Tuesday, 23 December 2008

Dangle in the wind, ya bastard

Joyous Christmas cheer as we observe that rancid pope-poisoning pervert Bishop John Magee dangle slowly in the wind. He clings to power like shit to a blanket but his days seem numbered. He seems genuinely confused as to why he’s attracting so much opprobrium.

And why not? Protecting child molesters has been a key element of Bishops’ job spec for years. And now he’s being hung out to dry. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. I met him briefly once and found him to be an unctuous, greasy, limp-wristed, insincere, conniving, reptilian, jelly-like excuse for a human being.

He was catapulted into the Cloyne Diocese after his shenanigans during the untimely death of Pope John Paul I became too much for even the Vatican to stomach. Having spent his life up to then as a pampered Vatican bureaucrat, he was horrified to find that one of his female servants would be spending Christmas Day with her family. ‘But who’s going to look after me?’ he wailed, putting immense pressure on the woman to forsake her own family.

He’s as bent as a banana. I saw him in Cork Airport once saying goodbye to an Italian choirboy whom he had over in his palace as a ‘guest’. The way he groped, pawed and slobbered over the youngster was stomach-churning. Little wonder he was so unenthusiastic about putting the clampers on pedophile priests in his own diocese.


Anonymous said...

I get the impression you dont like this guy?

Anonymous said...

So for us in the far off colonies - what has he done to incur your ire? Pun not intended..lol!

SAVANT said...

What did he do? Well, poisoned a pope (no bad thing in itself, I suppose) fucked a thousand alter boys, treated underlings like shit and sold off diocesan property to cronies at knock-down prices.

He's now in trouble because an independnet report on his activities showed that he failed to cooperate with the police and left two child molesters continue in office despite compelling evidence of their guilt.

But the bastard might still hang in there.

Jack The Ripper said...

Expose these fcuk faces for what they are. I was in a convent for years and these dick heads behaved as if they had a god given right to do as they pleased. Don't hold back, give in. EXPOSED THESE DOGS FOR WHAT THEY ARE.

Kilbarry1 said...

This is Christmas Eve and I am very busy. However there is an article (plus 34 comments) on the Bock The Robber site called "John Magee, Bishop of Cloyne - Resign You Fucking Bastard" that goes into this case in detail.

Check out the Comments in particular.

Happy Christmas


Anonymous said...

Its amazing that so many would-be pedephiles have wound up being priests.

If priests were allowed to marry, perhaps some of these men would get to release their sexual urges in the normal way: with their wives.

I think that its gotten to the point that pedophiles looking for a "safe" way to indulge in their desires, flock to the priesthood because they figure that they can get away with it as a priest with altar boys, runaways, etc. What Im accusing some of the priests of is in fact, unbelief. I really think many priest got into the priesthood because they were child molesters first, and "faked" the religious conversion to pursue their true desire: 13 year old adolescent boys.

Flame me all you want to, but thats the way it looks from the couch.

You dont see many protestant "pastors" or whatever, most all of whom are married, sleeping with underage boys. You do see them having affairs with women or picking up hookers though.

I saw a television program a while back that set up "stings" in which officers would pose as underage girls on the internet, and adult men (some in their fifties!) would come over to the girl's houses with alchohol, condoms, and sometimes drugs, ready for sex. One of the men who showed up was a rabbi, who got hysterical about hiding his identity. The guy had a wife and everything.

I think letting priests get married would lessen the occurence of pedophelia amongst their ranks. Just my opinion. I know that rankles some and Ive seen folks argue passionately against that.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget something here. The police viewed the evidence and decided no charges would follow. So why blame the Bishop then?

Fair play.

Anonymous said...

you must bare in mind that their have been lots of false claims against clergy. the Bishop needs to be fair on this. your certainly not fair to him.

elaine mcp

Anonymous said...

I believe the bastard said Mass at Cobh Cathedral today, not a bother on the fucker.


Kilbarry1 said...

There are now 40 Comments about this issue on the above-mentioned "Bock The Robber" website. I am attaching 4 of the best and most cogent. By an extra-ordinary co-incidence they are all by me!

No 8 Kilbarry1
December 23rd, 2008

According to a report in the Irish Examiner on 20 December; “Despite extensive Garda probes, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) decided that two priests in the Cloyne diocese accused of child abuse should not face criminal charges.

GardaĆ­ confirmed that “full and thorough” investigations were carried out into each of the allegations levelled against Fr A and Fr B, both priests in the Cloyne diocese.

But after examining one substantial Garda file in relation to Fr A and three files in relation to Fr B, the DPP directed that neither priest should face criminal prosecution.”

So maybe the DPP should resign as well - and be clapped in jail for obstruction of justice!

On the other hand maybe the editors of the Irish Times and Independent should be clapped in jail for failing to report those rather significant facts. The Irish Times is supposed to be the “Newspaper of record” in this country.

No 9 Kilbarry1
December 23rd, 2008

The local Garda Superintendant should also be jailed for obstruction of justice. The following is a further quote from the Irish Examiner on 20 December (also ignored by our “Newspaper of Record”):

Supt McCarthy said each of the allegations relating to both priests were investigated “fully and thoroughly”.

“Substantial and comprehensive Garda files were prepared. We took the investigations as far as possible and all possible evidence was gathered,” he said.

A single Garda file in relation to Fr A was forwarded to the DPP in November 2006 but the DPP directed in February 2007 that no prosecution should follow.

Three substantial files relating to allegations against Fr B were forwarded to the DPP some time later and in each of the cases, the DPP directed that no prosecution should follow.

Supt McCarthy confirmed that there are no current investigations relating to alleged child abuse by priests in the Cloyne diocese.

17 Kilbarry1
December 23rd, 2008

BOCK wrote: “Kilbarry1 — This isn’t about the priests. It’s about Magee’s failure to deal properly with complaints, but of course, you knew that, didn’t you?”

Your post contains a great deal about the allegations against Priest A and Priest B. You might have mentioned in passing (A) that the DPP directed that neither priest should be prosecuted and (B) that the local Garda Superintendant has confirmed that there are NO current allegations being investigated. Yet you talk about the Bishop’s “policy on handling criminals.” WHAT CRIMINALS?

Actually you probably didn’t know about the dropping of all charges. It was not mentioned by our “Newspaper of Record” last Saturday and the Irish Examiner had one article out of 7 or 8 that discussed it. All of the Examiner’s other articles ignored the issue including their very long editorial that called on the Bishop to resign!

If Jews were being falsely accused of child abuse, that is how anti-Semitic journalists would handle the story i.e. publish long articles about the allegations and bury the contrary evidence.

Anti-clericalism has a lot in common with anti-Semiticism. You are aware that several Bishops have had false sex allegations made against them - including Bishop Magee?

No 22 Kilbarry1
December 24th, 2008

Actually it is not just the “policy that’s being discussed”. Why do you think the Irish Times and the Irish Independent completely ignored the decision of the DPP and the statement by Garda Supt McCarthy? Why did the Examiner mention it in passing and then bury that aspect of the story? Our anti-clerical journalists are trying to drum up hysteria about paedophiles on the prowl. However “No Clerical Abusers in Cloyne say Gardai” is not the sort of article that incites the mob.

My understanding of Church policy is that a CREDIBLE allegation of child abuse must be reported to the Gardai. It is true that some Bishops like Martin of Dublin, interpret this in an incredible way i.e. they deem every allegation to be credible unless it is OBVIOUSLY false e.g. if the accused was out of the country or was 2 years old at the time of the alleged rape. (Believe me, I’m not making that one up - although it relates to a Christian Brother not a priest!)

In contrast it seems that Bishop Magee wanted actual proof of wrongdoing and did not consider that he was getting it - AND the DPP agreed with him. I see from the media reports that some of the accused specifically said that they did not want the Gardai involved. One reason why a person might take that attitude is that he seeks “Compensation” but not a Garda inquiry that might lead to himself being charged with making false allegations.

SAVANT said...

Thanks for these comments Kilbarry1. There's no doubt that many people are jumping on the bandwagon and making unfounded allegations for money. I think however you're being far too lenient on Magee. The report by the Chutrch's own investigators severaly criticed him for his lack of cooperation with the gardia. If the priests were innocent, why not cooperate?

Also, just because the DPP doesnt order a prosecution doesnt mean the accused is innocent. It just means that the case would be unlikley to stand up in court. That's a long way from saying someone's innocent. Dont forget also that the report said there were 'credible' claims of abuse, and from a number of people re the same offender.

Anonymous said...

hes still hanging in there i see.


Kilbarry1 said...

The debate about the Bishop of Cloyne on www.politics.ie (Current Affairs) is hotting up nicely. The main problem is that most of the participants don't KNOW the most basic facts i.e. that the DPP has directed that no charges be brought against the priests and the Gardai say there are no further investigations pending. In the absence of knowledge, insults proliferate.

(Incidentally the problem with the Church's own investigators is that they are applying the "guilty until proven innocent" standard pioneered by Archbishop Martin and Bishop Willie Walsh.)

CORELLI: "Are you willfully being obtuse or are you actually stupid?"

Do the ordinary rules of civilised debate apply on this site or do you think because you are a "liberal", that they don't apply to you?

ANDRREW49: "Isn't it chilling Kilbarry1 that you, like Magee can be so dismissive of paedophilia in the ranks of the clergy. Or maybe its instructive."

Same question to you.

LIAMFOLEY: "Resign? Fired? The son of a ************************* should be tarred and feathered and then run out of town. Why are there no protests around the clock outside his house?"

Are you aware that the DPP has directed that NO prosecution be proceeded with against the 2 priests AND that the local Garda Superintendent has confirmed that there are NO outstanding criminal investigations into child abuse allegations in Cloyne? Do you want demonstrations outside their houses as well?

Bishop Magee seems to have taken a much more robust view than other Bishops of what a "credible" allegation of child abuse consists of. In the Sunday Tribune yesterday one lady complained that, at a meeting with the Bishop he told her: "There is always the civil route". Presumably he didn't believe her and rather than give her a private payoff, he was demanding that she prove her case. That is what I would do in the circumstances.

The probable reason why Magee has taken a harder line than other Bishops is that he is the only SERVING Bishop whom the media have targeted with sexual slanders. The others were the late Archbishops John Charles McQuaid (Dublin) and Thomas Morris (Cashel), the late Bishop Peter Birch of Ossory, and the retired Cardinal Cahal Daly (Archbishop of Armagh) , Brendan Comiskey (Ferns) and Eamon Casey (Galway). Moreover Magee was probably targetted TWICE (apart from the apology by TV3 in 1999, the UK Guardian apologised for slandering an un-named Bishop in 1994 - and the details given fit Magee.)

Bishop Magee has every good reason for demanding that accusers provide proof and for declining to notify the Gardai until they do so. When some (or all?) of them say they don't WANT the Gardai informed, the Bishop has good reason for suspecting that they want a private payoff without the need to go through an official investigation.

Bishop Magee has now apologised and presumably will interpret the Church rules in future the way some other Bishops like Martin of Dublin interpret them i.e. they accept any claim that is not OBVIOUSLY nonsense and immediately suspend the priest and notify the authorities.

I don't regard this as an improvement and I am aware of cases involving teachers and social workers where the normal rules of evidence apply - the kind of normal rules that Bishop Magee was trying to apply in Cloyne.