Soper's defence barrister had almost nothing she could say in mitigation. She could not say that he was remorseful - he isn't. Instead she had to say that Soper still proclaims his innocence and that he considers himself the victim of a miscarriage of justice. All she could do was to ask the judge to be careful not to double-count the aggravating factors in Soper's crimes when determining sentence. For instance, the crimes involved a gross abuse of trust as he was a priest and a teacher. That's a serious aggravating factor. The crimes also took place in a school, which is also an aggravating factor, but she said that this shouldn't be taken into account because the crimes essentially couldn't take place anywhere else if they were to involve an abuse of trust because of his position as a teacher.
In its way, it was a heroic performance. There is almost nothing good you can say about someone who has been convicted of child rape and who is unrepentant and still claiming his innocence.
The judge didn't even try to find anything good to say. He pointed out that Soper was intelligent and accomplished, but that none of that would count for anything in terms of how the world would now view him. He said that he could not take into account any suggestions as to Soper's good character since his very respectability was used to enable his abusing. The judge said "Your disgrace is now complete."
Ealing Abbey responded to the sentencing with a weird tweet.
We heard that the judge began the sentencing of former abbot Andrew Soper today 21 December at 1530h, the Winter Solstice and shortest day, and imposed a sentence of 18 years imprisonment.— Ealing Abbey (@EAbbeyW5) December 21, 2017
I mean, what on earth has the winter solstice got to do with anything at all about this?
A short time ago, I emailed a few friends (former pupils of St Benedict's) a short note saying "I know some of you at least know already, but Soper was given 18 years at the Old Bailey today. The judge had absolutely nothing nice to say about him." I got this reply back from one of them.
That'll be Father Soper if you don't mind. A chap may have been committing sexual assault and rape of children for decades, gone on the run from the police and is a proven forger/fraudster. But, dammit, he's still a priest.That seems to me to be a perfectly appropriate expression of rage at the situation, and it deserves to be seen publicly.
I can't quite get my head around WHY I care, but as if my blood was not boiling enough based on what he was convicted of (and the vast numbers of things he will never be convicted of) but the fact that, today, right now, he is still a priest in the Catholic Church does my head in. It just sums up how utterly unreformed and fucked up the Church still is.Will they expedite his expulsion? Why wasn't his expulsion order sitting on a desk waiting to be signed the very day he was finally convicted? Answer: because, as we all know, the Catholic Church is still the very same corrupt, paedo-protecting mafia it ever was.Sorry for the rant. I hope the 18 year sentence brings some satisfaction to people. Soper is now gone. Excellent. But the institution that created him is as alive and kicking as it ever was.
Last week, Ealing Abbey published a letter on their website in response to Soper's conviction. In included the following.
Our thoughts and prayers are with his victims. We admire them for their courage in coming forward as witnesses in order to secure his conviction.Another former pupil, one of the complainants, has sent me this,
We apologise to everyone who is affected by the crimes Soper committed while he was a monk of Ealing and a teacher at St Benedict’s School in the 1970s and 1980s.
To be congratulated by the school for our courage in coming forward about former Abbot-Headmaster Soper is grotesque in view of the school’s record in not only facilitating and covering up for Pearce, Soper, Maestri et al but in slandering us. As for their unreserved apology, they can shove it. I will not forget what they did to the teachers and monks who did try to intervene. It seems that one must conform to very shady criteria to be part of the management and that this persists to this day after decades.
Detective Superintendent Ang Scott, from Operation Winter Key, has said the following.
I would like to pay tribute to the victims in this case for the bravery they have showed in coming forward and reporting these offences and giving evidence at court. Although it can never make up for the emotional and psychological trauma caused by Soper's crimes, I hope the sentence handed to him today can give them some form of closure. This case demonstrates that perpetrators of sexual abuse, no matter how long ago it took place, can be prosecuted and subjected to a custodial sentence.To which I can only add my heartfelt agreement and support.
We now need to turn our attention to Ealing Abbey. We must work towards its dissolution. The monks and the monkpriests must not be permitted to exercise ministry in any capacity. A campaign to secure this objective must now be initiated.
ReplyDeleteI say this as I strongly believe that Shipperlee and the others who continue to remain know a good deal more about what has happened. I would be a simpleton to accept that Soper has been convicted of all the crimes he has committed in his lifetime.
Has anyone ever got around to interviewing or questioning those who lived at the abbey as postulants and novices? Those people who did not stay for solemn profession. That could be an interesting narrative.
I’ve spent the last couple of days reading the transcripts of the current public enquiry into child abuse and all that is related to the English Benedictine Congregation. I expected to be shocked; instead I am utterly appalled by the way in which monks and priests have attempted to explain what has happened. Their regret is tinged with a feeling of “but what were we to do”. The closing remarks very clearly indicated what could have been done.
DeleteSoper is getting the punishment he deserves. I suspect more people may now come forward.
I hope the enquiries and questions that 06:45 has asked will feature in the Ealing and (?) Worth section of the enquiry.
Notwithstanding the rather faltering performance of the new Chief Inspector of the Independent Schools Inspectorate who said that Ampleforth and Downside met all the relevant independent schools standards regulations and national minimum standards for boarding, I’d hesitate to send any child of mine currently to a Benedictine school. I write as a Catholic and someone associated with education at a senior level in the independent sector. Much too much still feels dodgy.
While in no way condoning his actions, as a contemporary of Andrew Soper and at one time in the same set at St Benedict's I have found it extremely difficulty to come to terms with his crimes; all I can say is that as far as I am concerned there was no indication of the sadist he would become in later life. I was not aware during my time at the school from 1951 - 1961 of any untoward behaviour towards pupils by any of the monks or lay staff. As has been mentioned in a previous comment he deserves to be laicised as soon as possible and I sincerely hope the Catholic Church carries this out in order to restore some of its reputation. I sincerly that his victims can now gain some closure and carry on with life as best they are able. I wish them all well in the future.
ReplyDeleteWhile you may not be aware of "untoward behaviour" by staff during your time at the school, I can assure you it was happening. Fr Kevin Horsey was active at that time. I have accounts of abuses by him from 1948 and 1963, and I have no doubt that other abuses occurred between those times.
DeleteWhilst Soper has been found guilty by a majority verdict, he continues to protest his innocence. It is not impossible that he is, in fact, an innocent man - it would explain a lot. Therefore whilst the punishment he has been given is just, we need to grant him the dignity that every person deserves.
DeleteFor him to be an innocent man would require that 10 different pupils, at the school at fairly widely separated times, either managed independently to imagine or lie about abuses in a way that indicated a consistent pattern of behaviour, or not knowing each other and having no motive to do so, managed to get together and cook up a story and then contact the police about it at widely different times from 2004 onwards. The jury did not find that credible.
DeleteAnd neither do I.
It amazes me that even after people like Andrew Soper are convicted, because they are priests, there are still people who will defend them when they would not defend people in any other walk of life.
DeleteThere were people defending David Pearce even after he had pleaded guilty!
DeleteSo your main concern is that the Catholic Church restores some of its reputation? Given that Soper's colleagues knew quite well what was going on for all those years, and chose not to go to the police, and then compounded the issue even more by sending him off abroad, I don't think merely laicising this man is going to fix anything. I find it very sad that that is your major concern though, when lives have been ruined. These men whom you seem so keen to defend protected a child molester from the workings of the law. . .where's your moral compass?
DeleteJonathan, it surely isn't necessary to think that 10 people have lied, or perhaps have false memories, to believe that Soper is innocent.
DeleteThere were only two claims of buggery. The rest of the case against him really boiled down to whether the way in which Soper administered physical punishment amounted to sexual abuse or not. The majority of the jury thought it did, as (presumably) do those witnesses who testified, and I respect their opinions. But I suspect that the vast majority of those who were caned by Soper would disagree.
If it were merely a matter of whether Soper's beatings were sexually motivated, then I wouldn't have expected a conviction or even a prosecution on those charges. But there was additional touching on the genitals before or after the beatings, as related by the complainants. For you to think Soper innocent would require you to think that they were all lying about that.
DeleteI've had a comment from "Victim 1" which I can't publish because he has included part of his name.
ReplyDeleteVictim 1, as far as I'm aware, you haven't formally renounced the anonymity you are legally entitled to, and it would be an offence for me to publish anything which might lead to you being publicly identified as having been a complainant in this case.
If you want to resubmit your comment removing any details that might help identify you, I will publish that version.
I do apologise it was a natural reaction I think. As for what I said I can't actually remember but I think it went along the lines of..... I first reported Soper back in 2004 and due to the fact that it was my word against his nothing could be done. I went years until 2010 not being believed. Jane Humpries QC knew exactly what I had gone through. The self harm and over doses. She had access to all my medical records. From 2000-2010 I spent best part six years in psychiatric hospitals. But, and I know it's her job, as the first victim to give evidence she tried to tear me apart. Calling me a fantasiser and a professional victim. The verdict meant everything to me and the sentence was just the icing on the cake. I know the courage and bravery it took to come forward and would like to congratulate the other victims for doing the same. Without them not even this blog would be possible. I would like to say a massive thank you to all of them from myself and my family!
DeleteI have nothing but admiration for all of you that came forward and had the courage to expose him. It must of been difficult, and I cant imagine the trauma, you all have endured. Now, that beast has been jailed, I now hope you can go about your lives as best you can! Onwards and upwards :)
DeleteOur father.
ReplyDeleteWho art in prison
Harrowing is thy blame
The kingsdons dumb
And will be done on earth but never heaven.
No forgiveness for his trespasses .
And stay in gaol
Forever and ever
Amen
What was Sopers reaction as he was sentenced, anyone there in court to see it? I expect it's likely he will now die in prison.
ReplyDeleteI was there. He was entirely impassive throughout. Hand on knees staring straight ahead.
Deletephew i was not expecting that. he should sack his lawyers and not use them for the appeal. anyone know who his lawyers were and who paid for them because they are a firm to well avoid. Does anyone know how many of the 10 people who gave evidence had recieved pay offs from the RC church before this trial and whether any of them are per-suing actions against the church for cash compensation now the verdict is in? Did any of the people who gave evidence know one another socially before the investigation
ReplyDeleteAll you have described concerning the complainants was fully addressed in evidence, and the jury reached its conclusions having heard the evidence.
DeleteAs for his lawyer, I can assure you that she left no stone unturned in her efforts to discredit the complainants and their description of events. In that respect by all accounts she did her job extremely well, even to the extent of explaining to the jury in her closing remarks that while she might appear to have been bullying the complainants, she was just doing her job, she had to test the evidence.
Thank you to those who testified.
ReplyDeleteI went to St Bens and was ‘lucky’ to only experience the physical violence not the sexual.
What makes me angry is the veil of silence that allowed the atrocities to continue. I don’t care what excuse those individuals tell themselves (protecting the school, the church, they’d been forgiven in confession etc) their silence allowed this to continue and I pray Dante is right in the following....
“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.”
I think that the reason people find it extremely difficult to believe that a person is guilty of heinous acts is because if there is also direct or indirect evidence of that person's separate capacity for good, it can be difficult to square the circle. There is also the point of loyalty to an institution in that people are reluctant to believe that such things have happened at their school whilst they , oblivious, dealt with the ordinary, everyday problems of school life. There can also be some unwarranted guilt felt -that they now know that they were oblivious to others' suffering at the very time that their own schooldays were in the main, pleasant...Many paedophiles, wife beaters and confidence tricksters are kind, gregarious, generous, entertaining and charming. Such are the facets of a complex personality. What one person sees is the truth of that person at that time only. Other truths are hidden. I would question assertions that " everyone must have known". Really not so, although possible that some people were aware that things were not quite right.I think this abuse goes back a long way and may involve learned behaviour being somehow seen as normal. I agree that perpetrators must be removed from society and I hope that this validation where those speaking out are finally and publically vindicated will be of lasting benefit to them. It does not address the problem of what appears to be quite common compulsive behaviour and how this can be prevented in the future. Although children are much more informed and much more likely to report abuse, that is still not tackling the problem at its source.
ReplyDeleteEaling Abbey will in due course come under the spotlight of the IICSA in the same way that Downside and Ampleforth were under examination in November and December.
DeleteThen we will be able to find out how much and for how long people knew about Soper and others before the police were made aware.
A reply to anonymous at 2.37.
DeleteI write with reference to your comment: "I think that the reason people find it extremely difficult to believe that a person is guilty of heinous acts is because if there is also direct or indirect evidence of that person's separate capacity for good, it can be difficult to square the circle."
I think that this is extremely important as a partial explanation for people, including myself, having not gone to the police with reports of abuse by Soper. The evidence for good as well as abuse extended in my case to my personal experience of the perpetrator. Please note that I am not trying to excuse or exonerate abuse. I am simply trying to explain why I - and probably nearly all the others who experienced any kind of abuse from Soper -did not come forward. He was not just an abuser but a kind man - not in just a trickster way but genuinely kind. This ought not to get in the way of law and justice - and it has not. But I offer it as an explanation why I and countless others didn't come forward. This is not quite the Stockholm syndrome - it is when there has been a lot of good and a little abuse - not everybody's experience of course.
I think you might be right in identifying ONE reason why people don't come forward. But we need a real paradigm change here (not "just" in Catholic schools but in society generally). Of course an abuser might sometimes be kind! But bear in mind that is part of their cunning and deceitful modus operandi: they want people to disbelieve their victims. I'm sad to say that a lot of people, and ESPECIALLY a lot of people with a religious grounding, are far too willing to exonerate abusers on these grounds ("He's a lovely man really" "He is much liked" etc). Abuse ruins lives. I doubt very much that "a genuinely kind man" would have abused children for years, then bugger off abroad to escape the tentacles of the law and then, on returning, plead "Not Guilty" with the result that his victims had to go through even more trauma by being cross-examined in the witness box (i.e. being repeatedly and very publically told that they are lying.) As someone whose father was continuously abusive and whose mother constantly said (and says to this day) "Oh, but he's a nice man really" I have very little tolerance for your approach. You allowed an abuser to continue abusing.
DeleteThe suppression of Ealing Abbey is a necessary and urgent work.
ReplyDeleteI know of two former Ealing Abbey novices who left and are now secular priests in different diocese' in England. Perhaps they too should come forward with their accounts.
The IICSA will I hope get to the truth of what has been going on there. Perhaps evidence from this pair can assist in securing this outcome
The report of a mass beating stirred my memory as I was also the victim of a mass beating in the playground of the Middle School in the school year 1973-74, dished out due to excessive noise in the Middle School hall, whilst the class waited for a teacher to turn up. We were displayed for the rest of the Middle Schools’s amusement (they were hanging from the windows) against the far brick wall. We were beaten in alphabetical order; around 18 of us as I remember. By the time he got to me Fr. Head Master of the Middle School was a little past his best and the couple of thwacks I got with the autographed mini-cricket bat he dished it out with were less painful but just as humiliating for the innocent 12 year old with an exemplary record that I was....however it was all legal and within school policy nevertheless the detail of these things are seared into the memory. This was the first of a number of beatings that lasted until I reached the upper 5th. I was beaten frequently but not regularly - but often for trivial homework-related reasons. It was somehow acceptable because it was the norm at St. Benedict’s, not necessarily because it was actually normal. When in either the Upper 4th/Lower 5th (I struggle to recall the school year but not the event itself), I once witnessed a lay teacher (he lived on the premises in Montpelier Avenue, long dead - I do remember his name but not sure I am allowed to identify him here) turn up and remove a boy from my class. We then heard a savage beating from down the hallway. On his return the boy reported that the Master had previously checked the punishment book and found that the Master himself was on 94 and needed the additional 6 to hit a century for the term. Random, sadistic, brutal and unchallenged by the teacher giving the class.
ReplyDeletecontinued see next post
continued from earlier post
ReplyDeletecontinued from previous post
In 1977, the Head Boy or Deputy Head boy (I remember his name well but struggle to recall his post and again not sure of the legality of identifying anyone on this site) of the Upper School told me on the 83 bus on the way from Wembley Central to Ealing Broadway that he would throw me out of assembly that week, for a big joke, as it was a guaranteed beating. Without cause, later in the week, he duly did so - and I was beaten harshly and without question by the Second Master. Everyone was at it. Institutionalised, unquestioned bullying. It was in the rotten, decaying, fabric of the whole place in those days, to the extent that even those pupils deputised to assist in the running of the school could be co-conspirators, apparently. By that time I was inured to the treatment, especially as earlier complaints to my parents had fallen on deaf ears; as did my later report to my mother that the now-convicted Soper had once called me to his office (about 1975) after school to discuss my poor maths (he was also my Division Master for one of my school years, possibly the same year) and spent some time during his explanation of a mathematical problem stroking my thigh and trying to unzip me. I extricated myself, safely, physically, but rather worried as one might expect, not least by the faux-sceptical “are you sure? he’s a Catholic Priest” cop-out by my mum. He later tried a similar tack when I was sent to see him one Friday lunchtime in Fr George Brown’s office (about 1976, Fr George, Head Master - off sick and never to return as I recall) after a ruckus with another boy and Soper wanted to recreate the wrestling match that had taken place to understand the other boy’s injuries. So he groped me from behind and sweated like someone in the full throes of unbridled orgasm. I was however a little older and wiser by this time and although initially, sceptically, taken in, I did swat him away with some gusto. Soper Interruptus. I was a stronger character by then. Notably, no action was taken against me for the fight. I did anticipate a suspension and a letter home with enormous trepidation after the Whitsun break which immediately followed that Friday’s incident but nothing happened. I have always assumed that I had provided Soper with enough immediate and probably premature gratification to forget the whole thing, despite the brief, dramatic and probably rather unnecessary afternoon hospitalisation of the other boy.
The undercurrent of abuse that went on, although somewhat invisible was also somewhat palpable. Most boys knew who and what to avoid. Most of the abusers were easily identifiable and we all knew predators to avoid such as “Gay Dave” and “Father Florence“ and Stanislaus Hobbs as much as we did the sadists like “Pole” (also long dead) who at about 6’7” had a hell of a back swing and Fr. U4th Division Master (another one long dead) who seemed to suffer from terminal dyspepsia and a constant rage (rumoured to have started when he lost toes to frostbite in WWII - possibly apocryphal), resulting in an overwhelming need to beat boys in his charge for trivial transgressions in a daily basis. John Maestri, on the other hand was a complete surprise to me. He even befriended my parents when I was a Middle School pupil. My parents were fellow Scots, who thought Maestri a jolly amusing chap at one time. His supervision of school trips to Italy with Fr. Gregory every May in the early 70s should perhaps now be the cause of further investigation, as should the many and various secondments and transfers between all the Benedictine schools of errant monks whose timely career and developmental moves no doubt coincided with serious complaints. Unfortunately for our own reasons, we ALL played the game (parents included it seems), where nearly everyone knew something but no one said anything, especially it transpired, to other members of staff; thus providing them all these years later with the oft-claimed defence of total, braying and indignant ignorance. Nevertheless, we know they are all complicit and the God they all claim to believe in will have a special place in Hell for them all to commune; both the abusers and the enablers alike. I have been in touch with the current Metropolitan Police enquiry, although I will not be figuring in any future proceedings for a number of very valid and good reasons which I cannot share here. I do want to say to Jonathan and all the victims that their part in all of this is to be highly commended. Well done all. Sincerely. You are doughty crusaders and indomitable campaigners. Your efforts, testimony, perseverance and resilience have helped so many of the silent watchers. Thank you. I wish you peace and continued fortitude.
ReplyDeleteReply to anonymous 29 Dec at 11.01. Memories of that particular U4th division master have terrified me for 48 years. His savage beatings, his threats of beatings, his mockery of boys, and his earnest warnings that hell existed - once he pointed to a boy who had done something minor wrong and said 'you are going to hell'. The devastating threat of a very likely eternity of excruciating punishment has haunted me and still does. I am not sure this aspect of the ideology, subscribed to by the school and many of the parents, can be separated from physical abuse.
ReplyDeleteI would like to thank Jonathan and the witnesses who have enabled Soper to be sentenced. I think there must be more to come to public scrutiny. My son, now in his 50s recently told me of a beating he received from Soper. He also said that a class mate of his had been sexually abused. As neither of these "boys" gave evidence I suspect the witnesses at the trial represent the tip of a very much larger submerged iceberg of others who suffered under Soper's regime and who have not, or not yet, come forward. My son had a serious breakdown in the last 18 months and was latterly diagnosed with throat cancer (thankfully well treated by the NHS so he is on the road to recovery). Counselling for the breakdown led straight back to St Benedicts. Both my cousin(whose son did given written evidence read out in court) and I had sons at St Benedict's. We were pathetically grateful that our sons had been accepted by such a prestigious school. The catholic church had powerful sway in our lives. My mother, when beaten by my father, an inveterate gambler and non provider, went to the parish priest for help circa 1949, she was told to turn her other cheek; I remember her sobbing. I write of this not for sympathy but to emphasise the prestige in which the priest was held; his parishioners did as they were told; he was the one who gave you guidance and advice on pain of your immortal soul. Mr Cleugh is on camera describing the talk of paedophilia as an anti-Catholic plot. How painful to listen to that. As children the church taught that we lived in a Protestant country. The position and inviolate reputation of the catholic church was always to be protected against hostile forces. I have news for Mr Cleugh. There has been no anti-Catholic plot. Titus Oates died in 1705. Our priests are no longer trundled along for execution at Tyburn. This downfall is of their own doing. Those people who sent their sons to St Benedicts, like me, believed the school provided a good catholic education; we had no knowledge of it as a violent or sexually dangerous place. What I read now makes me now believed we had unknowingly consigned our sons to the modern equivalent of Rugby School circa 1830. I believe the publication of Tom Brown's Schooldays led to reform I suppose we must be grateful St Benedict's had no open fires.
ReplyDeleteThe unedifying spectacle of Soper, the former Abbott of Ealing Abbey, elected to his high office by his confreres, throwing himself on the floor of his cell and refusing to emerge, sits ill with the current relentlessly upbeat web page promoting St Benedict's which states it is "proud of its heritage". Oh dear, really? It also says "St Benedict's recognises the importance of educating the whole person by encouraging principled leadership, resilience and character". Oh dear, oh dear.....back to the former Abbott, now exposed as a cowardly paedophile, liar , cheat, fraudster and deceiver, cowering on the floor. All this makes painful reading. Now approaching by 80s I have little solace from the faith of my fathers. The church talks of people "losing their faith". This indicates the individual has put themselves beyond the benefits of the church. I have not lost my faith. Rather it is being stripped from me, strip by painful strip. What more can there be to be exposed? The details of the IICSA state that the Benedictines believe their first duty was to their fellow monks rather than the children in their care. Pain is the overarching word. My 20 or 30 year old self would hardly have believed that my near 80 year self would ever say such things. The pope recently announced the need to change a word in the Our Father. Change a word in a prayer? this certainly tells us where the priorities of the Vatican lie. Not apparently with sorting out this Stygian mess. My son used to cycle passed Wormwood Scrubs on his way to Ealing. Soper is welcome to his new quarters. He is after all used to institutional life. Meanwhile Jonathan's Labours of Hercules continue.