Sinister!

There's a report in the news from one of the lawyers who handled victims vs Catholic church previously .... he comments on the legal obstacles to effective prosecution of offenders .... and the active processes used by the church to prevent prosecution!
 There has rarely existed an opportunity for victims to seek redress against the Catholic Church because of statute of limitation laws, which apply strict timelines for civil legal recourse. Even where provision exists for an extension of time, church authorities in the past have taken steps to transfer claims to states where no such legislative ''chance to be heard'' applies.
.
He commented on some interesting legal protections that are peculiar to the Catholic church ...
They enjoy the benefits of corporate status - for tax land purposes and perpetual succession of property - but avoid corporate tort liability for the very atrocities committed under their roof. A Catholic archbishop, unlike the heads of other organisations, cannot be held accountable for the negligent and reckless acts or omissions of their predecessor.
.
.... and I pondered how such evil  can have become entrenched in our society.
I think the origins can be traced to medieval times when the church (note ... at that time there was nothing other than what later became the catholic church) was probably the only real remaining pillar of society ..... the society that later became 'western society'.  The 'dark ages' didn't really affect the other older societies.

Because the church was so important, it assumed a role of limitless power.  The members of the church hierarchy fought to maintain the position of the church in society from that time on.  Sometimes the intent would have been honourable but all too often, the intent was to maintain the powerbase of the church organisation.  Clearly many of the law-makers of western society either came from a church background or were fully approving of the role that the church played.

Consequently subtle 'leanings' have been included in the laws enacted over time.  These have brought us to the point where today the practitioners of evil can hide within the walls of the church  .... and where the church sees its role as being to protect these evil people rather than to protect the innocent. 
 .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14/11/12
People who were sexually abused as children have waited a long time for a royal commission.
They have been waiting a long time to break down the walls of legal protection their abusers have hidden behind so successfully.
In the mid-1990s, I represented more than 250 men who, as children, were victims of sexual assault and abuse while in the care of the Catholic Church and the Christian Brothers order.
We know the predators within the order colluded with each other to create a systemic network of abuse. They shared information about vulnerable children and worked together to suppress complaints.
When their activities became too overt, church superiors stepped in, and moved them elsewhere within the order. In doing so, authorities reduced the possibility a paedophile might have been exposed, and they did nothing to prevent the continuing abuse.
I travelled to Western Australia to interview men who were residents of four Christian Brothers' institutions in that state. These men, many of whom were orphans and child migrants, told stories of horrific physical and sexual abuse. They told stories of brothers, who were meant to be caring for them, coming to their beds at night and performing the most obscene acts of abuse.
It didn't take long to realise a pattern was emerging. Particular children were targeted because of their vulnerability - the quiet ones, the shy ones. These victims also reported the special privileges bestowed on them by the brothers post-abuse - a bemusing thank you for the unwitting loan of their bodies.
I remember at the end of a week of taking testimonies, my colleague Peter Gordon, eminent silk Jack Rush and I were speechless. We could not comprehend what we had heard. Abuse so horrific, with victims so completely helpless and, despite their number, so completely alone.
In those interviews, we also heard how children attempted to escape and how clean clothes were given out when state authorities came to visit and were then taken away as soon as they left.
We heard of vicious beatings for those with the courage to complain.
The Catholic Church and other church denominations occupy a unique position under Australian law. They enjoy the benefits of corporate status - for tax land purposes and perpetual succession of property - but avoid corporate tort liability for the very atrocities committed under their roof. A Catholic archbishop, unlike the heads of other organisations, cannot be held accountable for the negligent and reckless acts or omissions of their predecessor. How can this continue in modern Australia?
And it gets worse. There has rarely existed an opportunity for victims to seek redress against the Catholic Church because of statute of limitation laws, which apply strict timelines for civil legal recourse. Even where provision exists for an extension of time, church authorities in the past have taken steps to transfer claims to states where no such legislative ''chance to be heard'' applies.
For this royal commission to make a difference, it must consider these special protections. And, above all, it must recognise that abuse is not just the act of predators lurking in dormitories at night but also of those in some of the highest echelons of the church who have allowed such betrayal to happen.
The men I interviewed in the 1990s suffer a range of psychiatric and physiological disorders. Many of them can not engage in any form of intimacy with their family members. Alcoholism, sexual dysfunction, self-harm and violence were common responses to what happened. For the few who were able to face up to their pasts, weekly counselling sessions were needed to try to overcome it.
In every case, legal action was not just about money. There is no adequate compensation for a lost childhood.
These men were seeking simple recognition by someone, some court or authority that these events actually occurred and that they were deeply wrong. Apologies from the perpetrators, or their superiors, play a critical role at these times.
Financial redress is important in the rebuilding process, not least when it comes to affording specialised medical help.
But, more than anything, what I heard from these men was that they wanted the truth to be acknowledged and they wanted this to never happen again. A royal commission can help with this.
Hayden Stephens is a lawyer with Slater & Gordon.