Deny, dispute, defend

Catholic Church's long history of abuse by priests ... Cover-up ... Parliamentary investigation ... The Three Ds ... Running the rabbit ... The whitewash of "independent" investigations ... Vic Police uncover "shocking" figures ... Barry Lane files 

Numerous old lawyers calling the shots

FIRST we had Rupert and co on phone hacking; then Abbott and his claquer, Alan Jones, on misogyny directed at the PM; and now it's the Catholic Church (Victorian chapter) with decades of child abuse by priests and other worthy clerical types.

The Age reported Police Deputy Commissioner Graham Ashton's evidence to the Victorian parliamentary committee inquiring into hundreds of allegations of abuse: 

"Police had statistics for sexual offences by clergy and church workers since January 1956, uncovering 'shocking' figures: 2110 offences against 519 victims, overwhelmingly perpetrated by Catholic priests and mostly against boys aged 11 or 12. But in all that time the church had not reported a single crime to police.

Savaging the church's Melbourne Response protocol for dealing with complaints, Mr Ashton said: 'If a stranger were to enter a church and rape a child it would be immediately reported to police. But if the stranger were a member of the clergy, their special process would be wrapped around him. What is different about the clergy? It is the reputation of the church that creates the difference'."

He said the Melbourne Response was ''based on a flawed notion of independence'', with independent commissioner Peter O'Callaghan QC appointed and paid for by the church.

In another article, Ashton is reported to have told the committee: 

"The Catholic Church systematically hindered police, alerting offenders that they were being investigated, destroying evidence, hiding documents from police with search warrants, seeking injunctions against police, moving offenders, discouraging victims."  

The church's response, no doubt crafted by its lawyers Stonewall, Obfuscate & Delay, was delivered by its local mouthpiece, Archbishop Denis Hart who came to O'Callaghan's defence, saying that for the past 16 years the church had been ''honest and open'' in co-operating with police.

''Any suggestion of a lack of independence of the independent commissioners is a very serious attack on the professional integrity and competence of senior members of the Victorian bar. I reject any such suggestion.'' 

And it's not the first time that O'Callaghan QC in his role as "independent commissioner" investigating complaints of sexual abuse on behalf of the Catholic Church has come in for criticism in handling complaints.

It was reported in August and December 2009 that O'Callaghan had, to use the expression familiar to most lawyers, "run the rabbit" to priests he was investigating when he became aware that police had opened investigations into those priests, but had yet to interview them. 

It's been apparent to your correspondent for some time that one of the problems with the church's "Melbourne Response", and any other whitewash called in aid, is that it has had far too many old-time lawyers both within and outside the organisation calling the shots. 

In such pressing circumstances, all those litigators can do for a client is rely on one or all of the 3Ds: deny the undeniable, dispute the indisputable and defend the indefensible and, as a last resort, if all else fails, try offering a few bob to complainants accompanied by a deed of release to buy their silence.

If the Church still wants to rely on a legal strategy for dealing with complaints of sexual abuse may I suggest that they retain new lawyers called Confess & Avoid, ditch the "Melbourne Response" and sign-up to the model litigant guidelines. 

If senior clerical members of the church continue with the current strategy they might find themselves on the receiving end of a conviction and jail time - viz. Monsignor William Lynn of the Philadelphia Diocese in US. 

I don't know about charges of child endangerment here, but I can imagine that misconduct by members of the Salesians of Don Bosco, including the order's Australian head at the time, Father Julian Fox, investigated by Sydney University law prof Patrick Parkinson, might give rise to a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.