Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/373141
Opinion 21 maltatoday, SUNDAY, 31 AUGUST 2014 a crisp the next quiet demeanour"… You will surely note how this sort of reaction – i.e., the blanket assumption of a conspiracy theory – goes well, well beyond the maxim of 'giving the suspect the benefit of the doubt'. Benefit of the doubt means that, until absolutely certain, one shouldn't really comment about the case at all. There was, however, no 'doubt' in the minds of the many people who outspokenly defended the suspects in these cases. These were innocent, blameless and even exemplary men, who were victims of a gross fabrication aimed at besmirching the Church they represented. OK, enough about ancient history. Coming back to the two cases mentioned earlier: I think it's fair to say that attitudes towards such matters have changed considerably: on the part of the Church, on the part of the various branches of law enforcement in Malta, on the part of the media, and – most significant of all – on the part of the public. Let's take them one by one. We now know that Fr Jesmond Gauci, the 42-year-old Gozitan priest accused of molesting girls aged (roughly) 15, was originally reported to the police by none other than Gozo Bishop Mario Grech himself. This marks an earth-shattering departure from Mgr Joseph Mercieca's way of handling such matters, and up to a point from the global Catholic Church 's entire modus operandi… as evidenced in so many high-profile sex abuse cases covered up the world over. Kudos to Bishop Mario Grech. Finally, it seems that someone within the Catholic Church has come round to understanding that this particular institution is not, in actual fact, above the law. From here on, however, things become a little less rosy. Initially, the Gozo court issued an order against the publication of Gauci 's name. I admit this poses a particular challenge to those of us who work in the media, where there is an automatic and self- explanatory interest in naming suspects, regardless of guilt or innocence. But if I may step out of that role for a minute: that, in itself, is not and should not be a driving force in the court's decision-making process. There are many valid reasons to issue a publication ban, the most obvious being to protect the victims' identit y… or, (in other cases) out of concern for national securit y. A lesser known reason – which is sometimes controversially applied in the UK (the case of triple child killer David McGreav y springs to mind) - is to 'prevent harm to suspects', where there is reasonable cause to fear that the suspect might be lynched. Whether this was the reason for the original gag order, I don't know. What I do know, however, is that the order itself was revoked following the formation of a spontaneous lynch mob on Facebook, demanding that the suspect be 'named and shamed ' (naturally, before the trivial question of whether the man was actually guilt y or not was established at law). And that, surely, is NOT a justifiable reason for the court to change its mind. Likewise, the court also initially granted Fr Gauci bail… only to revoke it at the request of the prosecution, under the exact same circumstances. Again, there may even be valid reasons to revoke bail in this instance (though to be honest I can't really see any myself: fear that the suspect might abscond, perhaps? If that's the case, then bail should quite frankly never be granted at all…) But again, there are clearly invalid reasons to revoke bail, too… and satisf ying a widespread hunger for revenge masquerading as ' justice' surely must be one of them. This brings us to the most recent case of all: the one that seems to suggest that we might have swung so far to the opposite extreme from the days of Dar San Guzepp, that we are now off the rails entirely. Anthony Callus, a 46-year-old catechism teacher, has become the latest to stand accused of child molestation. According to the bill of indictment, the offence in question was that he "grabbed a 10-year-old boy from his waist and lifted him out of the water"… "slightly brushing the boy's genitalia" in the process. It transpires that the original complaint came from the child (though whether it was the child or his parents who filed the police report is not immediately clear). Either way, times have clearly changed. Considering how, up until a few years ago, concerted efforts were made NOT to report people accused of very real and very serious cases of child abuse… but instead to stoutly defend them from the evil, nast y media that was unfairly out for their blood… my, how far we've progressed since those days. If a man can now face court charges for " brushing against a boy's genitalia" while swimming – when (to date, any way), there seem to be no other complaints about the same man from any other quarters: nothing to suggest that this might form part of a serial pattern of abusive behaviour, of the kind that characterised all the other child abuse cases… why, we may as well go the whole hog, and just prosecute every male citizen over a certain age to have ever somehow come into physical contact with a child. Starting with every father who's ever given his own baby a bath… But what emerges is not just the profound change on the part of a public that now seems to see child molestation every where it looks (when the same public used to adamantly refuse to see child molestation, even when it took place right under its own nose). The attitude of law enforcement has changed, too. Not so long ago, the police were visibly reluctant to press charges when three priests were accused of serially molesting boys in their care for years. Now, they act with unprecedented zeal on what seems to be the most contrived child abuse allegation this country has ever seen. As for the law courts: this time round, there was no question of a gag order, and certainly no question of revoking bail. On the contrary: the man was denied bail at first instance, after his name had already been splashed all over the press. Even from a cursory glance, you can see a very clear pattern emerging. It is as though the law courts are simply making up their policy on child abuse cases as they go along. It works roughly like this: 'Ok, so we angered a lot of people by issuing a publication order against identif ying the suspect in one case... let's not make the same mistake a second time. Oh, and the same goes for the issue of bail. We screwed up by granting bail once. No need to screw up twice," and so on. Sorry, folks, but this is not how justice is supposed to work. There are (or are meant to be) regulations and court practices governing such issues as bail and gag orders… and these practices should have nothing to do with satisf ying popular demands for heads affixed to the battlements. Moreover they should, in theory, be applied separately, according to the merits of each individual case. Mistakes (real or perceived) made in one case should not have any bearing on decisions made in another. Otherwise, the chances of justice actually being served at all, in any case whatsoever, will depend on how badly the law-courts screwed up the last time they had a remotely comparable decision to make. And honestly: what sort of justice do you call that? FIMBank p.l.c. is a licensed credit institution regulated by the Malta Financial Services Authority and listed on the Malta Stock Exchange. The Bank is a participant in the Depositor Compensation Scheme in Malta. Terms and conditions apply. 2132 2102 helpdesk@easisave.com www.easisave.com 2132 2102 2132 2102 No Hidden Fees or Bank Charges Individual or Joint Account Option Easy, Flexible and Secure Visit our website, open your online bank account and start beneting from superior interest rates on your savings and xed term deposit accounts. US Dollar Fixed Term Deposit 3 month: 0.90% 6 month: 1.50% 9 month: 1.75% 1 year: 2.25% 2 year: 2.65% 3 year: 2.85% 3 month: 2.20% 6 month: 2.30% 9 month: 2.40% 1 year: 2.50% 2 year: 2.85% 3 year: 3.00% Euro Fixed Term Deposit Minimum Deposit €1,000 Minimum Deposit $1,000 Rates of interest are on a gross per annum basis Rates of interest are on a gross per annum basis Euro Savings Account Minimum Deposit €50 US Dollar Savings Account Minimum Deposit $50 1.75 % 0.50 % I can't be sure about the reasons behind the original gag order. What I do know, however, is that the order itself was revoked following the formation of a spontaneous lynch mob on Facebook, demanding that the suspect be 'named and shamed' (naturally, before the trivial question of whether the man was actually guilty or not was established by law) What emerges is not just the profound change on the part of a public that now seems to see child molestation everywhere it looks (when the same public used to adamantly refuse to see it – even when it took place under its nose) – the attitude of law enforcement has changed too