If you have strong evidence that several monks have been involved in abuse, you should pass this to police without delay. Also, if you have received allegations, you must encourage those concerned to go to police. You are in danger of prejudicing prosecution if you carry out an unofficial investigation.It's a serious question and it deserves a serious answer.
If you have evidence that there are 'hundreds of abuse victims' at St Benedicts' you should contact the police immediately.
Of course, I have spoken to the police. I have told them that from time to time I receive emails from victims talking about their abuse. The detective I spoke to was happy with the approach that I take, which is to provide such support and encouragement as I can to persuade the victim to come forward voluntarily to make a statement, but not to forward correspondence without permission.
As I understand it, if the victim is unwilling to make a statement to police and is unprepared ultimately to speak in court, then any email sent privately to me by a victim is useless for the purpose of a prosecution.
So, I treat correspondence as confidential unless and until the victim is prepared either for me to contact somebody on his behalf or to make that contact himself.
It is not easy for victims to come forward. There is a considerable overhang of guilt and shame involved, which remains even though the adult rational part of their mind recognises that there is nothing for them to feel guilty about. That is why victims can often take 30 years or more to summon the courage to come forward. When dealing with child sex abuse and its effects, all ideas of what we think of as logical thought-processes count for very little, and the guilt doesn't go away just because the rational part of your mind decides that it should. This is because the experiences occurred before your adult rational mind was fully formed.
The victims have an experience of the adult world betraying their trust. I have no moral right to betray that trust all over again.
By the way, I'm not carrying out my own investigation. I can't barge into the Abbey and demand to see all its books and correspondence. I'm calling for the Church to carry out its investigation. My aim is to ensure that procedures are put in place to prevent abuse in the future. I hope you would agree that is a good idea. In order to know what must be prevented in the future, it is necessary to acquire a realistic perception of the nature and extent of the abuse in the past, even though relatively few cases might ultimately end in prosecution.
So let's have a think about what that realistic perception consists of. Given the range of dates on which Pearce committed crimes he was convicted of, it is reasonable to infer that he has been an active paedophile for pretty much the whole of the 40 years or so that he was resident at the Abbey. Moreover, we have dozens of accounts of abuse here in comments on this blog, most of them from people who have not yet come forward to the police, or at least hadn't at the time they wrote.
Given the difficulty in coming forward in the first place, and the active work in suppressing complaints which we can infer from the comment by "Paul", it is entirely unrealistic to think that anything but an extremely small proportion of Pearce's crimes have come to trial. But nonetheless, based on what we do know, we can make a conservative estimate of perhaps 3 boys a year whom he abused. That's perhaps 120 boys.
Then there is Maestri. He was at the school for something like 12 years. Chalk him up for an estimate of another 3 a year. That's another 36.
Then there are others about whom comments have been made. Even supposing they between them only account for 50 or so, that puts us over 200 in total. Hundreds is a vague but entirely reasonable estimate. It is the sort of figure indicated by the evidence we have so far. You might choose to make a different estimate. But don't think in terms of saying that since Pearce has only been convicted of abusing 5 boys that this is the total extent of his crimes. That's just wishful thinking, hoping that the problem will go away. I don't expect that Pearce or anybody else will get convicted of hundreds of counts of child abuse, unless I am vastly underestimating the extent of his crimes and they actually number in the thousands. But there isn't evidence to suggest that.
So, if you are former pupil at St. Benedict's School and are a victim of Pearce or anybody else, and feel that the time has come to share the burden you have carried for so long, I have these words for you.
You are not alone. Others have also suffered as you have. You have friends in the world who wish you well and want to help, even though you might never actually meet them.
If you wish, I can put you in touch with other victims of abuse who are willing to share their experiences, so you can compare notes and talk with somebody who really understands in a way I can't, not having been abused myself.
If you wish, I can help you contact the appropriate people within the police. I am assured that you will be taken seriously. The police have specialist units which specialise in child sex abuse, they understand what it takes to talk to them.
If you wish, I can help you find professional assistance which I hope might bring some healing to your life.
Or if all you feel able to do is take the step of privately contacting me in confidence, then I will hear you and take you seriously. Whether and when you take the matter any further is for you to decide, based on your strength and welfare and that of your family. You don't have to take all the decisions at once. Believe me, I have a good idea of how brave you have had to be even to have looked up this page and read down this far.
Unless and until you decide to take it further our correspondence will be confidential. I know what a massive step it is for a victim to confide in anybody at all, even 30 or 40 years after the event.
Naturally I hope that you will in due course feel able to contact the police, but I know enough about the effects of sexual abuse on children to realise what a gigantic step it is even to contemplate this. I will think no less of you if you decide that for now or for ever you feel unable to do so. The great majority of victims never manage it. There is no shame in being part of that majority. But tackling lesser hurdles first can help, for instance talking privately to somebody you decide you can trust. That's a big enough first step by itself. Other steps can be left for another day.
If you wish, you can email me at jonathanwest22@googlemail.com. Or you may decide that talking to a sympathetic member of your family would be better. Or a trusted friend. You do what you think is best for you.
If you read this but don't feel able to make any approach, know that the door will remain open, and you can choose to walk through it some other time.
To Jonathan,
ReplyDeleteI do not wish to negate your offer of help to those who would benefit from it.However-how would you differentiate between those who truly have suffered some form of abuse and those who imagine that this might have happened?
It's just that I have read of cases where some people have visited hypnotists for therapy and then regained false memories of uncomitted abuse.
I wish also that there were no financial incentives which can in some instances , lead to false claims.
Well, quite obviously, those who approach me of their own volition would not fall into such a category.
ReplyDeleteA criminal conviction requires a very high standard of evidence. The case of Father Stanislaus Hobbs appears to have turned at least in part on whether false memories could have been induced.
I have no wish to see innocent men in jail, and I fully accept that only the highest standard of evidence should be used for criminal convictions.
But when considering whether a child may be in danger sufficient to justify removing an adult from access to children, it is ridiculous to consider that nothing less than a criminal standard of proof will do. If you were to think that, then there would be no justification for any organisation to take any separate measures to protect children - you would just rely on the police and courts as the sole arbiters of who is safe to be around children. If somebody isn't in jail, they must be safe. i think you can see the illogic of such a position.
I'm calling for an enquiry by the church to find out the extent of the abuse by Pearce and others, for the purpose of working out what measures are needed to protect children at the school in the future, and also to help provide some comfort to the obviously large number of victims involved, most of whom will never have their day in court.
If in the course of that enquiry, evidence of sufficient quality is uncovered that would enable further prosecutions to be undertaken, then of course it should be handed over to the police. This is what I understand the Bishops' promise of openness to entail.
As for the idea that people would make up stories of abuse in the hope of screwing the church for compensation, I think you need have little worry of that. Pearce's abuse of "C"
drove him to attempt suicide, and yet C was only awarded £43,000. Not enough to interest any serious gold-digger.
The phoney spectre of False Memory Syndrome raises its head once again when child abuse is discussed. The last refuge for those who are convinced their collar is about to be felt. Please let’s not give it traction here – it’s bunk!
ReplyDeleteFMS – is it real? No.
Is there a medical board anywhere in the world that recognises it? No.
The founder of the theory is a mathematician Professor Peter Freyd from the University of Pennsylvania who together with his wife, was accused of child abuse by their daughter.
You can read all about it in this at this very interesting Wiki entry
FMS was the default claim made by the man who abused me. The police ignored it and it was never discussed again. It is a fabricated distraction to the brutal realities of abuse. I was keen to discover further information about the existence or otherwise of malicious claims and the size of the problem and so spoke with leading counsel in child abuse. The answers are unscientific but such claims by men are almost non-existent in his extensive experience. The incident of malicious claims by women is greater but still very small in number.
However let’s look at convictions for child abuse.
It is estimated that the average perpetrator abuses 180 children during his/her career of abuse. (Police)
1 in 6 children are sexually abused before 16yrs (Lucy Faithfull Foundation)
40% of all sex crimes reported to the police involve children (Home Office)
Only 10% of child abuse crimes are reported to the Police (Lancet report Nov 2008)
Only 5% of those reach court.
Only 2% result in convictions.
Rape achieves the dismal conviction rate of 5% with the judiciary under pressure to raise this rate.
No wonder the “Soft Box” on the CRB returns is so important.
Thank you for taking the time to respond following my comments regarding your involvement with potential complainants.
ReplyDeleteYou are encouraging victims to confer with each other and this will most certainly weaken evidence. Do the police know you are putting these people in touch with each other?
I suggest you refer anyone claiming to be a victim of abuse to those well versed in these matters and who can give expert guidance and support. The NSPCC could help them if they are not ready to go to the police.
I am sure you are acting with the best of intentions but your many writings indicate that you do not have an academic understanding of abuse.
Your estimate of incidences is little more than speculative assumption. Many abusers in care situations, and this includes clergy as well as, for example, teachers and care home staff, abuse when they give into temptation rather than on a regular basis. They know it is wrong, even wished they did not do it, and sometimes could go years without offending. This does not in any way minimise the criminality of the offending. This may, or may not be the case at Ealing.
If you had evidence that hundreds of boys at the school had been abused, the police would most certainly act on it.
I reiterate, you may do more harm than good so please let those who are qualified and experienced help any victims.
If you feel you can tell me how to manage this better, by all means email me so we can continue this conversation by email.
ReplyDeletedisscuss it open...here... so we can all read and take a view..why go under cover again?
ReplyDeleteI speculate the site has a Troll viz.
ReplyDeleteYou are encouraging victims to confer with each other and this will most certainly weaken evidence. Do the police know you are putting these people in touch with each other?
I suggest you refer anyone claiming to be a victim of abuse to those well versed in these matters and who can give expert guidance and support. The NSPCC could help them if they are not ready to go to the police.
Where are victims being encouraged to confer when repeatedly the site owner makes clear that confidentiality will be maintained. There will also be a clear audit trail of evidence “contamination” if one exists.
The NSPCC does not handle Child Sexual Abuse claims made by adults. They refer all such matters to NAPAC.
I am sure you are acting with the best of intentions but your many writings indicate that you do not have an academic understanding of abuse.
One therefore presumes you do have an academic understanding of the subject but clearly this does not include any understanding of what NGO handles matters relating to CSA in adulthood.
Your estimate of incidences is little more than speculative assumption. Many abusers in care situations, and this includes clergy as well as, for example, teachers and care home staff, abuse when they give into temptation rather than on a regular basis. They know it is wrong, even wished they did not do it, and sometimes could go years without offending. This does not in any way minimise the criminality of the offending. This may, or may not be the case at Ealing.
This is a disturbing paragraph for so many reasons. You may wish to consider taking this helpful test . Do not be fooled by the titles on the front page – it gets more involving and broader the further one gets into it.
If you had evidence that hundreds of boys at the school had been abused, the police would most certainly act on it.
This statement is trolled out regularly by those who wish to silence anyone expressing concern. I feel sure I am not alone in being disturbed at at the content of the post to which I am offering this reply.
I reiterate, you may do more harm than good so please let those who are qualified and experienced help any victims.
“And stop stirring matters up, muddying the waters, and upsetting us all!”
Who are the people “qualified and experienced to help?” Are they presently at the school sorting matters out? Speak up we are keen to hear. A robust and evidenced reply may provide us with the motivation to await in silence the outcome of their examination.
Well, openness goes two ways. My name is known, as is my interest in this matter.
ReplyDeleteSo tell me your name and your connection to this, and why you seem so interested in undermining efforts at helping the victims. Tell us something about yourself.
"Only" £43,000!!!!
ReplyDelete