna Lowell: http://www.timesofmalta.com.mt/articles/view/20080423/local/ex-religion-teacher-confesses-to-defilement-via-sms ( http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2008/04/23/it-was-the-weatherman-mark-vella-gera/ )
Dr. Giglio’s eldest daughter is now almost exactly the same age as the victims in the infamous Mark Vella Gera case. I wonder how he (Giglio) feels about it now, especially since Vella Gera was recently on Facebook linked up to several children, including at least one of the victims in the court case in question. How would he feel if it were his child, I wonder?
You clearly have no idea how the system of justice works in a civilised country, Grezz. This is not to say that Daphne does not have a very good point about the “closed doors” aspect of the case she mentions, but your position is untenable: it assumes everyone who is charged is guilty.
For heaven’s sake. I never assume that everyone who is charged is guilty. It is just that I can never understand people who defend paedophiles when the proof of the act is right there in their face, as was that in the Mark Vella Gera case, where he himself confessed to it all from day one.
Here is the evidence, learned sir, since in your haste you chose to overlook what is public knowledge:
Wednesday, 23rd April 2008
Ex-religion teacher confesses to defilement via SMS
A former religion teacher who yesterday admitted to sending SMS messages with sexual connotations to former students over the past weeks was given a two-year jail term suspended for four years.
The 37-year-old man, who cannot be named by court order in order to protect his identity and that of the victims, pleaded guilty to defiling minors between the ages of 13 and 14.
Magistrate Anthony Vella heard that the man had started internet chatting sessions with his former students and then proceeded to send SMS messages. The messages and chat room conversations contained sexual connotations.
The man, whose teaching warrant has not been renewed, is now self-employed.
Magistrate Vella ordered that the teaching warrant never be issued again and that the man keeps away from schools or institutions that have minors in attendance.
Prosecuting Police Inspector Louise Calleja said the man was still being investigated and that he had been collaborating with the police.
Lawyers Joseph Giglio and Stephen Tonna Lowell were defence counsel.
Perhaps if this country had fewer cases being heard behind closed doors, Cikku l-poplu would gradually become better informed about matters like due process and the rule of law.
So THAT’s what Guido was telling the pope when he hung around chatting with him so long in the presentation line that an aide had to pull him away:
“Your Holiness, my daughter is defending the paedophile priests who abused those men you’re meeting tomorrow. Be sure to give them her regards.”
Guido mhux dejjem kien show-off.
Dawn in-nies ghandhom dritt li jkollhom avukat?
A few minutes ago in Washington DC:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-breaking-news/dc/cardinal-replaced-over-sex-abu.html?wpisrc=nl_localalert
“Our first reading at Mass today is one that I know you love to hear, the account of Paul’s shipwreck on the coast of Malta, and his warm reception by the people of these islands. Notice how the crew of the ship, in order to survive, were forced to throw overboard the cargo, the ship’s tackle, even the wheat which was their only sustenance. Paul urged them to place their trust in God alone, while the ship was tossed to and fro upon the waves. We too must place our trust in him alone. It is tempting to think that today’s advanced technology can answer all our needs and save us from all the perils and dangers that beset us. But it is not so. At every moment of our lives we depend entirely on God, in whom we live and move and have our being. Only he can protect us from harm, only he can guide us through the storms of life, only he can bring us to a safe haven, as he did for Paul and his companions adrift off the coast of Malta. They did as Paul urged them to do, and so it was “that they all escaped safely to the land” (Acts 27:44).”
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20100418_floriana_en.html
I believe that Pope Benedict is ready to “throw overboard the cargo, the ship’s tackle, even the wheat which (is) (the church’s) only sustenance”
For me this means that he is more determined than ever to throw out of the church priests who abused children under their care.
In my opinion the ones who come out tops in this distasteful saga are the poor victims and the Pope. The former for their courage in the face of daunting adversity and the latter for demonstrating to the whole world his incomparable humility and humanity. The behaviour of the local courts and curia, as usual, have so far been a damage limitation exercise and an attempt at a monumental whitewash. Closed doors my foot! I suggest the court sessions should in future be held in Piano’s theatre, weather permitting.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/revising-history-vatican-style
Did the court ban the publication of photographs of the accused priests?
[Daphne – No, of course not. But no one seems to have any.]
What upsets me further is when apologists refer to these cases as “mistakes” . These perpetrators committed double crimes, in that children were trusted in their care.
It’s like a police officer found to be dealing in drugs, or a fireman committing arson. These are NOT mistakes.
We have yet to see one priest behind bars for these heinous crimes, unlike the Pandolfino brothers who got 10 years each because they were not priests.
[Daphne – They did not get 10 years because they were not priests. They got 10 years because of what they did, early reporting, and the hard evidence to prove it. And quite frankly, they deserved life if life were possible under the sentencing guidelines, which apparently it is not. This is the first time that priests are being tried for similar crimes, so it is premature to speculate about their sentence. I agree with you about the use of the word/concept ‘mistakes’, but it is popular verbal currency here in Malta. Maltese freely deploys ‘zbal’ and ‘zbalja’ in the context of crimes, even murder. I have written about this myself occasionally. The word ‘zbalja’ is used precisely because it reflects the Maltese way of thinking. English does not have the same thinking reflected in the language, which is why you cannot translate ‘zbalja’, used for crime or wrong-doing, as ‘mistake’. A mistake, in the English way of thinking and this is reflected in the language, is adding something up wrongly, or putting something away in the wrong drawer. You cannot say, in English ‘I made a mistake. I abused a child.’ Or ‘I made a mistake. I killed somebody.’ It sounds ridiculous, and anyone who says any such thing will be dismissed as cracked.]
Daphne, a mistake and ‘zball’ as used in our language has the same meaning even though you insist on your interpretation. A mistake is an incorrect act or decision: an incorrect, unwise, or unfortunate act or decision caused by bad judgment or a lack of information or care. To conclude that two plus two equals five is a mistake, to commit a crime is also a mistake.
“Christians, does God forgive if you ask but repeat the same mistakes over and over again?”
This is idiomatically as well as formally correct and the question is not about mistakes in addition or subtraction.
[Daphne – Whatever the meaning might be in Maltese, Charles, it’s not the same in English. That is probably because the cultural context is different. In English, mistakes are unintentional. Crimes are intentional. That’s one of the reasons they are classified as crimes, because intent is a crucial factor. When you make a mistake, you don’t intend to make it. That’s precisely why it is a mistake. No man can claim to have had sex with a boy by mistake. How would that work out? Oh my god, I thought he was a man? Oh my god, I thought he was a woman? Oh my god I thought he was a rubber dolly from the sex shop? Come off it, Charles.]
There are many types of paedophiles: a man who sodomises a boy deserves a bigger punishment than a man texting sexual innuendoes to a boy. Stealing an apple and carrying out an armed heist of half a million euro are not the same.
Each case should be treated on its own merits. Lawyers are there to ‘show’ the court the gravity of the crime committed.
I would say a closer (but still not exact) English translation of “zbalja” is “erred”
Daphne, well done for thsi article and I have to say I agree with you 100%. It takes a lot of guts for these men to come forward and describe what happened to them, especially to the Pope himself.
Thumbs up yet again Daphne!
The Church spokespersons in Rome often refer to these crimes as “mistakes”, using the English language.
[Daphne – Well, then they are the ones making a mistake. It’s not idiomatic English at all.]
And because of this ‘arrangement’, seven years later no one knew that some of the priests had actually admitted in full gory detail…. what else do we need to sentence them? For crying out loud!
I don’t even know why we keep saying ‘allegedly’…THEY ADMITTED!
http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20100409/alison-bezzina/what-a-papal-joke
“There is much filth in the Church”…These are words uttered by the then Cardinal Ratzinger during the Via Crucis which he carried out instead of Pope John Paul II at the Coliseum.
Many Vatican commentators and not believe that this is what made Cardinal Ratzinger ‘papabile’ during the Conclave a few weeks later…..His determination to purify the Church from this filth.
drinu,
I remember seeing photographs of the three priests in a newspaper seven years ago.
hot mama quote me one organisation where there is not filth as you call it. Just one teeny one. even the government said that there is no filth in the powerstation tender. who will agree with him when one of these filthy bustards got 2 illion for himself and his family and the other got a nice juicy job abroad.
I’m thinking that the case falls under the statute of limitations right? So how is it being heard in court?
[Daphne – Well, if there’s been a prosecution then obviously, it isn’t time-barred.]
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Support-Lawrence-Grech-The-Brave-Man/111833638854559
Support Page for Lawrence Grech
When this whole story came out in the open there was a gag order. Was it to protect the victims or the culprits? I have a feeling that it was more to protect the priests involved. Take a look at this video on youtube and make the connection with what has happened here.
I’d like to answer Mr. Charles Buttigieg. Having sex is not a mistake; having non-consensual sex is a crime and not a mistake. It’s called rape. Rape is intentional and warrants a long prison sentence. If the one who is raped is a child it warrants life-imprisonment.
Ray,it all boils down to choosing right from wrong. I hope nobody got the impression that in any way I was trying to soften the horrendous crime of paedophilia. If I had my way I will bring back capital punishment for these savages.
Confucius says that rape is not possible because woman with skirt up runs faster than man with pants down. lol
[Daphne – Very amusing, Charles. You demonstrate by this joke your age, your gender, your mentality and yes, your voting preferences (backward).]
Marelli anke meta nghid cajta zghira issawwatni, Daghne. L-aqwa li jien ‘insignificant’.
Strange to you as may sound that joke was said to me by a very intelligent young lady and in spite of her intelligence she votes PN.
PS. And she’s born and raised in Sliema too.
[Daphne – Ho ho ho. Tell your little joke to Marlene Mizzi and then come back to me with her reply. I think we might be in accord on that one.]
Sorry Charles, but you asked for it; it’s something serious we’re talking about here. Besides studies have shown that bringing back the death penalty won’t change a depraved and twisted mind.