Did Brady covered up child abuse?

[orangeman]

Bishop Hegarty on apologising over abuse by Nazreth nuns in Derry today.

[orangeman]

Martin Mc Guinness has asked Brady to consider his position !!!

Pressure is on.

[longrunsthefox]

good for Martin... in spirit of equality, hopefully he was as robust in challenging his leader over
brother Liam's abuse.

[ardmhachaabu]

We need to cut through all the emotional stuff and get to the kernel of procedure re child protection.  The question is - Was the proper procedure followed when he was faced with the disclosures.

And the answer is yes he did.

Firstly, the latest and most modern procedures for dealing with child abuse is contained ina  circular for teachers called 1999 10.  This states that you have to take notes, not investigate or unearth and then pass the information on.  He did just that.

Secondly, under the Human Rights Act 1998 Article 8 - the Need to Know principle bars ANYONE who passed information on from receiving a report on what happened.

Cardinal Brady acted perfectly appropriately when put up against these 2 most modern of criteria in that he passed on the information and asked no more.   This was his duty and nothing whatsoever beyond that.

No more comment required.  I sense a complete witchhunt against the Catholic Church here.

I agree with everything you said, especially the bit I bolded

[ardmhachaabu]

McGuinness has a cheek

[orangeman]

Here's what Mc Guinness has to say on the issue :


The head of Ireland's Catholic Church "should consider his position", Martin McGuinness has said.

As a priest in 1975 Cardinal Sean Brady was at meetings where children signed vows of silence over complaints against paedophile priest Fr Brendan Smyth.

The Northern Ireland deputy first minister questioned how many other children were asked to stay silent.

He said many Catholics shared his "great sense of unease at what we've learned over the last couple of days".

[Main Street]

  "Secondly, under the Human Rights Act 1998 Article 8 - the Need to Know principle bars ANYONE who passed information on from receiving a report on what happened. "

Why do agree with that line, ardmhachaabu?
What relevance does the Human Rights Act 1998 Article 8  specifically titled "Private life and family" have in this matter?

[ziggysego]

McGuinness has a cheek

Why?

[orangeman]

McGuinness has a cheek

Are you wondering about the other methods of silencing people ??

I can't help but think that.

Cheeky enough alright.

[longrunsthefox]

'No way' says Papa... 'there's a witch hunt on'  over there   


No Pope visit for Northern Ireland

Pope Benedict XVI will not come to Northern Ireland as part of his visit to the UK, it has been confirmed.
The Pope's four-day visit in September will include a meeting with the Queen in Edinburgh.
He will not visit Northern Ireland as it comes under a separate bishops' conference and he will not visit Wales because of time constraints.

A papal visit to Northern Ireland was rumoured, although the Catholic Church dismissed this as "pure speculation".
It will be the first papal visit to the UK since 1982 when Pope John Paul II came to England for a pastoral visit.
Pope Benedict XVI's trip is an official visit, and his engagement with the Queen at Holyrood Palace will be the first ever official meeting between a Pope and the British monarch.

Huge crowds greeted Pope John Paul II during his visit to the Irish Republic in 1979, but security concerns meant he was not able to come to Northern Ireland.

[ardmhachaabu]

McGuinness has a cheek

Are you wondering about the other methods of silencing people ??

I can't help but think that.

Cheeky enough alright.

Not just that, for how many years did he and his fellow travellers urge people NOT to support the police? NOT to tell them anything about say a murder that might have happened outside their own doorstep

On top of that, his organisation was responsible for a lot worse.  I don't see him or Gerry resigning over murders that the IRA were responsible for since the ceasefire

[Main Street]

I thought it was something to do with him not turning the other cheek.

[pintsofguinness]

Unreal - to think it was only a few months ago I couldnt understand how this all could have happened - there's a few boys on this board and I'd be willing to bet they'd turn a blind eye to child abuse if it meant protecting their precious church. 
Bloody right this is a witch hunt against the Catholic church.

Yous are arguing today over what he done, did he follow canon law, did he follow some procedure and even drink driving ffs! - can we get back to the reality here.

A man, of 37 years of age, knew two youngsters were raped, multiple times, by Brendan Smyth.
He sat in a room while they were made/brainwashed in to signing oaths of silence.
And he watched as the Church cover it up, moved Brendan Smyth on to do it again.  Smyth was prosecuted and not once during all those years that passed or during Smyth's prosecution did Brady come forward.

What sort of human being does that. He's as bad as the perverts he was protecting. 

[longrunsthefox]

McGuinness has a cheek

Are you wondering about the other methods of silencing people ??

I can't help but think that.

Cheeky enough alright.

Not just that, for how many years did he and his fellow travellers urge people NOT to support the police? NOT to tell them anything about say a murder that might have happened outside their own doorstep

On top of that, his organisation was responsible for a lot worse.  I don't see him or Gerry resigning over murders that the IRA were responsible for since the ceasefire

Worth a seperate thread...but a good attempt at deflecting from Brady

[ardmhachaabu]

I saw somewhere today that Smyth was a member of the Norbertine Order.  If that's true, it means that Brady was utterless powerless as he couldn't have done a thing about Smyth still being a member of the clergy or anything else for that matter.  There are very strict protocols in place between a diocese and any religious order living inside the boundaries of the diocese.  It's also up the the head of any order to decide what punishment a member should receive and if they should be reported to the authorities

I know that some of you will say none of matters in which case I am wasting my time.  Anyway, I have said all I have to say and won't be replying to any more posts

What's the point in re-hashing everything for the millionth time?  You have your views, I have mine and we aren't going to agree