Fr Ioannes (a pseudonym) was born in 1927 and ordained in June 1953. He served in parishes in the Dublin archdiocese from 1953 to 1988. He was in the USA from 1988 until 1993 when he was summoned home to deal with a complaint of child sexual abuse. He has not been in ministry since then.
The Commission is aware of three complaints of child sexual abuse and one of physical abuse against Fr Ioannes. These complaints all relate to incidents in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. He has admitted to sexually abusing three others.
1974
The first complaint against Fr Ioannes was made by the parents of a young boy.
Murphy notes: ''There are no records in the archdiocesan files about this complaint but there is no doubt that it was made.''
The parents complained to a local priest who wrote a letter to the archbishop. Monsignor Glennon was asked to investigate; he met the boy's father and then met Fr Ioannes.
Fr Ioannes admitted the allegations. Monsignor Glennon informed the parents that Fr Ioannes was being sent for treatment. However, Fr Ioannes in fact had been sent for a psychiatric assessment, not treatment.
The psychiatist conducted the assessment based on information received that it was alleged Fr Ioannes had taken an altar boy to the pictures and later to his room where he indulged in indecent behaviour and took photographs. During this, Fr Ioannes admitted ''that there had been some 'handling of the organ'.'' (Murphy) Nevertheless the psychiatrist found no evidence of psychiatric disorder or any serious psycho-sexual maladjustment, and judged the incident an ''isolated aberration''. (Murphy)
1978
Complaints were made to his parish priest that Fr Ioannes had behaved in a violent and aggressive manner, in one case knocking a young boy unconscious. The priest reported to the archdiocese and Bishop O'Mahony was asked to deal with the matter. The bishop sent Fr Ioannes back to the 1974 psychiatrist, and he attended a number of times between September and December. The assessment now concluded that, while the priest tended to act impulsively, he recognised the aberration and ''it should therefore be safe and in fact advisable'' to leave Fr Ioannes where he was.
1979
Enquiring after Fr Ioannes, Archbishop Ryan was told by his parish priest that he was still behaving in an aggressive manner. Following a conversation with Bishop O'Mahony, Fr Ioannes returned to psychiatric treatment for this.
1985
The parish priest believed that Fr Ioannes no longer had aggression problems. Now Fr Ioannes began looking for a post in the United States. He ''expressed his disappointment at not being made a parish priest''. (Murphy)
1986
The parish priest prepared a draft reference for Fr Ioannes, for use by the archdiocese. While it dealt with the issue of the priest's aggression, it made no reference to the sex abuse allegation of 1974 - ''there is no evidence that the parish priest had any knowledge of the 1974 complaint''. (Murphy) However, the archdiocese was aware. The reference was sent by Archbishop McNamara to an American diocese, but it did not result in an appointment for Fr Ioannes.
1988
In June the Bishop of San Diego wrote to Archbishop Connell asking for a reference in respect of Fr Ioannes. Fr Ioannes was subsequently described as ''an excellent priest in many ways''. There was no mention of a child sex abuse allegation or problems with aggressive behaviour. Later the archbishop recommended Fr Ioannes as ''a priest in good standing''.
Fr Ioannes subsequently worked in San Diego from 1988 to 1992.
1992
After the return of Fr Ioannes, Msgr Alex Stenson contacted San Diego to inquire as to how he had fared. A ''less than flattering'' report returned, but without mention of any allegations of abuse or aggression. The Bishop of San Diego did not want Fr Ioannes back.
Fr Ioannes now sought appointment to the US Archdiocese of Seattle. The diocese in turn asked Dublin ''for a comprehensive letter of recommendation indicating, among other things, that he 'is a priest in good standing, and there has never been any charge of misconduct against him. Please also indicate that you do not know of any behaviour on his part that could cause scandal in your diocese, or in the Archdiocese of Seattle, if it were to become publicly known'.'' (Murphy)
Msgr Stenson replied to the letter that Fr Ioannes was indeed a priest in good standing without mention of any misconduct or scandal.
''A further letter from Seattle in July asked for a description and some examples of Fr Ioannes's 'relationships with others: men, women, youth, children'. The letter continued: 'Did you ever hear any criticism about the way he relates with others? Have questions, rumour regarding celibacy or his relationship with others been raised? If so please explain.' In reply, Monsignor Stenson said that, in the past, there had been some outbursts of temper with altar boys but 'there has never been any suggestion whatever of improper or immoral behaviour'.'' (Murphy)
1993
In March, the boy involved in the 1974 complaint, started a civil claim against the Dublin archdiocese and Fr Ioannes. He alleged that the sexual abuse he suffered had included buggery.
Fr Ioannes was asked to come home and was referred to Dr Patrick Walsh, director of psychological services, Hospitaller Order of St John of God. In his letter to Dr Walsh, Monsignor Stenson said: ''It appears now that he has had a history of paedophilia, beginning when a curate in [parish omitted] with one boy. Subsequently, he had involvement with boys in [three other parishes]. As far as can be determined there have been five or six boys in all. All that was known to us up to very recently was one incident involving unseemly photographs of a boy and occasional outbursts of physical violence with altar boys.''
''Monsignor Stenson had discovered this information when he attended a meeting with Fr Ioannes and the archdiocesan solicitors'' (Murphy), during which Fr Ioannes said he had first abused around 1961 and last in 1986. He admitted the 1974 abuse but denied buggery.
Fr Ioannes did not have an appointment in Dublin at this time. He was living with a religious order.
In June, Dr Walsh issued his report, detailing Fr Ioaness's admissions of abuse against four boys. ''Dr Walsh considered that, because of his tendency to deny and minimise, it was safer to leave open the possibility that he may have abused others.'' (Murphy) A therapeutic programme was recommended.
''Fr Ioannes continued to live with the religious order. Suggestions that he be appointed to a limited ministry were rejected by Archbishop Connell.'' (Murphy)
Fr Ioannes subsequently paid compensation in respect to the 1974 complaint; the claim against Dublin was withdrawn.
1994
In March, the man who was the subject of the 1974 abuse (and the 1993 complaint) made a complaint to An Garda. He detailed the 1974 case and his subsequent dealings with Fr Ioannes and the archdiocese. ''He also complained that he had been indecently assaulted by a priest who his family thought was involved in investigating the complaint against Fr Ioannes. This priest was Fr Dominic Savio Boland.'' (Murphy - see Chapter 32)
In May, gardaí contacted Msgr Stenson who declined to comment on the case as he ''was not at liberty as Chancellor to disclose what files we may or may not have on individual priests''.
The Garda investigation subsequently noted that Fr Ioannes and the Church authorities had offered little or no assistance to the investigation.
In August, the Director of Public Prosecutions decided not to pursue the case, citing the delay aspect of the case.
1995
In October another complaint against Fr Ioannes was made.
Relating to alleged abuse in the late 1970s/early '80s, the complaint was made by a young man to gardaí. (The statement was then mislaid or lost) (''Fr Ioannes had admitted to abusing the young man who made this criminal complaint when he made admissions to Monsignor Stenson and the archdiocesan legal advisors in 1993. Nothing further happened.'' (Murphy)
The media spotlight now turned on the 1974 case and the settlement in 1993. The archdiocese issued a statement in which it said the priest had paid the victim, and not the archdiocese.
It appears that Fr Ioannes moved out of the religious order's house where he was living when the story broke. Gardai were subsequently unable to contact the priest, though, believing he had been at St John of God's, they requested that gardai be informed when Fr Ioannes returned.
In November, Fr Ioanness's name was one of 17 given by the archdiocese to An Garda as part of the implementing of the Framework Document on child abuse.
1996
From November 1995 to May 1996, Fr Ioannes was in a therapeutic facility in America.
In February the facility reported ''excellent progress'' on the priest's part. He ''possesses a good level of insight to have realised these psychological dynamics''.
In March, Fr Ioannes wrote to Archbishop Connell asking about his future. He had been encouraged to write by the facility.
In June, however, the facility stated that the priest was ''a fixated paedophile'' and recommended individual therapy for some time. Archbishop Connell was also advised to identify someone from his office to who Fr Ioanness would be accountable. ''The conclusion was that, if his internal work was supported by external supports, the likelihood of his re-offending 'is almost nil'.'' (Murphy)
Fr Ioannes returned to Ireland in that month and was given temporary accommodation at St John of God's, though gardaí were not notified as had been requested. ''The archdiocese did not know gardaí were looking for him at this stage.'' (Murphy)
The advisory panel informed the archbishop that Fr Ioannes should be requested to maintain a low profile, but when it became apparent he had left his supervised accommodation and that his whereabouts were unknown, it advised that An Garda be notified immediately.
In July, An Garda was notified Fr Ioannes had left Ireland.
1997
Fr Ioannes returned to Ireland and again lived at the community centre in St John of God's. Monsignor Dolan wrote to gardaí to tell them of his return. However, gardaí did not pursue the matter of the second complainant: ''It appears that the original investigating garda had retired and, somehow, the file on the complaint was lost.'' (Murphy)
Accommodation was found for Fr Ioannes. This was an apartment which was previously occupied by Fr Ivan Payne (Murphy-Chapter 24). He lived alone here and a support team was put in place. He was to remain in touch with the archdiocese. He was treated as a retired priest and remained there until October 2002.
2002
In April, the Diocese of San Diego quoted Archbishop Connell's 1988 recommendation of Fr Ioannes in an RTÉ report. Dublin responded that when Archbishop Connell gave the recommendation to the Diocese of San Diego in 1988, he had no knowledge of the 1974 complaint. ''There was no record of such a complaint in the archdiocesan files'' [but Dublin] accepted that the absence of a record was a serious deficiency.'' (Murphy)
In October, just before RTÉs Cardinal Secrets aired, it transpired that Fr Ioannes had left Ireland again.
Later in the year, the 1995 complainant sought an update on the Garda investigation.
''As the original statement had been mislaid, a new statement of complaint was taken (January 2003). He stated that there were about six incidents of abuse over a three-year period when he was between 11 and 14 years old. The abuse involved fondling of the genitals.'' (Murphy)
In November 2002, another complaint was made, this one by the young man who had been seriously physically assaulted and knocked unconscious by Fr Ioannes in 1978. Attempts by gardaí and the archdiocese to contact the priest again failed.
2003
In January, Fr Ioannes returned to Dublin. At the same time, the second complainant, whose original statement could not be located, made a fresh statement to gardaí. Fr Ioannes agreed to meet investigating officers, but did not turn up, and later in the year, went abroad again.
2009
Having returned to Ireland once again in 2008, Fr Ioannes pleaded guilty to a number of sexual assaults.
Summing up the Fr Ioannes case, the Murphy Commission criticises the lack of action that offered the priest a free hand in his activities: ''Nothing was done even though Fr Ioannes admitted his guilt. He was free to commit other offences and this he duly did. The failure to do anything was compounded by the failure to maintain any proper record of the complaint.''
While accepting that neither Cardinal Connell nor Msgr Stenson were armed with full knowledge when dealing with the American dioceses, Murphy states ''it is notable that the Diocese of Seattle was, in 1992, diligent in looking for detailed information about priests coming to work there. Effectively, that diocese did force the Dublin archdiocese to admit the problems about physical aggression''.
The description of the mishandling of the initial 1974 complaint serves to neatly sum up Ioannes's and other cases. It was Murphy says ''disastrous'' and ''of its time''.
