John left Yea not long after the 1969 bush fires. John sought compensation from the Catholic Church Melbourne Response where he was acknowledged for a number of years as a survivor of abuse by Kevin O'Donnell. John's claim was stymied when his older brother Robert contacted the Church claiming that he had evidence that I was only in it for the money and cited events that occurred some 25 years after my abuse as being a part of his evidence.
Several attempts have been made to clarify and to pass on relevant information to O'Callaghan however his operation operates in a manner unlike anything that he described while giving evidence at the Royal Commission. More on this to come
Some time after the Royal Commission hearings in Ballarat I was contacted by Waller Legal on behalf of a victim. That conversation resulted in an offer from Waller legal to undertake a no obligation, free of charge review of the current status of my claim with the Melbourne Process. I received the result of that on 19 July 2016. The curious thing to note is that O'Callaghan appears to have dropped a mention of my brother Roberts' claim of my fraudulent claim and is now relying on statements made by my sister Janette (see link above for the full statement by O'Callaghan).
My sister Janette is some 4 years younger than I am. My abuse by nuns occurred before she was born. My abuse by O'Donnell occurred when she was around 4 years of age. As I understand it the statements she made (There is some doubt as to what occurred; as well access to evidence of these claims as O'Clallaghan claims issues in finding actual transcripts of interviews with siblings. A copy of my sisters' spurious, vague and at times false statement is available.)
As I understand it the way this has worked against me can only have come about through applying the same fallacy as O'Callaghan applied initially as it appears that the evidence claimed to exist by my brother Robert was in fact a reference to the claims of my sister Janette. Those claims as I understand it*
Initially O'Callaghan referenced the matters claimed by my brother Robert to be relevant in his determination that I had or had not been abused by O'Donnell. It was this referencing that was used in his initial turning down of my claim. As mentioned today that has moved to statements by my sister and obviously to be in compliance with Australian rules of law in regard evidence these statement would have to reference events before my abuse or relevant connected evidence that can be presented upon request for any events after my abuse by O'Donnell is relied on by the Melbourne Response.
Again because I have no right of access to see what Peter O'Callaghan claims is sufficient evidence then I am left to guess and to speculate that my siblings must be OK with Peter O'Callaghan's fraudulent process that denies the natural right to see the evidence.
*(there is no right of access to the evidence under the Catholic Melbourne Response - here I am left to speculate and to formulate only on the basis of what I can learn from others despite the process engaged in by O'Callaghan being against the rules of law in Australia.
What that means is that O'Callaghan can and does play games that could be referred to as 1000 questions and guess what we are talking about. It is an arduous process that lacks any veracity or morality. It gives a consistent picture of mobster and gangster style activity only this time that is being used to protect paedophiles within the catholic system.)
Brown Family The Parade Yea Victoria 3717
My parents were Kathleen Rose and Albert Joseph, we lived in the third house up from Pellissier Street directly across the road from the Catholic Church.
My siblings and I in birth order:
Jimmy (Leslie James deceased)
John Anthony :) thats me
Helen Patricia (Munro)
Eirene Veronica (Moore)
Philip James deceased
I feel you have been used by the Catholic system sufficient that it pollutes and denies access to justice, it does not provide open and responsible dialogue and has been disastrous for many years and will continue to be so whilst the issue remains open to question in the way it currently is.
I personally find the process to be damaging as well as immoral and it appalls me that your silence can be used to allow the appearance that you sanction in some way the repressive process of the Melbourne Response. The experience has shown quite starkly how closely related to so many suicides this has become and yet there is silence despite the many attempts to engage in meaningful non-adversarial conversation with a number of you. There has been no real attempt to engage, only silence, disapproval and back-stabbing behind the scenes along with further disconnection. Presumably I have missed some important unspoken, unstated, unwritten message or understanding that is assumed I should be aware of. How ludicrous and how childish it seems and of course in that most catholic of ways it appears that I should be shunned etc as a result.
While disapproval and disgrundlement persist and while no conversation takes place then it stands to reason that I get to publish this. I preferred for many years not to have to go to this level to be heard and acknowledged by my siblings. What a pity. What a shame.
And as I have mentioned to several that I have attempted to engage with "I do not do obviously bad psychology".
Human rights are not and can never be respected while a child or adult's life is trapped by the claimed will or word of an unaccountable blackmailing God.
"The Christian religion creates an environment where the child must bend and fold to the experience, the child must distort and fracture its own personality simply so that it may continue to survive in the environment in which it finds itself" JohnB