The response of the Church of England Boys' Society and the Anglican Dioceses of Tasmania

194 Pages·2017·1.24 MB·English

1
REPORT OF
CASE STUDY NO. 36
The response of the Church of
England Boys’ Society and the
Anglican Dioceses of Tasmania,
Adelaide, Brisbane and Sydney to
allegations of child sexual abuse
JANUARY 2017
2
ISBN: 978-1-925289-98-5
© Commonwealth of Australia 2017
All material presented in this publication is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
Australia licence (www.creativecommons.org/licenses).
For the avoidance of doubt, this means this licence only applies to material as set out in this document.

The details of the relevant licence conditions are available on the Creative Commons website as is the
full legal code for the CC BY 3.0 AU licence (www.creativecommons.org/licenses).
Contact us
Enquiries regarding the licence and any use of this document are welcome at:
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse
GPO Box 5283
Sydney, NSW, 2001
Email:
3
Report of Case Study No. 36
The response of the Church of England Boys’ Society and
the Anglican Dioceses of Tasmania, Adelaide, Brisbane
and Sydney to allegations of child sexual abuse
January 2017
COMMISSIONERS
Justice Jennifer Coate
Mr Bob Atkinson AO APM
3 .oN ydutS esaC fo tropeR 6
4
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au
5
Table of contents
Preface 4
Executve Summary 8
1 The Anglican Church and the Church of England Boys’ Society 31
1.1 The Anglican Church 31
1.2 The Church of England Boys’ Society 33
2 Diocese of Tasmania 36
2.1 Louis Daniels and Garth Hawkins 36
2.2 Survivors of sexual abuse by Daniels and Hawkins 38
2.3 Response of the Diocese of Tasmania to sexual abuse by Daniels 49
2.4 Response of the Diocese of Tasmania to sexual abuse by Hawkins 75
2.5 Scope of redress provided by the diocese 79
3 Diocese of Adelaide 83
3.1 Mr Robert Brandenburg 83
3.2 Survivors of sexual abuse by Mr Brandenburg 84
3.3 Response of the Diocese of Adelaide to sexual abuse by Mr Brandenburg 86
3.4 Scope of redress provided by the diocese 105
4 Diocese of Brisbane 107
4.1 John Elliot 107
4.2 Survivors of sexual abuse by Elliot 109
4.3 Response of the Diocese of Brisbane to sexual abuse by Elliot 110
4.4 Scope of redress provided by the diocese 123
5 Diocese of Sydney 125
5.1 Simon Jacobs 126
5.2 Survivors of sexual abuse by Jacobs 126
5.3 Response of the Diocese of Sydney to sexual abuse by Jacobs 129
5.4 Scope of redress provided by the diocese 133
6 The insttutonal response of CEBS to sexual ofending within CEBS 135
6.1 The CEBS Natonal Council revokes natonal CEBS awards 135
6.2 The CEBS Natonal Council decides not to make an apology 135
6.3 Lack of CEBS monitoring and disciplinary policies 136
3 .oN ydutS esaC fo tropeR 6
7 Links between perpetrators and the culture of CEBS 137
7.1 Relatonships between perpetrators 137
7.2 Survivors’ evidence of being shared by perpetrators 140
7.3 The culture within CEBS 141
7.4 Responses of dioceses and General Synod to ofending within CEBS broadly 143
8 Systemic Issues 147
APPENDIX A: Terms of Reference 148
APPENDIX B: Public Hearing 155
Endnotes 161

Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au
4
Preface
The Royal Commission
The Leters Patent provided to the Royal Commission require that it ‘inquire into insttutonal
responses to allegatons and incidents of child sexual abuse and related maters’.
In carrying out this task, we are directed to focus on systemic issues but be informed by an
understanding of individual cases. The Royal Commission must make fndings and recommendatons
to beter protect children against sexual abuse and alleviate the impact of abuse on children when
it occurs.
For a copy of the Leters Patent, see Appendix A.
Public hearings
A Royal Commission commonly does its work through public hearings. A public hearing follows
intensive investgaton, research and preparaton by Royal Commission staf and Counsel Assistng
the Royal Commission. Although it may only occupy a limited number of days of hearing tme, the
preparatory work required by Royal Commission staf and by partes with an interest in the public
hearing can be very signifcant.
The Royal Commission is aware that sexual abuse of children has occurred in many insttutons,
all of which could be investgated in a public hearing. However, if the Royal Commission were to
atempt that task, a great many resources would need to be applied over an indeterminate, but
lengthy, period of tme. For this reason the Commissioners have accepted criteria by which Senior
Counsel Assistng will identfy appropriate maters for a public hearing and bring them forward as
individual ‘case studies’.
The decision to conduct a case study will be informed by whether or not the hearing will advance
an understanding of systemic issues and provide an opportunity to learn from previous mistakes, so
that any fndings and recommendatons for future change which the Royal Commission makes will
have a secure foundaton. In some cases the relevance of the lessons to be learned will be confned
to the insttuton the subject of the hearing. In other cases they will have relevance to many similar
insttutons in diferent parts of Australia.
Public hearings will also be held to assist in understanding the extent of abuse which may have
occurred in partcular insttutons or types of insttutons. This will enable the Royal Commission
to understand the way in which various insttutons were managed and how they responded to
allegatons of child sexual abuse. Where our investgatons identfy a signifcant concentraton of
abuse in one insttuton, it is likely that the mater will be brought forward to a public hearing.
3 .oN ydutS esaC fo tropeR 6
5
Public hearings will also be held to tell the story of some individuals which will assist in a public
understanding of the nature of sexual abuse, the circumstances in which it may occur and, most
importantly, the devastatng impact which it can have on some people’s lives.
A detailed explanaton of the rules and conduct of public hearings is available in the Practce Notes
published on the Royal Commission’s website at:
www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au
Public hearings are streamed live over the internet.
In reaching fndings, the Royal Commission will apply the civil standard of proof which requires
its ‘reasonable satsfacton’ as to the partcular fact in queston in accordance with the principles
discussed by Dixon J in Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336:
it is enough that the afrmatve of an allegaton is made out to the reasonable satsfacton
of the tribunal. But reasonable satsfacton is not a state of mind that is atained or
established independently of the nature and consequence of the fact or facts to be proved.
The seriousness of an allegaton made, the inherent unlikelihood of an occurrence of a
given descripton, or the gravity of the consequences fowing from a partcular fnding are
consideratons which must afect the answer to the queston whether the issue has been
proved to the reasonable satsfacton of the tribunal...the nature of the issue necessarily
afects the process by which reasonable satsfacton is atained.
In other words, the more serious the allegaton, the higher the degree of probability that is required
before the Royal Commission can be reasonably satsfed as to the truth of that allegaton.
Private sessions
When the Royal Commission was appointed, it was apparent to the Australian Government that
many people (possibly thousands) would wish to tell us about their personal history of child sexual
abuse in an insttutonal setng. As a result, the Commonwealth Parliament amended the Royal
Commissions Act 1902 to create a process called a ‘private session’.
A private session is conducted by one or two Commissioners and is an opportunity for a person to
tell their story of abuse in a protected and supportve environment. As at 6 January 2017, the Royal
Commission has held 6,349 private sessions and more than 2,166 people were waitng to atend
one. Many accounts from these sessions will be recounted in later Royal Commission reports in a
de-identfed form.
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au
6
Research program
The Royal Commission also has an extensive research program. Apart from the informaton we
gain in public hearings and private sessions, the program will draw on research by consultants
and the original work of our own staf. Signifcant issues will be considered in issues papers and
discussed at roundtables.
3 .oN ydutS esaC fo tropeR 6
7
This case study
In Case Study 36, the Royal Commission into Insttutonal Responses to Child Sexual Abuse inquired
into the response of the Church of England Boys’ Society and the Anglican Dioceses of Tasmania,
Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane to allegatons of child sexual abuse.
The public hearing was held in Hobart, Tasmania, between 27 January and 5 February 2016.
The scope and purpose of the hearing was to inquire into:
a. The experiences of survivors of child sexual abuse by lay people and/or clergy involved in or
associated with the Church of England Boys’ Society (CEBS).
b. The responses of CEBS and the Anglican Dioceses of Tasmania, Adelaide, Sydney and
Brisbane to allegatons of child sexual abuse made against lay people and/or clergy involved
in or associated with CEBS, including Louis Daniels, Garth Hawkins, Robert Brandenburg,
Simon Jacobs and John Elliot.
c. The systems, policies and procedures in place within CEBS and the Anglican Dioceses of
Tasmania, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane in relaton to:
i. youth camps and actvites
ii. raising and responding to concerns and complaints about child sexual abuse.
d. Any related maters.
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au