Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Nuns, Brothers and Priests named in the Ryan Report

  • 04-06-2009 11:42AM
    #1
    little_miss_sun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭


    It's about time someone had the balls to name the abusers who inflicted so much hurt and pain on children. These should have been named in the first place.

    http://www.tribune.ie/news/article/2009/may/31/exclusive-named-and-shamed/
    But out of curiosity do people who read this agree that they should be named? Or do you think they did the right thing by not naming them?


Comments

  • #2
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,473 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    little_miss_sun wrote: »
    It's about time someone had the balls to name the abusers who inflicted so much hurt and pain on children.
    It's uncontested that abuse took place, but not everybody agrees who the abusers were. The populist notion that people can be publicly "named and shamed" on the basis of allegations, rather than cases proven in court, and achieve anything useful by doing so, is dangerous and stupid.

    A few years back in the UK, the News of the World took it upon itself to run a campaign to "name and shame" convicted pedophiles in the UK (see here and here.) Some were run out of the communities by armed mobs, many more absconded from parole or otherwise disappeared from the police radar, while in one case in South Wales, a pediatrician had "paedo" spray-painted around her house because the NotW-reading morons couldn't distinguish between pedophiles and pediatricians (see here).

    Seems to me that the best way forward is a south-African style Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The abusers get a period of time to make full public confessions and any who do can request a pardon for what they confess. After the period expires, the police go after the remainder, including those who protected them, with a vigor that seems to have been lacking so far.


  • #3
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    I really can't say with any certainty. Is it common practice to name abusers be they secular or religious? I don't see what good it does anyone to name the people. They will be known in their communities and one would hope that they do the time. Naming them could lead to retaliation.

    Mod note
    We'll see how this thread develops. If it goes down the road of another clerical abuse thread it may be merged with the last one. Any of the usual trollish accompaniment will be deleted and a ban received.


  • #4
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    robindch wrote: »
    It's uncontested that abuse took place, but not everybody agrees who the abusers were. The populist notion that people can be publicly "named and shamed" on the basis of allegations, rather than cases proven in court, and achieve anything useful by doing so, is dangerous and stupid.

    A few years back in the UK, the News of the World took it upon itself to run a campaign to "name and shame" convicted pedophiles in the UK (see here and here.) Some were run out of the communities by armed mobs, many more absconded from parole or otherwise disappeared from the police radar, while in one case in South Wales, a pediatrician had "paedo" spray-painted around her house because the NotW-reading morons couldn't distinguish between pedophiles and pediatricians (see here).

    Seems to me that the best way forward is a south-African style Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The abusers get a period of time to make full public confessions and any who do can request a pardon for what they confess. After the period expires, the police go after the remainder, including those who protected them, with a vigor that seems to have been lacking so far.

    Yes, well said, robin.

    Trying to figure out what a NotW is, though.


  • #5
    toiletduck
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭toiletduck


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Yes, well said, robin.

    Trying to figure out what a NotW is, though.

    News of the World.


  • #6
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Also important to remember that many of the accused are deceased, and a lot of the allegations made have no way to be substantiated.

    While in no way doubting the integrity of most of those making allegations I would have a worry of the wrong people being named and shamed even unintentionally, or being accused of crimes they did not commit.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    robindch wrote: »
    A few years back in the UK, the News of the World took it upon itself to run a campaign to "name and shame" convicted pedophiles in the UK (see here and here.) Some were run out of the communities by armed mobs, many more absconded from parole or otherwise disappeared from the police radar, while in one case in South Wales, a pediatrician had "paedo" spray-painted around her house because the NotW-reading morons couldn't distinguish between pedophiles and pediatricians (see here).

    I had to feel sorry for those attackers in Wales. They live in a world where paedophiles advertise in the yellow pages and put brass plates outside their offices.:confused:


  • #8
    Talon.ie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39 ✭Talon.ie


    If they had named any of the accused, then the chances of actually getting a conviction in a court of law would be about zero.

    While naming them might appease the vigilante justice crowd, the fact that they're not named means that the victims actually still have a chance of seeing their abusers end up in jail where they belong.


Advertisement
Advertisement