Boards.ie wins battle with Brady

Winty

After our very successful debate on Monday about whether Sean Brady committed a crime, he has come out with a sycophantic and weak apology but has not yet offered to resign.


203 people so far ( 97% ) want Brady punished.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055855125

So today’s vote is a call on Mr. Dooley to resign.

The next subject must be Maurice Dooley insisted yesterday he would not report child sex abuse to Gardai if a pedophile priest confided his crimes to him.

This is not a forum to express anger against the RCC or Cannon Law; it’s simply whether Maurice should be forced out.

I would like to hear from anyone who knows him or has heard him speak from the alter.

The press does fellow After Hours so our response will be mirrored in the press.

Outrage

Fr Brady broke no law.

The Church received a serious complaint and Fr Brady was tasked to find the facts and make a report to his Bishop.

Big difference between boards.ie populism (as populated by a bunch of church-hating liberals - 35% of whom have been arrested) and establishing guilt/innocence in a court of law.

phasers

I'm the Pope, resign Brady!

Hagar

We had a Pope Benny here but he got site banned, maybe an Admin could lift the ban and get him to order Brady to resign?

General Zod

Outrage wrote: »

Fr Brady broke no law.

The Church received a serious complaint and Fr Brady was tasked to find the facts and make a report to his Bishop.

Big difference between boards.ie populism (as populated by a bunch of liberals - 35% of whom have been arrested) and a court of law.

actually he did. there was a statute in Irish law up until 1977 concerning the failure to report a crime.

Even if that wasn't there, he took part in a procedure to silence victims of child abuse.

Mahatma coat

Phasers wrote:

I'm the Pope, resign Brady!

^^^^^^^the Phoney Pope can be recognised by his High top sneakers and Extremley foul mouth

anyway I'll defer to the SpacePopes Crocodilian Wisdom on this one and have him Eat the B@stards

Winty

General Zod wrote: »

actually he did. there was a statute in Irish law up until 1977 concerning the failure to report a crime.

Even if that wasn't there, he took part in a procedure to silence victims of child abuse.

Nice one General

Outrage will love that

dilallio

Good man Winty - Keep the pressure on now you are on a roll

Winty

dilallio wrote: »

Good man Winty - Keep the pressure on now you are on a roll

Winty for TD

MaybeLogic

Winty wrote: »

The press does fellow After Hours so our responses will be mirrored in the press.

Heaven help us.

General Zod

misprison of felony

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misprision_of_felony

phasers

Mahatma coat wrote: »

^^^^^^^the Phoney Pope can be recognised by his High top sneakers and Extremley foul mouth

How dare you, I am the pope.

Here's a picture of me in my pope outfit

MaybeLogic

General Zod wrote: »

misprison of felony

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misprision_of_felony

I believe Outrage is correct. The crime of not reporting a crime was removed from the statute books sometime during the noughties.

ilovelamp2000

Trial by Boards.

Excellent. :rolleyes:

Outrage

General Zod wrote: »

actually he did. there was a statute in Irish law up until 1977 concerning the failure to report a crime.

Even if that wasn't there, he took part in a procedure to silence victims of child abuse.

Yawn. I suggest you read the writings of a rational man: http://www.mcguirk.eu/?p=863

Hagar

MaybeLogic wrote: »

I believe Outrage is correct. The crime of not reporting a crime was removed from the statute books sometime during the noughties.

Does anybody else wonder why it was removed or is it just me?

Outrage

69 wrote: »

Does anybody else wonder why it was removed or is it just me?

Probably some Catholic conspiracy involving Opus Dei/the Knights of Columbanus/etc...

General Zod

MaybeLogic wrote: »

I believe Outrage is correct. The crime of not reporting a crime was removed from the statute books sometime during the noughties.

It was removed in 1977, Brady aided the cover-up in 1975. Was still in law when he did not report the abuse of two children to the police.

General Zod

Outrage wrote: »

Yawn. I suggest you read the writings of a rational man: http://www.mcguirk.eu/?p=863

I'll pass on reading your blog, thanks.

Outrage

General Zod wrote: »

It was removed in 1977, Brady aided the cover-up in 1975. Was still in law when he did not report the abuse of two children to the police.

Clutching at straws there. Some journo hack writes about some obscure law and tries to skew an article so as to nail him on some technicality, and next thing this elusive law (that nobody seems to be able to quote) is being bandied about all over the internet. I'm sure the DPP is really interested.

Jip

Just when I thought this twat couldn't annoy me any further after hearing him on several radio stations last week, he pulled it out of the bag with the story in todays Independent
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/monsignor-would-not-report-paedophile-to-gardai-2102871.html

He was asked would he report a paedophile and he said he wouldn't go to the police or social services about it, it's not his job and he would just ask the person to stop abusing children.

Words can't describe what I feel about that man.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Who?

Outrage

Jip wrote: »

Just when I thought this twat couldn't annoy me any further after hearing him on several radio stations last week, he pulled it out of the bag with the story in todays Independent
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/monsignor-would-not-report-paedophile-to-gardai-2102871.html

He was asked would he report a paedophile and he said he wouldn't go to the police or social services about it, it's not his job and he would just ask the person to stop abusing children.

Words can't describe what I feel about that man.

Glad you have such great 20/20 hindsight. I suppose you can see in the dark too? Like these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesh_fly

Jip

Outrage, you're a fool. This has nothing to do with hindsight, are you trying to say it was acceptable not to report such a thing if you thought the fu(ker involved wouldn't do it in the future ?

Outrage

Jip wrote: »

Outrage, you're a fool.

Reported.

Jip

You are hilariously ironic

Now if only Brady and Dooley were as quick to report child abuse, an extremely serious crime, as quick as you are to report someone calling you a food, something the majority here would probably agree with.

Do you not see the stupidity of your argument in siding for someone who didn't report child abuse but go crying to mods because you've been called a fool ? Is there some obscure law that obliges you to do so as the main argument from that idiot Dooley is that there was none obliging anyone to report child abuse and rape ?

Outrage

Jip wrote: »

Do you not see the stupidity of your argument in siding for someone who didn't report child abuse but go crying to mods because you've been called a fool ? Is there some obscure law that obliges you to do so as the main argument from that idiot Dooley is that there was none obliging anyone to report child abuse and rape ?

Were you there in 1975? Do you know for definite that the child/child's family even wanted the local Garda to know what happened? Do you know for definite that the child/child's family even wanted to stand in a public court? You're very smug and sure of yourself for someone who knows nothing apart from biased scraps that you've obviously picked up in the popular press (who incidentally, are in the business of selling advertising - paedophile stories are always popular with the readers).

Cardinal Brady, Archbishop Martin, et al. are on the coal face dealing with abuse victims. You crib and moan from the sidelines and snipe in and out like the coward that you are.

Hagar

Jip wrote: »

You are hilariously ironic

Now if only Brady and Dooley were as quick to report child abuse, an extremely serious crime, as quick as you are to report someone calling you a food, something the majority here would probably agree with.

Do you not see the stupidity of your argument in siding for someone who didn't report child abuse but go crying to mods because you've been called a fool ? Is there some obscure law that obliges you to do so as the main argument from that idiot Dooley is that there was none obliging anyone to report child abuse and rape ?

Excellent point well made. On that basis no ban for Jip please mods.

Vegeta

This is hilarious

Brady himself feels he didn't act correctly in the situation but church sheeple still feel the need to defend him

Cracks me up, thanks for the laughs folks

Vegeta

Outrage wrote: »

like the coward that you are.

Reported

How Christian of you to turn the other cheek

super_furry

A wildman's rantings against the 'sex abuse lobby'?

Forgive me if I don't bookmark that blog.

Jip

It is indeed hilarious, but scarily so when you see the attitude of people like Outrage, it's frightening that some people feel the need to defend them, it's not media hysteria, it's fact as reported by Brady himself, he admitted he knew about it and said nothing.

General Zod

Outrage wrote: »

Clutching at straws there. Some journo hack writes about some obscure law and tries to skew an article so as to nail him on some technicality, and next thing this elusive law (that nobody seems to be able to quote) is being bandied about all over the internet. I'm sure the DPP is really interested.

Actually it was Colm O'Gorman raising it in his Today FM interview where I heard of it first.

Let's face facts. Brady aided an investigation which ensured that no scandal came to the church ahead of seeing a paedophile brought to justice.

old_aussie

Winty wrote: »

After our very successful debate on Monday.

So, boards .ie had a mass debate did they.

Did anyone get off on this?

Vigilantes all.

Outrage

General Zod wrote: »

Actually it was Colm O'Gorman raising it in his Today FM interview where I heard of it first.

Let's face facts. Brady aided an investigation which ensured that no scandal came to the church ahead of seeing a paedophile brought to justice.

Like I said: I'm sure the DPP is *really* interested in making a case against the Primate of All Ireland at the time, Cardinal Conway and Uachtarain na hEireann at the time, Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh. (both of whom are dead). Maybe pissing on their graves might satisfy you?

Winty

old_aussie wrote: »

So, boards .ie had a mass debate did they.

Did anyone get off on this?

Vigilantes all.

Thanks for the input Aussie, very helpful

Run_to_da_hills

Vegeta wrote: »

Reported

How Christian of you to turn the other cheek

There is no such thing as a Roman Catholic Christian, its a contradiction in terms.

Winty

To stay with the subject, does anyone have any personal connection with Monsignor Dooley? Do you know him or have you been to a Mass or service with him on the alter?

What is he like, he comes across as a cruel man in the press

Vegeta

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

There is no such thing as a Roman Catholic Christian, its a contradiction in terms.

I purposefully didn't make the assumption that they were Roman Catholic, unlike you

General Zod

Outrage wrote: »

Like I said: I'm sure the DPP is *really* interested in making a case against the Primate of All Ireland at the time, Cardinal Conway and Uachtarain na hEireann at the time, Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh. (both of whom are dead). Maybe pissing on their graves might satisfy you?

why would I want to miturate on a grave?

You're spinning so fast I should attach my washing and get it dried for free.

Daly helped cover for a paedophile. Facts are facts.

Outrage

I'm sure you hold everyone else in society to the same level of accountability? You'd better start lobbying your local TD to spend 50% of GDP on new prisons for every town in Ireland for any officer/executive/team leader/manager who was in any way connected with any organisation that fiddled children. While you're in his office, tell him he'll need to go to prison too. Sure once we've cut this cancer from society, we will be sinless and nothing bad will ever happen again... Fact.

Hagar

So what's your plan? Do nothing?

General Zod

Outrage wrote: »

I'm sure you hold everyone else in society to the same level of accountability? You'd better start lobbying your local TD to spend 50% of GDP on new prisons for every town in Ireland for any officer/executive/team leader/manager who was in any way connected with any organisation that fiddled children. While you're in his office, tell him he'll need to go to prison too. Sure once we've cut this cancer from society, we will be sinless and nothing bad will ever happen again... Fact.

I counterracted the claim you made that Brady broke no law, when in fact he did.

Now, keep up your argumentum ad absurdum all you want, but the fact remains Brady aided in the silencing of two children abused by Smyth. He swore them to an oath of secrecy, and rather than going to the police, he stuck to canon law (which exists to protect the church and nothing else).

It's not up to me to decide wether Brady still has a legal case to answer, but he still has his conscious to answer to.

Winty

69 wrote: »

So what's your plan? Do nothing?

Very simple but yet very powerful statment, answer please Outrage what is your master plan

Vegeta

Outrage wrote: »

I'm sure you hold everyone else in society to the same level of accountability? You'd better start lobbying your local TD to spend 50% of GDP on new prisons for every town in Ireland for any officer/executive/team leader/manager who was in any way connected with any organisation that fiddled children. While you're in his office, tell him he'll need to go to prison too. Sure once we've cut this cancer from society, we will be sinless and nothing bad will ever happen again... Fact.

Entertaining stuff, keep it coming.

Thursday cant pass quickly enough but with gems like this the day will go that bit quicker

MaybeLogic

Winty wrote: »

Very simple but yet very powerful statment, answer please Outrage what is your master plan

With all due respect, doing nothing is about one step removed from conducting a poll on After Hours. It's hardly a masterplan.

Outrage

General Zod wrote: »

It's not up to me to decide wether Brady still has a legal case to answer, but he still has his conscious to answer to.

I have no doubt that the man sleeps soundly at night (not just because he puts in incredible hours for a man of 71). If he had even the most minor thing on his conscience, I have no doubt that he'd act to cleanse his soul as a matter of priority. Holding such a responsible position pretty much requires that you are constantly in a state of grace. I'm not saying he's perfect, but he is quite obviously highly regarded by both the Church and those in his diocese and I have no doubt that the man continually strives for perfection in everything he does.

Winty

Vegeta wrote: »

Entertaining stuff, keep it coming.

Thursday cant pass quickly enough but with gems like this the day will go that bit quicker

Outrage should by right be banned but I want him to stay for his comedy value alone

Winty

Outrage wrote: »

Holding such a responsible position requires that you are constantly in a state of grace.

O Matron, I am in a state of grace, can I have a bed bath

Cheap Thrills!

This is some funny sh!t !

Hagar

MaybeLogic wrote: »

With all due respect, doing nothing is about one step removed from conducting a poll on After Hours. It's hardly a masterplan.

Not exactly true. There is a very good chance the media are picking up on this and that it will become an indicator of public opinion which the politicians will find hard to ignore and hopefully will force them to act in the face of quantifiable public outrage.