Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne

172 Pages·2015·4.04 MB·English

ROYAL COMMISSION INTO INSTITUTIONAL
RESPONSES TO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

Public Hearing - Case Study 35
(Day C130)

County Court of Victoria
250 William Street, Melbourne, VIC

On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 10am

Before
The Presiding Member: Justice Peter McClellan AM (Chair)
Commissioner: Justice Jennifer Ann Coate
Mr Andrew Murray

Counsel Assisting: Ms Gail Furness SC Mr
Stephen Free
.01/12/2015 (C130) C13698
Transcript produced by DTI
1 MS FURNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
2
3 <ARCHBISHOP DENIS JAMES HART, on former oath: [10.05am]
4
5 <EXAMINATION BY MS FURNESS CONTINUING:
6
7 MS FURNESS: Q. Archbishop, do you still have your
8 statement with you. I do, yes.
9
10 Q. Yesterday I was asking you questions about the 1989
11 set of grievances, remember those questions, that were sent
12 by concerned staff to --
13 A. Yes, yes, I remember that, yes.
14
15 Q. If you could continue down that page on your statement
16 to subparagraph (h), page 20, paragraph 136.
17 A. Thank you, yes, I have it.
18
19 Q. You refer there to further complaints in 1991, and you
20 set out those complaints and they include putting
21 children's heads on his knee, hitting an altar boy and
22 observing boys going through showers at camp and
23 misappropriating money.
24
25 Then, over the page, you report a further complaint,
26 this time in 1993, that Searson had started a fire and
27 encouraged children to throw material on the fire.
28
29 You go on, in paragraph 137 to say that most of the
30 complaints were known to the CEO, the Vicar-General or the
31 Archbishop.
32
33 In circumstances where the Auxiliary Bishop was
34 responsible for this area, you would expect also, wouldn't
35 you, that those complaints would have come to his attention
36 one way or another?
37 A. I don't have any knowledge. One would expect that, if
38 anything was going on, the Auxiliary Bishop would have
39 had - would have been brought up to speed with it, but
40 that's only a conjecture that I make.
41
42 Q. Well, it's more than conjecture, isn't it, it's based
43 on your understanding and practice that an Auxiliary Bishop
44 in a region --
45 A. Yes, I would have understood that, yes.
46
47 Q. That he would know, as a matter of your practice and
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13699 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 experience, given the nature of these complaints, and that
2 they were known to the Vicar-General and Archbishop?
3 A. Well, that would certainly have happened - certainly
4 happen in my time.
5
6 Q. You then refer to a further serious incident in 1993,
7 when it was alleged that Searson had held a knife to a
8 girl's chest; do you see that?
9 A. That's right.
10
11 Q. And again, you note that the documents record that the
12 Vicar-General, Archbishop and the Curia were aware of the
13 matter; you see that in your paragraph?
14 A. That's right, yes.
15
16 Q. Therefore, each member of the Curia would have
17 knowledge of that incident if indeed the Curia --
18 A. That was a very significant incident and I would have
19 imagined they would have been aware of it.
20
21 Q. I beg your pardon?
22 A. I would imagine they would have been aware of it.
23
24 Q. Well, you don't need to imagine if the documents
25 record that the Curia knew, do you?
26 A. Yes.
27
28 Q. Advice was then sought from a firm of solicitors after
29 the knife incident. Perhaps if we can have tab 113 of the
30 Searson bundle on the screen; that's the document you
31 referred to in your third line, Archbishop, of
32 paragraph 139.
33 A. That is correct.
34
35 Q. Perhaps if we can turn to the last page, which is
36 page 3. You understand that the various matters recorded
37 in the files have been considered by the lawyers.
38 A. Correct.
39
40 Q. Then, in the final paragraph, it begins:
41
42 None of these comments ... disclose any
43 evidence which would justify a charge ...
44 in relation to sexual offences.
45
46 As you would understand from having read this
47 document, the advice that was sought was in relation to
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13700 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 criminal charges?
2 A. That is correct.
3
4 Q. And the evidence is that this letter of advice
5 concerns criminal charges?
6 A. Correct.
7
8 Q. Whether or not a criminal charge could or couldn't be
9 made against Father Searson is not something that would be
10 determinative of any action the church could take?
11 A. No, it would not.
12
13 Q. A quite different standard of proof, quite different
14 rules and procedures?
15 A. That would be right.
16
17 Q. And maybe, if there was a conviction, the church could
18 take action following the conviction, but by no means was a
19 conviction or even a charge necessary for the church to
20 take action?
21 A. You've put that correctly, yes.
22
23 Q. Moving down that paragraph, the second sentence
24 begins:
25
26 However, the fact that over the years a
27 number of suggestions have been made from a
28 number of different people that there is
29 something untoward about Father Searson's
30 behaviour with children is, in my view,
31 sufficient to warrant some investigation of
32 his conduct in view of his position of
33 responsibility to the children in his
34 parish.
35
36 A. That is correct.
37
38 Q. You understand what the lawyers are advising in this
39 case is an investigation?
40 A. Yes.
41
42 Q. Into Searson's conduct in respect of sexual matters?
43 A. Yes.
44
45 Q. That never happened, did it?
46 A. No.
47
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13701 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 Q. But there's no doubt that that was what was being
2 suggested?
3 A. Exactly.
4
5 Q. You refer, at paragraph 141, to a canonical warning
6 that was made in respect of Searson; do you see that at
7 paragraph 141?
8 A. I see that, yes.
9
10 Q. You understand, I think, that the canonical warning
11 was in respect of relatively minor conduct, given the
12 nature of the complaints against him?
13 A. I would have understood that, yes.
14
15 Q. In June 1994, it came to the attention of the Curia
16 another matter in respect of Father Searson, and that's at
17 tab 131 of the Searson bundle.
18
19 You see, this is the minutes of a Curia meeting on
20 3 June 1994?
21 A. Correct.
22
23 Q. There's reference, firstly, at topic 16 on page 3, see
24 under the heading, "Special Issues - meeting with Corrs"?
25 A. Yes.
26
27 Q. In those days "special issues", as you understand it,
28 was a euphemistic term to deal with child sexual abuse
29 allegations against the clergy?
30 A. That is correct.
31
32 Q. The reference there is that the recommendation from
33 the lawyers is:
34
35 an appropriate person review all clergy
36 files, and that the handling of special
37 issues be the responsibility of a senior
38 priest.
39
40 This is 1994, and that's before you had any specific
41 responsibility in this area, isn't it?
42 A. That is correct, yes.
43
44 Q. You weren't attending the Curia at this time?
45 A. No.
46
47 Q. Did it come to your attention, either when you began
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13702 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 as Vicar-General or before, that this happened?
2 A. I certainly have some memory - if I may say two
3 things: I certainly have some memory of a conduct document
4 sent out to all the clergy in 1995. In my preparation for
5 this appearance, I did find interim guidelines as to how
6 accusations of sexual abuse should be dealt with.
7
8 Q. You note at the end of that item:
9
10 It was agreed that Fathers Fleming and
11 Waters should review the ... files.
12
13 A. Yes.
14
15 Q. Who were Fathers Fleming and Waters in 1994?
16 A. Father Fleming was the former rector of Newman College
17 at the University of Melbourne, a Jesuit. When he ceased
18 that appointment, he came as personal assistant to
19 Archbishop Little, and he brought his wide experience and
20 so on.
21
22 Father Ian Waters was the judicial vicar of the
23 Regional Tribunal, and he had commenced working as
24 assistant to Monsignor Cudmore. Father Waters is a
25 canonist.
26
27 Q. Did you see the outcome of a review of clergy files
28 when you began?
29 A. No.
30
31 Q. Would you expect to have seen it, had it occurred,
32 given your role as Vicar-General a couple of years later?
33 A. I would have expected that there would have been some
34 record passed on, but there wasn't, and I haven't seen any
35 record subsequently.
36
37 Q. Turning over the page on these minutes to item 8, this
38 is a reference to Father Searson having sought permission
39 to conduct an exorcism. Do you see that?
40 A. Yes.
41
42 Q. Is that something that was common in the Archdiocese?
43 A. Normally exorcism is conferred for a person who is
44 burdened or under some spiritual influence, evil spiritual
45 influence; it's normally only given rarely and at the
46 direction of the Diocesan Bishop.
47
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13703 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 Q. And it's given at the direction of the Diocesan Bishop
2 for the priest seeking it to carry it out in respect of the
3 person they wish to be exorcised?
4 A. I've always had the practice of having someone who has
5 knowledge of psychology and knowledge of - deep spiritual
6 knowledge and holiness; I've always chosen a priest that
7 I've appointed, rather than just a particular priest asking
8 might they do it.
9
10 Q. At the time that Searson's conduct was coming to the
11 attention of the Archdiocese, there were indeed a number of
12 canonical steps that could have been taken in respect of
13 his conduct, weren't there?
14 A. Yes.
15
16 Q. One of them was in relation to canon 1740, which you
17 will recall provides for the removal of any pastor when his
18 ministry becomes harmful or ineffective --
19 A. Yes, I mentioned that yesterday, I think, without
20 naming the canon.
21
22 Q. Perhaps if I can read it in full:
23
24 The removal of any pastor when his ministry
25 becomes harmful or ineffective for any
26 cause even with no grave negligence and
27 there is no need to find fault.
28
29 Those circumstances, that is, a harmful or ineffective
30 ministry, clearly applied to Searson?
31 A. Yes.
32
33 Q. And it applied to him, no doubt, in 1994?
34 A. Yes.
35
36 Q. But also, when the first serious complaints were
37 coming through about his conduct with children?
38 A. Yes.
39
40 Q. Indeed, financial mismanagement may be sufficient to
41 give rise to the exercise of the rights under that canon?
42 A. Correct.
43
44 Q. That canon was never used in respect of Father
45 Searson; that's right?
46 A. Not that I know of.
47
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13704 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 Q. If it were to be used, what would be the process that
2 would be followed?
3 A. Well, normally the Bishop would document what is - you
4 know, what is the accusation or what is the problem. He'd
5 then look at the effect on people. Because, this is all
6 geared to the care of souls, and that canon means that the
7 care of souls is being impeded, and therefore something has
8 to be done for the good of people.
9
10 The Bishop would then document what the problem is,
11 what the effect on people is. He's required to consult two
12 priests from a stable group - I have a stable group of six
13 selected from the Council of Priests, and he has to consult
14 two of them, and they have to read the Acts and they should
15 normally meet with the Bishop to present their
16 observations, and then he would issue, first, a notice of
17 intent, giving a certain number of days to reply, and then
18 after that he would issue his decree.
19
20 Q. Yesterday, you referred to the list of grievances and
21 particularly those in relation to children; you remember
22 that?
23 A. I do.
24
25 Q. It's the case, isn't it, that just that list alone in
26 relation to children could give rise to canon 1740?
27 A. I would have thought so.
28
29 Q. Those alone would satisfy canon 1740, wouldn't they?
30 A. Yes.
31
32 Q. There's also canon 1741, which provides examples in
33 respect of the removal of a priest, and they include:
34
35 Loss of good reputation among upright and
36 responsible parishioners or an aversion to
37 the pastor which it appears will not cease
38 in brief time.
39
40 Now, that applies in full measure to Searson, doesn't
41 it?
42 A. It does.
43
44 Q. And certainly did so by 1989, if not earlier?
45 A. Oh, yes.
46
47 Q. Can you help us, notwithstanding you weren't there at
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13705 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 the time, why you think, having read all the documents,
2 nothing was taken in that direction with Searson?
3 A. I would have to rever that matter or lay that matter
4 at the feet of the Archbishop; that he seemed to have an
5 aversion to using these procedures of removal; he tried to
6 work by consensus, and of course you wouldn't be getting
7 consensus in that situation and, therefore, nothing that I
8 know of was done and this had a tremendous impact on people
9 and endangered children.
10
11 Q. It's the case, isn't it, that the Curia were aware of,
12 according to your review of the documents, at least some of
13 the complaints that had been raised by the Catholic
14 Education Office through the Vicar-General and the
15 Archbishop?
16 A. From reading the documentation, that's very clear.
17
18 Q. It would be within the role of the Curia - in fact,
19 one might say a necessary part of the job of the Curia - to
20 raise such matters?
21 A. I would have thought so.
22
23 Q. You would expect, from your experience, that the use
24 or availability of these canons would be a matter of
25 discussion in the Curia?
26 A. I certainly would have thought so.
27
28 Q. There would be, among the Curia, those trained in
29 canon law?
30 A. At that stage Bishop O'Connell was an Auxiliary Bishop
31 and he had a doctorate in canon law.
32
33 Q. Even if there was no person trained in canon law, the
34 availability of this measure, I suggest, would have been
35 known to those among the Curia, at least some of them?
36 A. Well, I certainly would have thought so. I mean, when
37 problems arise - and I won't go on about this - but when
38 problems arise, you certainly look to see what are the
39 options that can be done for the good of people and for the
40 good of - not only for the good of people at large, but
41 also often for the welfare of a person themselves who can't
42 see how their way of acting is harmful.
43
44 Q. So a lack of insight?
45 A. Yes.
46
47 Q. In paragraph 148 of your statement, if I can take you
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13706 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI
1 to that, you refer there to "until that time", that is,
2 when you took over as Vicar-General, I understand?
3 A. That's right.
4
5 Q. You:
6
7 ... had no knowledge of the problems with
8 Searson or the many complaints ...
9
10 You say there that you had been appointed
11 Vicar-General on 1 September 1996 and Archbishop Pell was
12 Archbishop some two and a half months before you became
13 Vicar-General.
14 A. Yes.
15
16 Q. He in fact appointed you as his Vicar-General, didn't
17 he?
18 A. He did.
19
20 Q. And that was a promotion, I take it, for you at the
21 time?
22 A. Well, I think that's the way it's regarded; it's a way
23 of serving the church and trying to lead as I could and
24 should.
25
26 Q. Well, you regarded it as such too, I suspect?
27 A. Yes.
28
29 Q. You say that he briefed you in broad terms concerning
30 the problems of sexual abuse by clergy. Can you help us
31 with that briefing?
32 A. He would have - by that time, of course, a number of
33 things would have been in the newspapers. He briefed me,
34 indicating that something needed to be done about this
35 problem, again in general terms, and that he was
36 contemplating and engaged in discussions to set up a system
37 which would deal independently with the investigation of
38 complaints, which would provide counselling and medical
39 help and which would also provide some financial redress.
40 It was in those general terms that what he was thinking of
41 doing because the problem was emerging quite strongly. He
42 didn't take me through a whole lot of cases or anything
43 like that.
44
45 Q. How did he describe the problem to you?
46 A. Well, that some priests were abusing children; I think
47 that's how - it was as simple as that.
.01/12/2015 (C130) 13707 D J HART (Ms Furness)
Transcript produced by DTI