‘It Was Not Evident “What Weight, If Any, Was Afforded To The Testimony Of The Women”‘

at | 13 Replies

A Magdalene laundry in the 1950s; Dr Martin McAleese with his report into Magdalene laundries in 2013

This morning.

In the Irish Examiner

Conall Ó Fátharta reports:

The Department of Justice failed to examine all available evidence when it wrongly refused some Magdalene laundry survivors access to redress payments.

Following an almost year-long investigation of the scheme, Ombudsman Peter Tyndall has published a scathing assessment of the department’s administration of the scheme.

The department had refused several women access to redress, claiming they were not resident in one of the 12 institutions covered by the scheme.

However, the Ombudsman was provided with evidence that some of the Magdalene laundries were either physically linked to the units where the women lived, or were located on the same grounds as the Magdalen laundries and were, in reality, “one and the same institution”.

The report determined that the department gave “undue weight” to evidence supplied by the religious congregations and some of it had been requested and received by the department after the decision to exclude the women was made.

The report also said it was not evident “what weight, if any, was afforded to the testimony of the women and/or their relatives”.

Department of Justice ignored Magdalene redress evidence (Irish Examiner)

Previously: ‘Based On The Findings Of The McAleese Report’

The Magdalene Report: A Conclusion

13 thoughts on “‘It Was Not Evident “What Weight, If Any, Was Afforded To The Testimony Of The Women”‘

  1. Barry the Hatchet

    “It was not evident what weight, if any, was afforded to the testimony of the women”. You could say precisely the same thing about the McAleese Report itself. The way this whole issue has been handled has been an utter disgrace.

    Reply
  2. postmanpat

    What kind of pay day are the victims expecting? four or five figure sum? Its going to cost a fortune and the pope isn’t going to kick in his share.

    Reply
      1. Anomanomanom

        I know, but for some of these women a payday is the only “justice” they’ll get. It really should be the Catholic church being sued but we all know the deals the government of Bertie did.

        Reply
      2. postmanpat

        Payday , as in, paid for work they did years ago. I only get annoyed that this massive faux-progressive phony that call the Pope and his team of slimy lawyers are holding back on their obligations. Pope trendy owes a fortune at this stage, and we are still waiting. I doubt we will ever see it. Its okay though. we’ll just tax young people instead for the cash. its only 1.2 billion. Cant be risking eternal damnation getting angry at the church now can we?

        Reply
    1. Nigel

      You’d think this massive lesson in the true costs of short-term easy-seeming solutions and abdication of moral responsibility would take hold somewhere, bit no.

      Reply
  3. Daisy Chainsaw

    These women have been abused and ignored all their lives. Why would it change now? Official and Religious Ireland covering up for each other at the expense of its victims.

    Same as it ever was.

    Reply
  4. bisted

    …McAleese was thrown under a bus by the church…the nuns were quickest to react to his whitewash by refusing previously agreed redress…you won’t find it in the bible Martin but some people call it karma…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *