St. Bede’s College in Manchester and the Salford Diocese – Part 2

One of the real sad things about Pannone’s settlement in the case last week against the Salford Diocese is that because of the settlement there was no publicity and so St Bede’s College and the Salford Diocese did not get the hammering they deserved.  But before I go any further let me correct a wrong that I should have corrected in last week’s blog posting.  Pannone now of course do not exist, they went the way of most some weeks ago and are now part of the Slater & Gordon empire, however Pannone is still Pannone to Manchester watchers but let us hope their policy might change with the new name, but I doubt it.

Richard Scorer is now the National Senior Injury Manager (sounds ominously threatening) for Slater & Gordon.

Now for all I know the two lads who settled last week with the Salford Diocese must have needed the few bob they were offered but they were not helped by, according to lots of people, by the Pannone policy of getting to court quickly and getting out quickly, lengthening the action means a slower return on money and a crafty lawyer can soon persuade a nervous litigant when to cash in his chips.

Settlement it seems is what Pannone seek, look at their House Blog of 4th November 2009 where their Kim Harrison is positively crowing about the fact that they had just received a settlement of between £15,000 and 20,000 for a client who was abused by Fr William Green whilst a pupil at St Bede’s College.  What is £15,000 – £20,000 for 30 years of trauma, Kim Harrison needs to understand a few things about trauma and how it fuck’s up one’s life and the trauma does not end on pay-day either, you carry it with you for the rest of your life, you under-achieve in your career, you find it impossible to commit to relationships, you often find no way out but suicide.  £15,000 - £20,000 is peanuts for the damage caused.  In America the judicial system have far more empathy for the abused and often pay out 50 times more to the victim.  Why is an American far better treated than an Englishman?

On the day after the Bishop’s wankered apology of the 15th March 2011, Richard Scorer was interviewed by the Manchester Evening News, why I do not know because he had nothing to do with the process, they did not think of interviewing me, who had started and led the debate from its conception in February 2010.  Keegan the arsehole ace cub reporter who took five months to write the 500 word article about the Bishop’s apology and his bigger arsehole editor ONeal, both Old Bedians, did not want to disparage Bede’s any more than it was, so they kept well away from Co Roscommon.

Scorer said in that interview “the danger is that once you have sat through hundreds of accounts, you can become case hardened.  You have to remind yourself that empathy is all-important.  I hope it is something I have always had”.  I wonder whether three years later if there is any vestige of empathy left.  He seemed even then in November 2010 to have no empathy for my case, when it took him 10 minutes to decide that I had no chance, but I think he regretted his hastiness afterwards.

He robotically said when asked if he had a personal grudge against the Catholic Church “No , not at all.  I’m not a Catholic but I married one”.  It’s one of his stocks, he said the same to me.

In the MEN interview he went on to say when accused of being an ambulance chasing lawyer “for most of our clients it’s not about money.  For instance, if the Catholic Church had held its hands up and said ‘we’re sorry’ the victims would have been satisfied.  Fundamentally they wanted acknowledgement from the Church that they were wrong.  The amounts paid out in these cases aren’t enough, unlike the US where you get very big awards because they are made by juries.  Here awards are made by judges under the rules of normal personal injury cases.  They do not seek to punish the wrongdoer, but to put the victim in the financial position they would be without the abuse.  Because so many victims have spent their early lives in the care system, the Church has argued that as adults, they would not have amounted to much anyway.  I try to get the best settlement possible and ensure part of that goes towards paying for therapy.  Some never get over the abuse but others go on to live a happy and fulfilled life”.  I would like to know how he knows that?  Is he sitting in the heads of all his clients?  Why does he sit back and allow the system to set the pace?  Why is he not out there fighting for change?

Any way I do not think that he thought those words of his through at all, because only five months earlier he had dismissed my case saying it was not worth running with because the victims were all well educated and suffered no loss and therefore receive no compensation off a judge.  Whereas a competant lawyer would argue with no difficulty that no matter what station in life you attain, your trauma would have lowered your eventual level of success.  To me Scorer tries to say all the right things which have been said often by others before him.  It is like his new book, it contains all the right ideas that have been used by others before him but nothing new, nothing to cause a spark, no new thinking. So why write the book?

Let us start to ask why is an abused American worth 50 times more than an abused Englishman and why is the Catholic Church not punished severely for the damage they have caused?  These are the two questions I would like answering over the next short while.

Smart Meters, A Step Too Far – Part 7

 Well having thought long and hard I decided to appeal to the more lovable side of Ross.  Here is my letter to my friend in Cork.

 Irish Water

PO Box860

South City

Delivery Office

Cork City


 10th March 2014

 Irish Water Reference No: 8315207755

 Dear Ross,

 Before we get into the nitty-gritty could you tell me why my Irish Water Reference No. keeps changing with every letter, it’s confusing me.

 Your second letter to an extent addresses my concerns but does not alter my thoughts on the matter.  A smart meter is one that emits electro-magnetic radiation, 24/7.  Your meters do this therefore they are smart meters.  Your inspector agreed with me that they were in fact smart meters.  Safety standards means nothing to me, history is littered with safety standards that were wrong and had to be altered.

 I am now glad that you agree with me that Irish Water is responsible for Irish water and is not just a metering programme as you suggested in your letter of 27th March 2014.  I am now also glad that you understand the difficulties we people have had and will continue to have with our drinking water.  This problem seems eternal but I do accept your company is giving some thought to the situation and while I understand that you are required to provide “wholesome and clean” water to your customers that service needs paying for but I am afraid that your use of smart meters and fluoridation of water is never going to provide “wholesome and clean” water.

 In your position as Complaints and Escalations Manager you have obviously proved to somebody that you are not stupid, so please understand neither am I.  To quote me European Directives that are 16 years old when water science has come on in leaps and bounds over that period is treating me with some disrespect, especially when we both know Ireland is the only country in Europe with a mandatory fluoridation policy.  All the rest of the countries have eschewed the idea long ago, leaving Ireland playing catch-up as it always seems to do.

 You also know just like I know that to set limits on the amount of fluoride a person can be subjected to is an impossibility.  95% of the toothpastes on the market are now dosed with fluoride and lots of other dental health products also.  So please do not quote meaningless rubbish to me.  We also both know fluoride is a poison, it is on the HSE list of poisons and we both know that the amounts ingested individually cannot be controlled.  Therefore Irish Water’s aim in continuing to infuse drinking water with a known poison can only be described as a form of eugenics but if you do not accept that, it is definitely not ethical.

 What I always look for in my dealings with companies is their ethical approach to business, so please ally your company with Cork County Council and pressurise this present government into getting up to the mark with this problem.  Your work will be made easy because I understand Simon  Coveney TD, one of your local politicians is doing some good work in this regard.

 So Ross start looking at the bigger picture, make a name for yourself in this burgeoning and new company of yours, become the man they will talk about in history classes of generations to come, escalate my complaint.  Rid Ireland of this pestilent fluoride dosage.  If nothing else, think of your family and the harm this poison and electro-magnetic radiation can and is doing to them and please do not deliver clap-trap to me in future.  We are both mature, intelligent human beings.

 Yours sincerely,


 Paul Malpas

5 Wooden Bridge


Co Roscommon  


Smart Meters, A Step Too Far – Part 6

Well Day 19 arrived and I went to King House at 10.30am and noticed that either the wind, an irate neighbour or a passer-by had made a hames of the barriers.  They had been pushed and shoved all over the place, constituting for me a traffic hazard.  Now  Sierra had not been round to inspect the barriers since they put them up nearly two weeks ago so it was doubtful that they would be round anytime soon.  Now I know I gave Sierra man a solemn undertaking that I would not interfere with their works but the place was in such a mess, I took the matter into my own hands, being a dutiful citizen, and picked up the delapidated barriers, road signs and sandbags and laid them in the verge on the far side of the road.  

A thought crossed my mind to re-erect same as before but for Health and Safety reasons I did not.  I am not qualified to erect said barriers and the consequences, if I erected them wrongly and something happened, could be worse.  Also they had been erected to protect nothing only a shovel which the gang had inadvertently left behind so I was not putting anybody in any kind of danger  Incidentally as I was engrossed in my labours I noticed said shovel was missing, presumably stolen.  People would steal anything these days.  Perhaps the shovel stealer might have created the disarray of the barriers in the pursuit of his crime.  He could have been disturbed whilst carrying out the act and in his haste to remove himself from the scene could have collided with the barriers if indeed he had a vehicle with him.

After my act of good citizenship life returned to the humdrum way it has been since Day 7.  The road shorn of worksmen, foremen and inspectors and now barriers.  There were two roadsigns outside No1 warning of men working ahead but I left them insitu as I did not class them a road hazard.

  I read in the papers at the weekend that a conference of scientists in America had listed the three biggest dangers to mankind and said it is everybody’s duty if they wanted to live a healthy long life to steer clear of A.) Fluoridated Water, B.) Genetically Modified  Food commonly known as GM Food, and C.) Injected Mercury in vaccinations, the body can rid itself of ingested mercury but not the mercury injected into the blood and in England and all over the world parents are being told to make sure their babies have 32 of these vaccinations before they reach two years of age.  Agenda 21 is well on its way to eugenically controlling the worlds population.  I think those in the know want the population to reduce from nine billion to 3 billion in the next generation.  Well Ireland you are surely doing your bit for the controlling elite.

Day 21 arrives and so does the postman with another letter from Irish Water sent from their offices in Cork but posted in Dublin.  Mr Mulvaney is the same author but he must need his post examining by Dublin first.  Yes Mr Mulvaney of Complaints and Escalations ( see my blog posting Smart Meter, A Step Too Far – Part 4 posted on 2nd April 2014 for his first letter) is a little more conciliatory this time but still thinks I am an eejit and again tries to blind me with science and directives that go back to the last century.  Here is Ross’s letter and my comments follow

Irish Water Reference Number: 8315207755 (Well blow me it has changed again they are really cranking up their attack)

Dear Mr and Mrs Malpas,

Thank you for your letter dated 31st march 2014.  This letter outlines your copncerns regarding the health and safety around “Smart Meters”.  As stated previously, Irish Water is not using smart meters.  Irish Water are using analogue meters fitted with an automatic Meter Reading (AMR) device.  These meters meet all the required safety standards.

Irish Water took responsibility of the water services on 1st January 2014.  As agents of Irish Water, the Local Authorities will continue to operate the water scheme in Boyle on our behalf as well as working with Irish Water to resolve the problems giving rise to these “Boil Water Notices”.

We has appointed aProgramme Manager (Sic) with responsibility to oversee the measures, both operational and capital, which will remove the risk to water quality.  We recognise that capital investment is required in Boyle to provide an effective barrier to cryptospridium breakthrough, and the capital programme has committed funding to these schemes as its top priority.

Irish Water will determine a programme for completion of the required work for each scheme and we will monitor the progress from that point, against the programme.  We expect to be able to outline the timeframes within which we expect to have resolved the water scheme in Boyle within the next two months.  We look forward to working with and supporting the Local Authority staff to ensure that the measures taken are effective and that monitoring of the water will enable the HSE to lift boil notices as soon as it is satisfied to do so.

Irish Water is committed to the delivery of a water supply to our customers that is wholesome and clean and meets the requirements of Drinking Water Regulations.

The requirements for the quality of drinking water in public water supplies in Ireland are set out in the Drinking Water Regulations.  The purpose of the Regulations is to give full effect to the European Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3rd November 1998.

Under these Regulations, the current limit for fluoride in public water supplies is as follows:

a) fluoridated supplies – 0.8 mg/l

b) supplies with naturally occurring fluoride, not needing further fluoridation – 1.5 mg/l

The upper limits for fluoride in the EC Directive 98/83/EC is 1,5 mg/l and accordingly the limit for fluoridated water supplies in Ireland of o.8 mg/l is below the limit set in the EC Directive.

The requirements for fluoridating public water are set out in the Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act 1960 and the Fluoridation of Water Supplies Regulations 2007 [S.I. No 42 of 2007].  As the Water Service Authority, Irish Water is working with the HSE to implement State policy on fluoridation.

I hope the information above will address your concerns regarding the watewr meters and water quality concerns.

Yours sincerely,

Ross Mulvaney

Complaints and Escalations Manager

Irish Water

Whereas he uses the name Irish Water 12 times in his first letter he only uses it 10 times in his second but he is still trying to preach to me and pushing the organisation’s line. No matter what he likes to call his meters, they are still smart meters ie, they push out electro-magnetic radiation, his inspector agreed with me that they were smart meters and I agree with the inspector.

Paragraph 2 is more interesting.  In his first letter to me he told me that Irish Water were only a metering programme and that any complaints about quality of water should be addressed to the local authority.  He now says that the local authority act as agents for Irish Water and since 1st January 2014 Irish Water have responsibility for water service and quality.  So in his first letter there was an element of porkiness.  When I have a complaint , I do not want to speak to the middle man, I want the top man that is why I am addressing Irish Water.

Paras 3 and 4 are just gobbledegook spouting out the line.  All I am saying is like all business practice, get your product right before you start marketing it.

Para 5 makes me think this man is getting serious about his obligations but it is that obvious it should not need stating.  Just get on and do it.

The rest of the letter is where again he trys to blind me with science.  He quotes European Directives that are 16 years old.  Water knowledge has moved on a great deal since 1998 and Ireland is the only country in Europe that has a mandatory fluoridation of water policy.  Every other country has copped itself on leaving little old Ireland far behind the field.  He even quotes the Health (Fluoridation of Water) Act of 1960, that is 54 years old, the man is bonkers.  He must think I am some country yokel.

The bare facts of the argument about fluoridation of water is that it is a poison for which the consumption cannot be controlled.  With 95% of toothpastes on the market containing fluoride it is impossible to state what individual limits are.  It always amazes me when governments can actually place limits on the ingestion of poisons.  How do they work out the limits?  Do they stand 10 men in a line and give the first man 10 spoons of the shite and the next man nine and so on until the last man receives one spoon and then watch to see how many fall down and then go to the eigth man who is still standing but groaning and say there is your upper limit? 

Do you want to control your own destiny and take care of your own personal dental hygeine, retain an enquiring and questioning mind and live to a ripe old age or do you want to be dosed with poison, have a splendid set of knashers covered in brown spots, an addled brain and die prematurely of one or other of the various cancers.  Because a poison is what it is, it is on the list of poisons dangerous to health published by the Irish Government.

I will leave it there and think of my reply and try and explain to Ross that I have still most of my faculties, I do not like being preached to, especially by a robot and that electro-magnetic radiation and fluoridated water are not for me.

St Bede’s College in Manchester and the Salford Diocese

 I do not know how many readers knew, but in our struggle with the Salford Diocese over these last four and a half years for them to recognise the sexual, mental and physical abuse that abounded at the College during the aegis of Monsignor Thomas Duggan (1950-1966), two court cases emerged.  The big case which is the one I have been involved with since I innocently wrote a blog posting about what happened to a great friend of mine whilst at Bede’s and his sad decline and fall over many years is coming up later this year or early next year.  There was another case which has gathered speed over the last 18 months.  This involved originally three men from the 1955 intake at St Bede’s who were alerted after the Bishop of Salford, Terence Brain, set out his half-witted joke of an apology in March 2011.  Instead of doing the clever thing and approaching me, because it was only myself who had all the information regarding the abuse which I had gathered over the previous two years, they decided to go to Pannone.

Pannone had gathered a small reputation over the years as a personal injury specialist, they had in fact represented some of the victims of William Green, the teacher of Religion at St Bede’s who had rampaged through the school in the 1970s and1980s causing all sorts of damage to a large number of pupils with his sexual attacks. It took nearly twenty years before his criminality came to light and he was eventually given a six year jail sentence in 2008.

He was given early release last year and incidentally he has recently been laicised by the Catholic Church.  Pannone, under the guidance of Richard Scorer, their personal injury man, took up the cudgel in the civil courts for some of Green’s victims and showed his style by settling quickly and quietly.  His brash, know it all approach would put many off. I met him in November 201o when I was invited to his office in Manchester. I had previously offered him a sample of my evidence.  He said that it was not worth bringing to court and dismissed me fairly quickly.  A few months later after the Bishop’s weedling apology he was hot on my tail, the ink had not dried on the MEN edition of the 15th March 2011 when one of his chums rang me up offering their services.  I blurted out the first two words that came to mind.  But I digress.

The three men went to Pannone about two years ago and Scorer quickly approached me once again in the guise of his run-around Molly Whittall, who asked if I would come on-board with them.  I told her of my situation with Anderson Olivarius, our London lawyers, who had quickly realised the efficacy of the case when we met in April 2011 and had gone to great lengths in order to bring justice to the victims I had found.  The upshot was and against my better judgement the two firms traded notes, AO’s position was that they only wanted the best for any victim whether their client or not.  This I fear was not Pannone’s stance as they continually disregarded professional ethics by approaching our witnesses instead of channelling their enquiries through AO.  Finally only a few months back as they were lining up the witnesses for their case Molly approached me again.  I lost my temper and told Molly that she was transgressing Lawyers Professional Ethics No 101 and I politely used the same words that had come to mind back in March 2011. 

The three men were now reduced to two, one had been dropped whatever the reason and this week AO’s witnesses who had been lined up by Pannone to give evidence in their case, which  was listed for five days commencing 28th April in Manchester County Court, were told their verbal evidence was not needed.  Pannone had clearly been able to beg a deal.  But at what cost?  This is curious: Panone to get critical witnesses for their case (which it did not want to wait on and bring with AO’s more substantial litigation), Pannone through Scorer’s right hand, Molly Whittall, had violated ethical rules by not contacting AO advocates, by going round AO’s back to make contact with AO’s clients.  Pannone wanted AO’s clients to testify for their clients (in this case).  This to me is a dishonest way to do business.  Pannone clearly thinks that the professional rules that govern the legal profession don’t apply to them; they are prepared to go for other firm’s clients and make secret and illicit contact with them.  This is bad form at best; unethical at worst.  When AO’s clients contacted the AO firm about Pannone’s sneaky approach, AO did what was best for the clients and assisted Pannone in getting them the information from their clients that Pannone needed to help achieve a successful outcome in Pannone’s case.  Pannone did not pay AO Advocates for their time; they gave it generously, to help the men who had been abused.  AO’s whole approach is so different from Pannone’s self-centred, self-advancing style which is motivated by achieving a quick settlement, with legal fees assured, no matter the settlement figure.  Am I glad that my opinion of Mr Scorer had been proven correct.  What a good judge of bad character I am.  But as they say “It takes one to know one”.

Knowing that Pannone policy is to bring cases to court quickly and settle cheaply, knowing that they would get paid come what may, I decided to contact AO to find out the settlement terms.  Sadly, they explained, that they had lines out to Pannone to learn the basis for vacating the trial and whether the settlement was only about money or did it include (which they hoped) an agreed plan to try to stop this mis-behaviour in the future; were apologies given?  Therapy offered?  But as of last night, AO’s calls and e-mails had not been returned.  They had been given no information to tell their witnesses who had prepared and were ready to assist at trial.

I have just learned that this morning, Molly Whittal returned their calls, but no information was forthcoming.  Pannone is still in the secret’s business. 

I understand that the case if heard would have a list of 16 defence witnesses, all priests, all acting like the three monkeys, swearing on the bible that sexual abuse of boys did not happen because they neither saw or heard anything of the sort.  They would wouldn’t they.  The same can be said of ex-Fr William Green who abused boys for 17 or 18 years with impunity whilst the other priests saw and heard nothing.  Especially the priest who had his room opposite Green and had a tendency towards young girls and the comings and goings to Green’s room was stifling his own activities. 

Anyway our case is the biggie and about to be listed in the High Court in London for hearing later this year or early next year and I believe with this one there will be no back alley settlement and respect will be given to all of the good men who came forward to testify, to assist, to share their stories, their hearts and souls.  Perhaps justice is in sight.  Thanks to Pannone, perhaps there was a hint of justice this week in Manchester.  But now the warriors, the people’s law firm, are batting.  Now the real legal battle begins.



1 2 3 4 5 90 91