The victim, David Ridsdale, told an Australian royal commission into child sexual abuse that he called Cardinal George Pell in 1993 to report being abused by his uncle Gerald Ridsdale, a former priest who is in prison after committing more than 130 offences against children as young as four between the 1960s and 1980s.
David Ridsdale said Pell had a “terse” response to being told of the abuse, before offering him money to buy his silence.
“George then began to talk about my growing family and my need to take care of their needs,” Ridsdale told the royal commission hearing. “He mentioned how I would soon have to buy a car or house for my family.
“I remember with clarity the last three lines we spoke together. Me: Excuse me, George, what the [expletive] are you talking about? George: I want to know what it will take to keep you quiet. Me: [expletive] you, George, and everything you stand for.”
Ridsdale, now 48, said he called his sister after the conversation with Pell and told her “the bastard tried to bribe me”.
“Some days, I don’t know who I am angrier at, Gerald for being a sick monster, or George for the way he reacted and dealt with the issue,” Ridsdale said. “Catholic clergy are meant to be the moral leaders of our society, but after my reactions from George and the Catholic church I have zero respect for him and the institution.”
The evidence was heard on the second day of public hearings in Ballarat for the royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse. Ballarat is a Victorian city about 62 miles (100km) north-west of Melbourne. The commission has held 27 hearings across Australia into the response of the Catholic church and other institutions to child sexual abuse.
Justice Peter McClellan, chair of the royal commission, said that Pell would be asked to answer the serious questions raised by the evidence. Peter Gray SC, representing the Catholic church’s witnesses, said Pell had a different recollection of the conversation.
In a statement, Pell said he was “extremely sympathetic” to David Ridsdale but said the abuse victim was confused about the conversation in question.
theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/20/cardinal-george-pell-offered-bribe-to-child-sex-abuse-victim-inquiry-told“I continue to regret the misunderstanding between us. At no time did I attempt to bribe David Ridsdale or his family or offer any financial inducements for him to be silent. At the time of our discussion the police were already aware of allegations against Gerald Ridsdale and were investigating. Then, and now, I supported these police investigations. I have previously made a sworn denial of these allegations and I reiterate that denial,” he said.
A Ballarat bishop knew Australia’s worst pedophile priest had abused boys when he moved him between parishes with Cardinal George Pell involved in at least one decision to move him, an inquiry has heard.
Then Ballarat Bishop Ronald Mulkearns knew Father Gerald Francis Ridsdale had abused boys ‘so he was taken out of there’ and again moved to another parish, the abuse royal commission heard on the opening day of three weeks of hearings in the city devastated by decades of abuse.
Senior counsel assisting the commission Gail Furness SC said Ridsdale was discussed at a meeting of the bishop’s advisers - the College of Consultors - in September 1982, where Cardinal Pell was present.
The meeting minutes say the bishop advised it had become necessary for Ridsdale to move from Mortlake parish, but do not disclose what reasons Bishop Mulkearns gave.
‘There will be evidence that Bishop Mulkearns knew it was because Ridsdale had abused boys in Mortlake, and that he had offended in this manner in 1975,’ Ms Furness said.
skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2015/05/19/inquiry-says-bishop-knew-of-clergy-abuse.html‘Several of the consultors had been present at meetings, or were members of the College of Consultors, on each occasion in the past when Ridsdale was moved.’
The Catholic Church will continue to use a controversial legal defence to block victims of clerical abuse from seeking compensation, despite a promise to abandon the practice having been backed by Cardinal George Pell.
The church’s backflip comes as the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse sits today for a three-week hearing into decades of horrific abuse in the Diocese of Ballarat.
Fairfax Media can reveal a major rift between the country’s most influential bishops, religious orders and their insurers over the continued use of the so-called Ellis defence, which was supposedly disavowed in April 2014.
The Ellis defence is based on a 2007 NSW Court of Appeal decision that found the church cannot be sued for compensation because it does not technically exist as a legal entity.
theage.com.au/victoria/church-to-block-victims-court-bids-despite-promise-to-abandon-practice-by-pell-20150517-gh3jkr.htmlThe precedent has angered victims seeking compensation, who are forced to rely on the church’s Melbourne Response and Towards Healing redress schemes, which cap ex gratia payments at $75,000 and require recipients to waive their legal rights to sue.
Have you paid any attention to the work Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have done on this front?How much more can we Catholics take of this unmitigated disaster and denial. When will some heads roll?
Prodigal, there are hundreds of cases that are settled silently, where millions of dollars are being paid to many victims by the Church. The Church wouldn’t do that if these were in fact unsubstantiated claims of people who just want to take advantage of the situation.Have you paid any attention to the work Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have done on this front?
If you had, you’d realize that heads have rolled, perpetrators have been handed over to the authorities, regulations have been rewritten to account for instances such as this, and a general clean out has begun on the curia to remove those who allowed such offenses to take place.
Furthermore, this article really only addresses one side of it. Cardinal Pell has denied the claims (which he would do whether he was innocent or not), and we owe it to him to not jump to conclusions. A lot of people have been using the abuse scandal to try to get the Church to pony up for fabricated offenses, the number of substantiated claims is actually quite low (in terms of percentages, not the actual numbers where even one case is far too many), so the Church has to be on guard and do due diligence to make sure she isn’t being taken advantage of.
This is the kind of denial that I am talking about. Name some heads that have rolled.Have you paid any attention to the work Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have done on this front?
If you had, you’d realize that heads have rolled, perpetrators have been handed over to the authorities, regulations have been rewritten to account for instances such as this, and a general clean out has begun on the curia to remove those who allowed such offenses to take place.
Furthermore, this article really only addresses one side of it. Cardinal Pell has denied the claims (which he would do whether he was innocent or not), and we owe it to him to not jump to conclusions. A lot of people have been using the abuse scandal to try to get the Church to pony up for fabricated offenses, the number of substantiated claims is actually quite low (in terms of percentages, not the actual numbers where even one case is far too many), so the Church has to be on guard and do due diligence to make sure she isn’t being taken advantage of.
#1: If you’re going to make assertions like that, you need to provide sources for themProdigal, there are hundreds of cases that are settled silently, where millions of dollars are being paid to many victims by the Church. The Church wouldn’t do that if these were in fact unsubstantiated claims of people who just want to take advantage of the situation.
With this in mind, the number of claims that are substantiated are probably higher than we all think.
I did not deny anything. The abuses happened, and we are still working on the problem. That does not mean that every last cry of abuse should be treated as fact without using our minds and knowledge to look into it.This is the kind of denial that I am talking about. Name some heads that have rolled.
He doesn’t look convincing in the video link posted earlier:Full text of statement from Cardinal George Pell
mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/statement-from-cardinal-george-pell/6485580
You do not know this. And no doubt, Satan, the Father of Lies, has made hay of the accusations really perpetrated by many priests over the years by falsely accusing even the innocent to get them out of the way of his evil work.Lots of lying going on, on both sides.
Did you watch the video interview? Cardinal Pell is caught lying, said he never paid anyone. Then the interviewer brings out the paperwork right after he says that, which said he paid $50,000 and a clause to keep quiet, and he was forced to admit it.You do not know this. And no doubt, Satan, the Father of Lies, has made hay of the accusations really perpetrated by many priests over the years by falsely accusing even the innocent to get them out of the way of his evil work.
I did not watch that particular one and the situation is horrendous. Who knows what mis-guided decisions were made in an attempt to avoid scandal (making it even worse and creating sin upon sin.) I defend none of it, but know that evil will use every means possible, even the destruction of innocent priests in some situations, to try to accomplish the destruction of the church.Did you watch the video interview? Cardinal Pell is caught lying, said he never paid anyone. Then the interviewer brings out the paperwork right after he says that, which said he paid $50,000 and a clause to keep quiet, and he was forced to admit it.
The denial here sometimes is appalling.