I had hoped to have time to make comment last evening but time passed me by and now I am dead tired 🙁
There is one thing which I must draw to your attention which I made reference to earlier, and that is the 10 December 2010 email of Michel Bastarache to John MacDonald
Note particularly these words:
As a professional, my duty is to report if a “child” is or may be in need of protection, even when the information is supposed to be confidential or privileged. As all of the victims who have come forward are over the age of 18, they could also report this abuse, should they wish to do so. If ever there was a case where an individual would be in danger, no matter if he/she were a minor, I would definitely not hesitate to report this to the police.
“If ever there was a case where an individual would be in danger, no matter if he/she were a minor, I would definitely not hesitate to report this to the police.”
Why then, in light of these, his own words, did Mr. Bastarache NOT report the Father Yvon Arsenaul allegations to police?
Did Mr. Bastarache somehow conclude that Father Arsenault does not pose a threat to any child or young person, minor or not? If that’s the case, how did he manage to draw that conclusion? Did he perchance interview Father Arsenault and Father Arsenault denied the allegations? If not that, then why did he conclude that this particular priest – who has been reported to him as a molester by four or five individuals – would not lay a wayward hand on a single soul – minor or not?
Does he perhaps know Father Arsenault personally? is that it?
I just do not understand how Michel Bastarche can conclude that in this particular instance he has no need whatsoever to go to police. I fail to understand why he would allow children and others to be unwittingly placed and/or left at risk.
Those comments are a far cry from Mr. Bastarche’s comments in this article of this year:
04 January 2013: “Archdiocese failed abuse victims: lawyers” & related articles
“The bishop can’t give them the names because he doesn’t have them and I can’t give them because I have a confidentiality agreement with the victims,” Judge Bastarache said in an interview from Ottawa.
“It has to be a victim that goes to the police and not somebody with third-party information.”
Note again: “I can’t give [the names] because I have a confidentiality agreement with the victims,” (January 2013)
And note from 2010: “… my duty is to report if a ‘child’ is or may be in need of protection, even when the information is supposed to be confidential or privileged.” (November 2010)
Why did Michel Bastarache chose NOT to report to police?
That’s my comment for now, but please take time to watch the CBC video clip linked into this article here:
04 January 2012: Priest sex abuse allegations not reported to RCMP
I’m having difficulty downloading the CBC clips – just can’t get anything but the commercials. I will see if I can get copies to put on the site next week, but for now, please do click on the link and catch the latest here. A victim says he went to Archbishop Leger in 1998 and nothing was done.
And attempts to get comment from Archbishop Leger (now retired and living in Ottawa) have failed.
And in as much as Father Arsenault presumably retired in July it seems that many parishioners had not an inkling that he was retired. They simply thought he was away on holiday, and then, he didn’t come back.
Oh what a tangled web we weave….
Keep the victims and all parishioners in your prayers. There are, I believe, tough days ahead for Catholics in the Archdiocese of Moncton.
Enough for now,
PS: I have updated pending court dates. I will make note of all new court dates in a blog later today.