The shocking truth is uncovered

The shocking truth is uncovered

25 January 2017

FORMER residents of Rubane House have come forward in recent years to paint a hellish picture of life in the Kircubbin children’s home.

Characterised by violent assaults and sexual abuse so commonplace there was barely an effort to conceal it, it was a nightmare vision so extreme that some found it difficult to believe.

But this week the victims have been vindicated with the release of the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry report, which kept some of its severest criticisms for the De La Salle Order run home.

The inquiry panel, led by Sir Anthony Hart, found evidence of widespread and serious physical abuse as well as sexual abuse carried out on an ongoing basis at the home over an 18-year period. During one five-year period from 1957 to 1962, it found that three Brothers in the small community were all sexually abusing boys at the one time. Most likely aware of each other’s activities, the Inquiry found that they had the confidence to act with impunity and even carried out barely concealed sexual assaults in public areas.

The home’s handling of allegations of sexual abuse came under particular criticism. In one instance in the 1960s it was noted that an abusing Brother was moved to a primary school in Downpatrick and that he continued to abuse children.

Fifty of the 60 former residents of Rubane who gave evidence to the Inquiry over eight weeks at Banbridge Courthouse said that they suffered physical abuse by some Brothers and lay staff and observed other boys being subject to such abuse.  

Fifty-one said they were sexually abused by staff and/or their peers in Rubane and that they were aware of other boys being subject to such abuse.

In total, the Inquiry considered almost 40,000 pages of documentation in relation to Rubane, 20,000 pages of which was provided by the police.

PHYSICAL ABUSE

“Witnesses who were resident in Rubane across the four decades of its operation described staff losing control and severely beating boys, excessive caning and strapping which was not limited to hands and  behinds, and some staff using their fists and feet to hit boys,” the Inquiry report read. “They described a culture of physical force being used to assert  and maintain authority and control and an atmosphere where the risk of physical violence was constantly present and often realised.”

It continued: “We recognise that during much of Rubane’s operation, the use of informal corporal punishment was typical of many day schools and families. However, we are satisfied that there was widespread resort to excessive physical  punishment by some brothers and lay staff. We are convinced by the evidence we have heard that individual brothers, and in later years lay staff, lost control and physically abused boys and that in some cases this violent behaviour amounted  to  serious  physical  assault. We accept that, particularly in the early years, the risk of violence from some brothers was ever present and that in many instances the violence was random and unpredictable.  

“We consider that such behaviour was a consistent feature of life in Rubane up until at least the early 1980s and that it amounts to a systemic failure by the Order to keep children free from abuse.”

The report highlighted several examples, such as one involving a Brother, referred to as BR 17: “HIA 399 [a former resident] described observing BR 17 hitting boys so hard that sweat poured from him and that ‘he looked like he was enjoying it too much’.”

In another example involving a Brother referred to as BR 15, the report noted: “HIA 183 described BR 15 hitting a boy across the face with a bamboo cane and continuing to hit across the legs and back with the cane although blood was pouring from the boy’s face.”

A Brother known as BR 77 was the only Brother who worked in Rubane to be convicted for physical abuse of the boys in his care. Appearing at Ards Court on May 11, 1981, he pleaded guilty to three assaults of occasioning actual bodily harm. He received a conditional discharge on each of the counts.

One of the assaults related to a basketball game in the sports hall.

His victim recalled: “BR 77 came over to me and punched me on the jaw. I tried to cover myself up and he kept on punching me with both fists until I fell and hit my head on the wall.  When I was on the ground he kept on hitting me and cut my upper lip. He also kicked me once when I was on the ground.”

The Inquiry noted that after 1980, new Brothers were in charge which “suggested a more positive approach of rewarding good behaviour” and there was an intention to reduce the use of corporal punishment.

“While we did not accept every allegation about physical abuse by brothers in these later years we concluded from the accounts of witnesses that the restrictions described by BR 7 were not always adhered to and that brothers continued to use their superior physical force to exercise authority over the boys, as did lay staff,” said the report.

It gave as an example, a lay member of staff, referred to as DL 81, who was 20 years-old when he started working at Rubane and ended up in a number of physical confrontations with boys.

Giving evidence to the Inquiry he denied the allegations against him, saying he was known as a ‘softie’.

The Inquiry noted that staff had to deal with provocative behaviour at the home and that in one instance when DL 81 slapped a boy “it highlighted how important it was for them to be properly supported in their work and the adverse impact when that support was not available”.

The report also recorded allegations that Brothers and members of staff known for their quick temper and physical abuse of boys were also working under the influence of alcohol.

SEXUAL ABUSE

BR 17

The first investigation of alleged sexual abuse in Ruane occurred in 1958 and was prompted by five boys telling the then chaplain that the Brother Director, BR 17 had sexually interfered with them.

The inquiry said it was satisfied that BR 17 sexually abused boys in Rubane over a number of years and was highly critical about how it was handled.

Its report stated: “We consider BR 19’s handling of the investigation in 1958 was gravely deficient…. BR 17 remained in post for almost four more years until he was moved on August 1, 1962 to work in a primary school in Downpatrick.  We are aware from documentation provided by the Order that BR 17 sexually abused children while working in Downpatrick. Had BR 19 [the Provincial] reported the 1958 allegations to the civil authorities as he should have done, then it may well be the case that BR 17 would have been brought to justice at that time, and so have been unable to abuse more children in Rubane and in Downpatrick.”

The inquiry noted that BR 17 maintained contact with two children after they left Rubane to return to their families and when he himself had left Rubane in the early 1960s. BR 17, who offered financial help to the family, stayed overnight and abused one of the boys.

The report recorded his deion of the impact of the abuse: “It  wasn’t  just  the  physical  aspect  of  the  abuse  that  affected  me;  it messed  with  your  mind. I  remember  thinking  I  hope  when  I  grow  up  it isn’t compulsory the way mass and prayers were compulsory.  I was thinking I hope this isn’t something all adults do because it doesn’t seem right at all.”

BR 14

The second recorded incident of alleged sexual abuse being investigated in Ruane involved a Brother known as BR 14. In a letter seeking dispensation from his post he admitted to “grave immoral actions with a number of boys”.

BR 19 countersigned the letter describing him as “a positive danger to young people”.

In a separate letter to Brother Vicar General in Rome about the matter, BR 19 stated that “during the past three years he has interfered with boys, a couple each year”. BR 19’s letter is dated September 12, 1964, five days before he submitted his report to the Ministry of Home Affairs officials assuring them that BR 14 had only admitted to a one-off incident with one boy.

BR 15

The third allegation of sexual abuse in Rubane investigated by the De La Salle Order involves BR 15. This Brother was subsequently moved to Finglas on January 31, 1971. The Order told the inquiry that the Provincial was faced with a strenuous denial of any wrongdoing by BR 15 and that the complainant’s mother had indicated her son’s word was not reliable. It was decided to move the Brother as a precautionary measure.

The inquiry found no effort had been made to alert the authorities and that this was a “systemic failing” by the Order. It noted that the Order accepted this complainant had been abused, as well as another child who received compensation.

BR 1

BR 1 was a director of Rubane who was suspended in 1980. Twenty-nine boys made allegations of a sexual nature against him and the police brought charges. However, BR 1 developed a malignant tumour of the spine and the Public Prosecution Service decided not to pursue proceedings against him. BR 1 underwent major surgery and went into remission for a number of years before dying in 2000. The Order has settled a number of civil claims made against him.

“We  are  satisfied  from  the  evidence  we  have  received  that  BR  1  used  the  pretence  of  medical  examinations  to  sexually  abuse  boys  and  that  more generally he inappropriately fondled boys,” the inquiry report concluded. “We consider it particularly significant that he acted in this way while he was the Brother Director, given the authority that role gave him and that it meant there was no brother senior to him in Rubane to whom the boys could have expressed their concerns about his behaviour.”

FR BRENDAN SMYTH

Two witnesses told the Inquiry that the notorious paedophile priest sexually abused them in Rubane. One said they reported this to BR 1 and from that point Brendan Smyth stopped visiting him.

“We have seen no evidence to suggest that BR 1 reported this abuse to the police, the Diocese or Fr Smyth’s Order,” the report noted.

MULTIPLE OFFENDERS

Looking at the sexual offending in Rubane as a whole, the Inquiry made some disturbing conclusions: “We are satisfied that between 1953 when BR 17 arrived in Rubane and 1971 when BR 15 left, 18 years in total, at any one time there was at least one brother sexually abusing boys.”

The Inquiry said it was also satisfied that three Brothers [BR 17, BR 14 and BR 15] in the five-year period from 1957 to 1962 were all sexually abusing boys.

“One of the most concerning aspects of the behaviour of these brothers is that at the same time as they were sexually abusing boys they were also very physically aggressive in the home, including towards boys they were sexually abusing,” their report stated. “Exploitation of the power differential between adults and children is a common feature of sexual abuse of children, but this was particularly the case in relation to these three brothers who reinforced that differential with frequent displays of physical violence towards boys.”

It continued: “We  do  not  know  whether  the  three  brothers  who  were  sexually  abusing boys in Rubane at the same time were aware of each other’s behaviour, discussed it or co-ordinated it.  However, given the small number of brothers  in the community in Rubane, the close living and working conditions and the talk that went on between the boys about the abuse we consider it probable  that  the  three  brothers  were  aware  of  each  other’s  activities  and  took  some  comfort  that  their  sexual  misconduct  was  unlikely  to  be  challenged  by  like-minded  brothers. We  consider  that  BR  14  and  BR  15 could have taken particular comfort from their knowledge that the Br Director, BR 17, was sexually abusing boys and therefore would be likely to overlook their behaviour if it was reported to him.  

“Although the most serious sexual abuse was carried out in secrecy , and usually in the brother’s room, it is significant that brothers were prepared to engage  in  covert  sexual  activity…when other boys were present in the television room and at night in the dormitories. This 

was an era when room lights were commonly turned off when the television was on, so they had the advantage of carrying out their abuse in darkness, as would have been the case when they interfered with boys at night in the dormitories.  

“However covert or discreet this behaviour was, it was being conducted in public places in front of a number of boys and it is clear from witnesses that  the  boys  knew  what  was  going  on.  The  brothers  therefore  ran  a  significant  risk  of  their  behaviour  being  discovered. 

“That  they  were  prepared to run that risk suggests that they felt confident their behaviour would  not  be  challenged  or  reported  and  that  this  confidence  allowed  them to abuse boys on a regular basis. HIA 279 commented in relation to being interfered with by a brother, who we take to be BR 15, at night in  the dormitory and in his office: ‘He  never  threatened  or  warned  me  not  to  tell  anyone  about  these incidents.  He acted as if it was normal behaviour’.”

EMOTIONAL ABUSE

 The Inquiry found that there was “clearly very significant emotional abuse associated with the physical and sexual abuse that boys suffered in Rubane.”

“Witnesses talked of the fear and trepidation they experienced not knowing when they would next be subject to abuse, the confusion that grooming behaviour caused them and the mental impact of sexual and physical abuse,” Sir Anthony Harte’s report recorded. “They told us that the brothers’  inconsistent  behaviour  and  changeable  moods  meant  they felt they had to be constantly on their guard.

“Witnesses told us about how the abuse they suffered in Rubane affected them throughout their lives and caused them difficulties in establishing and maintaining personal relationships and in parenting.  

“Some witnesses told us about the struggles they have had with alcohol and drug dependency and mental  illness,  and  many  referred  to men who had been boys with them in Rubane who had died early deaths, some at their own hands, or who were too unwell or vulnerable to engage with the Inquiry. The impact of this emotional abuse has remained with witnesses throughout their lives.”