Bishop Regrets Inaction on Child Abuse Claims

By Ian Kirkwood
Newcastle Herald
July 11, 2013

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1633170/bishop-regrets-inaction-on-child-abuse-claims/?cs=391

BISHOP Michael Malone was terrified that priest Jim Fletcher was a paedophile, but he did not make inquiries at the time, the Special Commission of Inquiry sitting in Newcastle heard yesterday.

Nor did he warn the Lochinvar presbytery that allegations had been made against Fletcher, who was subsequently jailed on child sex abuse charges, even though he had added the area to Fletcher's Branxton ministry against the express wishes of Detective Chief Inspector Peter Fox.

Mr Fox had urged the then Catholic Church bishop of the Maitland-Newcastle diocese to stand Fletcher aside from active duty.

Bishop Malone said he told the principal of the Branxton school - although counsel assisting the commission, Julia Lonergan, said this was contested - but he admitted not warning the Lochinvar school of the suspicions about Fletcher.

In a full and at times gruelling day in the witness box, Bishop Malone told of an epiphany a decade ago about the widespread nature of child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, a problem he described in a 2002 statement to police as "endemic".

Questioned by Ms Lonergan, Bishop Malone spoke of a personal journey that took him from doubting the claims against his priests to a personal call in 2008 for then Pope Benedict to apologise to victims of priestly sexual abuse.

But it was Bishop Malone's recounting of his dealings with complaints against Fletcher and his fellow serial paedophiles, Vince Ryan and Denis McAlinden, that held the most interest for the victims and their families in the public galleries yesterday.

They opened a window on a chilling chapter in the Church's history.

On Fletcher, Bishop Malone went through his account of events from 2001 when one of the priest's male victims, AH, accused him of rape.

Initially, Bishop Malone said he believed there was "insufficient evidence" to take action against Fletcher, because of doubts whether AH's allegations were true.

But asked whether he thought Fletcher might be a paedophile after his experience with Ryan and McAlinden, Bishop Malone said: "I was scared stiff about that, yes."

He said there was "smoke" but "little in the way of facts" about Fletcher at the time, but he agreed with Ms Lonergan that he did not seek to speak with either the victim AH or Fletcher.

Bishop Malone said he learnt of AH's complaint to the police on June 4, 2002, and drove that day to the Branxton presbytery to confront Fletcher, hoping to get a confession from him that would "circumvent" the need for a long police inquiry.

He acknowledged that telling Fletcher the complainant's identity had hindered the police investigation, but he denied he was attempting to do so at the time. He agreed it may also have resulted in evidence being destroyed.

He said he hoped he might "trigger a confession" from Fletcher, which he said he would have taken to the police, although he agreed with Ms Lonergan that he had not taken an earlier confession from McAlinden to the authorities.

Bishop Malone told of a second trip to Branxton a fortnight after the first, an unsuccessful attempt to have Fletcher stand aside.

Instead, as the commission heard, he expanded Fletcher's duties because a Second Vatican Council edict made it necessary to rationalise the number of parishes in the diocese and he was short of priests.

"Better to put in a priest accused of paedophilia than no priest?" Ms Lonergan asked.

"That's a bit strong, but I take your point," Bishop Malone replied.

He went on to confirm that he had offered a personal loan to Fletcher to pay for his court costs - to be repaid out of his estate - but he offered the same to AH.

After telling Ms Lonergan that "pastoral care" rather than Canon law was his strong point as a priest, he confirmed he did not seek out AH's family during the Fletcher trial, or send anyone else to do so.

He said he had "a lot of regrets" about his handling of the paedophilia scandal and had hoped the early cases were what Ms Lonergan described as "one-offs".

"But they kept piling up," Bishop Malone said.

The morning session opened with Bishop Malone explaining his failure to tell the police about McAlinden, which he said repeatedly was based on the wishes of two victims, AL and AK, not to give evidence to the police.

Although he thought McAlinden's argument he could control his paedophilia "by prayer" was "quite ridiculous" because "it's a psychological condition", he did not report McAlinden even though he knew he could continue to prey on children. Nor did he try to meet one of the victims, AL, although she lived in the area.

Bishop Malone confirmed the Church had an address for McAlinden in WA in 1995 but did not try to warn the diocese there until about 2003.

Asked by Ms Lonergan if he thought to contact WA police about "an admitted paedophile acting as a priest" in their state, Bishop Malone said: "I did not."

See your ad here

Asked about his child protection obligations, Bishop Malone said his understanding at the time was "fairly innocuous" and he "wasn't aware of the full extent of the issue" and "on a sharp learning curve".

Bishop Malone was shown a 1996 letter to senior Newcastle diocese figure Monsignor Allan Hart, alerting him that police in NSW and Victoria were considering "misprision of felony" charges over concealing offences in relation to child sex offences.

Bishop Malone agreed the letter should have gone to his office, but he did not recall seeing it.

The hearing continues today.