RTÉ apologises over false allegations made against Fr Kevin Reynolds

alex73

http://www.thejournal.ie/rte-forced-to-apologise-over-allegations-made-against-fr-kevin-reynolds-247398-Oct2011/


Hopefully the media with think twice before they publish totally unfounded allegations that destroy the moral of Priests.



RTÉ acknowledges that the material in the programme concerning Fr. Reynolds ought never to have been broadcast.

RTÉ now fully and unreservedly accepts that the allegations made by Prime Time against Fr. Kevin Reynolds are baseless, without any foundation whatever and untrue and that Fr. Reynolds is a priest of the utmost integrity who has had an unblemished 40 year career in the priesthood and who has made a valuable contribution to society in Kenya and Ireland both in education and in ministry.

RTÉ acknowledges the defamation has had a devastating effect on Fr. Kevin Reynolds, his family, his peers, his parishioners in Ahascragh, those in the diocese of Kakamega in Kenya who were aware of the allegations and all those who know him or of him.

RTÉ fully and unreservedly apologises to Fr. Kevin Reynolds for this defamation and deeply regrets the serious consequences suffered by him. He was entirely innocent of the allegations broadcast about him.

n32

heads must roll in rte over this. this is one of the most disgraceful acts of journalism i have ever heard. rte have destroyed this priests life, his reputation and damaged all belonging to him as well. words cant describe how awful this case is. hopefully people recognise this for the travesty it is and have sympathy for the poor man

alex73

n32 wrote: »

heads must roll in rte over this. this is one of the most disgraceful acts of journalism i have ever heard. rte have destroyed this priests life, his reputation and damaged all belonging to him as well. words cant describe how awful this case is. hopefully people recognise this for the travesty it is and have sympathy for the poor man

I hope he sues them to hell. Not for the money but just for the principle of it..

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

n32

alex73 wrote: »

I hope he sues them to hell. Not for the money but just for the principle of it..

for the good of our society he has to sue. rte have a near monopoly on our media and have a huge influence on everybody in the country so the fact that they can blacken a mans good name means that they must face severe consequences. We cant have a situation where a media outlet has the freedom to defame people without consequences

copacetic

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The girl (now a woman) and the child were interviewed in the programme I think and made the claims?

Shocking for the priest that it went so far, once he so strenuosly denied the whole thing and offered a paternity test the broadcast shouldn't have gone ahead until they had the results.

The Quadratic Equation

The lazy and unprofessional dumbed down Irish media strikes again.
Reporting misquotes and opinionated hysteria as facts is now the norm.
I wish they would do some proper undercover and professional investigative journalism on the Irish establishment for a change.
Maybe then we would not be 300 billion in debt.

gimmebroadband

It's high time that RTE's anti-Catholic "Jounalism" be exposed, and It's also likely that what they did to this poor priest is only the tip of the iceberg! I hope RTE get whalloped for all it's worth!

Paparazzo

No doubt Joe Duffy will cover this in tomorrows show :rolleyes:

Manach

Playing devil's advocate only, the national broadcaster has a duty to report on topic issues. It also has a time deadline which is always present in the media which necessitates publishing material before a rival. It might have also felt that under recent changes in Irish Law (defamation act 2009) the right of the public to be informed of the alleged actives took precedence over any lingering doubts.

yosser hughes

n32 wrote: »

heads must roll in rte over this.

Do you think that will happen? Do heads roll in Ireland especially in the state sector? Nothing will happen and if he sues, the taxpayer will pick up the tab and the reporter will continue to get her fat, unjustifiable salary.

seanybiker

Seent his earlier on. Disgraceful what they said about the poor fella.

Keaton

The accusers ought to be brought to justice. If they have made false accusations, they ought now to feel the full force of the law, if that is how it is done in the country in which they reside. I don't know how the legal situation is there. But they should be brought to justice. I've no time for people who make false accusations and walk off, scot-free, into the sunset, their little money-spinning scheme having failed.

Meanwhile, RTE ought to be sued for a grand sum for their actions are unacceptable.

Clare_Culchie

Keaton wrote: »

The accusers ought to be brought to justice. If they have made false accusations, they ought now to feel the full force of the law, if that is how it is done in the country in which they reside. I don't know how the legal situation is there. But they should be brought to justice. I've no time for people who make false accusations and walk off, scot-free, into the sunset, their little money-spinning scheme having failed.

Meanwhile, RTE ought to be sued for a grand sum for their actions are unacceptable.

Who is more culpable, the Kenyan woman who made the initial accusation or the RTE journalist, Aoife Kavanagh, who made this accusation public without not only verifying facts but also rejecting Fr. Reynolds' offer to undergo paternity tests in advance of the air-date of the programme in May? I think, personally, that this is far too serious a matter to remain unpunished. She should be let go from RTE, although that is unlikely to happen. She is full-time on the Morning Ireland team and she is, or has been, linked romantically to Richard Crowley of that parish. She is a daughter of RTE now, they won't let any harm befall their own. Her job is safe, and yet us, the license-payer will carry the can for her unprofessionalism.

Keaton

Clare_Culchie wrote: »

Who is more culpable, the Kenyan woman who made the initial accusation or the RTE journalist, Aoife Kavanagh, who made this accusation public without not only verifying facts but also rejecting Fr. Reynolds' offer to undergo paternity tests in advance of the air-date of the programme in May? I think, personally, that this is far too serious a matter to remain unpunished. She should be let go from RTE, although that is unlikely to happen. She is full-time on the Morning Ireland team and she is, or has been, linked romantically to Richard Crowley of that parish. She is a daughter of RTE now, they won't let any harm befall their own. Her job is safe, and yet us, the license-payer will carry the can for her unprofessionalism.

Of course she should be prosecuted personally, as well as her employer, RTE.

The other two must face the full force of Kenyan law for those who make false accusations. I don't know how culpable they are, but they should be investigated.

ISAW

Manach wrote: »

Playing devil's advocate only, the national broadcaster has a duty to report on topic issues.

Less than a percent of pedophile abusers are Catholic Priests . The only reason it is a "topical issue" is because an anti clerical media myth is being promulgated.

It also has a time deadline which is always present in the media which necessitates publishing material before a rival.

They had plenty of time to get a test done. why should the truth suffer because it is more popular to report a lie on time?

It might have also felt that under recent changes in Irish Law (defamation act 2009) the right of the public to be informed of the alleged actives took precedence over any lingering doubts.

so "report a doubtful lie and don't bother to go through professional objectivity and check the facts when they are freely available with a scientific test" is a legal requirement now?
Clearly it seems sensationalism and an anti clerical agenda is paramount over professional reporting standards.

antiskeptic

Perhaps the most constructive thing this priest (and the folk in this thread) could do .. is forgive his persecutors.

Morgans

Shameful actions from RTE. I dont know how the priest can get his life back. And i hope that RTE are sued heavily for this.

But I hope that RTE and other investigative arms dont trest children's claims any less seriously because of this case and dont stop trying to uncover child abuse.

ISAW

antiskeptic wrote: »

Perhaps the most constructive thing this priest (and the folk in this thread) could do .. is forgive his persecutors.

I'm sure he can. And for penance... let the court award damages.

ISAW

Morgans wrote: »

Shameful actions from RTE. I dont know how the priest can get his life back. And i hope that RTE are sued heavily for this.

But I hope that RTE and other investigative arms dont trest children's claims any less seriously because of this case and dont stop trying to uncover child abuse.

I agree 100% . Particularly if they try to focus on the 99% of non Clerical Child abusers a bit more as well instead of focusing on clerics .

The Black Oil

It's a horrendous thing for anyone to have their character stained this way, something which will probably follow him to the grave.

gimmebroadband wrote: »

It's high time that RTE's anti-Catholic "Jounalism" be exposed, and It's also likely that what they did to this poor priest is only the tip of the iceberg! I hope RTE get whalloped for all it's worth!

What do you mean by 'anti-Catholic'? Seems like if you don't toe the Church's line you're tagged with this label, much like some Americans who are branded as being unAmerican.

ISAW wrote: »

I agree 100% . Particularly if they try to focus on the 99% of non Clerical Child abusers a bit more as well instead of focusing on clerics .

Do we not hear a fair bit about this already? I would have thought there are regular stories/pieces about middle to older aged men being brought before the courts and they often don't have collars...

n32 wrote: »

heads must roll in rte over this.

Fairly unlikely. How often do you see any senior member of RTE getting a good grilling on Prime Time et al? Whilst not perfect, the likes of the BBC come across as more transparent in this respect and their management do sometimes appear on Newsnight or the Today programme. I get the feeling that RTE's own journalist's are even a bit afraid when doing the odd report about the place, whereas the BBC ones don't seem to be under the impression that an axe might fall on their heads if they don't give a positive report.

alex73

antiskeptic wrote: »

Perhaps the most constructive thing this priest (and the folk in this thread) could do .. is forgive his persecutors.

Yes and he probably has forgiven them, His is afterall an honest hardworking priest...


But what needs to be avoided is the media doing this again and putting Priests names in Public domain without any EVIDENCE!!

So the Priest HAS to sue RTE, Otherwise Priest and Relgious will be seen as soft targets for Media.

antiskeptic

alex73 wrote: »

So the Priest HAS to sue RTE, Otherwise Priest and Relgious will be seen as soft targets for Media.

I'll remember that next time I'm considering turning the other cheek. To do so might make me look like a soft target. Sorry Jesus...alex73 has a point



Personally I think there would be better mileage to be had by him publically stating he'd forgiven the horrible deed done and that he had no intention to sue.

It would stand completely apart from what happens all day every day in secular-land. Which is what the gospel is meant to do.

antiskeptic

ISAW wrote: »

I'm sure he can. And for penance... let the court award damages.

To be paid for by you and me.

Manach

Unless of course the government decides to deregulate RTE and do away with the TV license/tax - not going to happen is it?

Clare_Culchie

antiskeptic wrote: »

ISAW wrote: »

I'm sure he can. And for penance... let the court award damages.

To be paid for by you and me.

Probably so, but the blame for this rests squarely at the feet of the Prime Team and RTÉ, not Fr. Reynolds. He should sue, he's not only a priest but a human being and when his or anyone else's rights are denied in such a horrific way he is entitled to compensation. It has nothing to do with forgiveness, he may have forgiven already. Compensation is a different matter. Don't set expectations or standards for other people that you would not try to aspire to yourself.

ISAW

The Black Oil wrote: »

Do we not hear a fair bit about this already? I would have thought there are regular stories/pieces about middle to older aged men being brought before the courts and they often don't have collars...

Given Pedo Priests are less than one per cent of offenders even an overreporting by a factor of two would mean at least 50 times the amount of space devoted to non clerical abuse. But I would think there is nowhere near that. Earlier in this thread ...EDIT:Inthe clkerical Abuse thread before the merge I think .... I believe i did a comparison for one week. The amounts of coverage of clergy was still a majority of column inches never mind fifty to a hundred times less.

Fairly unlikely. How often do you see any senior member of RTE getting a good grilling on Prime Time et al?

And they will retire with a big pension ( in the 100s of thousands) and bonus.

antiskeptic

Clare_Culchie wrote: »

Probably so, but the blame for this rests squarely at the feet of the Prime Team and RTÉ, not Fr. Reynolds. He should sue, he's not only a priest but a human being and when his or anyone else's rights are denied in such a horrific way he is entitled to compensation. It has nothing to do with forgiveness, he may have forgiven already. Compensation is a different matter. Don't set expectations or standards for other people that you would not try to aspire to yourself.

Listen, I've absolutely no problem if Fr. Reynolds proceeds down precisely the same path as every secular Tom, Dick and Harry. I'm not exactly a fan of the Roman Catholic church afterall

I would have thought that he has a unique opportunity to do something striking to counter the sh1tstorm rolling over his particular occupation at the present time.

soterpisc

antiskeptic wrote: »

Personally I think there would be better mileage to be had by him publically stating he'd forgiven the horrible deed done and that he had no intention to sue.

It would stand completely apart from what happens all day every day in secular-land. Which is what the gospel is meant to do.

Well as someone who is currently directly involved in 2 incidents of false accusations I have to beg otherwise.

One incident a Girl accused the priest, Priest publicly removed, Gards investigate and found out there was no way the abuse could have happened as the Girl said (as Priest was not even in the country when it happened) Charges Drop.. but whole Parish knew. And its an absolute nightmare situation for the priest. Of Course he forgave the girl, she only wanted money for Drugs anyway. He did not sue.. But the media DID report the story.


What is needed is for priest to be treated with Respect... You are innocent until proven Guilty.. Yes remove them from the Parish while under investigation, but not report them to the world while the investigation is going on, Sufficient that Gards and HSE is aware of accusation and that Priest/Bishop fully Cooperate. No need for a trial by media.

and that what RTE did, THe priest in the documentary was totally portrayed as a Rapist and was guilty. 100% he has to sue, and give the money to some charity. But Justice needs to be done.

ISAW

soterpisc wrote: »

No need for a trial by media.

and that what RTE did, THe priest in the documentary was totally portrayed as a Rapist and was guilty. 100% he has to sue, and give the money to some charity. But Justice needs to be done.

The Priest can do what he wants with the money. Please dont start another trail by media as to what he should do with it. Actually I would prefer RTE give the priest say a half hour a week prime-time to discuss whatever he feel like say an African Parish or investment in schools and jobs in his own area. But I wont stipulate what the damages should be. and like the child abuse cases in the Church in addition to compensation for the victim I would ask RTE to draw up a code of practice to prevent similar abuse by RTE happening in future? I would also like RTE to produce a report of how much time they devote to clerical and other abuse cases.

tfitzgerald

The makers of this show should be fired and then taking to court for defamation

Roger Hassenforder

as what you would consider an atheist (although not me) i think it was apalling what was done to the man.

trial and conviction by a hack based on heresay and little evidence ( i wont enter the irony of that statement here).
I hope he cleans out RTE

cybercellesta

If there was any justice, RTE should name and shame their source (reporter) who scandalised this poor man!

georgieporgy

RTE should be wound up like News of the World.

It certainly should no longer be publicly funded.

cybercellesta

georgieporgy wrote: »

RTE should be wound up like News of the World.

It certainly should no longer be publicly funded.

TV3 isn't much better! :pac:

Zombrex

Morgans wrote: »

Shameful actions from RTE. I dont know how the priest can get his life back. And i hope that RTE are sued heavily for this.

But I hope that RTE and other investigative arms dont trest children's claims any less seriously because of this case and dont stop trying to uncover child abuse.

That is some what contradictory? It is shameful and they should be sued, but I hope they keep reporting claims of child abuse?

Why would they if the response if they report an incorrect allegation is that they should all get fired?

marknine

Manach wrote: »

Playing devil's advocate only, the national broadcaster has a duty to report on topic issues. It also has a time deadline which is always present in the media which necessitates publishing material before a rival. It might have also felt that under recent changes in Irish Law (defamation act 2009) the right of the public to be informed of the alleged actives took precedence over any lingering doubts.

They are all good points to a degree.
BUT my view of RTE is that they have a very narrow D4 view. Anti-Catholic church (which is understandable) but they don’t have a balanced view and just seem to have an agenda. I know the church has let us all down and have to start building our trust again, but that does not mean all priests are bad. Almost every day you will hear Anti-Catholic negativity on RTE, which I am sure is part of the healing process. But you will never heal a cut if you keep picking the scab. That poor priest didn’t stand a chance and I’m sure most members of the clergy feel the same. By the way I haven’t been a catholic for over 20 years and I don’t think I will go back. At the same time, I can still see the good and bad in the church. But I can mostly see the media blindness.

Zombrex

marknine wrote: »

They are all good points to a degree.
BUT my view of RTE is that they have a very narrow D4 view. Anti-Catholic church (which is understandable) but they don’t have a balanced view and just seem to have an agenda. I know the church has let us all down and have to start building our trust again, but that does not mean all priests are bad. Almost every day you will hear Anti-Catholic negativity on RTE, which I am sure is part of the healing process. But you will never heal a cut if you keep picking the scab. That poor priest didn’t stand a chance and I’m sure most members of the clergy feel the same. By the way I haven’t been a catholic for over 20 years and I don’t think I will go back. At the same time, I can still see the good and bad in the church. But I can mostly see the media blindness.

At what point should RTE say they are no longer going to investigate and report on Catholic child abuse because the country needs to heal (what does that even mean?)

Surely everyone who suffered child abuse deserves to be heard?

cybercellesta

Of course abused children should be heard, but that doesn't give RTE or any other media the right to use the collar as a bulls-eye! They should back up their stories with facts and not heresay!!!

Zombrex

cybercellesta wrote: »

Of course abused children should be heard, but that doesn't give RTE or any other media the right to use the collar as a bulls-eye!

Not sure what you mean, RTE shouldn't investigate child abuse claims if the claim involves priests?

Most child abuse involving the Catholic church would still be hidden if that was the case, wouldn't it?

cybercellesta wrote: »

They should back up their stories with facts and not heresay!!!

How are you defining hearsay in that context? How would any child abuse cases be investigated if you had to dismiss the claims themselves?

antiskeptic

cybercellesta wrote: »

Of course abused children should be heard, but that doesn't give RTE or any other media the right to use the collar as a bulls-eye! They should back up their stories with facts and not heresay!!!

Primetime is a news programme which thrives (like Moaning Ireland and so many other news outlets) on bad news. Hence the constant diet of darkness: tales of recession and repossession, drugs on our streets, the lost cause Health system. Anything that will cause fear, anxiety, depression, resignation. The badder is literally the better.

Child abuse on it's own might warrant a story. Child abuse carried out under the auspices of a pillar-of-the-community (albeit a pillar that has lost much of its relevancy in post-Catholic Ireland) is goldmine territory for the likes of Primetime.

The collar is a bulls-eye because of the nature of modern news programming. Nothing will change that. Once the digging has started and gold is struck, you can be sure the digging won't stop. I imagine stories about the Catholic church (sex scandals, financial scames, etc) will be a permanent diet until such time as the Catholic church ceases to be relevant.

Manach

Zombrex wrote: »

How are you defining hearsay in that context? How would any child abuse cases be investigated if you had to dismiss the claims themselves?

My understanding is that the hearsay referred to would be that type of oral evidence which is not admissible in court. This is a rule in Irish law, which perhaps RTE could have taken on board prior to broadcasting the report.

The Quadratic Equation

Zombrex wrote: »

At what point should RTE say they are no longer going to investigate and report on Catholic child abuse because the country needs to heal (what does that even mean?)

Surely everyone who suffered child abuse deserves to be heard?

At what point are RTE going to investigate the other 99% of child abuse as well ?

laoch na mona

it was a disgrace the church did enough bad with out slandering the good priest out there

Zombrex

Manach wrote: »

My understanding is that the hearsay referred to would be that type of oral evidence which is not admissible in court.

Does that include testimony from the person effected by the crime, ie the rape victim?

Zombrex

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

At what point are RTE going to investigate the other 99% of child abuse as well ?

Are you suggesting that Prime Time turn a blind eye to the abuse in the Catholic church?

The Quadratic Equation

Zombrex wrote: »

Are you suggesting that Prime Time turn a blind eye to the abuse in the Catholic church?

Where did I say that ?

Now how about answering the question this time instead of trying to dodge it.

At what point are RTE going to investigate the other 99% of child abuse as well ?

Zombrex

antiskeptic wrote: »

Primetime is a news programme which thrives (like Moaning Ireland and so many other news outlets) on bad news. Hence the constant diet of darkness: tales of recession and repossession, drugs on our streets, the lost cause Health system. Anything that will cause fear, anxiety, depression, resignation. The badder is literally the better.

Child abuse on it's own might warrant a story. Child abuse carried out under the auspices of a pillar-of-the-community (albeit a pillar that has lost much of its relevancy in post-Catholic Ireland) is goldmine territory for the likes of Primetime.

The collar is a bulls-eye because of the nature of modern news programming. Nothing will change that. Once the digging has started and gold is struck, you can be sure the digging won't stop. I imagine stories about the Catholic church (sex scandals, financial scames, etc) will be a permanent diet until such time as the Catholic church ceases to be relevant.

Isn't that the nature of investigative journalism?

People seem to be forgetting that RTE was a major player in bringing the Catholic church abuse scandal to light in the first place.

Or perhaps they haven't forgetting that, could it be that some people (not you anti) want to punish RTE for doing that in the first place?

Calls to have the journalists fired and the organisation disbanded or sold off would certainly help keep further cases of abuse from coming to light.

Can't help but think that that is what some want.

Zombrex

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

Where did I say that ?

I'm trying to understand what your point is? Are you saying that they have picked on the Catholic church enough and they should ignore future cases that they learn about and not investigate them?

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

Now how about answering the question this time instead of trying to dodge it.

At what point are RTE going to investigate the other 99% of child abuse as well ?

I've no reason to believe they don't. Primetime have investigated abuses in child care, the HSE, nursing care etc.

Again though I'm not sure what point you are making. Are you saying that if Primetime find out about future abuse in the Catholic church they should ignore it because they have, to your mind, been reporting too much on Catholic abuse and should instead report on other abuse?

The Quadratic Equation

Zombrex wrote: »

I'm trying to understand what your point is? Are you saying that they have picked on the Catholic church enough and they should ignore future cases that they learn about and not investigate them?

Again though I'm not sure what point you are making. Are you saying that if Primetime find out about future abuse in the Catholic church they should ignore it because they have, to your mind, been reporting too much on Catholic abuse and should instead report on other abuse?

Yet more strawman diversion, I'll ask you again where I said that, what I have asked is quite plain.

Zombrex wrote: »

I've no reason to believe they don't. Primetime have investigated abuses in child care, the HSE, nursing care etc.

At a ratio of 99 to 1 ?

Have the resouces invested in these investigations been split in the actual ratio of abuse, and if not why not ?

Children are at risk in a lot of other places as well

Zombrex

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

At a ratio of 99 to 1 ?

No, why would they? The vast majority of abuse is done in isolated cases. So what would there be to investigate?

The Catholic church is an large organisation, and Primetime investigates the abuse of the organisation, not simply the individual cases. The RTE News reports on the isolated cases, when someone (a father, brother uncle friend etc) is convicted of child abuse. It would be a bit stupid to have a large Primetime investigation over Billy's father down the road abusing him after school.

Can you think of an organisation that has had as many sexual abuse cases, yet Primetime have never investigated them?