Colm O'Gorman

Colm O'Gorman Book Release for "Beyond Belief" (Discussion on website www.politics.ie) PART 1

This is a PART 1 of a discussion on Colm O'Gorman book release within the Chat forums, part of the Off-Topic category on Politics.ie. Former p.ie poster and 2007 election candidate Colm O'Gorman is releasing a book on his expereinces growing up in ireland ...

http://www.politics.ie/chat/66263-colm-ogorman-book-release.html

#1 6 May 2009 wexfordman

Colm O'Gorman book release

Former p.ie poster and 2007 election candidate Colm O'Gorman is releasing a book on his expereinces growing up in ireland and the catholic church abuse scandal affect on him. Any thoughts ? Nothing local on it, apart from an article in the wexford people, and found this doing a bit of googling!!

http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/player_launch.pl

#2 6 May 2009 White Horse

He was always a fair poster on this site. I hope the book does well for him.

#3 6th May 2009 by cavok
Ex-Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
Former p.ie poster and 2007 election candidate Colm O'Gorman is releasing a book on his expereinces growing up in ireland and the catholic church abuse scandal affect on him. Any thoughts ? Nothing local on it, apart from an article in the wexford people, and found this doing a bit of googling!!

http://www.abc.net.au/cgi-bin/common/player_launch.pl

wah wah wah Daddy / Mammy / person of your choice / didnt love me

Get over it!

Move on Colm
________________________________________
Last edited by cavok; 7th May 2009 at 12:12 AM.

#4 8th May 2009 benjamin
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 203

You've read it then Cavok? Sounds pretty dire based on that 'review.'

#5 8 May 2009 Fab
Politics.ie Newbie

Bought it yesterday. Have read first 100 pages. Very interesting and well written.Have to declare that I know Colm and went to school with him.The only thing I find it difficult to figure, and this is re-enforced from my reading of the book so far is how he declared for the PD,s.

#6 9th May 2009 manicstreetporter
Politics.ie Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 302

Piss-poor review of the book in today's Irish Times by the serially misinformed, undereducated sub-par intellectual and college magazine wanna-be editor Eamon Delaney.

Wonder if the book mentions the suspect financial affairs of One in Four or how U2 had to bail them out? Or the running for the PDs after Mike Allen couldnt persuade Gollum to join the Labour Luvvies.
________________________________________
Last edited by manicstreetporter; 9th May 2009 at 02:12 PM. Reason: typo

#7 9th May 2009 CookieMonster

Good luck to him. P.ie misses you Colm.

#8 9th May 2009 benjamin
Politics.ie Member

It seems the book may not be half bad at all.

From the Indo:Irish Independent

...clerical abuse is such a familiar story now that O'Gorman must have been concerned that his book could be affected by abuse fatigue among the general public.

He need not have worried. His book is a riveting account of his own abuse and his battle with the Church -- and he's a very good writer, which helps. It seems certain to be a bestseller.
________________________________________
Last edited by benjamin; 25th May 2009 at 09:49 AM.

#9 benjamin

Quote:
Originally Posted by manicstreetporter
Wonder if the book mentions the suspect financial affairs of One in Four or how U2 had to bail them out? Or the running for the PDs after Mike Allen couldnt persuade Gollum to join the Labour Luvvies.

Libel action perhaps? Or do you have a point to make? I ask in a non-aggresive intersted way. If he was respopnsible for "suspect financial affairs" then that should be explained.

Thats a pretty serious charge.

#10 9th May 2009 draiocht23

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fab
The only thing I find it difficult to figure, and this is re-enforced from my reading of the book so far is how he declared for the PD,s

I could never quite understand that either. Truly bizarre - plus the now defunct PDs ended up shafting him in the end.

#11 Andrew49 9th May 2009

The One in Four charity was established to support men and women who have experienced sexual abuse.

THE support group One in Four vowed to continue assisting victims of sexual abuse despite a 24% cut in funding for 2004.The charity had signed a 12 month service agreement with the Department of Health and Children but the State funding is less than that allowed in 2003. In 2003, One in Four received €504,000 in State Funding while for 2004 it was granted €383,238.

In October 2003, One in Four threatened to cease operating at the end of the month because of a dispute with the Department of Health over the funding of its counselling programme. Funding provided by the department for 2004, however, specifically excluded any grant provision for the organisation's therapy programme - a therapy programme which providing some 5,000 therapeutic sessions in 2004 to women and men who have experienced sexual abuse and/or sexual violence.

The rock group U2 gave One in Four a welcome boost at the time of their threatened closure when it donated €40,000. One in Four was also overwhelmed by hundreds of other individual offering support.

#12 9th May 2009 Andrew49

Politics.ie Member Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: on Aldebaran, safe on the green desert sand Posts: 3,758

Quote
Originally Posted by manicstreetporter
Piss-poor review of the book in today's Irish Times by the serially misinformed, undereducated sub-par intellectual and college magazine wanna-be editor Eamon Delaney.

Wonder if the book mentions the suspect financial affairs of One in Four or how U2 had to bail them out? Or the running for the PDs after Mike Allen couldnt persuade Gollum to join the Labour Luvvies.

You didn't provide a link!

Irish Times Review of Beyond Belief:
Quote:
It is an amazing story and now comes his memoir, which focuses on his early life and the period of abuse with Fortune and after. It is sparely and well written and somewhat in the tradition of “misery lit”, which is very popular in publishing, except that here there is a strong political context.
...
Eloquently, he hopes that, “if Fortune has found an after life” he may have been able to “face the truth, accept his actions. . . and then finally, to forgive himself.” In saying this, O’Gorman transcends much of his terrible anger and brings some sense of resolution to what was, and is, a dark period in the story of modern Ireland.

Irish Times Book Review
Quote:
Proof that not all memoirs are miserable comes from the director of Amnesty International in Ireland, Colm O'Gorman, who tells how he turned his life around after suffering clerical sexual abuse in Beyond Belief (Hodder Stoughton)
Irish Times

#13 10th May 2009 pollyanna

I had a quick look at it today. It's well worth a read - particularly for the reminder of how the catholic church facilitated abusing priests and role played by the then Cardinal Ratzinger in the whole ugly saga.

#14 10th May 2009 swansandtyphus
Ex-Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 700

Is anyone sick of Colm O'Gorman's whole because-I-got-raped-by-a-priest-please-vote-for-me-and-buy-my-book-and-oh-by-the-way-I'm-gay-too schtick?
I am.

#15 10th May 2009 Kilbarry1
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 741

Colm O'Gorman and False Allegations of Child Abuse
________________________________________
A few months after Nora Wall (formerly Sister Dominic of the Sisters of Mercy) had got a miscarriage of justice certificate from the Court of Criminal Appeal, Colm O'Gorman announced in the Irish Times that:

"In the past few months a number of commentators have suggested that grave injustice is being done to priests falsely accused of child sexual abuse. Such suggestions rightly concern fair minded people, but remarkably, no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused."

This was published on 29 March 2006. The Court of Criminal Appeal judgement regarding Nora Wall was published in mid-December 2005. It made it clear that both of her accusers had made several other false allegations. True their other claims were not directed at Catholic clergy but O'Gorman's words were still remarkable.

I wrote a letter to the Irish Times at the time. It wasn't published (I didn't expect it to be) but here it is anyway.
Quote:
Editor
Irish Times

9 April 2006

Madam,
Writing in the Irish Times on 29 March last, the director of "One in Four" Colm O'Gorman made some remarkable statements in an article headed "There is no evidence to show that the rights of those accused have been abused".

Mr O'Gorman stated: "In the past few months a number of commentators have suggested that grave injustice is being done to priests falsely accused of child sexual abuse. Such suggestions rightly concern fair minded people, but remarkably, no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused."

Did Mr. O'Gorman never hear of the case of Nora Wall, formerly Sister Dominic of the Sisters of Mercy? In 1999 she became the first woman in the history of the State to be convicted of raping a child AND the first person to get a life sentence for rape. She was also the first person to be convicted on the basis of "Recovered Memory Syndrome". (This kind of evidence is very rare in Ireland but has a long and infamous history in the USA).

Nora Wall was convicted on the word of two women Regina Walsh and her "witness" Patricia Phelan, BOTH of whom had made a string of allegations against other people (mainly relatives and boyfriends). The case started to collapse when they sold their story to The Star newspaper and one of the men who had been accused by Patricia Phelan read it and contacted Nora Wall's family. In December 2005 in the Court of Criminal Appeal, Patricia Phelan finally confessed publicly that she had lied.

In the same newspaper article Regina Walsh stated that she had also been raped by a "black man in Leicester Square". Again it was the first the Defence had heard of this allegation.

At the trial Regina Walsh claimed that one of the rapes occurred on her 12th birthday. She said that Nora Wall held her down while Pablo McCabe raped her. Pablo McCabe was in Mountjoy Prison on that date!! When this was pointed out to the jury they acquitted the two accused on that charge but convicted them on the other allegations. I believe that the only reason for this incredible decision is that Nora Wall had been a nun. Does Colm O'Gorman have an alternative explanation?

Mr. O'Gorman might like to look at the Judgement of the Court of Criminal Appeal on the Nora Wall case. It is dated 16 December 2005 and is readily available on the Internet.

But perhaps the Nora Wall case is just an aberration? Consider the following.

There are wild claims that the Christian Brothers and other religious have murdered up to 'hundreds' of the boys in their care. (For example an interview with Mannix Flynn about Letterfrack Industrial School in the Sunday Independent on 22 December 2002). Gardai at Clifden, Co Galway, investigated claims that there were bodies of boys who had died as a result of foul play buried in the grounds of Letterfrack. Early in 2003, the Gardai reported that they had found no evidence to back this up. Superintendent Tony O'Dowd said: "There was no evidence available that would suggest that foul play led to the deaths of anybody buried inside or outside of the cemetery at the old Industrial School in Letterfrack." He added: "There was no evidence of a mass grave."

Then there was the case of former Letterfrack resident, Willie Delaney. His body was exhumed in April 2001 because of claims that he had died as a result of head wounds inflicted by a Christian Brother. The subsequent autopsy revealed that he had died from natural causes and that there was no evidence of a blow to the head.

The list goes on. Patrick Flaherty, who spent some years in the Holy Family School in Renmore, Co Galway said he made two allegations against members of the Brothers of Charity because of 'false memory syndrome'. He later withdrew the allegations. He has also said that while attending a public meeting of the Laffoy Commission in 2003 he overheard other former residents discussing among themselves whether or not to accuse a particular Brother. Some in the group said the Brother had never abused anyone. Others said he should be accused anyway.

The evidence of Patrick Flaherty was not widely reported in the media (I saw it in the Irish Independent on 1st November 2003 and nowhere else). However as head of "One in Four", surely Colm O'Gorman should be aware of it?

There is no way that Mr. O'Gorman can have missed the allegations about the "killing" of Willie Delaney . The media screamed obscenities at the Christian Brothers. About 20 April 2001, Evening Herald posters were all over the streets of Dublin proclaiming "Now it's Murder Enquiry". Then the autopsy report was published and the entire media dropped the story like a shot. Yet this was a Blood Libel against the Christian Brothers which was no different from Nazi Blood Libels about the Jews.

Did Colm O'Gorman have anything to say at the time? Will he say something now? How can he possibly maintain that "no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused."

I was so sure that the Irish Times would not publish this that I sent it to Mr. O'Gorman on the same day saying that I did not expect publication and requesting his comments. Maybe he would care to give them now?

#16 10th May 2009 benjamin
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 203

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
A few months after Nora Wall (formerly Sister Dominic of the Sisters of Mercy) had got a miscarriage of justice certificate from the Court of Criminal Appeal, Colm O'Gorman announced in the Irish Times that:

I wrote a letter to the Irish Times at the time. It wasn't published (I didn't expect it to be) but here it is anyway.

I was so sure that the Irish Times would not publish this that I sent it to Mr. O'Gorman on the same day saying that I did not expect publication and requesting his comments. Maybe he would care to give them now?

It does seem to me to e rather bizarre that some people seem to take an individual case of injustice as evidence of a wider pattern of injustice.

If we take the Nora Wall case as evidence that our criminal justice can make mistakes, tragic and appalling mistakes, then how can we disregard the numerous cases proven as fact and accepted as fact as evidenced by guilty pleas, as proof that such appalling abuse happened?

We cannot. if Nora Wall's case proves that we got it wrong, then other cases, especially those involving guilty pleas and denied appeals prove that we got it right.

Truth is truth, however we get there.

#17 10th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Colm O Gorman and False Allegations of Child Abuse

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamin
It does seem to me to e rather bizarre that some people seem to take an individual case of injustice as evidence of a wider pattern of injustice.

We cannot. if Nora Wall's case proves that we got it wrong, then other cases, especially those involving guilty pleas and denied appeals prove that we got it right.

Truth is truth, however we get there.

"An individual case of injustice" - did you read my letter. Both of Nora Wall's accusers had made several previous false allegations. One man had been dragged through the courts - he was the one who read the Star article and contacted Nora Wall's family after she had been convicted.

#18 10th May 2009 Odyessus
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamin
It does seem to me to e rather bizarre that some people seem to take an individual case of injustice as evidence of a wider pattern of injustice.
If we take the Nora Wall case as evidence that our criminal justice can make mistakes, tragic and appalling mistakes, then how can we disregard the numerous cases proven as fact and accepted as fact as evidenced by guilty pleas, as proof that such appalling abuse happened?
We cannot. if Nora Wall's case proves that we got it wrong, then other cases, especially those involving guilty pleas and denied appeals prove that we got it right.

Truth is truth, however we get there.

No denies that children have been cruelly sexually abused, most often by those in a position of trust which makes the crime even more abhorrent.

The point is there have also been false accusations against innocent people, and it serves no-one to deny there are innocent people accused of sexual abuse which never happened.

The false conviction in the case cited came to light accidentally. How many more innocent people have been convicted because of the belief that there is no such thing as a false accusation of sexual abuse?

#19 10th May 2009 bobbysands81
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 4,999

Quote:
Originally Posted by swansandtyphus
Is anyone sick of Colm O'Gorman's whole because-I-got-raped-by-a-priest-please-vote-for-me-and-buy-my-book-and-oh-by-the-way-I'm-gay-too schtick?
I am.

A new low for this website.

#20 10th May 2009 Andrew49

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
"An individual case of injustice" - did you read my letter. Both of Nora Wall's accusers had made several previous false allegations. One man had been dragged through the courts - he was the one who read the Star article and contacted Nora Wall's family after she had been convicted.

ALSO do you think that allegations of murder and mass murder against the Christian Brothers don't matter because no one was convicted of such crimes? Suppose Irish newspapers published similar Blood Libels against the Jews - at the same time that Jews were accused of abusing Christian boys. Would that be OK or would it serve to prejudice juries who were trying those accused of sexual abuse? The purpose of those lunatic allegations was to demonise Catholic religious.

No mention here of Crimen Solicitationis which has done more to demonise the Roman Catholic church than anything else. It was a call to cover up paedophilia amongst the clergy and clergy having sex with animals.

This document was issued before the Second Vatican Council had taken place and before the revision of the present Code of Canon Law. The Vatican practice of issuing special procedural rules for its various courts or tribunals is not unusual. It is also not unusual to have a special document issued for a specific type of problem which in this case was solicitation of sex in the context of sacramental confession. Title V of the document, De crimine pessimo includes the crimes of sexual contact with same sex partners, sexual contacts with minors and bestiality.

Child abuse and bestiality!
__________________

There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls.

21 10th May 2009 Horace Horse
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 2,642

Does he detail his human rights work in the years before he got the Amnesty job? What campaigns was he involved in ? And how about during his time with the PDs--they don't have much of a track record on human rights, do they? How did he try to bring an awareness of human rights to the PDs?

Oh, he didn't?

And does he give info about how he got the Amnesty job? How many other candidates were there? Was it a tough interview?

On second thoughts--was there any interview at all? Was the job even advertized?

If it had been, I'd have applied. I have a longer and stronger record in human rights than O'Gorman.

#22 10th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Guilty Errors are Rare?

There is a letter from Fiona Neary, Executive Director of the Rape Crisis Network in the Sunday Times today (Irish Edition - it doesn't seem to be on line). The heading is "Guilty Errors are Rare". It acknowledges the wrong done to Michael Feichin Hannon, does not mention Nora Wall and concludes:

"It is important that we continue to create an environment where children can feel safe to disclose abuse. False allegations remain the exception [my emphasis] and those that result in convictions are highly exceptional."

It is practically impossible to judge the number of false convictions - unless the accuser actually confesses that he/she lied. False allegations are most certainly NOT rare. I gave several examples in my letter to the Irish Times in April 2006 but here is an overall one.

A few years ago one of the heads of the Christian Brothers said that practically every Brother who had ever worked in an industrial school had been accused of child abuse. Nearly all of these had also worked in ordinary schools but very few allegations related to such schools. The difference is that Industrial Schools come under the Redress Board scheme and you can get a payout on next to no evidence. However to get compensation for alleged abuse in a day school, you must prove it in court - like any other compensation claim.

I believe that about 200 Brothers were accused of child abuse. Of these two were convicted, one from Letterfrack and one from Artane - a conviction rate of one per cent. One (or maybe both) convictions was for indecent assault i.e. indecent fondling not penetrative sex. These court cases have gone on over a period of about 10 years and concluded only recently. The waste of time has been enormous.

The following article in the Irish Independent on 4 September 2003 gives an idea of the the amount of work that (eventuall) resulted in the ONE conviction for Artane Industrial School.

Ten gardai, a three-year inquiry . . . but only one prosecution - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie
Quote:
A THREE-and-a-half year Garda investigation into a raft of sexual and physical abuse complaints against Christian Brothers at the former Artane boys industrial school in Dublin resulted in a single criminal prosecution.

The outcome of the most wide ranging garda inquiry into child sex abuse highlighted the difficulties confronting the authorities in successfully completing an investigation into allegations about events that took place decades earlier.

The sole prosecution has not yet been determined by the courts. The accused, a 65-year-old Christian Brother, who cannot be named, was charged in July 1999 with 53 sexual offences allegedly committed in the Artane school.

As a result of legal challenges the case went to the High Court and then the Supreme Court and is now back in the High Court where a judicial review has been listed for October.

Ten gardai including a detective sergeant were assigned full-time to working on the Artane inquiry IN EARLY 1998. The inquiry arose out of an initial small number of complaints from former pupils of the school and it then began to "mushroom". - [my emphasis. In 1999 Bertie Ahern apologised and announced the setting up of a "compensation" scheme.]

The ten-person team worked permanently on the investigation for almost 18 months and took well over a thousand statements from potential witnesses.

The big majority of the complaints related to physical abuse of the boys and it was decided that these should be deal with firstly in an early file to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

But the DPP ruled against bringing criminal charges in any of the physical abuse cases because of the statute of limitations arising from the time-lapse between the date of the alleged assaults and the garda inquiry.

Most of the allegations centred on incidents that took place between the late 1940s and the late 1960s when the Artane school was shut down. The DPP ruled that he would deal only with sexual abuse allegations, in accordance with the law.

The gardai pressed ahead with their inquiries and interviewed between 25 and 30 Christian Brothers about the claims. Some of the specific allegations involved "horrendous" sex acts. ................

A number of the Christian Brothers faced more than one complaint and these were all examined before the first file on sex abuse was sent to the DPP who ruled in favour of a prosecution. The future of the sole criminal prosecution is expected to be determined next month.

It fact it was determined a few months ago - after a decade.

Since investigating child abuse is a specialist function we had 10 Gardai tied up for years who could have been investigating current allegations. It is not only falsely accused Brothers who suffered but genuine victims who are experiencing abuse today.

Colm O'Gorman seems to have no interest in this issue. In his article in the Irish Times in March 2006 he specifically denied that false allegations are a problem:
Quote:
"remarkably no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused."

Incredible and this man is now Executive Director of Amnesty International in Ireland!
________________________________________
Last edited by Kilbarry1; 10th May 2009 at 04:58 PM.

#23 10th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace Horse
And does he give info about how he got the Amnesty job? How many other candidates were there? Was it a tough interview?

On second thoughts--was there any interview at all? Was the job even advertized?

If it had been, I'd have applied. I have a longer and stronger record in human rights than O'Gorman .

Not sure if you mean too, but you make it sound like sour grapes , but tell us, what is your record in human rights ?
__________________
The greens..... "Got a problem ? There's a tax for that!!"

#24 10th May 2009 Supermanpolitician
Ex-Member Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,344

Thought he was misplaced in politics. Hope he gets some peace from the evil that was done to him.

It's hard to be very critical of someone who has suffered like that, even when you disagree on the most basic point, as you always have some sympathy.

#25 10th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermanpolitician
Thought he was misplaced in politics. Hope he gets some peace from the evil that was done to him.

It's hard to be very critical of someone who has suffered like that, even when you disagree on the most basic point, as you always have some sympathy.

I am not so sure about that. The following is part of an interview Colm O'Gorman did with Emily Hourihane in the Sunday Independent today.
The man who faced his demons - Lifestyle, Frontpage - Independent.ie

Quote:
In Beyond Belief, O'Gorman writes, bleakly, "there were two men living in our village who hurt children ... they raped and abused ... I was one of the children they hurt." When I ask him now how this could have happened, why he was not better protected, he responds, "because I was five at a time when this wasn't possible. It was 1971, child sexual abuse didn't exist. I didn't have anything like the level of understanding to know what was happening to me. And at that age, one of the things I knew was that grown-ups hurt you when you'd been bad. So my experience of adults who hurt me, was that they hurt me if it was my fault." ................

When he was seven or eight, an older boy from the area began abusing Colm, abuse which he was by then tragically inured to "accept as normal".

And after that there was Father Sean Fortune who was the FOURTH person to abuse him - at the age of 14. Most people's character and personality are well formed by the time they are 14 years old. I do intend to read the book but it seems strange that Sean Fortune and the Catholic Church should be the sole focus of O'Gorman's human right's campaign.

Perhaps it's because of the power of the Church? In an interview with John Spain in the Irish Independent yesterday Colm O'Gorman explains:
About a boy - Books, Entertainment - Independent.ie

Quote:
"You have to remember the social and political power the priests had at the time." In the book he brilliantly describes the flagrant way Fortune would arrive in the house and be feted with food as he waited for Colm. In every house he visited in the area, O'Gorman remembers, people deferred to him and lavished attention on him. His own parents were no different.

But does that explain how two other men - and a youth - were able to abuse him, long before Father Fortune appeared on the scene? Why has O'Gorman's entire career been based on the behaviour of the fourth male to have abused him?

#26 11th May 2009 asset test
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
But does that explain how two other men - and a youth - were able to abuse him, long before Father Fortune appeared on the scene? Why has O'Gorman's entire career been based on the behaviour of the fourth male to have abused him?

As you say because of the church connection. The church has been very slow to acknowledge the damage done, but that is changing slowly. Priests had a powerful role in local communities, and maybe now Colm O'Gorman is venting the anger at the way these swaggering priests could pick and choose who they wanted on a particular day.

Yes it is strange that the other abuse happened also. The fact that O'G doesn't refer to this much is again, because those people did not have a worldwide protectorate around them like the clergy did. Maybe he now sees that as a one off travesty. However the ability of priests in any parish to do the same with impunity was rampant (not all did of course, but could have).

Institutional cover up is probably the reason for his focus on Fortune.

#27 11th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by asset test
Yes it is strange that the other abuse happened also. The fact that O'G doesn't refer to this much is again, because those people did not have a worldwide protectorate around them like the clergy did. Maybe he now sees that as a one off travesty. However the ability of priests in any parish to do the same with impunity was rampant (not all did of course, but could have).

Institutional cover up is probably the reason for his focus on Fortune.

I wish I could be more charitable. The following is from a Profile of Colm O'Gorman that appeared in The Sunday Times on 30 April 2006:
Profile: Champion for the abused valiantly joins political fray - Times Online
Quote:
It was July 1984 and Colm O’Gorman wanted to tell his sister that he had been sexually abused by Fr Sean Fortune. But the words wouldn’t come. Instead, he told her he was gay and that he had been having an affair with the priest, a monstrous character who eventually committed suicide in 1999 while facing 66 charges of molesting young people. ......When his sister Barbara tracked him down [in Dublin] in 1984, he had found a job in a restaurant and a place to stay. Even though he couldn’t tell her the truth, just telling someone he was gay helped. He became part of the gay scene in Dublin. Previously, when confused about his sexuality, he had thought of himself as “something sick and wrong and evil”, but now this changed. “I will never forget the first time I walked into a meeting and realised, ‘My God, all these people are like me’,” he has said ........

[In London] Things improved in 1994, after he trained as a physical therapist and, for the first time, began to think deeply about his teenage experience.

Word reached him that Fortune was going to celebrate a family wedding, so he didn’t attend. But the priest, according to his sister, was surrounded at the event by a crowd of teenagers. The news triggered O’Gorman into action. He went home, told his father what had happened, and then walked into Wexford garda station and made a statement in March 1995. That action triggered an investigation into Fortune’s activities and led to the uncovering of the widespread sexual abuse in the diocese of Ferns and elsewhere.

Colm O'Gorman was 18 in 1984. According to this article, he was too ashamed to tell his sister that he had been raped by Father Sean Fortune so instead told her he was gay and had an affair with the priest. Am I the only one to see something strange about that scenario? My suggestion: Colm O'Gorman was gay and had been having an affair with Father Fortune!

This may also explain why Colm O'Gorman finds it so difficult to acknowledge the fact that false allegations of child abuse are a significant problem in Ireland today.

#28 11th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Colm O'Gorman was 18 in 1984..
Not sure what the relevence is here ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
According to this article, he was too ashamed to tell his sister that he had been raped by Father Sean Fortune so instead told her he was gay and had an affair with the priest. Am I the only one to see something strange about that scenario? My suggestion: Colm O'Gorman was gay and had been having an affair with Father Fortune!

When O'Gorman denounced Fr Fortune in 1995, the latter was in no position to tell the Gardai that he had been having a sexual affair with O'Gorman prior to 1984. After all, that would have been statutory rape!

So, lets be clear here, you are accusing Colm O'Gorman of falsely accussing fr sean fortune with rape, buggery and child abuse (acusations which finally led to the man being brought before the courts ? Just want to be clear on this, cos its a fairly serious acusation, and one which you would need to be very sure of to make a statement like you ahve above. Pretty libelous imho to accuse someone of such, and pretty stupid also, given the amount of evidence agains fortune, and his own suicide.
__________________
The greens..... "Got a problem ? There's a tax for that!!"

#29 11th May 2009 onthefence
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Dublin Posts: 272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbysands81
A new low for this website.
A new low. you cant blame p.ie
__________________
Knowledge is power.

Economic Left/Right: -0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.97

In 2009
Economic Left/Right: -2.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.26

#30 11th May 2009 benjamin

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
My suggestion: Colm O'Gorman was gay and had been having an affair with Father Fortune!

This may also explain why Colm O'Gorman finds it so difficult to acknowledge the fact that false allegations of child abuse are a significant problem in Ireland today.

Well based upon that "suggestion" I think its pretty clear where you are coming from. In your view it is possible for a 14,15,16 year old, regardless of their sexual orientation, to have an adult sexual relationship with someone twice their age and in a very powerful position. Ever hear of statutory rape?

You are a very shady character indeed. I only hope you are not in a position of authority or responsibility with regard to young people.

11th May 2009 wexfordman

It seems KILBARRY has run to ground, perhaps he is having second thoughts on his outragous claims he made earlier ?
__________________
The greens..... "Got a problem ? There's a tax for that!!"
________________________________________
Last edited by wexfordman; 11th May 2009 at 10:46 PM. Reason: Sorry, wrong op

#32 11th May 2009 manicstreetporter

Nice of the state to pump the best part of nearly one million euros into an organization that failed to account for it - great way for someone to get their career funded, isn't it? What a crock.

#33 11th May 2009 121.5
Ex-Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1,086

Can Colm kindly embrace his gayness and get on with life?

'me, me, me, wah, wah, wah, me, me, me, wah, wah, wah . . .'

#34 12th May 2009 Utopian Hermit Monk
Politics.ie Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,604

Did anyone else hear the interview with Colm O'Gorman on this morning's Tubridy Show?

link to audio

I caught the second half in the car, but I've just listened to the whole interview (almost 40 minutes).

I have to say that there is something about his story and/or his way of telling it that leaves me uneasy, because I find it very difficult to believe him. He went into detail about being repeatedly abused by a local old fellow when he was five. In spite of this happening repeatedly and, according to himself, having a devastating effect on him, absolutely nobody seems to have noticed that something was wrong. He explains away his parents' failure to notice anything, but he had five siblings, pals, teachers, etc. Apparently, nobody noticed a change in his personality, signs of depression, terror, confusion, etc.

Then, just three years later, as an 8 year old, he was sexually abused by another local - a teenager this time - and, again, nobody noticed.

Then, when he was 14, he had his first encounter with S. Fortune, who enticed him into bed and abused him, only for C.O'G. (after making a cup of tea for himself) to return to bed and, thereafter, allow Fortune to bully him into continuing the abusive relationship.
Later still, aged 17 and studying hotel management at Cathal Brugha Street, he supplemented his finances by working as a male prostitute (still unaware that he was gay - and this in 1984, not 1948!!).

Repeatedly, Colm depicts himself as lurching between exceptional self-possession (e.g., at 14, he decided to 'take charge' of the relation with Fortune, and even started addressing him as 'John' from the night of their first encounter) and exceptional innocence (in Dublin, several years after the Fortune episode, a man in a public toilet invites him back to his place, and Colm is innocent enough to think that there is nothing sinister about this).

Listening to him, I want to believe his account, but I find it impossible to do so. Even when he describes himself in the present as "a very happy man", I can't believe him. It just doesn't ring true. To me, listening to this interview, he comes across as a troubled individual.

At the end of the interview, I was curious to hear him speaking about himself and his partner having adopted children. Not having read the book, I don't understand the legal status of this adoption, but I would imagine it is unusual in Ireland.

Anyhow, I wish him well.

#35 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Colm O'Gorman and False Accusations

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamin
Well based upon that "suggestion" I think its pretty clear where you are coming from. In your view it is possible for a 14,15,16 year old, regardless of their sexual orientation, to have an adult sexual relationship with someone twice their age and in a very powerful position. Ever hear of statutory rape?

You are a very shady character indeed. I only hope you are not in a position of authority or responsibility with regard to young people.

If you bothered to read my piece you would see that I specifically said that Fr Sean Fortune was in no position to defend himself against Colm O'Gorman's claims because he was at least guilty of statutory rape.

Regarding your second sentence I have come across this type of allegation before. It is one reason why there are practically no male primary school teachers nowadays and why men are so reluctant to volunteer to work with children. Colm O'Gorman has denied that false allegations of child abuse constitute a problem and did so within 3 months of Nora Wall receiving her Certificate of Miscarriage of Justice from the Court of Criminal Appeal. This kind of cover-up contributes to the atmosphere of hysteria that surrounds child abuse claims.

#36 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
It seems KILBARRY has run to ground, perhaps he is having second thoughts on his outragous claims he made earlier ?

It seems wrong -I was away for the day.

How do you feel about Colm O'Gorman's article in the Irish Times in March 2006 entitled "There is no evidence to show that the rights of those accused have been abused"? It includes the statement "remarkably, no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused." See Post No 15 (also No 22).

Colm O'Gorman wrote that article - AFTER the trial of Nora Wall, AFTER the exhumation of the body of Willie Delaney, AFTER the collapse of the child murder and mass murder allegations against the Christian Brothers etc Did he not know about those fake scandals? Did he consider that they were insignificant? If so then he is making "outrageous claims".
________________________________________
Last edited by Kilbarry1; 12th May 2009 at 01:44 AM.

#37 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
Did anyone else hear the interview with Colm O'Gorman on this morning's Tubridy Show?

link to audio

I caught the second half in the car, but I've just listened to the whole interview (almost 40 minutes).

YEs, because in the 70's everyone was an expert in spotting children who were victims of abuse, sure you cold spot them a mile away, thats why we were so quick to react to protect the victims and punish the perpetrators

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
Then, when he was 14, he had his first encounter with S. Fortune, who enticed him into bed and abused him, only for C.O'G. (after making a cup of tea for himself) to return to bed and, thereafter, allow Fortune to bully him into continuing the abusive relationship.

Of course he allowed him, sure did;nt all 14 year olds know how to tackle yer basic pervert priest in the 80's, it was part of the school curriculum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
Later still, aged 17 and studying hotel management at Cathal Brugha Street, he supplemented his finances by working as a male prostitute (still unaware that he was gay - and this in 1984, not 1948!!).

Ah, I heard differently, perhaps we both need to listen again, cos one of us got it wrong., I beleive he said he had a place in the college, but did not/could not attend, and he never made money from prostitution, he refeered to it as a 6 month period when he was on the streets and it was simply to get a place to stay for the night. He menhtioned at one stage someone giving him a cheque for 8 pounds which he could nto even cash, as he had no bank account and was homeless.

WITH REGARDS 1984 V 1948, things were not as different as you think, ffs, condoms were still prohibited, never mind homosexuality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
LRepeatedly, Colm depicts himself as lurching between exceptional self-possession (e.g., at 14, he decided to 'take charge' of the relation with Fortune, and even started addressing him as 'John' from the night of their first encounter) and exceptional innocence (in Dublin, several years after the Fortune episode, a man in a public toilet invites him back to his place, and Colm is innocent enough to think that there is nothing sinister about this)..

I dont think he said he was innocent, I think he spoke about it saying he was perfectly aware of what it was about, a night on the streets or a bed to sleep in. I beleive he made a reference to how low he valued hinmself at the time, that for someone to use him was quite normal, and meant aboslutely nothing. You may interpret that as something sinister, I would interpret it differently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
Listening to him, I want to believe his account, but I find it impossible to do so. Even when he describes himself in the present as "a very happy man", I can't believe him. It just doesn't ring true. To me, listening to this interview, he comes across as a troubled individual.

He has a partner, a family, kids, a home of his own, reconciliation with his own family, his perpetrator was brought to justice (although not in the way he would have wished), he received an apology from the church (the first ever such from the church in ireland), was instrumental in getting the ferns enquiry established, was nominated to the senate (briefly) and is well regarded by most reasonable people.

Yeah your right, why should he be happy, having come from where he once was....
__________________
The greens..... "Got a problem ? There's a tax for that!!"

#38 12th May 2009 KJ_C
Politics.ie Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 146

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
If so then he is making "outrageous claims".

"Outrageous claims"? Like.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
My suggestion: Colm O'Gorman was gay and had been having an affair with Father Fortune!

Is this the same Fr Fortune who was facing 66 charges of sexual abuse against 29 boys when he killed himself?

Kilbarry1, you are either related to Fr Fortune, or you are....na, don't want to be banned after my first post.

#39 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
I wish I could be more charitable. The following is from a Profile of Colm O'Gorman that appeared in The Sunday Times on 30 April 2006:

Profile: Champion for the abused valiantly joins political fray - Times Online

My suggestion: Colm O'Gorman was gay and had been having an affair with Father Fortune!

This may also explain why Colm O'Gorman finds it so difficult to acknowledge the fact that false allegations of child abuse are a significant problem in Ireland today.

Welcome back Kilbarry, so do you still stand by your allegation that colm o'gorman lied and falsely accsued fr fortune of abuse against him ?
__________________
The greens..... "Got a problem ? There's a tax for that!!"

#40 12th May 2009 KJ_C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
How do you feel about Colm O'Gorman's article in the Irish Times in March 2006 entitled "There is no evidence to show that the rights of those accused have been abused"?

He was, quite evidently, wrong.

So, you therefore conclude that he was having an affair with Fr Fortune?

(Do you claim that because Fortune killed himself while awaiting trial for 66 charges of sexual abuse against 29 boys that he was innocent?)

And you gloss over the list of proven cases of child abuse against Catholic priests and brothers?

That's an interesting agenda you have there, Kilbarry1.

12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Colm O Gorman and False Allegations

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJ_C
"Outrageous claims"? Like.....

Is this the same Fr Fortune who was facing 66 charges of sexual abuse against 29 boys when he killed himself?

Kilbarry1, you are either related to Fr Fortune, or you are....na, don't want to be banned after my first post.

"Outrageous claims" such as that "no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused." (Colm O'Gorman's own words). Does he consider that claims of child murder do not constitute "false allegations"? Or that the rights of Nora Wall and her co-accused Pablo McCabe were not abused?

As to your second suggestion, I repeat the second part of my reply to Benjamin. Don't worry about being banned. I have come across many people like you in the course of my work. Your type flourishes in an atmosphere of hysteria.

#42 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
Welcome back Kilbarry, so do you still stand by your allegation that colm o'gorman lied and falsely accsued fr fortune of abuse against him ?

Any chance you could repeat your claim, or withdraw it ?
__________________
The greens..... "Got a problem ? There's a tax for that!!"

#43 12th May 2009 KJ_C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
I have come across many people like you in the course of my work.

Ah, I see, you're a legal advisor for the Catholic church. I get it.

#44 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJ_C
He was, quite evidently, wrong.

So, you therefore conclude that he was having an affair with Fr Fortune?

(Do you claim that because Fortune killed himself while awaiting trial for 66 charges of sexual abuse against 29 boys that he was innocent?)

And you gloss over the list of proven cases of child abuse against Catholic priests and brothers?

That's an interesting agenda you have there, Kilbarry1.

He was certainly "wrong" but it goes a lot further than that. He ignored evidence that was widely available in the public domain because it did not suit his agenda. (And as head of "One in Four" he would have known a lot more than appeared in the media.) I believe that his refusal to acknowledge the significance of false allegations means that he has no credibility.

Father Sean Fortune was certainly not innocent. I made it clear that he was at least guilty of statutory rape. I would be dubious if it went beyond that.

#45 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJ_C
Ah, I see, you're a legal advisor for the Catholic church. I get it.

I am not a legal adviser to the Catholic Church. Do you think that if a Jew objects to anti-Semitism (for example allegations that Jews murder Christian boys) he must have a special agenda?

#46 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1

Father Sean Fortune was certainly not innocent. I made it clear that he was at least guilty of statutory rape. I would be dubious if it went beyond that.

SO again, jsut to be clear, you are saying that Colm O'Gorman made false allegations against his perpetrator, fr sean fortune, that fortune was guilty of nothing more than statutary rape, irrepsective of the claims mabe by 29 boys against him and the 66 charges.

JUSt to be clear, cos I keep asking you this and you wont answer, deny, retract or clarify it. You are saying that COlm O'GOrman made false allefations against fr sean fortune ?

#47 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
Any chance you could repeat your claim, or withdraw it ?

I repeat my reply to KJ_C.
Quote:
[Colm O'Gorman] was certainly "wrong" but it goes a lot further than that. He ignored evidence that was widely available in the public domain because it did not suit his agenda. (And as head of "One in Four" he would have known a lot more than appeared in the media.) I believe that his refusal to acknowledge the significance of false allegations means that he has no credibility.

Father Sean Fortune was certainly not innocent. I made it clear that he was at least guilty of statutory rape. I would be dubious if it went beyond that.

#48 12th May 2009 Utopian Hermit Monk

Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
YEs, because in the 70's everyone was an expert in spotting children who were victims of abuse, sure you cold spot them a mile away, thats why we were so quick to react to protect the victims and punish the perpetrators

wexfordman, I think there is an elaborate mythology about how benighted and innocent Ireland was back in the 70s. I am older than Mr. O'Gorman, and I can assure you that, from an early age, my schoolmates and myself were well able to spot a dodgy teacher, priest, neighbourhood pest (or even older schoolmate!). Any suspicious behaviour did not pass without comment. By the 1970s, Ireland had been well exposed to the 50s/60s 'youth culture' of sex, drugs, rock'n'roll, etc. Whatever about 'the older generation', a more or less normal teenager would have to have been suffering from sensory deprivation not to be aware of the birds and the bees, and most variations of bird/bee behaviour. It was on TV, in cinemas, in song lyrics, books, magazines, etc., etc.

Quote:
Of course he allowed him, sure did;nt all 14 year olds know how to tackle yer basic pervert priest in the 80's, it was part of the school curriculum.

I have seen several photos of Fortune, and I can assure you that if a weird looking creep like that had looked sideways at me when I was 14, I would have been fully aware of the appropriate reaction!

Quote:
Ah, I heard differently, perhaps we both need to listen again, cos one of us got it wrong...

I am listening again, just to be clear. He agrees with Tubridy's depiction of himself as 'a farm boy' (= 'innocent'?) in Dublin. He spent a few weeks with a student friend, freeloading, and then lived on the streets on and off for six months, "either on the streets ... or I'd get picked up". One night he was sleeping in an underground toilet cubicle in O'Connell Street, and a man asked him if he wanted "to do business", and he agreed (to do business) in order to have a place to sleep. He said he never made much money because "I was a bad prostitute", because he had no business sense. Well, my own recollection of coping with student penury is that there was no shortage of ways to earn a little extra income from part time jobs in bars or restaurants, etc. The best source of information on part time work was fellow students. Had Colm O'Gorman's no friends whatsoever at Cathal Brugha Street? Perhaps his book explains why not?

Quote:
WITH REGARDS 1984 V 1948, things were not as different as you think, ffs, condoms were still prohibited, never mind homosexuality.

I beg to differ. I think things were VERY different indeed. For goodness sake, this was 20 years (!) after The Beatles, Stones, Hendrix, Dylan, Late Late Show, etc., etc. By the 1980s, even Ireland had been well exposed to the best and the worst of what the post-60s world had to offer. Even the stuff that was still officially banned was available via late night British TV channels. How anyone could have remained 'sheltered' from all of that is beyond me.

Quote:
He has a partner, a family, kids, a home of his own ...

I just wondered about the legal status of his children. I am not an expert on adoption procedures or criteria in Ireland, but I haven't heard of other legal adoptions by either single men or gay couples.

Quote:
... why should he be happy, having come from where he once was....

I may be mistaken, and I going strictly on the content and tone of that one interview, but his profession of happiness does not ring true for me. My impression (it is no more than that, since I know very little about the man) is of a troubled individual.

#49 12th May 2009 KJ_C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
Father Sean Fortune was certainly not innocent. I made it clear that he was at least guilty of statutory rape. I would be dubious if it went beyond that.

How do you mean "dubious"? Were all 29 boys telling fibs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
I am not a legal adviser to the Catholic Church. Do you think that if a Jew objects to anti-Semitism (for example allegations that Jews murder Christian boys) he must have a special agenda?

Let me get this right, you are equating a Jew objecting to anti-Semitism with a Catholic glossing over the proven fact that hundreds (thousands?) of priests and brothers in their church abused children, simply because some false or unproven allegations were made against other priests and brothers?

Right.

#50 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
I? My suggestion: Colm O'Gorman was gay and had been having an affair with Father Fortune!

This may also explain why Colm O'Gorman finds it so difficult to acknowledge the fact that false allegations of child abuse are a significant problem in Ireland today.

No kilbarry, you have said that ogorman was having an affair with fortune and as such made false allegations against fortune, you further qualifeid your statement by inferring that that is tthe reason he has difficulty acknowledging false alegations, by virtue of the fact that he made one himsrlf.

Now apart from the vileness of the suggestion that a 14 yr old is capable of having an affiar with an adult in his late 20's or thereabouts, apart from the fact that you claim fortune is guilty of nothing more then than statutary rape, I woudl sugget you retract it i the interet of the dgds rule!!

12th May 2009 KJ_C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
He spent a few weeks with a student friend, freeloading, and then lived on the streets on and off for six months, "either on the streets ... or I'd get picked up". One night he was sleeping in an underground toilet cubicle in O'Connell Street, and a man asked him if he wanted "to do business", and he agreed (to do business) in order to have a place to sleep. He said he never made much money because "I was a bad prostitute", because he had no business sense. Well, my own recollection of coping with student penury is that there was no shortage of ways to earn a little extra income from part time jobs in bars or restaurants, etc. The best source of information on part time work was fellow students. Had Colm O'Gorman's no friends whatsoever at Cathal Brugha Street? Perhaps his book explains why not?

No offence UHM, but you sound suspiciously like someone who has never heard an abuse victim's story first hand, or has any understanding of how their experiences result in them regarding themselves as worthless pieces of sh1t. The abuse victim I have in mind - his abuser pleaded guilty in court so, no, he didn't make it up - also turned to prostitution. Who the f**k are you and me to judge?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
My impression (it is no more than that, since I know very little about the man) is of a troubled individual.

Are you serious? Wouldn't you be too??

#52 12th May 2009 Utopian Hermit Monk

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJ_C
No offence UHM, but you sound suspiciously like someone who has never heard an abuse victim's story first hand, or has any understanding of how their experiences result in them regarding themselves as worthless pieces of sh1t. ...

On the contrary, KJ_C, I have indeed heard firsthand accounts of abuse. Some I found entirely believable. Others I found almost impossible to believe.

Quote:
Are you serious? Wouldn't you be too??

That is precisely my point. If I had endured a fraction of what C.O'G. says he endured, I probably would be troubled. But he denies that he is still troubled and describes himself as "a very happy man". He didn't sound very happy to me. Just to repeat: my only basis for this impression is that one interview on Tubridy's show. My impression is entirely subjective.

#53 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
wexfordman, I think there is an elaborate mythology about how benighted and innocent Ireland was back in the 70s. I am older than Mr. O'Gorman, and I can assure you that, from an early age, my schoolmates and myself were well able to spot a dodgy teacher, priest, neighbourhood pest (or even older schoolmate!). Any suspicious behaviour did not pass without comment. By the 1970s, Ireland had been well exposed to the 50s/60s 'youth culture' of sex, drugs, rock'n'roll, etc. Whatever about 'the older generation', a more or less normal teenager would have to have been suffering from sensory deprivation not to be aware of the birds and the bees, and most variations of bird/bee behaviour. It was on TV, in cinemas, in song lyrics, books, magazines, etc., etc..

Seriously, you are now suggesting pretty much that any victim of abuse is pretty mcuh self inflicted cos they should have known better ? You are suggesting that any family memebr or firend of a victim of abuse should have been able to spot it ? I take it you come from a family that was not affected by such things, lucky for you, you should be aware that there are many many families who are unfortunatel more acutely aware of how such things happened, and of the benefits of 20/20 hindsight, which you so lightly bestow on those very victims and their famalies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
I have seen several photos of Fortune, and I can assure you that if a weird looking creep like that had looked sideways at me when I was 14, I would have been fully aware of the appropriate reaction! .

Seen any from the time of the events in question ? Ever meet the man ? I did, and in those days too, and nothing unusual about the man at the time. He ran youth clubs in the area ffs, lots of parents were content to leave their kids in his presence at the time. Jesus, you make it sound as if people deliberatley put their kids in harms way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
Well, my own recollection of coping with student penury is that there was no shortage of ways to earn a little extra income from part time jobs in bars or restaurants, etc. The best source of information on part time work was fellow students. Had Colm O'Gorman's no friends whatsoever at Cathal Brugha Street? Perhaps his book explains why not?.

Your own recollections are thankfully happier, but I beleive if you listen again he says he never actually attendeded CAthal Brugha street. An with regards friends, I suppose your ability to interact with people is very much down to your own self confidence, something which I would imagine would be impacted by the events that this young man experienced. If you are unable to relate to even your own family, if you fell your own family sees littel value or worth in you, it would be hard to see how others would.

I suppose the main thing I find ahrd to understand, is that your impression that it is not possible for people to recover and lead happy normal lives ?

________________________________________
Last edited by wexfordman; 12th May 2009 at 03:06 AM.

#54 12th May 2009 KJ_C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
On the contrary, KJ_C, I have indeed heard firsthand accounts of abuse.

Okay - but you still don't understand why some abuse victims, like O'Gorman, felt worthless as a result of what they experienced? How closely did you listen?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
Some I found entirely believable. Others I found almost impossible to believe.

No harm in keeping an open mind, so long as the inclination isn't to dismiss every allegation of abuse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
That is precisely my point. If I had endured a fraction of what C.O'G. says he endured....

You doubt him too? I don't. Why? Because his abuser was awaiting trial for 66 charges of sexual abuse against 29 boys when he killed himself.

And forgive me for being melodramatic, but when I listen to Colm O'Gorman and watch him while he speaks I know he is telling the truth about his abuse. I have zero doubts, for all kinds of reasons. But because he has been such a powerful advocate for abuse victims it is only natural that abuse apologists will try to smear him. As we have seen in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Hermit Monk
.....I probably would be troubled. But he denies that he is still troubled and describes himself as "a very happy man". He didn't sound very happy to me.

Hell, I regard myself as troubled and happy all at the same time - it is what one calls life! His family life, judging by what he says, appears to be a happy one now, he is the legal guardian to two children, whose mother (his friend) died, so he has to get on and be the best father he can be for them. I have no reason to doubt him when he says he is happy, but nor am I vacant enough to believe his past experiences don't haunt him.

#55 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by wexfordman
No kilbarry, you have said that ogorman was having an affair with fortune and as such made false allegations against fortune, you further qualifeid your statement by inferring that that is tthe reason he has difficulty acknowledging false alegations, by virtue of the fact that he made one himsrlf.

A 14 year old male is certainly capable of having an affair with an adult - as distinct from being violently raped by an adult - but the actions of the adult are still illegal. The same applies to a 14 year old girl who has consensual sex with a man of 30. That is why there is an offence of "Statutory Rape" distinct from Rape. A 14 year old is not a helpless infant.

Colm O'Gorman has certainly made a false allegation by stating that
Quote:
no evidence of any kind has been presented to suggest that false allegations are being made or that the rights of those accused are being abused.
and it is NOT a minor issue.
That does not fill me with confidence in relation to other allegations that he has made.

#56 12th May 2009 wexfordman

That is precisely my point. If I had endured a fraction of what C.O'G. says he endured, I probably would be troubled. But he denies that he is still troubled and describes himself as "a very happy man". He didn't sound very happy to me. [/quote]

IN fairness, the subject matter was not what you would call comical!!!

#57 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
A 14 year old male is certainly capable of having an affair with an adult - as distinct from being violently raped by an adult - but the actions of the adult are still illegal. The same applies to a 14 year old girl who has consensual sex with a man of 30. That is why there is an offence of "Statutory Rape" distinct from Rape. A 14 year old is not a helpless infant.

Colm O'Gorman has certainly made a false allegation by stating that and it is NOT a minor issue.
That does not fill me with confidence in relation to other allegations that he has made.

Really, you were in the room, and can verify that he made a false allegation that what heppened to him was against his will ? I think if you beleive he made a false allegation, you should report it to the authorites immediately, you are after all it seems concerned very much with those who do make them, and you have stated as fact that he has done so himself. I suggest you report this to the gardai immediately.
__________________

#58 12th May 2009 KJ_C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilbarry1
A 14 year old is not a helpless infant

Kilbarry1, you are one maladjusted individual, with a troubling and obsessive antipathy towards victims of clerical abuse. Colm O'Gorman was, patently, incorrect when he dismissed the notion that false abuse allegations are made.....and you leap on this to suggest he was having an "affair" with his adult abuser (when he was 14)?

Maybe you're not a lawyer after all. Are you a priest by any chance?

#59 12th May 2009 Kilbarry1

Quote:
Originally Posted by KJ_C
Maybe you're not a lawyer after all. Are you a priest by any chance?

As they used to say in the McCarthyite Era, "I am not and never was ...."

You really are incapable of rational debate aren't you?

#60 12th May 2009 wexfordman

Have you reported the false claims you allege cog made re fr fortune to the authorities yet kilbarry?