I decided to set other work aside and get it posted. Here it is:
01 June 2012: Video-audio Spokesman for the Archdiocese of Moncton speaks out (CBC New Brunswick – audio clip)
I have several comments:
(1) I specifically discussed Norm Brun’s meeting with Archbishop Leger and then Father Valery Vienneau with Norm on Wednesday. According to Norm “his” lawyer was not present for the “negotiations.” In fact, it was only after the archbishop got the go-ahead to approve cutting a cheque for Norm that Norm was contacted by the archbishop and told to get a lawyer. Norm went to the Yellow Pages and picked out the first French name in the list of lawyers. The lawyer was present the following day to walk Norm through the paperwork and explain the terms of the settlement.
That was it. The lawyer was NOT there for the ” negotiations” ;
(2) Norm’s allegations against Father Leger were more than “rumours.” A Vancouver psychiatrist had examined Norm and found his allegations to be credible – a letter to that effect was sent to the Archdiocese of Moncton. Then Norm showed up in flesh and blood to confront the archdiocese with his allegations. The archdiocese very quickly drew up a cheque for an undisclosed sum.
According to Norm he asked for and was denied an apology. And, according to Norm, his initial request was that the archdiocese pick up the tab for his psychiatrist and all other counselling until he turned 65. The request was, according to Norm, turned down because it would leave the file “open.” He was then asked “How much do you want?”
Were Norm’s allegations “rumour” Is that what they’re trying to tell us now?
As far as I’m concerned at the very least the “rumours” swirling around Father Camille Leger became fact the day the Archdiocese wrote a cheque to pay-off Normand Brun. By the time other victims began to speak up early this year it was incorrect and misleading for Archbishop Richard to say there had been “rumours.” What an insult and outright slap in the face to Normand Brun!
(3) The Archdiocese was more than capable of advising residents of Cap Pele in 1997 that a victim of Father Camille Leger had come forward, and it was more than capable of doing so without revealing Norm’s identity. It was also more than capable of asking other victims to contact them privately;
Furthermore, the fact that the Vicar General of the day, Father Valery Vienneu (now Bishop of Bathurst) was born and bred in Cap Pele and, as I learned from Norm, was a schoolmate of Norm Brun for ten years, makes the failure to reach out to other victims even more egregious;
(4) Yet again I get the distinct impression that Church officials quite enjoy the fear of victims to be identified or speak out publicly. It would be nice just for once to hear these people encourage victims to speak out with assurance they have nothing to be ashamed of, and that the shame belongs squarely of the priest who molested him/her;
(5) Is former Supreme Court Justice Michel Bastarche going to be on the job in the Archdiocese of Moncton in the not too distant future? If not him, someone else?
According to Langis, the archdiocese is “investigating other options” aside offering counselling to the victims of Father Camille Leger?
Does this mean the archdiocese is going to try to take control of the situation before being deluged with a raft of lawsuits? Is it going to try to circumvent being legally obliged to disclose whatever files it has tucked away in the Secret Archives on Father Camille Leger?
I think a deal of some sort is just around the corner – something like the Bastarache deal where names of offending clergy are kept hush, hush and any and all damning diocesan files never see the light of day?
We shall see. Something is in the mill.
And, here we go again. Concern for victims at the 11th hour – with Church officials kicking, screaming, tap-dancing and circling the wagons all the way.
Enough for now