(+44)207 4041400 [email protected] London EC4A 1JS IICSA Inquiry Roman Catholic Church Investigation Wider Hearing 7 November 2019
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IICSA Inquiry Roman Catholic Church Investigation Wider Hearing 7 November 2019 1 Thursday, 7 November 2019 1 in mind for the meeting, I am sure that he would be 2 (1.00 pm) 2 grateful to receive them." 3 THE CHAIR: Mr Altman? 3 Within an hour or so, if we look at page 1, she 4 CARDINAL VINCENT GERARD NICHOLS (continued) 4 responded by email to your private secretary: 5 Examination by MR ALTMAN (continued) 5 "It is very disappointing to receive this response 6 MR ALTMAN: Cardinal, thank you very much for coming back 6 from the cardinal and it is not the 'meaningful 7 this afternoon. I was asking you questions about A711 7 response' that you reassured me of back in December. 8 and I have a few more before moving on. Can we put up 8 "In the Archdiocese of Birmingham, where I reside, 9 on screen, please, INQ004702_002. This is an email from 9 Archbishop Longley has said quite publicly that he would 10 Ellen Dunleavy, your personal secretary, of 29 January 10 meet with any survivors of abuse in the diocese. I am 11 to A711, and it reads: 11 reminded again, also, of the cardinal's words at the 12 "Dear Ms ... 12 inquiry in December, when he talked about the difficulty 13 "Thank you for your emails of 3rd and 28th January. 13 of making contact with survivors -- yet he declines to 14 "The cardinal has had a number of meetings with 14 meet with me when I offer to do so, especially when 15 survivors of childhood sexual abuse prior to the meeting 15 I have such current experience of safeguarding in his 16 in February." 16 own diocese. 17 So this is in relation, you will remember, to my 17 "I sent the cardinal a copy a while ago of a report 18 reminding you yesterday that she had sought to engage 18 which highlights my concerns about the way Westminster 19 with you, and the help that she was sure that she could 19 dealt with my case ..." 20 give you before the meeting that you were to attend in 20 That's a reference to the Abrams report of 21 Rome in the February, none of which had met with any 21 7 November 2017: 22 reply: 22 "... it upholds all my complaints. I would ask that 23 "His Eminence's diary is very full between now and 23 the cardinal reads the report and takes the 24 that meeting. However, if you wish to note, in writing, 24 recommendations it makes to the meeting in Rome as these 25 any key points that you would like the cardinal to bear 25 are not just particular to my case -- in particular, the Page 1 Page 2 1 findings that highlight the part that the church 1 to meet with you. Did you receive such an email? 2 insurers play in influencing dealings with 2 A. I can't recall now. 3 victims/survivors. The report raises the question -- 3 Q. You're not saying you didn't? 4 who is being safeguarded/protected -- the church or the 4 A. I can't recall, so I can't deny it, no. 5 survivor?" 5 Q. To which she said there was no reply. She then sent you 6 She adds: 6 the product of her subject access request. You 7 "It would be really helpful to think that the church 7 certainly remember receiving those? 8 today is willing to listen to survivors and is not just 8 A. Well, I remember the request being made, and obviously 9 dismissing us. Sadly, that is not my experience at all 9 I remember the work of getting together all that she 10 and the cardinal declining my offer to meet highlights 10 requested. 11 this even more." 11 Q. But did she send them to you? 12 Do you agree that the question at the foot of 12 A. No, I don't -- she didn't send me all the papers back, 13 the first page, that the report raises the question, who 13 I don't believe. 14 is being safeguarded or protected, the church or 14 Q. But you must have seen the product of that request -- 15 the survivor, was a reasonable question for her to pose? 15 A. Oh, yes, yes, yes. 16 A. I think it is a rhetorical question, and, given the 16 Q. -- because it was something you apologised for when you 17 experience that she'd had, I understand how she phrased 17 met her on 12 April and followed up in your letter on 18 it in that way. But I would also assert that the 18 the 17th? 19 efforts across the whole journey that the church is 19 A. Yes, yes. 20 making is focused on safeguarding those who are 20 Q. Had anyone actually ever brought to your attention in 21 vulnerable and trying to respond to them well. 21 the Westminster Safeguarding Office the offensive nature 22 Q. Which didn't happen in her case; do you agree? 22 of some of those emails? 23 A. Which did not happen in her case, I accept. 23 A. I don't think so. 24 Q. She told the inquiry in the first of two statements she 24 Q. So when was the first time you actually learned of them? 25 made that she emailed you again on your return from Rome 25 A. I think when they were being produced for her access Page 3 Page 4 1 (Pages 1 to 4) Epiq Europe Ltd www.epiqglobal.com Lower Ground, 20 Furnival Street (+44)207 4041400 [email protected] London EC4A 1JS IICSA Inquiry Roman Catholic Church Investigation Wider Hearing 7 November 2019 1 request, as far as I remember. 1 A. There were three things in my mind, quite honestly. The 2 Q. There are two things. At the time that those emails 2 first was, as I recall, the police closed their enquiry 3 were sent, nobody brought them to your attention? 3 into the allegations she had made to them in September. 4 A. I don't recall so. 4 Q. Of ...? 5 Q. But following the subject access request and the fact 5 A. 2018, I think. 6 that these emails had to be handed over to her, somebody 6 Q. Right. 7 brought them to your attention? 7 A. The Servite Order finally settled the civil litigation 8 A. Obviously. 8 in December 2018. 9 Q. Who was that? 9 Q. That's right. 10 A. I'm sorry, I can't remember. 10 A. Those two things were part of my decision that now is 11 Q. Presumably, you were shocked by them? 11 the time to meet her, because there were two legal -- 12 A. I was taken aback, yes. 12 one criminal and one civil process still in operation. 13 Q. Not shocked? 13 And then, of course, the fact that what I'd seen in the 14 A. I was taken aback. 14 access to documents, of course that played a part as 15 Q. She tells us that she also contacted a newspaper which 15 well. 16 wrote an article about your declining to meet her. 16 Q. So there was a suite of things going on: the civil 17 There was some publicity about that, wasn't there? 17 litigation had ended in settlement at the end of 2018? 18 A. There was. I remember reading that article, yes. 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. About your diary being too full? 19 Q. The police investigation had come to an end around the 20 A. I don't remember the details of it -- of the article, 20 same time, perhaps a couple of months before? 21 that is. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. But subsequent to those two events, the application for 22 Q. You'd seen the product of the subject access request and 23 and the product of provided to her the subject access 23 presumably you were also aware of some media attention 24 request and the media attention, is that when you 24 being paid to some of this? 25 offered her an invitation to meet you? 25 A. Yes. Page 5 Page 6 1 Q. So that brings us to the April. You meet her on the 1 You will remember my reading out to you yesterday 2 12th, in the presence of ...? 2 her 11 May 2017 email, so two years before the date of 3 A. There was one other person from the diocese there with 3 this letter when she had told you that a safeguarding 4 me, a woman. I asked her to do it precisely because she 4 coordinator who was offering her support had said this 5 was a woman. 5 was no longer about the original abuse, but that the 6 Q. Somebody from the safeguarding team? 6 process itself had become abusive. Is this what you're 7 A. No. No. I thought that would not be helpful. 7 accepting here? 8 Q. Then the letter that we first looked at when, yesterday, 8 A. I, again, would not force but refer to a distinction 9 I embarked -- but briefly, when I embarked on these 9 between physical and sexual abuse and the poor -- very 10 questions with you about A711. Let's put up on screen, 10 poor way in which she was treated, which was harsh and 11 please, INQ004668.