The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > No man is an island: except for Senator Xenophon > Comments

No man is an island: except for Senator Xenophon : Comments

By Malcolm King, published 16/9/2011

The populist Senator from South Australia is yesterday’s man.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Well, that's a rant.

I don't agree with what Xenophon did in revealing the priest's name, he should not have disregarded the alleged victim's wishes under those conditions, and I'm not sure what he thought he would achieve for anybody involved by taking that action.

You are stretching a long and disagreeable bow in claiming that Hepworth is "tainted" by Xenophon's actions. Hepworth isn't "tainted" by anything. He's the alleged victim of alleged rapist, he's the proven victim of two dead rapists, and he's now been disempowered yet again by Xenophon's complete disregard of his wishes. Now you want to pile on the insults by describing him as "tainted" by another man's ill advised actions. Have you no decency, sir?

Xenophon is "no more a crusader for justice than you or I?" I've crusaded for justice all my life so you can count me out of that presumptuous statement.

Xenophon did a very ill-advised thing. But he's got a very, very long way to go before he comes anywhere near Gillard's ill-advised actions, not to mention Abbott's. So why single him out for your self righteous wrath?
Posted by briar rose, Friday, 16 September 2011 7:52:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Personally, I would have gone in harder. Xenophon has corralled the Victim Lobby and is using them as a battering ram to get publicity. How long do we have to put up with this sort of stuff?

Xenophon only has Hepworth's word. No testimony. No evidence. Now he has trammelled Demspey's name. Xenophon is way out of his depth with this one. The ambassador from Victim Nation should go.

He is a minor politician whose stunts have served him well in getting elected. Now he is an embarrassment.
Posted by Cheryl, Friday, 16 September 2011 8:17:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Malcolm, Your "opinion" piece is a complete crock! Xenophon is a hero here in SA. We see him as just about the only honest broker on the policital scene. Of course as a professional political spin doctor for the Labor Party you must find him absolutely intolerable - but that just adds to his appeal in my opinion.

And by the way, as someone born into a Scientologist family I fully support his trying to shine a light on the "Church" of Scientology!
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Friday, 16 September 2011 9:01:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are very few people with integrity in the federal Parliament; Xenophon is one of them.
The use of the label 'populist' is a dead giveaway - the cheap, unthinking jibe for someone who stands outside the mainstream of corrupted politics.
'Nor now is he a friend of the Catholic Church'. And thank god for that. Is there anybody with any brains or moral fibre who is such a friend?
This PR flack blames Xenophon for not addressing a range of pressing issues. But Xenophon is not in government. Perhaps the author might harangue the Government and the Opposition benches on their neglect.
Xenophon is a member of the Senate Economics References Committee. The Committee members from the three major Parties are all subject to Party dictates (inhibiting genuine reform), whereas Xenophon takes an independent position - for example, on the excessive power of the Big 4 banks within the finance sector.
Xenophon's fault is that he is not part of any controllable Party machine, in which catering to the vested interests is the name of the game and spin is the vehicle for its obfuscation.
Let's have more Nick Xenophons please.
Posted by evan jones, Friday, 16 September 2011 9:43:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Xenophon should not have used 'trial by parliamentary privilege' to name the alleged abuser however I have to agree with the gist of comments made by posters like briar rose,michael and evan.

The parliament needs more Nick Xenophons with a bit of guts and integrity to stand up to corruption and to truly represent the views of his constituents. He was the only voice opposing poker machines being introduced into SA despite the cries of NO from the public at that time. I can see why some might not like Xenophon, he shows most politicians up for what they are - party-line driven hacks who are influenced by factors other than the wishes of their constituents.
Posted by pelican, Friday, 16 September 2011 9:51:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Xenophon is a hero here in SA. We see him as just about the only honest broker on the policital scene."

Who is this "We"? Neither I nor any SAussie I've spoken to in the last 2 days regards Mr X as a hero; "coward" is more our take.
Posted by L.B.Loveday, Friday, 16 September 2011 9:51:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loveday - if you had looked at the Adelaide Advertiser online poll on this issue you would have seen that about 2/3rds supported Xenophon's actions in naming the Catholic priest.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Friday, 16 September 2011 10:07:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is, I think, important to set this episode in it's historical background.
For generations, presumably centuries, some of the priests of the Roman Catholic Church have sodomised the young (and hence powerless) both within the young novitiates and outside within the various parishes. All that I have ever seen indicates that this power driven sodomisation of the weak has been widespread - Europe, USA, Ireland for example.
Consistently the Roman Church heirarchy has avoided the issue, failed to report to the secular authorities. It has to be the worlds greatest and most long standing cover up. In some cases the government has winked at the problem. In Ireland the power of the Roman Church over and within the government was such the the State was well described by Connor Cruise O'Brien as a 'theocracy'.

The conviction within the Roman Church that they are de facto above the law goes all the way back to 'benefit of clergy' more than half a millenium ago.
Currently, all over the world there are people and groups aho are trying to get justice for the evil treatment they endured at the 'hands' of the priests. What chance have they got? There will be scant secular government support, the Roman heirarchy will close ranks even tighter and will obfuscate and delay indefinitely.

Of course, if a complainant keeps the affair within the RC church they might, just might get some compensation. If the go to the police they will get nothing.

It is against this background of repetative evil, compounded by the even greater evil of the cover up that the Senators action may be seen. In particular what evidence is there, currently or historically, that anything in the way of an open investigation will occur?
Which is the greater evil, what may have happened as a result of X's action, or what has happened again and again - power driven sodomy followed by well organised cover ups.
Posted by eyejaw, Friday, 16 September 2011 10:53:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Xeonophan used parliamentary privilege to raise allegations against an individual who is subject to a police investigation. He did this against the wishes of the complainant and in the face of warnings to not use this tactic. What response did the Senator expect and what did he think he would achieve – it would appear no more than raise awareness of the issue per se not help those involved.

There is no evidence the investigation is failing to do its duty, there is no sign of policy failures, there is no evidence the complainant will be helped. An accusation does not equate to conviction or evidence. Let the investigation do its job.

Whether Xenophon is loved or hated, a good or bad Senator is not what needs to be considered. King may be taken as having biases, but a debate on that is not central to this issue.

The central debate is the use and abuse of parliamentary privilege.

Xenophon abused privilege by raising a matter under police investigation against the wishes of the complainant and in the absence of any evidence the matter was being improperly handled. The matter has not been proven. Furthermore, the naming of individuals to make general points is an abuse of privilege in its own right. Individuals are powerless against matters raised in Parliament – Parliament must police itself to ensure individuals are not harmed in this manner.

Parliamentarians are not judges giving verdict. The Senator has abused the complainant in no less a manner than the events which the complaint details.

The Hon John Hogg should refer this matter to the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges for advice.
Posted by Cronus, Friday, 16 September 2011 11:15:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Parliament is a better place because of Senator Xenophon.

He is not bound by Party Policy doctrines, Factional infighting, Wets/Drys, Others Leadership ambitions or the downward influence of " Cabinet Solidarity".

In other words , he is a True Independant, like Katter but unlike Oakshott et al.

More Power to Xenopon!
Posted by Aspley, Friday, 16 September 2011 11:24:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wrong Cronus - the matter was NOT under police investigation and the Catholic church was dragging its feet in SA in contrast to how the chuch had handled similar matters in Victoria. Xenophon was tired of the SA church's obfuscation - he gave them a last chance to act and they did not so he then named the person in parliament.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Friday, 16 September 2011 11:27:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If Xenophon is an SA hero, it's no wonder 23,000 people a year are leaving for other states.

This is a story about whether Xenophon was right to name someone under Privilege. Is the matter of national importance? Does it involve MP or police corruption, say on the scale of Queensland back in the 80s? No.

Xenophon did it to self-aggrandise because he has done almost nothing in his Senate term (except hold a gun to the head of the nation by not threatening to not pass the GFC money bills) and now his vote is meaningless in a Senate whose numbers fall to the Greens.

He has cleverly crafted a persona of being a battler for the little guy when in fact he has done almost nothing. He hates the ALP, the AFL and people who like a punt.

He is certainly lauded by The Advertiser but The Advertiser isn't so much a newspaper as a gossip sheet. He is the President of the Victim Lobby and will be getting inundated with emails and calls from people who have been victims all of their life.

Xenophon is an anti-politician. An individual who is at ease in criticising the ethics and actions of others (mainly the ALP and an array of church groups) but is far less comfortable when the criticism is aimed at him. He is a sham.
Posted by Cheryl, Friday, 16 September 2011 11:46:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
People are always leaving anywhere and people are also arriving. SA's population is exploding right now - the Rann govenment has brought forward its 2050 target of a 2 million population to 2027!!

Xenophon is popular because he has taken a principled stance on so many issues while other politicians have been afraid to say anything in fear of whips or loss of their own popularity. Thank the stars we have someone in Xenophon who is not afraid to address contentious issues with intelligent debate (rather than daily one-liners from party spin doctors). If Xenophon is an "anti-politician" then Australia is in desperate need of an "anti-goverment" in an "anti-Canberra"!
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Friday, 16 September 2011 11:59:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"if you had looked at the Adelaide Advertiser online poll on this issue you would have seen that about 2/3rds supported Xenophon's actions in naming the Catholic priest".

A far cry from being proven to be regarded as a hero, even by most, let alone by the all-encompassing "we". On-line polls are far from scientific, inherently biased.

Only those with access to the poll can vote; only those who read about the issue are likely to see the poll; those with a strong opinion are more likely to vote; there is no moderation of the sample; people can vote as often as they like - I've never before wasted time voting in these irrelevant "polls", but just did 5 times "no"; now you can vote 10 time "yes" to keep up the 2/3 "result".
Posted by L.B.Loveday, Friday, 16 September 2011 12:02:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Xenophon, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Madigan_(Australian_politician) & Katter are almost the only politicians in the land of OZ worth supporting.

We need more of them, less of the major mistakes.
Posted by Formersnag, Friday, 16 September 2011 12:21:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Any Brother, Priest or other member of the hierarchy of the RC Church who has remained in his position risks being accused of committing child abuse, or being associated with someone who has.

Anyone who thinks child abuse has not been an extremely serious problem needs to read up on the case of Brother Best and his compatriots in the Ballarat area.

In the sentencing hearing a police officer who had investigated the matters in that case stated that at least 20 victims of the abuse had committed suicide.

Any officer of the church who was aware of the abuse, or who forgave the abusers their evil in the confessional, or who concealed the abuse from thorough investigation by secular authorities has blood on his hands.

I was surprised that the ABC programme 7.30 only covered the Best case in their Victorian programme. I only became aware of the matter because it was reported in the UK.

The ABC Victorian coverage is available at;
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-30/police-probe-school-paedophile-network/2817328

In matter raised by the senator, if the senator became concerned that stalling and cover up was the problem, then more strength to his arm.
Posted by Foyle, Friday, 16 September 2011 3:52:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I too saw a documentary on Brother Best. Hats off to Nick Xenophon, he has a lot at risk to come out and name and shame an (alleged) victim of abuse. One who has been abused, as a child, will heal only when their abusers are brought to trial to face the music of their despicable deeds.
NSB
Posted by Noisy Scrub Bird, Friday, 16 September 2011 5:25:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
NSB, most abusers are never brought to trial, especially when they are family members. Unfortunately this means survivors have to find ways to heal as best they can without any legal justice.
Posted by briar rose, Friday, 16 September 2011 6:15:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I personally do not like Senator Nick Zenaphon because he tends to make himself the hero of the ordinary people,I am looking after you, he normally vets all his correspondence to only include those he feels will advance his own ego with the public, hence the outburst with the two Catholic priests in question.

I do not like the Catholic church or any church either,they tend to go the opposite of Nick Zenaphon and do their best to hide their wrong doings from the public, we are here for you, including paedophilia and other misdeeds, like brainwashing young children into a particular religion when it should be their choice later in life.
Posted by Ojnab, Friday, 16 September 2011 9:24:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am no fan of the Catholic church but it is gross hypocrisy to have Xenophon taking the moral high ground when our Parliament is full of people who have very questionable moral backgrounds. If he wants to go on a moral cruscade he should look inhouse instead of being cowardly enough to name someone who has not faced court and is unable to defend himself. Stinks of self righteousness to me.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 17 September 2011 10:27:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It appears there is no shortage of self-righteousness in South Australia, Runner, according to some of these posts.

Xenophon acted on his own to name and shame and individual who is innocent at law. As per the article, he is a modern day US Senator Joseph McCarthy, who believes evil and malfeasance is everywhere. But Xenophon knows he has gone too far this time.

He is madly trying to wedge the Catholic and Anglican Churches but he would be better advised to prepare for a Senate investigation in to his own conduct.

As a digression, what is it with Crow eaters and their beatification of Xenophon? He is a small time player in the Senate. Maybe he sells newspapers.
Posted by Cheryl, Saturday, 17 September 2011 10:49:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"if you had looked at the Adelaide Advertiser online poll on this issue you would have seen that about 2/3rds supported Xenophon's actions in naming the Catholic priest".

I could not find that poll today, but for interest just timed myself and on another poll easily voted 14 times in 2 minutes, equating to, say 200-500 votes per hour, depending on dexterity and industry.

I'd not be surprised if someone with greater interest and resolve than I in this matter could automate the process and achieve an even faster voting rate, then have lunch while the "bot" voted away.

Taxpayer-funded feminists groups are widely reputed to set to work swamping such "polls" on Family Law issues; maybe Xenophon's staff, or other anti-Catholic, or pro-Xenophon did the same in this "poll".

michael_in_adelaide is apparently naive enough to take notice of these rubbish polls; hopefully the vast majority, and particularly those with influence are more realistic.
Posted by L.B.Loveday, Saturday, 17 September 2011 11:12:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is it not amazing that so many posters stray off so many topics only to descend into political wrangling?, surely there are more interesting topics to discuss. This topic is about child abuse, one of the worst crimes to commit, given that the victims were children. Politics is a farce these days, but serious stuff seems to be relegated to the bottom of the pile...
NSB
Posted by Noisy Scrub Bird, Saturday, 17 September 2011 2:48:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No - the story is about the misuse of Parliamentary Privilege.
Posted by Cheryl, Saturday, 17 September 2011 3:12:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"This topic is about child abuse, one of the worst crimes to commit, given that the victims were children".

"No - the story is about the misuse of Parliamentary Privilege".

And the misuse of PP had nothing to do with child abuse - the alleged victim was well into his adulthood when the alleged offence was alleged to occur.

So, as so often happens, (s)he who makes the accusation of straying off topic is in fact the one who is way off topic.
Posted by L.B.Loveday, Saturday, 17 September 2011 6:43:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Parliamentarians are granted special protection for their speech in Parliament, in order to ensure they can govern courageously ... even if they're not particularly courageous. It's a very significant dispensation, something not available to any other citizens. The rest of us, and even Senator Xenophon when he's not speaking in Parliament, are responsible for the consequences of what we say. It follows, as a pretty obvious matter of ethics, that Parliamentary Privilege should be used only for the purposes for which it was intended.

Criminal matters are the province of courts, not Parliament. Duh. That's not news to Xenophon, I hope. Again, as a matter of ethics, we don't accuse someone without evidence. If you have reason to believe that someone's guilty of rape, you have exactly one option: hand the matter over to those who are authorised and equipped to decide if prosecution is warranted.

Xenophon hasn't even tried to play by the rules. He's certainly wrecked someone's reputation from the safety of his high position. It'd be a lot less exciting to do the right thing: take the matter to the police. No headlines. And probably no result: allegations of a crime which took place 40 years ago, without witnesses, will take a lot of proving. As it should.

Xenophon hasn't committed a crime. As far as I'm concerned, though, he's abused his position, big time. That, I think, earns him ... contempt.
Posted by donkeygod, Sunday, 18 September 2011 12:25:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't doubt Senator Xenophon's good intentions.
I'm sure that he meant well and thought that he
was doing the right thing. However it was a bit
pre-mature. As far as I'm aware - no official
complaint has even been lodged with the Church
against this priest, no charges have been laid.
Therefore to publicly name and shame someone in
a case like this - is jumping the gun. The Senator
should at least have waited until charges were
filed.
Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 18 September 2011 10:25:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi

Spot on.

For all my misgivings about the lack of accountability displayed by the church, presumption of innocence remains an intrinsic part of our legal system. Therefore, Xenophon, at the very least should have kept his mouth shut - he most definitely did abuse his political responsibilities.

He could've raised the entire issue of paedophilia within the church, thus gaining greater public attention, but just like Derryn Hinch he saw himself as a vigilante and made a mockery of his privileged position in society. Derryn was charged and found guilty of breaching court suppression orders.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/derryn-hinch-guilty-but-not-sorry-20110603-1fkap.html

People who may have stepped forward with information regarding this abuse of children are less likely if they feel they may be compromised and ditto for the church, whose action on this subject continues to be worse than nothing.
Posted by Ammonite, Sunday, 18 September 2011 11:13:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"He could've raised the entire issue of paedophilia within the church,....."

Again, it WAS NOT about paedophilia, but about the alleged rape of an adult man, 40 years ago.
Posted by L.B.Loveday, Sunday, 18 September 2011 2:05:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The question is, what is the purpose of parliamentary privilege. Surely in the end the individual Member of Parliament must make her/his own decision as to whether or not the particular issue s/he wishes to pursue is one for parliamentary privilege. Parliamentary privilege exists for Members to raise difficult issues that are being or have been covered up, and which have no alternative place of airing - in the true sense of the word. It is a question of public interest (not 'the public's interest as in purience, gossip, etc).

When Deidre Gruisovin and Franca Arena - at the time members of the NSW Parliament - raised issues relating to allegations of child sexual abuse they were criticised by their own political party, however, I do not recall that either resiled from her position. That is, having endeavoured to have the issues dealt with through alternative avenues and these avenues having failed or been unsatisfactory, each made a considered decision that she should speak in Parliament. Each made the considered decision that this was an appropriate use of parliamentary privilege. The rationale was, as it appears, that powerful interests were or may have been subverting a just outcome. It was, as it appears, a matter of power, power relationships and whether the powerful should be privileged in voice over the less powerful, the ignored, the powerless.

In one case (Franca Arena) it was a question whether a particular body established to investigate allegations of child sexual abuse had been privileging, in their questioning or recording of the same, persons in powerful positions. This was the query that was raised by her as a Member of Parliament,under parliamentary privilege.

If a person is elected to Parliament, then s/he is elected to, amongst other matters, make considered decisions about the use of parliamentary privilege. As per the above, in the end it is the individual Member who must confront her/his own conscience as to whether the use of parliamentary privilege in the particular circumstance is appropriate.
Posted by jocelynne, Sunday, 18 September 2011 4:53:55 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont.

If as a Member of Parliament, one perceives a 'cover up' or failure to address a matter that is serious and that should in the public interest be addressed, then it is a matter for that Member to determine her/his approach and in particular whether to use parliamentary privilege.

Some may agree on the decision. Some may disagree. In the end, it is a matter of conscience for the Member.
Posted by jocelynne, Sunday, 18 September 2011 4:54:51 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I was reading John Hepworth's story and it stated he allegedly had been sexually abused by 2 priests when he was 15 years old (thus these 2 priests were paedophiles), however it was not by the priest named by Senator Xenophon.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/one-mans-life-and-how-the-church-he-loved-let-him-down-20110916-1ke00.html

Apparently Mr. Hepworth was allegedly blackmailed into having sex with these men all during his 12 years learning to be a priest, by being told he would be thrown out of the seminary if he told what was happening there.

How disgusting is that?
How soul-destroying would that be for an apparently large man to have to submit to that sexual assault without trying to save himself?

I can't believe that one of the alleged perpetrators of this crime is still in charge of a parish.
I very much doubt that the Catholic church had no knowledge of this situation. I also doubt anything much will be done about it either.

However, I don't believe Nick Xenophon should have named this Priest in parliament before he was even charged.
Posted by suzeonline, Sunday, 18 September 2011 4:59:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think Senator Xenophon did the right thing. Sometimes things like this bring out other allegations. Successful prosecutions require more than one victim.

I wouldn't put this use of parliamentary privilege in the same category as allegations made against Justice Kirby: Cant say I thought much of that effort.
Posted by Fester, Sunday, 18 September 2011 7:39:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loveday

Please read my entire post in context.

The victim's abuse started when he was an adolescent. Perhaps I should've just written something more general like "church cover-up of abuse".

The 2 original abusers have since died. There remains one who continued to torment the victim into his adult years - that is the man who was named by Xenophon. No trial has been held, nor sentence mandated, Xenophon abused his privileged position by naming.
Posted by Ammonite, Monday, 19 September 2011 8:57:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nick Xenophon has yet again given a voice to the voiceless.
He does this extremely well.
Those of us who have been abused by people in authority or power breathe a little easier whenever a predator is named.
Those who have never been abused can never understand how powerless a victim of abuse becomes. The Law does not always provide Justice sometimes it doesn't even provide a hearing.
Ask me how I know.
Three cheers for Nick Xenophon..... again
Posted by Hilily, Monday, 19 September 2011 4:52:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh dear, according to the Advertiser (not a reliable source) the Catholic Church offered Hepworth an inquiry two years ago and he turned it down.

Xenophon is now swinging in the wind alone. His sole source (who seems to have some health problems) has deserted him and possibly has not disclosed all that he knew or knows.

Mr X, doyen of Victim Nation, is gone.
Posted by Cheryl, Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:17:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy