I give little credibility to the theory of Repressed Memory Syndrome and I have problems accepting testimonies that stem from so called “recovered memories”. Call me a skeptic. Besides, no one here is considering the side presented by the archdiocese.
If the Bishop was first made aware of allegations against Maskell in 1992, why was aSometimes in my travels I attend Mass in the Diocese of Wilmington, and I happened to notice that Bishop Malooly had issued a response to “The Keepers”, so just posting it here without comment.
cdow.org/bishop-malooly-responds/
The 2nd paragraph of the bishop’s letter speaks volumes to me:If the Bishop was first made aware of allegations against Maskell in 1992, why was a
letter not written until September of 1993 to the Deputy Attorney General?
I noticed that also. Since the adult survivor is not identified, I don’t know if it couldThe 2nd paragraph of the bishop’s letter speaks volumes to me:
“In 1992, while serving as Chancellor and Vicar General for the Archdiocese of Baltimore, I was first made aware of the accusations of sexual abuse of minors by Joseph Maskell. At that time, the adult survivor and her attorney were urged to report the abuse to civil authorities, and the survivor was offered counseling assistance. Maskell was removed from ministry and referred for evaluation and treatment with full disclosure to the facility as to the reason for the treatment. Maskell denied the allegation, and after months of evaluation and treatment, he was returned to ministry in 1993 after the Archdiocese was unable to corroborate the allegation following its extensive investigation.”
Did the “adult survivor” report the abuse to civil authorities?
If you noticed it, then there was no reason to question the lapse in time between being made aware of the allegations and notifying the AG.I noticed that also. Since the adult survivor is not identified, I don’t know if it could
have been someone who participated in the show or not.
How is that? It still doesn’t make sense.If you noticed it, then there was no reason to question the lapse in time between being made aware of the allegations and notifying the AG.
If you’re in a position of authority, and someone accuses your employee of a crime, and you respond by 1st telling the accuser to call the police, and 2nd speaking with the employee in question -and- having said employee examined, and everything checks out, what exactly are you supposed to do?How is that? It still doesn’t make sense.
Yes but the someone came to you in 1992. Why was the Deputy AG not notified untilIf you’re in a position of authority, and someone accuses your employee of a crime, and you respond by 1st telling the accuser to call the police, and 2nd speaking with the employee in question -and- having said employee examined, and everything checks out, what exactly are you supposed to do?
I see little, if ANY, fault with the archdiocese.
When I look at the available evidence of the case, I see a few elements of truth buried in a truckload of hyperbolized bat guano, and popular opinion is demanding that we buy the whole truckload. I’m not buyin it.
It’s up to the accuser to notify the police, who then notify the DA.Yes but the someone came to you in 1992. Why was the Deputy AG not notified until
Sept. of 1993? Did the AG investigate as well as the archdiocese? So you are disbelieving the victims? I be!ieve people can have repressed memories, but I am not
sure about how long they can remain suppressed.
The thing is, this Maskell had several survivors come forward and all their stories are similar to each other. Do you think that they all just decided to band together to concoct a phoney story? That’s just silly. And not just survivors but other bystanders who also contributed to the legitimacy of this story.It’s up to the accuser to notify the police, who then notify the DA.
I believe accusers have to be established as victims before they can rightfully be called victims. In this case, they are not proven to be “victims”.
The validity of Repressed Memory Syndrome is a hotly debated subject in the psych world, with it mostly being rejected. It has also been established that “memories” recovered through therapy based on the notion are imagined, created, and even coached. I know a few abuse survivors outside of the Catholic realm that think Repressed Memory Syndrome is total bunk. For them, the problem is not in remembering the abuse; the problem is not being able to forget the abuse. Read up on the daycare ritual abuse fiasco in the 80’s, and then check out Ralph Cipriano’s Big Trial blog.
Just finished the series. As someone in the greater Boston area, the stories ring very true, as does the pattern of cover-up, missing documentation, multiple transfers, and generally looking the other way. And say what you will about repressed memories, that still does not address the story of the dentist whose mother went to the archdiocese in the '60’s, triggered the first Maskell transfer, but whose complaint went down Baltimore’s memory hole.The thing is, this Maskell had several survivors come forward and all their stories are similar to each other. Do you think that they all just decided to band together to concoct a phoney story? That’s just silly. And not just survivors but other bystanders who also contributed to the legitimacy of this story.
Your last info is very interesting. I hadn’t heard that, but after all these years what
Just finished the series. As someone in the greater Boston area, the stories ring very true, as does the pattern of cover-up, missing documentation, multiple transfers, and generally looking the other way. And say what you will about repressed memories, that still does not address the story of the dentist whose mother went to the archdiocese in the '60’s, triggered the first Maskell transfer, but whose complaint went down Baltimore’s memory hole.
It wasn’t in the series, but Maskell’s body was exhumed earlier this year in order to obtain DNA samples.
Yes, they made a big deal that the DNA didn’t match, but so what? I believe he got someone else to do his dirty work. There were so many people involved, corruption on so many levels. So many people that would gladly look the other way.I don’t think the DNA could prove anything anyway. Since if Maskill was involved in the murder…he likely had someone else do it for him.
I agree. He had so many connections. I don’t think he commuted the murders.Yes, they made a big deal that the DNA didn’t match, but so what? I believe he got someone else to do his dirty work. There were so many people involved, corruption on so many levels. So many people that would gladly look the other way.
Didn’t two guys live in her apartment building at the time that may have been involved? They mentioned Maskell visited them there. Maybe they drove her car back after she was murdered.I agree. He had so many connections. I don’t think he commuted the murders.
I can’t figure out why the Sister’s car was returned to her neighborhood and parked
across the street.
Yes I do remember that.Didn’t two guys live in her apartment building at the time that may have been involved? They mentioned Maskell visited them there. Maybe they drove her car back after she was murdered.
Yeah that does seem strange. My guess is that whoever did it was trying to give them false leads. I really think that the murders had to be committed by someone who knew her, for exactly that reason.I agree. He had so many connections. I don’t think he commuted the murders.
I can’t figure out why the Sister’s car was returned to her neighborhood and parked
across the street.