26th April 2010
POST NO: 91
GATSPYGIRL
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE Originally Posted by Riadach
I can understand the narrative here that Kilbarry is trying to propagate. Mr McGlinchey was found innocent in a court of law of child abuse, therefore the abuse itself was pure imaginary, and it was just a case of lynch-mobbing, as suggested above. Therefore a lot of the abuse cases in this country, against for instance the Catholic Church, are imaginary.
However, that belies the true facts of the case. I'm willing to accept McGlinchey's innocence as established by a jury of his peers, but there is still physical evidence that at least two of the students in his class were abused.
I think people are finding it difficult to understand the nature of the disability in all these cases. It has been thrown around that the children who brought Mr McGlinchey to trial have the mental age of nine year olds. That hides the situation somewhat. One of them for instance, has a very poor concept of time. He couldn't tell what was next tuesday, from next tuesday six months down the road. Likewise, it is very difficult from him to distinguish between two points in the past, whether, for instance, someone was in his class in one year, or not in the next. This made his testimony very unreliable, and of course any conviction unsafe.
I agree there was a lot of witchhunting involved, and it is very easy to imagine how parents would get so animated about these matters, and how multiple stories could emerge. However, that does not automatically mean that there is no kernel of truth here, hidden by layers of confusion, caused by the condition of the children, and hysteria, caused by worried parents. That is not to say mrr McGlinchey was guilty, but at some level here there is still the likelihood that at some level here, there was indeed child abuse. ENDQUOTE
What exactly are you saying here? "There is some kernel of truth here" Do you mean truth in the assertion that the children were abused, or a kernel of truth in the allegations made against McGlinchy? But he has been found innocent......
If you agree that "there is a lot of witch hunting involved", who do you think is doing the witch hunting? You take Kilbarry to task in the first line of your post for using this "lynch-mobbing" argument.
There is a hesitancy in your acceptance of McGlinchy's acquittal "by a jury of his peers" as you seem to surround it with many qualifying statements. ("that is not to say McGlinchy was guilty....." etc)
Surely, since he has been found innocent, whatever abuse took place---if any abuse took place---cannot have anything to do with him
You mention "the hysteria caused by worried parents". Are you saying this could have had some bearing on the original accusations against McGlinchy, which have now been found to be untrue?
McGlinchy seems to have fallen victim to the old adage "Throw enough mud and some of it will stick" It seems all too true.
POST NO: 92
Old 26th April 2010
WEXFORDMAN
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by greenporcupine
You never say any thing of value,so why would any one care about YOUR OPINION ? ENDQUOTE
We'll obviously someone like yourself cares enough to reply to one of my posts!
Anyone for desert
POST NO: 93
Old 26th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by greenporcupine
May be they needed to look closer to home.
It is well established these days that the majority of child abuse is by parents ,other family members or those close to them.
Hysteria like this is often a way of redirecting guilt away from themselves.
And any why are people mentally disabled any way ?
Questions to ask.
M.Scott Peck wrote about parents like that in 'People of the Lie',
a study on Evil. ENDOFQUOTE
What on earth are you ********************eing on about?
POST NO: 94 (permalink)
Old 27th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by gatsbygirl20 What exactly are you saying here? "There is some kernel of truth here" Do you mean truth in the assertion that the children were abused, or a kernel of truth in the allegations made against McGlinchy? But he has been found innocent...... ENDQUOTE
Truth in the allegations that the children were abused, McGlinchey was exonerated.
QUOTE:
If you agree that "there is a lot of witch hunting involved", who do you think is doing the witch hunting? You take Kilbarry to task in the first line of your post for using this "lynch-mobbing" argument. ENDQUOTE
I meant to say there was a lot of hysteria involved. The post was typed quickly, I apologise.
QUOTE:
There is a hesitancy in your acceptance of McGlinchy's acquittal "by a jury of his peers" as you seem to surround it with many qualifying statements. ("that is not to say McGlinchy was guilty....." etc)
Surely, since he has been found innocent, whatever abuse took place---if any abuse took place---cannot have anything to do with him
ENDQUOTE
I'm accepting for the sake of argument that he is innocent. The thrust of my argument in this instance is not that McGlinchey was guilty, but that abuse did occur. Kilbarry's argument is that because McGlinchey was found innocent, that no abuse occured in the case of these chiuldren.
QUOTE:
You mention "the hysteria caused by worried parents". Are you saying this could have had some bearing on the original accusations against McGlinchy, which have now been found to be untrue? ENDQUOTE
No, I'm not. I'm suggesting that further accusations entered the public sphere, mainly through interviews with John Devane, in which hysteria may have played a stronger part than the actual truth behind them. However, I'm also saying that I believe there was indeed truth to the basic assumption that these children were abused. Who by, is the question that remains.
QUOTE:
McGlinchy seems to have fallen victim to the old adage "Throw enough mud and some of it will stick" It seems all too true. ENDQUOTE
Equally, the parents of these children are now subjected to various accusations of abuse, misleading, and coaching, because McGlinchey was found innocent. None of those accusations are warranted in my opinion.
POST NO: 95
Old 28th April 2010
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 19
Riadach you don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's too late now but I will write you a lengthy reply tomorrow. look forward to it - you will get an education.
POST NO: 96
Old 28th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,084
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Riadach you don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's too late now but I will write you a lengthy reply tomorrow. look forward to it - you will get an education. ENDQUOTE
Look forward to it.
POST NO: 97
Old 28th April 2010
DIDIMUS
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
I'm accepting for the sake of argument that he is innocent. ENDQUOTE
I think it might be better if any direct or indirect qualification of the verdict of a court as to someones's innocence was left out of discussions here.
If only to avoid having more screen space at the upper right hand side of this website taken up by legal explanation/apology.
POST NO: 98
Old 28th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Didimus
I think it might be better if any direct or indirect qualification of the verdict of a court as to someones's innocence was left out of discussions here.
If only to avoid having more screen space at the upper right hand side of this website taken up by legal explanation/apology. ENDQUOTE
It was never my intention to dispute his innocence on a public forum. My only intention was to produce the line that because he was found innocent, that does not mean that children were not abused, merely that he wasn't responsible.
I'll admit however, to not being a completely disinterested party, but as you have put it, I should not be adding such qualifiers which would undermine his innocence.
POST NO: 99
Old 28th April 2010
FIRINNE
Junior Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Riadach you don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's too late now but I will write you a lengthy reply tomorrow. look forward to it - you will get an education. ENDQUOTE
Well Riadach - here it is, the promised reply.
In the first place I would like you to know that the children involved in the allegations against Pat McGlinchey had a mental age of 4 - 6 years, not 9 as portrayed by you. This is confirmed in psychological assessments, so no argument there. These innocent children were subjected to repeated interviewing by unqualified persons - Gardaí, Social Workers, CARI therapists - all people who did not have a clue as to the level of communication skills of the children and this interviewing was done without any reference to psychological assessments, education reports etc. This was a most dangerous exercise and was tantamount to abuse, in my opinion and in the opinion of persons vastly more qualified than I am.
This repetitive interviewing elicited from the children the most farcical of stories. I will reiterate some of them, just to prove the point that the witch-hunt of Pat McGlinchey was alive and thriving in this irresponsible investigation.
1. Pat took the children to his home where he abused them in his upstairs bedroom whilst his wife and children were eating dinner downstairs. Guess what Riadach? Pat lives in a bungalow. Why didn't the Gardaí correct this and contradict what was being said?
2. One child was abused on Pat's round bed and in a red bath - you've guessed, these don't exist.
3. Another child was abused in a dog kennel in Pat's garden - he didn't have a dog, let alone a dog kennel.
4. A child left his home and rang his mother to pick him up. This child didn't even know his numbers let alone be able to use a phone. When this came out in court it became obvious to the judge, jury and all present that this was a set up to trap an innocent man.
5. One girl was abused in the school hall by being stripped naked by the Principal and Pat. She stated 'all the teachers were there'. Isn't it funny not one teacher was asked about this?
6. Another farcical story - 'he pissed on the dinners in the school canteen' - the 6 members of staff present in the canteen every day at lunchtime were never questioned about this.
7. One child accused 31 people - 9 teachers, 2 classroom assistants and 20 children - yet no one else was questioned about these allegations and no other teacher was suspended!!! Of course, they were all women. Pat was the only male teacher.
8. You state there was physical evidence that 2 of the children were abused. This is a lie. There was not a shred of evidence that Pat McGlinchey abused any child. One child stated he had been stabbed by Pat. Strangely he didn't have any scars to prove these knife attacks and all this was discredited in court. Stop printing misleading lies Riadach.
9. Another child was brought to a house in the woods and raped by a member of staff whilst she was held down by two female members. These 3 m3 members did not include Pat McGlinchey but none of them were questioned. Guess they weren't necessary for the witch-hunt and to ensure promotion for the investigators.
I could go on and on Riadach but maybe you are beginning to get the true message now. The facts here are that an innocent man has been set up and his life and that of his family has been destroyed. Shame on all those who have helped to perpetrate these lies. This country needs to know the whole story here and then maybe Pat McGlinchey will get justice and a massive apology from this State for what has been the greatest injustice of our times, in my humble opinion.
I rest my case.
POST NO: 100
Old 28th April 2010
Riadach Riadach is offline
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Well Riadach - here it is, the promised reply.
In the first place I would like you to know that the children involved in the allegations against Pat McGlinchey had a mental age of 4 - 6 years, not 9 as portrayed by you. This is confirmed in psychological assessments, so no argument there. ENDQUOTE
I'm not the one who suggested this, in fact it was Kilbarry.
QUOTE:
These innocent children were subjected to repeated interviewing by unqualified persons - Gardaí, Social Workers, CARI therapists - all people who did not have a clue as to the level of communication skills of the children and this interviewing was done without any reference to psychological assessments, education reports etc. This was a most dangerous exercise and was tantamount to abuse, in my opinion and in the opinion of persons vastly more qualified than I am. ENDQUOTE
Are you asserting that there was no interviews carried out by psychologists? As far as I'm aware, there was indeed, but these individiuals too were accused of misleading the witnesses.
QUOTE:
This repetitive interviewing elicited from the children the most farcical of stories. I will reiterate some of them, just to prove the point that the witch-hunt of Pat McGlinchey was alive and thriving in this irresponsible investigation.
1. Pat took the children to his home where he abused them in his upstairs bedroom whilst his wife and children were eating dinner downstairs. Guess what Riadach? Pat lives in a bungalow. Why didn't the Gardaí correct this and contradict what was being said?
2. One child was abused on Pat's round bed and in a red bath - you've guessed, these don't exist.
3. Another child was abused in a dog kennel in Pat's garden - he didn't have a dog, let alone a dog kennel.
4. A child left his home and rang his mother to pick him up. This child didn't even know his numbers let alone be able to use a phone. When this came out in court it became obvious to the judge, jury and all present that this was a set up to trap an innocent man.
5. One girl was abused in the school hall by being stripped naked by the Principal and Pat. She stated 'all the teachers were there'. Isn't it funny not one teacher was asked about this?
6. Another farcical story - 'he pissed on the dinners in the school canteen' - the 6 members of staff present in the canteen every day at lunchtime were never questioned about this.
7. One child accused 31 people - 9 teachers, 2 classroom assistants and 20 children - yet no one else was questioned about these allegations and no other teacher was suspended!!! Of course, they were all women. Pat was the only male teacher.
8. You state there was physical evidence that 2 of the children were abused. This is a lie. There was not a shred of evidence that Pat McGlinchey abused any child. One child stated he had been stabbed by Pat. Strangely he didn't have any scars to prove these knife attacks and all this was discredited in court. Stop printing misleading lies Riadach.
9. Another child was brought to a house in the woods and raped by a member of staff whilst she was held down by two female members. These 3 m3 members did not include Pat McGlinchey but none of them were questioned. Guess they weren't necessary for the witch-hunt and to ensure promotion for the investigators. ENDQUOTE
All this proves is that the testimonies were unreliable in court. In fact, you should let us know indeed how many of those stories were admitted to court, and how many were accusations by children, who charges were not pursued against. No girl took the stand, for instance. Nowhere have I said that mr McGlinchey wasn't innocent, and no where have I said that there wasn't a lot of hysteria around the case. You rightly remind us of the mental age of the children, and their limited abilities, which could also have lead to the inconsistencies you list about above, meaning at the kernel of the case, there may still be a case of abuse at this school, but that Mr McGlinchey was not responsible. Their testimonies were clearly unsafe.
I stand by the claim that two of the children had physical manifestations of abuse. These were not those two who gave testimony in court. These facts do not mean that Mr McGlinchey was guilty.
QUOTE:
I could go on and on Riadach but maybe you are beginning to get the true message now. The facts here are that an innocent man has been set up and his life and that of his family has been destroyed. Shame on all those who have helped to perpetrate these lies. This country needs to know the whole story here and then maybe Pat McGlinchey will get justice and a massive apology from this State for what has been the greatest injustice of our times, in my humble opinion.
I rest my case. ENDQUOTE
I take it from a slightly different angle. I take it from the side that because these children, arguable some of them the most vulnerable in society, were unable to adequately and consistently describe their abuse, or identify their abuser, that they have been deprived of their right to justice. When people are found innocent of murder, we don't automatically assume that their accusers were lying, now do we?
28th April 2010
POST NO 101
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
A short addendum to my previous post Riadach .....
Are you aware that the first parent to make an allegation against Pat McGlinchey had previously made a similar allegation against a bus driver?
Also this woman's son had been disturbed at school for about a year (when in fact he was in another teacher's class) and it was Pat who looked for assistance for him.
The boy had an appendectomy and had an adverse reaction to the anaesthetic which resulted in severe behaviour problems. When he went into Pat's class it was Pat who asked a psychologist and a social worker to visit the child's mother and see if anything could be done to help him. Following their visit this mother rang the school and made a statement 'you sent 2 *************************es out to my home and there's no abuse in my house.' Strange statement you would say, particularly in light of the fact that the next day she accused Pat McGlinchey of abusing her son. She then rang all the other parents in the school and told them their children had been abused. This is clearly documented so don't dispute it.
Do you think someone abusing a child would put the same child in the hands of a psychologist and a social worker?
I don't and I think you should think long and hard before you make sweeping statements.
POST NO: 102
Old 28th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by firinne
A short addendum to my previous post Riadach .....
Are you aware that the first parent to make an allegation against Pat McGlinchey had previously made a similar allegation against a bus driver?
Also this woman's son had been disturbed at school for about a year (when in fact he was in another teacher's class) and it was Pat who looked for assistance for him.
The boy had an appendectomy and had an adverse reaction to the anaesthetic which resulted in severe behaviour problems. When he went into Pat's class it was Pat who asked a psychologist and a social worker to visit the child's mother and see if anything could be done to help him. Following their visit this mother rang the school and made a statement 'you sent 2 *************************es out to my home and there's no abuse in my house.' Strange statement you would say, particularly in light of the fact that the next day she accused Pat McGlinchey of abusing her son. She then rang all the other parents in the school and told them their children had been abused. This is clearly documented so don't dispute it.
Do you think someone abusing a child would put the same child in the hands of a psychologist and a social worker?
I don't and I think you should think long and hard before you make sweeping statements. ENDQUOTE
I'm sure then you can provide us with the relevant documents that show this, and explain why parents (at least the ones I know) did not find out until a garda turned up at the door. All this relies on the assumption, of course, that parents want to believe their children are abused, I can say that that is precisely the converse of the truth. That is not how people found out about the potential abuse. Neither am I'm not the one many sweeping statements. I'm not the one assuming that the parents were involved in abuse, or that the stories were complete concoctions on the basis that a few were heavily-laden with inconsistencies.
POST NO: 103
Old 28th April 2010
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Yes Riadach - I can supply all the documentation. I never suggested the parents abused their children but I must ask why they allowed unqualified people to put words in their childrens mouths. I have not provided you with snippets that suggest the children made up some stories and by inference other stories were true. This is not the case - the WHOLE investigation is a concoction of lies and the victims are in the first place the McGlinchey family and thereafter the children whose disabilities were used in a most insidious manner to stitch up an innocent man.
There is not a shred of evidence in the tomes of paperwork to support any allegations of abuse. When you have read all this you may comment and I'm sure you will then approach this from a totally different angle and find it within yourself to apologise to Pat McGlinchey.
POST NO: 104
Old 28th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Yes Riadach - I can supply all the documentation. I never suggested the parents abused their children but I must ask why they allowed unqualified people to put words in their childrens mouths. I have not provided you with snippets that suggest the children made up some stories and by inference other stories were true. This is not the case - the WHOLE investigation is a concoction of lies and the victims are in the first place the McGlinchey family and thereafter the children whose disabilities were used in a most insidious manner to stitch up an innocent man.
ENDQUOTE
That there is the sweeping generalisation, and it was kilbarry who suggested the parents abused. Please do provide us with the documentation, especially the part with suggests that it was on the suggestion of another parent, that parents began to believe that their children were abused. I can assert, from the parents I know, that that simply wasn't the case.
QUOTE
There is not a shred of evidence in the tomes of paperwork to support any allegations of abuse. When you have read all this you may comment and I'm sure you will then approach this from a totally different angle and find it within yourself to apologise to Pat McGlinchey. ENDQUOTE
What have I said against Pat McGlinchey?
Under what circumstances do you have access to these tonnes of paperwork?
POST NO: 105
Old 28th April 2010
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Well obviously Riadach you have been misinformed. A lot of the information provided by me came out at Pat McGlinchey's trial. Get a transcript.
As to how I have all the documentation that is none of your business but suffice to say it is clearly documented that this whole story is a fabrication of lies.
I am not blaming the parents for anything. They got caught up in the lies and unfortunately they believed what was a tissue of untruths. They should actually be informed of the mistakes made by the Gardaí, Social Workers and CARI and then they could have the joy of knowing their children were not, in fact, abused by Pat McGlinchey or anyone else in the school. I guess this will not happen as long as inadequate peope try to cover their tracks for the mistakes they made.
You are basing your assumptions on hearsay - which is extremely dangerous and only serves to perpetuate the lies told about an innocent man.
I say this from a position of knowledge and you have been misled and I do not say this flippantly - the people who have obviously given you the information have never been appraised of the truth.
Shame on all those who know the truth and have done nothing to put right a terrible wrong.
POST NO: 106
Old 28th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by firinne
Well obviously Riadach you have been misinformed. A lot of the information provided by me came out at Pat McGlinchey's trial. Get a transcript. ENDQUOTE
It seems a lot of those allegations never made it to trial, so you clearly have another source.
QUOTE:
As to how I have all the documentation that is none of your business but suffice to say it is clearly documented that this whole story is a fabrication of lies. ENDQUOTE
Only to you unfortunately, the rest of us are lacking in documentation.
QUOTE:
I am not blaming the parents for anything. They got caught up in the lies and unfortunately they believed what was a tissue of untruths. They should actually be informed of the mistakes made by the Gardaí, Social Workers and CARI and then they could have the joy of knowing their children were not, in fact, abused by Pat McGlinchey or anyone else in the school. I guess this will not happen as long as inadequate peope try to cover their tracks for the mistakes they made. ENDQUOTE
Who are you referring to then, when you say that this was an attempt to stitch up an innocent man? The state and the social services? Why would there be a motivation by the state and social services, to create an allegation of abuse, where there was no evidence one existed? Would the simpler explanation not be that there were justifiable reasons for believing there was abuse of children who happened to attend that school, but various allegations were elevated due to the hysteria, but Mr McGlinchey got caught in the crossfire? What has McGlinchey done to deserve such malicious garda and social service attention?
QUOTE:
You are basing your assumptions on hearsay - which is extremely dangerous and only serves to perpetuate the lies told about an innocent man. ENDQUOTE
I'm not mentioning anything about a man here. I merely mentioning facts about an incident of abuse that may have occured.. I accept there is no proof that McGlinchy was guilty of abuse.
POST NO: 107
Old 28th April 2010
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Not only is there no proof that Pat McGlinchey was guilty of abuse, there is also no evidence of same.
As to your reference to motivation - there is such a thing as a 'trophy case' - and it appears to me that many thought they were on the path to promotion by being involved in what was to be a major sex abuse case. This may not be readily accepted by many but it is a known fact that this happens. Stitch someone up and you achieve notoriety.
I'm glad you accept your information is not based on actual documentation which clearly illustrates the many points made by me.
Someday Riadach, someday.
POST NO: 108 (permalink)
Old 28th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Berlin
Posts: 12,736
Blog Entries: 1
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
...suffice to say it is clearly documented that this whole story is a fabrication of lies. ENDQUOTE
But it does not suffice to assert that it is documented that this whole story is a fabrication of lies. Such a statement is possibly libellous to the 'liars'.
Where is the documentation and how does it document evidence of lying?
POST NO: 109
Old 29th April 2010
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
Extract from Post by firinne [post No 99]
Well Riadach - here it is, the promised reply.
In the first place I would like you to know that the children involved in the allegations against Pat McGlinchey had a mental age of 4 - 6 years, not 9 as portrayed by you.
This is confirmed in psychological assessments, so no argument there.
Extract from Reply by Riadach [Post no 100]
I'm not the one who suggested this, in fact it was Kilbarry.
Actually I was quoting from Riadach's post no 81 which included the following:
I think people are finding it difficult to understand the nature of the disability in all these cases. It has been thrown around that the children who brought Mr McGlinchey to trial have the mental age of nine year olds. That hides the situation somewhat. One of them for instance, has a very poor concept of time. He couldn't tell what was next tuesday, from next tuesday six months down the road. Likewise, it is very difficult from him to distinguish between two points in the past, whether, for instance, someone was in his class in one year, or not in the next. This made his testimony very unreliable, and of course any conviction unsafe.
This is a long discussion but I can't recall ever saying that the children had a mental age of 9 - except when I quoted Riadach [my Post no 82] in which I wrote:
The above weasel words indicate how this witch-hunt got going. It was NOT the handicapped children who assaulted Patsy McGlinchey. It was NOT the children who discovered the identity of his solicitor and manufactured a false allegation against him. John Devane was accused of molesting a child while playing Santa at a Christmas party in December 1996. He did not play Santa that year. How exactly did a child "with a mental age of 9" find out who Mr. McGlinchey's solicitor was - by reading the Irish Times perhaps? ...
Last edited by Kilbarry1; 29th April 2010 at 09:31 AM. Reason: Extract from Post No 82
POST NO: 110
Old 29th April 2010
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
Quote:Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
This is a witch-hunt caused by adults from beginning to end. The children were abused by the adults who encouraged them to make false allegations. ENDQUOTE
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
This is an astonishing claim to make. Care to provide me with your name and details so I can allow the parents of the children to defend the defamation of their character in a court of law? ENDOFQUOTE
Is there any doubt as to what I meant? If so let me clarify. I am NOT saying that parents sexually abused their children. I am saying that they emotionally abused them either by encouraging them to make false allegations OR by negligence in failing to inform them that they (the children) were talking nonsense. And by nonsense I mean the kind of claims detailed by Firinne:
1. Pat took the children to his home where he abused them in his upstairs bedroom whilst his wife and children were eating dinner downstairs. Guess what Riadach? Pat lives in a bungalow. Why didn't the Gardaí correct this and contradict what was being said?
2. One child was abused on Pat's round bed and in a red bath - you've guessed, these don't exist.
3. Another child was abused in a dog kennel in Pat's garden - he didn't have a dog, let alone a dog kennel.
4. A child left his home and rang his mother to pick him up. This child didn't even know his numbers let alone be able to use a phone. When this came out in court it became obvious to the judge, jury and all present that this was a set up to trap an innocent man.
5. One girl was abused in the school hall by being stripped naked by the Principal and Pat. She stated 'all the teachers were there'. Isn't it funny not one teacher was asked about this?
6. Another farcical story - 'he pissed on the dinners in the school canteen' - the 6 members of staff present in the canteen every day at lunchtime were never questioned about this.
7. One child accused 31 people - 9 teachers, 2 classroom assistants and 20 children - yet no one else was questioned about these allegations and no other teacher was suspended!!! Of course, they were all women. Pat was the only male teacher.
8. You state there was physical evidence that 2 of the children were abused. This is a lie. There was not a shred of evidence that Pat McGlinchey abused any child. One child stated he had been stabbed by Pat. Strangely he didn't have any scars to prove these knife attacks and all this was discredited in court. Stop printing misleading lies Riadach.
9. Another child was brought to a house in the woods and raped by a member of staff whilst she was held down by two female members. These 3 m3 members did not include Pat McGlinchey but none of them were questioned. Guess they weren't necessary for the witch-hunt and to ensure promotion for the investigators.
In addition the parents who assaulted and screamed abuse at Mr. McGlinchey were emotionally abusing their children when they gave vent to their own hysteria.
POST NO: 111
29th April 2010
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Is there any doubt as to what I meant? If so let me clarify. I am NOT saying that parents sexually abused their children. I am saying that they emotionally abused them either by encouraging them to make false allegations OR by negligence in failing to inform them that they (the children) were talking nonsense. And by nonsense I mean the kind of claims detailed by Firinne: ENDQUOTE
Once again, this is an astonishing claim to make. You are actively accusing the parents of purposely lying. Do you think any parent finds it easy to accept their child was abused?
QUOTE:
1. Pat took the children to his home where he abused them in his upstairs bedroom whilst his wife and children were eating dinner downstairs. Guess what Riadach? Pat lives in a bungalow. Why didn't the Gardaí correct this and contradict what was being said?
2. One child was abused on Pat's round bed and in a red bath - you've guessed, these don't exist.
3. Another child was abused in a dog kennel in Pat's garden - he didn't have a dog, let alone a dog kennel.
4. A child left his home and rang his mother to pick him up. This child didn't even know his numbers let alone be able to use a phone. When this came out in court it became obvious to the judge, jury and all present that this was a set up to trap an innocent man.
5. One girl was abused in the school hall by being stripped naked by the Principal and Pat. She stated 'all the teachers were there'. Isn't it funny not one teacher was asked about this?
6. Another farcical story - 'he pissed on the dinners in the school canteen' - the 6 members of staff present in the canteen every day at lunchtime were never questioned about this.
7. One child accused 31 people - 9 teachers, 2 classroom assistants and 20 children - yet no one else was questioned about these allegations and no other teacher was suspended!!! Of course, they were all women. Pat was the only male teacher.
8. You state there was physical evidence that 2 of the children were abused. This is a lie. There was not a shred of evidence that Pat McGlinchey abused any child. One child stated he had been stabbed by Pat. Strangely he didn't have any scars to prove these knife attacks and all this was discredited in court. Stop printing misleading lies Riadach.
9. Another child was brought to a house in the woods and raped by a member of staff whilst she was held down by two female members. These 3 m3 members did not include Pat McGlinchey but none of them were questioned. Guess they weren't necessary for the witch-hunt and to ensure promotion for the investigators. ENDQUOTE
None of such claims however, made it to the court. They were part of no child's testimony.
QUOTE:
In addition the parents who assaulted and screamed abuse at Mr. McGlinchey were emotionally abusing their children when they gave vent to their own hysteria. ENDQUOTE
That's a rather logical stretch there, don't you think?
POST NO: 112
Old 29th April 2010
FIRINNE
Junior Member
I think people are finding it difficult to understand the nature of the disability in all these cases. It has been thrown around that the children who brought Mr McGlinchey to trial have the mental age of nine year olds. That hides the situation somewhat. One of them for instance, has a very poor concept of time. He couldn't tell what was next tuesday, from next tuesday six months down the road. Likewise, it is very difficult from him to distinguish between two points in the past, whether, for instance, someone was in his class in one year, or not in the next. This made his testimony very unreliable, and of course any conviction unsafe.
I have just seen this post by Riadach - once again it serves to mislead. The reason Pat McGlinchey was found not guilty (unanimously by a jury - a verdict that took just over an hour) was because they heard the EVIDENCE, which proved that nothing had happened to these children when they were in Pat's class. These children were listened to, their abilities were considered, allowances were made for same and it was proven that the things being stated could not have happened. This was a 17 day trial. A fair hearing was given to all sides and it was proven that Pat McGlinchey did not touch a hair on any child's head. Don't make excuses Riadach, it is unfair on all concerned.
POST NO: 113
Old 29th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
I don't think the jury actually convicted anyone of lying, in fairness.
POST NO: 114
Old 29th April 2010
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE:Originally Posted by Toland
I don't think the jury actually convicted anyone of lying, in fairness. ENDQUOTE
Juries that bring in verdicts of non-guilty don't normally bring in a verdict that the accuser has lied. In fact they NEVER do.
With reference to a previous post by Firinne:
QUOTE: A short addendum to my previous post Riadach .....
Are you aware that the first parent to make an allegation against Pat McGlinchey had previously made a similar allegation against a bus driver?
Also this woman's son had been disturbed at school for about a year (when in fact he was in another teacher's class) and it was Pat who looked for assistance for him.
The boy had an appendectomy and had an adverse reaction to the anaesthetic which resulted in severe behaviour problems. When he went into Pat's class it was Pat who asked a psychologist and a social worker to visit the child's mother and see if anything could be done to help him. Following their visit this mother rang the school and made a statement 'you sent 2 ********es out to my home and there's no abuse in my house.' Strange statement you would say, particularly in light of the fact that the next day she accused Pat McGlinchey of abusing her son. She then rang all the other parents in the school and told them their children had been abused. This is clearly documented so don't dispute it.
Do you think someone abusing a child would put the same child in the hands of a psychologist and a social worker?
I don't and I think you should think long and hard before you make sweeping statements. ENDQUOTE
Was this the case that eventually ended up in court?
POST NO: 115
Old 29th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Juries that bring in verdicts of non-guilty don't normally bring in a verdict that the accuser has lied. In fact they NEVER do. ENDQUOTE
Clever of you to have worked that out.
The next step is to work out that calling people liars who gave prosecution evidence in trials where the verdict was eventually not guilty is rarely warranted and often actionable.
POST NO: 116
Old 29th April 2010
BOB3344
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Toland
The next step is to work out that calling people liars who gave prosecution evidence in trials where the verdict was eventually not guilty is rarely warranted and often actionable. ENDQUOTE
Either they were telling the truth & he abused the kids, or they didn't & he didn't.
Is there an other option ?
And I would argue that anyone giving false evidence in an abuse/rape case should do time.
POST NO: 117
Old 29th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by bob3344
Either they were telling the truth & he abused the kids, or they didn't & he didn't.
Is there an other option ? ENDQUOTE
Yes. One of the possible gaps lies in the standards of proof required to convict a defendant in a criminal trial and that needed to find someone guilty of libel.
This is fairly elementary stuff.
POST NO: 118
Old 29th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
Quote:Originally Posted by bob3344 View Post
And I would argue that anyone giving false evidence in an abuse/rape case should do time. ENDQUOTE
You'd agree though, that they'd have to be tried and convicted of that crime first, I trust.
POST NO: 119
Old 29th April 2010
BOB3344
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Toland
Yes. One of the possible gaps lies in the standards of proof required to convict a defendant in a criminal trial and that needed to find someone guilty of libel.
This is fairly elementary stuff. ENDQUOTE
Is someone giving false evidence regarded as libel ?
I would have thought perjury.
Maybe its not elementary enough for you, just a thought.
POST NO: 120 (permalink)
Old 29th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by bob3344 View Post
Is someone giving false evidence regarded as libel ?
I would have thought perjury.
Maybe its not elementary enough for you, just a thought. ENDQUOTE
Please please limit yourself reading what I wrote without adding what you read into it.
POST NO: 121
BOB3344
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Toland
You'd agree though, that they'd have to be tried and convicted of that crime first, I trust. ENDQUOTE
Would have thought that was obvious.
Maybe you're attempting to be humourous ?
POST NO: 122
Old 29th April 2010
TOLAND
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by bob3344
Would have thought that was obvious.
Maybe you're attempting to be humourous ? ENDQUOTE
To spell it out for you, the point is that the people who gave prosecution evidence have not been found to have perjured themselves. To say that they lied is therefore potentially libellous.
POST NO: 123
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Toland
To spell it out for you, the point is that the people who gave prosecution evidence have not been found to have perjured themselves. To say that they lied is therefore potentially libellous. ENDQUOTE
Yes people who invent and/or facilitate vicious lies are liable to get very shirty if they are called to account for their actions - see previous posts 110 and 114. (I am not talking exclusively about evidence given in court either but the entire witch-hunt.)
POST NO: 124
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Juries that bring in verdicts of non-guilty don't normally bring in a verdict that the accuser has lied. In fact they NEVER do.
With reference to a previous post by Firinne:
A short addendum to my previous post Riadach .....
Are you aware that the first parent to make an allegation against Pat McGlinchey had previously made a similar allegation against a bus driver?
Also this woman's son had been disturbed at school for about a year (when in fact he was in another teacher's class) and it was Pat who looked for assistance for him.
The boy had an appendectomy and had an adverse reaction to the anaesthetic which resulted in severe behaviour problems. When he went into Pat's class it was Pat who asked a psychologist and a social worker to visit the child's mother and see if anything could be done to help him. Following their visit this mother rang the school and made a statement 'you sent 2 ********es out to my home and there's no abuse in my house.' Strange statement you would say, particularly in light of the fact that the next day she accused Pat McGlinchey of abusing her son. She then rang all the other parents in the school and told them their children had been abused. This is clearly documented so don't dispute it.
Do you think someone abusing a child would put the same child in the hands of a psychologist and a social worker?
I don't and I think you should think long and hard before you make sweeping statements.
Was this the case that eventually ended up in court? ENDQUOTE
Of course not Kilbarry - this 'case' died the death it should have and all the others should have died with it. Strangely this woman was never called to account for her false allegations. Someday I hope she will be confronted and all the people whose lives she has ruined will see her for what she was/is (a leopard doesn't change it's spots and there is no one safe whilst this woman is allowed to perpetuate her evil openly and without even an admonishment.)
POST NO 125
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Of course not Kilbarry - this 'case' died the death it should have and all the others should have died with it. Strangely this woman was never called to account for her false allegations. Someday I hope she will be confronted and all the people whose lives she has ruined will see her for what she was/is (a leopard doesn't change it's spots and there is no one safe whilst this woman is allowed to perpetuate her evil openly and without even an admonishment.) ENDQUOTE
In 26 January this year the Irish Times reported in a VERY brief article that a number of outstanding CIVIL actions brought by parents against Mr McGlinchey "have been withdrawn and struck out".
In Short - The Irish Times - Tue, Jan 26, 2010
The Limerick Leader does not seem to have mentioned this at all. I'm not quite clear what happened here. Did the parents agree to withdraw the actions? Did the High Court "withdraw and strike out" the actions against their wishes? How long had those actions been outstanding and had the parents been actively pursuing them up to the time they were struck out by the Court?
POST NO: 126
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
In 26 January this year the Irish Times reported in a VERY brief article that a number of outstanding CIVIL actions brought by parents against Mr McGlinchey "have been withdrawn and struck out".
In Short - The Irish Times - Tue, Jan 26, 2010
The Limerick Leader does not seem to have mentioned this at all. I'm not quite clear what happened here. Did the parents agree to withdraw the actions? Did the High Court "withdraw and strike out" the actions against their wishes? How long had those actions been outstanding and had the parents been actively pursuing them up to the time they were struck out by the Court? ENDQUOTE
I believe there was a subsequent action.
POST NO: 127
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
I believe there was a subsequent action. ENDQUOTE
This would have been initiated 13 years after the original allegations - a case of Recovered Memory perhaps?
Can I take it that the High Court struck out all the other civil actions against the wishes of the parents? Did they even contest the High Court decision or just make allegations and then fail to follow them up OR withdraw them?
It is extra-ordinary that the Limerick Leader seems to have ignored the High Court decision to strike out the civil actions. Normally a local newspaper will write MORE about a local case than the nationals. Are local journalists afraid that if they publish something displeasing to the accusers, a child will "recover his memory" about said journalists?
POST NO: 128
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
This would have been initiated 13 years after the original allegations - a case of Recovered Memory perhaps?
Can I take it that the High Court struck out all the other actions against the wishes of the parents? Did they even contest the High Court decision or just make allegations and then fail to follow them up OR withdraw them? ENDQUOTE
The subsequent action was not against Mr McGlinchey. I'm not sure how much I'm at liberty to reveal, but it has come to a conclusion and a verdict was given.
POST NO 129
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
Of passing interest to this thread:
City solicitor John Devane must pay legal costs of ?300,000 - Limerick Leader
POST NO: 130
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Riadach
Of passing interest to this thread:
City solicitor John Devane must pay legal costs of ?300,000 - Limerick Leader ENDQUOTE
Is THAT the "subsequent action". I'm not very surprised that John Devane lost his civil action for slander against the Gardai. That is very difficult to prove. Also Limerick Leader journalists are unlikely to attract any Recovered Memory type allegations for publishing that story. Did they cover the story about the striking out of all the remaining civil actions against Mr. McGlinchey?
POST NO: 131
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
Quote:Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Is THAT the "subsequent action". I'm not very surprised that John Devane lost his civil action for slander against the Gardai. That is very difficult to prove. Also Limerick Leader journalists are unlikely to attract any Recovered Memory type allegations for publishing that story. Did they cover the story about the striking out of all the remaining civil actions against Mr. McGlinchey?
Not it isn't the subsequent case. As I've said, I'm not sure how much I can reveal, merely that it was an action taken by parents. ENDQUOTE
I think you also need to be careful in some of the allegations you have thrown around, as Mr McGlinchey is also pursuing a case.
QUOTE NO: 132
Old 4 Weeks Ago
DIDIMUS
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
Not it isn't the subsequent case. As I've said, I'm not sure how much I can reveal, merely that it was an action taken by parents. ENDQUOTE
Was the subsequent case reported on elsewhere?
POST NO: 133
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Didimus
Was the subsequent case reported on elsewhere? ENDQUOTE
Not that I can see, no. Hence I'm reluctant to post any details.
POST NO: 134
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Riadach
Not that I can see, no. Hence I'm reluctant to post any details.ENDQUOTE
The very brief Irish Times article I quoted a short time ago includes the following:
"A number of outstanding civil actions brought by parents against a teacher who was cleared of criminal charges of sexually abusing pupils at a school 13 years ago have been withdrawn and struck out at the High Court."
This seems to indicate that some civil actions had been struck out previously and the remainder were struck out in January 2010. If a "subsequent action" was initiated by parents against a teacher at the school then it must have been made 13 years after the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in March 1997. Is this Recovered Memory Syndrome?
POST NO 135
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
The very brief Irish Times article I quoted a short time ago includes the following:
"A number of outstanding civil actions brought by parents against a teacher who was cleared of criminal charges of sexually abusing pupils at a school 13 years ago have been withdrawn and struck out at the High Court."
This seems to indicate that some civil actions had been struck out previously and the remainder were struck out in January 2010. If a "subsequent action" was initiated by parents against a teacher at the school then it must have been made 13 years after the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in March 1997. Is this Recovered Memory Syndrome? ENDQUOTE
The subsequent action was not against another teacher. You may wish to actually think about it, right than running away with yourself. Besides, I doubt they could bring a civil action against another teacher, if criminal charges were never pursued.
POST NO 136
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Quote:Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
The very brief Irish Times article I quoted a short time ago includes the following:
"A number of outstanding civil actions brought by parents against a teacher who was cleared of criminal charges of sexually abusing pupils at a school 13 years ago have been withdrawn and struck out at the High Court."
This seems to indicate that some civil actions had been struck out previously and the remainder were struck out in January 2010. If a "subsequent action" was initiated by parents against a teacher at the school then it must have been made 13 years after the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in March 1997. Is this Recovered Memory Syndrome? ENDQUOTE
Kilbarry - originally there were 38 civil actions against Pat McGlinchey. In 2000 approx. 20 of these were struck out in the High Court. After the trial in 2002 9 cases were discontinued by the parents. Then in January the remaining 9 cases were withdrawn and struck out against Pat in the High Court. My only guess is that these people finally realised that Pat McGlinchey had no case to answer. How terrible that he was put through the horror of all this for 13 years before people accepted he had never touched any of these children. It should be noted that the 9 cases remaining until this year were for 4 children and 5 parents! The oringinal 38 were made up of children, their parents and some siblings.
POST NO: 137
Old 4 Weeks Ago
DIDIMUS
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
The subsequent action was not against Mr McGlinchey. I'm not sure how much I'm at liberty to reveal, but it has come to a conclusion and a verdict was given.
ENDQUOTE
If the case was not held in camera, and if there were no other reporting restrictions, it is in the public domain.
In any case I'm not sure it's wise to be alluding to cases which cannot be reported on, and which may or may not have any relevance to a case that has been decided on and is in the public domain.
POST NO: 138
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Kilbarry - originally there were 38 civil actions against Pat McGlinchey. In 2000 approx. 20 of these were struck out in the High Court. After the trial in 2002 9 cases were discontinued by the parents. Then in January the remaining 9 cases were withdrawn and struck out against Pat in the High Court. My only guess is that these people finally realised that Pat McGlinchey had no case to answer. How terrible that he was put through the horror of all this for 13 years before people accepted he had never touched any of these children. It should be noted that the 9 cases remaining until this year were for 4 children and 5 parents! The oringinal 38 were made up of children, their parents and some siblings. ENDQUOTE
Thanks very much for the information. Am I correct in assuming that the Limerick Leader has published very liittle on Mr. McGlinchey's case - even less than the national media that have done the absolute minimum? If so that would be very unusual for a local newspaper which has a huge story right on its own doorstep. Just compare that with media coverage of allegations of abuse in Artane in the 1950s and 60s!
POST NO: 139
Old 4 Weeks Ago
ANDREW49
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1 View Post
Thanks very much for the information. Am I correct in assuming that the Limerick Leader has published very liittle on Mr. McGlinchey's case - even less than the national media that have done the absolute minimum? If so that would be very unusual for a local newspaper which has a huge story right on its own doorstep. Just compare that with media coverage of allegations of abuse in Artane in the 1950s and 60s! ENDQUOTE
... and an independent judicial inquiry has found that the abuses at Artane in the 50s and 60s were true.
Some of the general conclusions from the Ryan Report regarding Artane:
Artane used frequent and severe punishment to impose and enforce a regime of militaristic discipline. The policy of the School was rigid control by means of severe corporal punishment and fear of punishment. Such punishment was excessive and pervasive. The result of arbitrary and uncontrolled punishment was a climate of fear. All Brothers became implicated because they did not intervene or report excesses.
Sexual abuse of boys was a chronic problem in Artane. The documented and admitted cases show that for more than half of the 33 years under consideration there was at least one Brother in Artane who at some time engaged in sexual abuse of boys. Much more abuse occurred than is recorded in documents because of inadequate recording and reporting procedures and other causes of under-reporting.
Incidences of abuse were managed primarily with a view to protecting the Congregation and the Institution from the harm that would be done if sexual abuse by Brothers became public. This involved suppression of disclosure of abuse, failure to investigate properly and failure to report. The policy facilitated further abuse when offenders were transferred within the Congregation or permitted to leave in good standing.
Sexual abuse by Brothers was a chronic problem in Artane.
Brothers who served in Artane included firstly those who had previously been guilty of sexual abuse of boys, secondly those whose abuse was discovered while they worked in Artane and, thirdly some who were subsequently revealed to have abused boys.
A timeline of the documented and admitted cases of sexual abuse shows that:
(a)For more than half of the 33 years under consideration, there was at least one such abuser working there;
(b)For more than one third of the years there were at least two abusers present;
(c)During one year .... there were seven such Brothers in Artane at the same time.
2.More abuse occurred than is recorded in documents because of inadequate recording and reporting procedures. In particular:
Artane failed generally to provide for the emotional needs of the boys. At management level there was a lack of respect for the boys as individuals. One example was the humiliating practice of inspection of underwear in public.
The number of boys in Artane, the extreme regimentation of their lives, the lack of appropriate training of the Brothers, the insufficient numbers of staff and the pervasiveness of corporal punishment all had serious adverse effects on the welfare and emotional development of many of the children who passed through Artane. The climate of fear was a dominant memory, and practices used for management and control of the boys were frightening and abusive. It was a problem central to the whole system in Artane that the boys’ perspective was not taken into account. The Christian Brothers did not understand the impact of those practices.
Artane had sufficient income to provide for the boys’ physical needs but it failed to do so in many respects:
* Accommodation was generally poor. Toilet facilities were primitive ... Facilities for preparing and serving food for the boys were primitive ... clothing was poor, patched and institutional ... Artane failed to cater for either educationally backward children or for those who were brighter. No effort was made to provide secondary education for boys who were capable of benefiting from it.
So tell us all just this once ex-Christian Brother Kilbarry1 - Did you leave the Christian Brothers in good standing?
There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls.
POST NO 140
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Andrew49
... and an independent judicial inquiry has found that the abuses at Artane in the 50s and 60s were true.
Some of the general conclusions from the Ryan Report regarding Artane:
Artane used frequent and severe punishment to impose and enforce a regime of militaristic discipline. The policy of the School was rigid control by means of severe corporal punishment and fear of punishment. Such punishment was excessive and pervasive. The result of arbitrary and uncontrolled punishment was a climate of fear. All Brothers became implicated because they did not intervene or report excesses. ..... etc
So tell us all just this once ex-Christian Brother Kilbarry1 - Did you leave the Christian Brothers in good standing? ENDQUOTE
Andrew will you stop this lunatic trolling. Because someone (even myself) mentions Artane in one sentence out of nearly 150 posts, it does not mean that you can start your usual rant.
I am not and never have been (as they said in the McCarthyite era) a Christian Brother. I was a De La Salle Brother for 3 years in the 1960s and have said this on different sites and topics. The Christian Brothers were founded in Ireland and have branches world-wide. The De La Salle Brothers were founded in France, 100 years earlier and have branches world-wide including Ireland. Their religious garb was different - especially in the 1960s and even their religious names are different. (The Christian Brothers were always called by their surnames and the De La Salle by their first names.) It really is very difficult to mix them up unless you are a bigot driven by media hysteria. The main media assault has been on the Christian Brothers so presumably this is why you cannot get basic facts right.
I left the De La Salle Brothers in good standing - as did most of my contempories who joined in the 1960s.
POST NO: 141
FIRINNE
Junior Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Thanks very much for the information. Am I correct in assuming that the Limerick Leader has published very liittle on Mr. McGlinchey's case - even less than the national media that have done the absolute minimum? If so that would be very unusual for a local newspaper which has a huge story right on its own doorstep. Just compare that with media coverage of allegations of abuse in Artane in the 1950s and 60s! ENDQUOTE
Yes Kilbarry you are very right. The Limerick Leader has published so little it begs the question - who has got to them? I'm sure the reporters in there have been appraised of the truth about this case and yet they choose not to print it. Strange, they would get even more publicity than they did on the Willie O'Dea fiasco. But I live in hope that some day SOON the whole truth will come out. Then and only then will the McGlinchey family get peace and full exhoneration. I don't think though at this stage that the story should go to the Leader and I think the people of Limerick will then need to ask why they have never chosen to print the true story here.
POST NO 142
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by firinne
Yes Kilbarry you are very right. The Limerick Leader has published so little it begs the question - who has got to them? I'm sure the reporters in there have been appraised of the truth about this case and yet they choose not to print it. Strange, they would get even more publicity than they did on the Willie O'Dea fiasco. But I live in hope that some day SOON the whole truth will come out. Then and only then will the McGlinchey family get peace and full exhoneration. I don't think though at this stage that the story should go to the Leader and I think the people of Limerick will then need to ask why they have never chosen to print the true story here. ENDQUOTE
Yes dozens of children and parents made allegations of child abuse against dozens of teachers and others in a legal saga that has continued for over 13 years now. You would think it would be a huge story for local journalists. They could even try to get it into the world press, act as stringers for Time magazine etc. In some ways it ressembles the frenzy surrounding Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) in the USA in the 1980s and 1990s where the owners of kindergartens were targeted with lunatic alllegations. Typically one mother used to complain on behalf of one child and that triggered a frenzy of accusations. That's how it started in Limerick. Moreover the Limerick school is for the mentally handicappped so the mental age of the children would not be much higher than kindergarten children.
Satanic Ritual Abuse generated world-wide headlines in its day - including sneering attacks on American stupidity and fanaticism. Yet the Limerick case is barely known even in this country - not a single Prime Time programme or impassioned article from the pen of Mary Raftery or Fintan O'Toole.
I am only speculating but are Limerick journalists afraid that if they launch a detailed investigation, they will end up being acccused of child abuse themselves? (Of course this theory would NOT explain the silence of Raftery, O'Toole and Company.)
POST NO: 143
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Yes dozens of children and parents made allegations of child abuse against dozens of teachers and others in a legal saga that has continued for over 13 years now. You would think it would be a huge story for local journalists. They could even try to get it into the world press, act as stringers for Time magazine etc. In some ways it ressembles the frenzy surrounding Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) in the USA in the 1980s and 1990s where the owners of kindergartens were targeted with lunatic alllegations. Typically one mother used to complain on behalf of one child and that triggered a frenzy of accusations. That's how it started in Limerick. Moreover the Limerick school is for the mentally handicappped so the mental age of the children would not be much higher than kindergarten children.
Satanic Ritual Abuse generated world-wide headlines in its day - including sneering attacks on American stupidity and fanaticism. Yet the Limerick case is barely known even in this country - not a single Prime Time programme or impassioned article from the pen of Mary Raftery or Fintan O'Toole.
I am only speculating but are Limerick journalists afraid that if they launch a detailed investigation, they will end up being acccused of child abuse themselves? (Of course this theory would NOT explain the silence of Raftery, O'Toole and Company.) ENDQUOTE
The Salem Witch Trials and the McMartin Case come to mind here Kilbarry. Your theory may have some basis but I feel that a lot of people think it would not be politically correct to appear to print something that is against the mentally handicapped. In my opinion it would be doing a favour for these children because were the full story to be made known then an effort could be made to ensure they are never again used as pawns for the enhancement of others.
POST NO 144
Old 4 Weeks Ago
ANDREW49
Politics.ie Member
Quote: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Andrew will you stop this lunatic trolling. Because someone (even myself) mentions Artane in one sentence out of nearly 150 posts, it does not mean that you can start your usual rant. ENDQUOTE
Lunatic trolling! Is that the best you can do Brother Kilbarry1. Gosh times have changed indeed! No longer can the cassocked brigade force small children to lick vomit from their boots, or hook little children up to live sockets and electrocute them.
Brother Benedict (from the de la Salle order) housemaster at St Ninian's School, in Stirlingshire. whose address was given as Hill Brow, near Liss, in Hampshire, had been found guilty of 10 offences of physical abuse, including giving electric shocks. A survivor said Brother Benedict made pupils hold metal rods wired up to a generator.
Quote:
"I was electrocuted in the boot room. Brother Benedict (from the de la Salle order) saw that as some sort of kick."
During the trial, the court heard how 10-to-12-year-old pupils at the school were whipped, forced to eat their own vomit and were sexually abused in dormitories and the school's woodwork room. A boy's arm was broken when Brother Benedict (from the de la Salle order) lost his temper with him. Source
Seeing as you are losing your temper ex de la Salle Brother Kilbarry1 should I go see if the light bill is paid?
There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls.
POST NO: 145
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Oh my God Andrew - find somewhere else to vent your anger instead of on a thread that is about an innocent man and the horror that has been visited on him.
I know terrible abuse took place but it is not fair on someone like Pat McGlinchey for you to air your opinions on this thread. Do you not agree it is equally as devastating on a man to be wrongly accused of horrific acts?
POST NO: 146
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
How Witch-hunts Begin
For an example of how witch-hunts begin, see another topic on THIS website (It has just been closed down actually - but one poster quotes a related discussion on a Cork website that is still ongoing):
Allegations against psychiatry at UCC
One disturbed individual makes extra-ordinary allegations against the staff of an institution and things escalate from there.
POST NO: 147
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
For an example of how witch-hunts begin, see another topic on THIS website (It has just been closed down actually - but one poster quotes a related discussion on a Cork website that is still ongoing):
Allegations against psychiatry at UCC
One disturbed individual makes extra-ordinary allegations against the staff of an institution and things escalate from there. ENDQUOTE
The other website is People's Republic of Cork - 99 posts to date and still ongoing.
I'm the "John Murphy" that sent the email at UCC. - Peoples Republic Of Cork Discussion Forums
Compare this to a previous post by Firinne on how the witch-hunt in the Limerick school started:
"Are you aware that the first parent to make an allegation against Pat McGlinchey had previously made a similar allegation against a bus driver?
Also this woman's son had been disturbed at school for about a year (when in fact he was in another teacher's class) and it was Pat who looked for assistance for him.
The boy had an appendectomy and had an adverse reaction to the anaesthetic which resulted in severe behaviour problems. When he went into Pat's class it was Pat who asked a psychologist and a social worker to visit the child's mother and see if anything could be done to help him. Following their visit this mother rang the school and made a statement 'you sent 2 ********es out to my home and there's no abuse in my house.' Strange statement you would say, particularly in light of the fact that the next day she accused Pat McGlinchey of abusing her son. She then rang all the other parents in the school and told them their children had been abused. This is clearly documented so don't dispute it.
Do you think someone abusing a child would put the same child in the hands of a psychologist and a social worker?"
POST NO: 148
Old 4 Weeks Ago
DISABLED STUDENT
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
For an example of how witch-hunts begin, see another topic on THIS website (It has just been closed down actually - but one poster quotes a related discussion on a Cork website that is still ongoing):
Allegations against psychiatry at UCC
One disturbed individual makes extra-ordinary allegations against the staff of an institution and things escalate from there. ENDQUOTE
That was interesting one. BTw, did you work in Artane a place for thugs who revelled in beating inmates up etc??
POST NO: 149
Old 4 Weeks Ago
DISABLED STUDENT
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Andrew49
Lunatic trolling! Is that the best you can do Brother Kilbarry1. Gosh times have changed indeed! No longer can the cassocked brigade force small children to lick vomit from their boots, or hook little children up to live sockets and electrocute them.
Brother Benedict (from the de la Salle order) housemaster at St Ninian's School, in Stirlingshire. whose address was given as Hill Brow, near Liss, in Hampshire, had been found guilty of 10 offences of physical abuse, including giving electric shocks. A survivor said Brother Benedict made pupils hold metal rods wired up to a generator. During the trial, the court heard how 10-to-12-year-old pupils at the school were whipped, forced to eat their own vomit and were sexually abused in dormitories and the school's woodwork room. A boy's arm was broken when Brother Benedict (from the de la Salle order) lost his temper with him. Source
Seeing as you are losing your temper ex de la Salle Brother Kilbarry1 should I go see if the light bill is paid? ENDQUOTE
Keep up the good work.
POST NO: 150
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Disabled student
That was interesting one. BTw, did you work in Artane a place for thugs who revelled in beating inmates up etc?? ENDQUOTE
Post no 140 was not a very long time ago "Disabled Student". However for your benefit I will quote from it again:
Andrew will you stop this lunatic trolling. Because someone (even myself) mentions Artane in one sentence out of nearly 150 posts, it does not mean that you can start your usual rant.
I am not and never have been (as they said in the McCarthyite era) a Christian Brother. I was a De La Salle Brother for 3 years in the 1960s and have said this on different sites and topics. The Christian Brothers were founded in Ireland and have branches world-wide. The De La Salle Brothers were founded in France, 100 years earlier and have branches world-wide including Ireland. Their religious garb was different - especially in the 1960s and even their religious names are different. (The Christian Brothers were always called by their surnames and the De La Salle by their first names.) It really is very difficult to mix them up unless you are a bigot driven by media hysteria. The main media assault has been on the Christian Brothers so presumably this is why you cannot get basic facts right. .........
POST NO: 151
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
The other website is People's Republic of Cork - 99 posts to date and still ongoing.
I'm the "John Murphy" that sent the email at UCC. - Peoples Republic Of Cork Discussion Forums
Compare this to a previous post by Firinne on how the witch-hunt in the Limerick school started:
"Are you aware that the first parent to make an allegation against Pat McGlinchey had previously made a similar allegation against a bus driver?
Also this woman's son had been disturbed at school for about a year (when in fact he was in another teacher's class) and it was Pat who looked for assistance for him.
The boy had an appendectomy and had an adverse reaction to the anaesthetic which resulted in severe behaviour problems. When he went into Pat's class it was Pat who asked a psychologist and a social worker to visit the child's mother and see if anything could be done to help him. Following their visit this mother rang the school and made a statement 'you sent 2 ********es out to my home and there's no abuse in my house.' Strange statement you would say, particularly in light of the fact that the next day she accused Pat McGlinchey of abusing her son. She then rang all the other parents in the school and told them their children had been abused. This is clearly documented so don't dispute it.
Do you think someone abusing a child would put the same child in the hands of a psychologist and a social worker?" ENDQUOTE
It's not true though Kilbarry. The claim against McGlinchey was due to the events I described above.
Riadach
POST NO: 152
Old 4 Weeks Ago
DISABLED STUDENT
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Post no 140 was not a very long time ago "Disabled Student". However for your benefit I will quote from it again:
Andrew will you stop this lunatic trolling. Because someone (even myself) mentions Artane in one sentence out of nearly 150 posts, it does not mean that you can start your usual rant.
I am not and never have been (as they said in the McCarthyite era) a Christian Brother. I was a De La Salle Brother for 3 years in the 1960s and have said this on different sites and topics. The Christian Brothers were founded in Ireland and have branches world-wide. The De La Salle Brothers were founded in France, 100 years earlier and have branches world-wide including Ireland. Their religious garb was different - especially in the 1960s and even their religious names are different. (The Christian Brothers were always called by their surnames and the De La Salle by their first names.) It really is very difficult to mix them up unless you are a bigot driven by media hysteria. The main media assault has been on the Christian Brothers so presumably this is why you cannot get basic facts right. .........ENDQUOTE
I am on this one with Andrew as he did so much work raising the awareness of abuses of what was happening here and there??
Thanks for the explanation re religious orders. But you havent' answered his question as to why did you leave DE salle?
That's fine if you don't want to answer it.
QUOTE NO: 153
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY!
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Disabled student
I am on this one with Andrew as he did so much work raising the awareness of abuses of what was happening here and there??
Thanks for the explanation re religious orders. But you havent' answered his question as to why did you leave DE salle?
That's fine if you don't want to answer it. ENDQUOTE
I left for the same kind of reason that people leave jobs as insurance clerks, or teachers or civil servants - because they want to move on to something else. I was in good standing when I left and lots of people did the same after Vatican II.
Now can we concentrate on the theme of this thread which is false allegations of child abuse - with specific reference to the McGlinchey case?
POST NO: 154
Old 4 Weeks Ago
DISABLED STUDENT
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1 V
I left for the same kind of reason that people leave jobs as insurance clerks, or teachers or civil servants - because they want to move on to something else. I was in good standing when I left and lots of people did the same after Vatican II. ENDQUOTE
Thank you Kibarry1.
Now can we concentrate on the theme of this thread which is false allegations of child abuse - with specific reference to the McGlinchey case?
Of course.
POST NO: 155
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
It's not true though Kilbarry. The claim against McGlinchey was due to the events I described above. ENDQUOTE
What's not true Riadach? This is exactly how the whole sorry saga started against Pat McGlinchey. IT IS DOCUMENTED. Long before the Gardaí turned up at the homes of the children (on their misguided trawl) parents were coming in to the school and saying the allegations were the topic of conversation around their dinner tables. Please don't intimate that I am lying. You may have some of the stories that caused mass hysteria but you do not, obviously, have the FACTS which clearly illustrate how these children were used and abused by persons who knew nothing about their level of communication and their susceptibility to suggestion etc. I am not blaming the parents but it is an awful pity they did not ask for the qualifications of the people who were interviewing their children. One parent who gave evidence at the trial of Pat's innocence told graphically how Gardaí had turned up at her door and tried to convince her that her daughter had been abused. But guess what? She had spent a lot of time in the school and knew nothing had happened to her child. She did the wise thing and cleared these people from her home before they got a chance to contaminate her beautiful child and before they caused untold heartache to her family. I pray that someday other parents will realise what has actually been done to their children and none of this was done by Pat McGlinchey. The awful thing is that so many lives have been blighted by these false allegations - not least of which is the life of an innocent teacher.
POST NO 156
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Firinne
What's not true Riadach? This is exactly how the whole sorry saga started against Pat McGlinchey. IT IS DOCUMENTED. Long before the Gardaí turned up at the homes of the children (on their misguided trawl) parents were coming in to the school and saying the allegations were the topic of conversation around their dinner tables. Please don't intimate that I am lying. You may have some of the stories that caused mass hysteria but you do not, obviously, have the FACTS which clearly illustrate how these children were used and abused by persons who knew nothing about their level of communication and their susceptibility to suggestion etc. I am not blaming the parents but it is an awful pity they did not ask for the qualifications of the people who were interviewing their children. One parent who gave evidence at the trial of Pat's innocence told graphically how Gardaí had turned up at her door and tried to convince her that her daughter had been abused. But guess what? She had spent a lot of time in the school and knew nothing had happened to her child. She did the wise thing and cleared these people from her home before they got a chance to contaminate her beautiful child and before they caused untold heartache to her family. I pray that someday other parents will realise what has actually been done to their children and none of this was done by Pat McGlinchey. The awful thing is that so many lives have been blighted by these false allegations - not least of which is the life of an innocent teacher. ENDQUOTE
I'm not intimating that you are lying, I'm intimating that you are not in possession of the full truth of the incident. I do not wish to claim for a second that there wasn't an incident that you described, of a woman who had a tendency to make false allegations, what I am claiming however, was that that woman was not the reason why these allegations were made. You show that in your above proof yourself. People were aware of these allegations, discussing them at dinner tables, without going into hysteria without approaching the Gardaí themselves. I'm not willing to dispute that this case occured. However, it is misleading to state that this was the fundamental reason why charges were pursued, and children were interviewed. That was due to the fact that two children exhibited signs of sexual abuse, and it was at that moment Gardaí started to approach parents. However, you will of course ignore this fact and assuming I'm lying because it does not sit well with your version of events. I would ask you to ask around a few parents, interview Gardaí involved, verify the claim before dismissing. Of course the DPP did not pursue the claims of these children in court, as their severe disability precluded them from giving testimony, as it had in all but two other cases, so if you base your opinion merely on what you heard in court, I'm not surprised that this may have bypassed your attention.
Were these claims even addressed in the court case? Have you heard them before approaching this forum? None of these claims have any baring on Mr McGlinchey's innocence but they do put claims about the flippancy of the allegations into a true perspective. The make the abuse claims non-imaginary, and show that at the root of all this, there was indeed a case of abuse that has never been answered for.
Last edited by Riadach; 4 Weeks Ago at 02:30 PM.
POST NO: 157
Old 4 Weeks Ago
Andrew49
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
It really is very difficult to mix them up (one set of celibate males in black cassocks with another set of celibate males in black cassocks) unless you are a bigot driven by media hysteria. The main media assault has been on the Christian Brothers so presumably this is why you cannot get basic facts right. ......... ENDQUOTE
I'm not a bigot former ex-De La Salle Christian Brother Kilbarry, nor am I driven by media hysteria. It's typical of your lot to point the finger - anywhere - except at yourselves.
Are you now comparing 'media assault' with clergy driven sexual assault?
Over the past decade, thousands of Catholic priests around the world have been accused of molesting children and the Church has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to settle sex-abuse lawsuits. The litigation exposed a far-reaching cover-up of child sexual abuse by the Church hierarchy, which included transferring pedophile priests to new parishes and intimidating victims and their families into silence.
Your lot has been pointing the finger at the media, at the gay community and at victims themselves in a pathetic attempt to deflect scrutiny from the worldwide cover-up of CLERGY SEXUAL TERRORISM on orders from the Vatican.
And as this thread is about INNOCENCE you should state whether you think victims of CLERGY SEXUAL TERRORISM are really, after all, the GUILTY people in the worldwide exposure of the complicity of the Vatican in the facilitation of CLERGY SEXUAL TERRORISM.
There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls.
POST NO: 158
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY!
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
I'm not intimating that you are lying, I'm intimating that you are not in possession of the full truth of the incident. I do not wish to claim for a second that there wasn't an incident that you described, of a woman who had a tendency to make false allegations, what I am claiming however, was that that woman was not the reason why these allegations were made. You show that in your above proof yourself. People were aware of these allegations, discussing them at dinner tables, without going into hysteria without approaching the Gardaí themselves. I'm not willing to dispute that this case occured. However, it is misleading to state that this was the fundamental reason why charges were pursued, and children were interviewed. That was due to the fact that two children exhibited signs of sexual abuse, and it was at that moment Gardaí started to approach parents. However, you will of course ignore this fact and assuming I'm lying because it does not sit well with your version of events. I would ask you to ask around a few parents, interview Gardaí involved, verify the claim before dismissing. Of course the DPP did not pursue the claims of these children in court, as their severe disability precluded them from giving testimony, as it had in all but two other cases, so if you base your opinion merely on what you heard in court, I'm not surprised that this may have bypassed your attention.
Were these claims even addressed in the court case? Have you heard them before approaching this forum? None of these claims have any baring on Mr McGlinchey's innocence but they do put claims about the flippancy of the allegations into a true perspective. The make the abuse claims non-imaginary, and show that at the root of all this, there was indeed a case of abuse that has never been answered for. ENDQUOTE
Let's get this straight. After the last CIVIL claim against Patrick McGlinchey was struck out by the High Court in January 2010, some parent(s) made an allegation against someone who is NOT Mr. McGlinchey and is NOT a teacher at the school? This is supposed to explain the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in 1997 - or at least show that they were not just a case of hysteria? Is that what you are saying?
For the purpose of this arguement let's call these people the "honest accusers" as opposed to the false and hysterical accusers who made the allegations against the teachers. What exactly were these honest accusers doing during the 13 years of the witch-hunt against Mr. McGlinchey?
If I had a genuine grievance against authority, I would be extremely annoyed if some fanatics/nutcases/fraudsters tried to piggyback on my genuine claim and I would make my displeasure known. Apart from any moral considerations, their behaviour would tend to discredit my claim - ESPECIALLY if I failed to publicly disassociate myself from them.
Have these "honest" accusers of a non-teacher disassociated themselves from the people who made the false allegations against teachers?
POST NO: 159
Old 4 Weeks Ago
RIADACH
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Let's get this straight. After the last CIVIL claim against Patrick McGlinchey was struck out by the High Court in January 2010, some parent(s) made an allegation against someone who is NOT Mr. McGlinchey and is NOT a teacher at the school? This is supposed to explain the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in 1997 - or at least show that they were not just a case of hysteria? Is that what you are saying? ENDQUOTE
No, no and no.
The original allegations came from physical evidence of abuse in 1997 involving two students, not from hysterical allegations from a serial accuser.
Your imagination has a fantastic tendency to run away with itself.
POST NO: 160
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
Politics.ie Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
No, no and no.
The original allegations came from physical evidence of abuse in 1997 involving two students, not from hysterical allegations from a serial accuser.
Your imagination has a fantastic tendency to run away with itself. ENDQUOTE
Riadach my "runaway imagination" was in fact based on the following statements that you made on this thread:
In your post no 126 you wrote that:
I believe there was a subsequent action.
This was in response to MY post which you quoted as follows:
In 26 January this year the Irish Times reported in a VERY brief article that a number of outstanding CIVIL actions brought by parents against Mr McGlinchey "have been withdrawn and struck out". .......The Limerick Leader does not seem to have mentioned this at all. I'm not quite clear what happened here. Did the parents agree to withdraw the actions? Did the High Court "withdraw and strike out" the actions against their wishes? How long had those actions been outstanding and had the parents been actively pursuing them up to the time they were struck out by the Court?
In Post No 128 you wrote:
The subsequent action was not against Mr McGlinchey. I'm not sure how much I'm at liberty to reveal, but it has come to a conclusion and a verdict was given.
In Post No 131 you wrote:
Not it isn't the subsequent case. As I've said, I'm not sure how much I can reveal, merely that it was an action taken by parents.
I think you also need to be careful in some of the allegations you have thrown around, as Mr McGlinchey is also pursuing a case.
In Post no 135 you wrote:
The subsequent action was not against another teacher. You may wish to actually think about it, right than running away with yourself. Besides, I doubt they could bring a civil action against another teacher, if criminal charges were never pursued.
Your long post 156 above concluded as follows:
.....None of these claims have any baring on Mr McGlinchey's innocence but they do put claims about the flippancy of the allegations into a true perspective. The make the abuse claims non-imaginary, and show that at the root of all this, there was indeed a case of abuse that has never been answered for.
Based on your comments above I wrote:
Let's get this straight. After the last CIVIL claim against Patrick McGlinchey was struck out by the High Court in January 2010, some parent(s) made an allegation against someone who is NOT Mr. McGlinchey and is NOT a teacher at the school? This is supposed to explain the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in 1997 - or at least show that they were not just a case of hysteria? Is that what you are saying?
Can you explain what you are saying because "No, no and no" doesn't do it?
POST NO 161
4 Weeks ago
RIADACH
QUOTE:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Riadach my "runaway imagination" was in fact based on the following statements that you made on this thread:
In your post no 126 you wrote that:
I believe there was a subsequent action.
This was in response to MY post which you quoted as follows:
In 26 January this year the Irish Times reported in a VERY brief article that a number of outstanding CIVIL actions brought by parents against Mr McGlinchey "have been withdrawn and struck out". .......The Limerick Leader does not seem to have mentioned this at all. I'm not quite clear what happened here. Did the parents agree to withdraw the actions? Did the High Court "withdraw and strike out" the actions against their wishes? How long had those actions been outstanding and had the parents been actively pursuing them up to the time they were struck out by the Court?
In Post No 128 you wrote:
The subsequent action was not against Mr McGlinchey. I'm not sure how much I'm at liberty to reveal, but it has come to a conclusion and a verdict was given.
In Post No 131 you wrote:
Not it isn't the subsequent case. As I've said, I'm not sure how much I can reveal, merely that it was an action taken by parents.
I think you also need to be careful in some of the allegations you have thrown around, as Mr McGlinchey is also pursuing a case.
In Post no 135 you wrote:
The subsequent action was not against another teacher. You may wish to actually think about it, right than running away with yourself. Besides, I doubt they could bring a civil action against another teacher, if criminal charges were never pursued.
Your long post 156 above concluded as follows:
.....None of these claims have any baring on Mr McGlinchey's innocence but they do put claims about the flippancy of the allegations into a true perspective. The make the abuse claims non-imaginary, and show that at the root of all this, there was indeed a case of abuse that has never been answered for.
Based on your comments above I wrote:
Let's get this straight. After the last CIVIL claim against Patrick McGlinchey was struck out by the High Court in January 2010, some parent(s) made an allegation against someone who is NOT Mr. McGlinchey and is NOT a teacher at the school? This is supposed to explain the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in 1997 - or at least show that they were not just a case of hysteria? Is that what you are saying?
Can you explain what you are saying because "No, no and no" doesn't do it? ENDQUOTE
Simply put, they made no subsequent allegation against anyone. You need to reign in your imagination.
Riadach
POST NO 162
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
No, no and no.
The original allegations came from physical evidence of abuse in 1997 involving two students, not from hysterical allegations from a serial accuser.
Your imagination has a fantastic tendency to run away with itself. ENDQUOTE
Riadach, I have had it with your false misrepresentation of the facts surrounding this case. There was NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that any abuse happened in this school. In 1997 one child was physically examined by a doctor and the report on this child stated there was 'evidence of hymenal stretching and bruising to this child's breast.' It was stated the stretching may have been caused by masturbation and as for the bruising - this would have been from recent onset. Do you know that bruising (contusions) only last for three weeks? Well guess what? This child had not been at school for weeks and she had not been in Pat McGlinchey's class (nor had he any access to her) for almost a year. Also this child was assessed by a fully qualified sexual psychotherapist on six occasions and when her mother was told there was no evidence to substantiate allegations of sexual abuse the psychotherapist was told the child would be taken elsewhere. I don't know if this girl was taken to any qualified person after this but I do know she was repeatedly questioned by unqualified persons in the Gardaí, HSE and CARI. What a sin to subject this child to repetitive interviews when it is a known fact that this only serves to contaminate children such as these ( and indeed all children). I refer you to the Cleveland and Orkney cases and also to a transcript of the evidence of a world renowned Psychologist in this field. You will find his testimony under the McMartin Trial (evidence of Dr. Michael Moloney) and this will explain to you how the horror of what happened to Pat McGlinchey is not restricted to him, unfortunately.
The two children involved in the trial of Pat McGlinchey had not a shred of evidence, physical or otherwise of sexual abuse. Had this been available I'm sure the Prosecution would have been only too willing to present it to the jury. On the contrary, Pat McGlinchey had to call witnesses who gave clear evidence as to the unprofessional way these children were subjected to repetitive interviewing by unqualified personnel. The Superintendent of the Gardaí even admitted they had no experience or training in interviewing children with learning difficulties. Their training for interviewing all children was confined to one hour in Templemore. Suffer the little children, comes to mind and it is frightening that more children may be abused in the manner in which these children were used and, in my opinion, abused.
Do you have any answers as to why one of the children here said he was abused on a school trip? He said he was taken to a toilet in a shed and abused there. Nobody had thought to question the 4 members of staff who accompanied this class on these trips. It wasn't until they were in court that it was heard from these reliable witnesses that Pat never left the group with any child on his own. Also if this child's interviews were to be believed he was left behind in the woods, in a shed and he looked out the window and saw the bus leave without him. Photographs of the shed in these woods which were shown to the court clearly illustrated that there was no toilet in the shed and there were no windows either. The child also stated he had been thrown in the lake beside the woods and he had to remove his clothes. Other children in their interviews and staff in court stated this had never happened. This child then said he had to walk back to school himself - a distance of 15/20 miles, and he was naked and nobody saw him!! Then his mother said she didn't remember him coming home with his clothes wet but this could have happened on a day when she brought her daughter horse-riding and his brothers may have washed his clothes. This was a very caring mother, from all accounts and all staff who had contact with her son would state she would have taken cognisence if he had come in home with a scratch. Do you honestly think a child with learning difficulties could come home to a decent family and no notice would be taken were he in total disarray? I don't think so. Also when this class returned from their trip they had to go to another teacher for a different subject and this teacher gave evidence this child had never come back from trips in any dishevelled state and he was always happy on his return. The unfortunate thing is that by the time this child was interviewed a lot of other children had been coming in to school talking about their interviews and telling the most farcical stories.
It was alleged at the trial that the second child involved was able to direct the police to Pat McGlinchey's home. Well again guess what? This child could not find his way around the school and he had been there for almost 10 years. He stated he had been stabbed and there was not a mark on him or a trace of any physical assault. He had gone to Pat's house one day when there was an emergency (a light switch had gone on fire and Pat's housekeeper had called him out to the house to make it safe.) Because everyone was busy that day in the school due to the fact that President Mary Robinson was visiting the next day Pat has to take 3 of the children with him. They went to his house, Pat secured the switch, Pat's housekeeper gave the children a drink and a biscuit and they all came back to school. The housekeeper gave evidence of this at the trial. This child gave evidence that he had run away from Pat's house and met a man and got a lift back to school. He later said he phoned his mother and she came and got him. This was so untrue. I know the teacher who met Pat and the three boys coming back into the school and they were all happy and laughing and told her about Pat's housekeeper, his baby and the faulty switch ('there was nearly a fire in Pat's house, and M gave us orange and biscuits'). The jury heard the facts and only took over an hour to separate out all the drivel and to give a proper verdict of 'not guilty'.
For you to now intimate that there was any credible evidence is cruel. I feel you may have heard mixed up stories which amount to a set-up of an innocent man. It ill becomes you to try to foster these lies, without a full knowledge of the facts. I am not basing my argument here on hearsay, or on snippets of information taken out of context but on the true facts which when all pieced together clearly show that Pat McGlinchey did not abuse any of these children.
I could write at least 50 more farcical stories and maybe someday, someone who has been led to believe a child in their care has been abused will have the joy of knowing it never happened - save of course the abuse done to them by charlatans who did not know the fire they were playing with.
Firinne
POST No 163
Old 4 Weeks Ago
QuI BONO
Senior Member
Rory ""TURKISH DELIGHT"" Connor, Rory Baby, whether you wear blue knickers, red knickers, pink knickers, A CHRISTIAN BROTHER, IS A CHRISTIAN BROTHER, IS A CHRISTIAN BROTHER, OF WHICH YOU STILL APPEAR TO BE ONE. stop splitting hair`s and take Florence for a coffee, there`s a good boy.
Qui Bono
POST No 164
Old 4 Weeks Ago
KILBARRY1
QUOTE:
Kilbarry1
...... Based on your comments above I wrote:
Let's get this straight. After the last CIVIL claim against Patrick McGlinchey was struck out by the High Court in January 2010, some parent(s) made an allegation against someone who is NOT Mr. McGlinchey and is NOT a teacher at the school? This is supposed to explain the original allegations against Mr. McGlinchey and numerous other teachers in 1997 - or at least show that they were not just a case of hysteria? Is that what you are saying?
Can you explain what you are saying because "No, no and no" doesn't do it? ENDQUOTE
QUOTE: Riadach
Simply put, they made no subsequent allegation against anyone. You need to reign in your imagination. END OF QUOTE
I'm trying to make sense of your weasel words. Were the latest allegations made against an institution rather than a person? If so, claims made 13 years after the original allegations, but based on physical evidence allegedly available in 1997, add nothing to the credibility of the original accusations. They do NOT indicate, as claimed by you, that "... they do put claims about the flippancy of the allegations into a true perspective. They make the abuse claims non-imaginary, and show that at the root of all this, there was indeed a case of abuse that has never been answered for."
Kilbarry1
POST NO 165
Old 4 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
QUOTE: Originally Posted by Riadach
Simply put, they made no subsequent allegation against anyone. You need to reign in your imagination. ENDQUOTE
Get your facts right Riadach. Two of the children made subsequent similar allegations against an art teacher in the new school to which they went. One child even said she had changed her mind and it was the teacher in the new school who had abused her!!!!
Firinne
POST NO 166
Old 3 Weeks Ago
FIRINNE
Junior Member
Thought for the day Riadach -
What do you think of the investigator in this case who made the statement he had 'found the key to unlock these kids brains' - do you find this worrying or interesting? Or maybe you saw evidence of a miracle. If so, please share it with us all and we will never again need to do the lotto.
Personally I think it is appalling and clearly indicates the lack of knowledge of those trawling around the city trying to invent a story.
Statements like these only serve to prove the sham of an investigation that was going on and it makes it extremely worrying for all persons with learning difficulties and indeed their families.
Firinne