Whakatakinga
Introduction

1.         Many of the tamariki and rangatahi, at Marylands and Hebron Trust suffered sexual abuse, physical abuse, psychological maltreatment and neglect at the hands of the brothers and other boys. Survivors described how the brothers at Marylands used physical abuse and violence against them. On many occasions, we heard that survivors were physically and sexually abused at the same time. We also heard from some survivors who say they were sexually and physically abused while at the orphanage.

2.         The unrestricted access to children and young people meant the abuse and neglect was pervasive and unrelenting for many survivors.

3.         The sexual abuse suffered by those in the care of the Order is inconceivable. Many survivors were abused by multiple perpetrators, some were forced to sexually abuse other boys, in ways that were often sadistic or ritualistic in nature, and were frequently coupled with violence, spiritual abuse and manipulation. They lived in constant fear.

4.         The boys who resided at Marylands were deprived of basic needs including nutrition, hygiene and clothing. There was clear educational neglect at Marylands and some describe being denied an education altogether. This had a profound effect on the later lives of almost all survivors.

5.         Young people at Hebron Trust expected shelter, safety and support. Instead, many survivors were supplied with drugs and alcohol and were repeatedly sexually and physically abused.

6.         Some disabled children and young people were targeted, and some were segregated and placed in isolated environments during their time in care at Marylands.

7.         Māori survivors faced racist abuse, were punished, constantly humiliated and were denied access to their cultural needs. We also heard from survivors from St Joseph’s Orphanage who suffered abuse by the brothers of the Order.  We set out their experiences in this report.

8.         Of all brothers in ministry within the Order who were in Aotearoa New Zealand, more than half (57 percent) have had allegations of abuse made against them.

9.         Survivors’ lives have been irreparably damaged, and the impacts of abuse and neglect have, in many cases, extended beyond survivors, to whānau, their support networks and the wider community. Survivors and other witnesses have told us of a number of people who suffered abuse and neglect while in the care of the Order, who have later taken their own lives.

Ngā tūkinotanga kāore i whāwhākia me ngā taero i aukatingia atu ai te whāwhākitanga o ngā tūkinotanga
Unreported abuse and barriers stopping abuse being disclosed or reported

10.      The Inquiry does not have evidence from all the boys placed at Marylands. Some are no longer alive, some did not engage with the Inquiry and some do not communicate verbally. In some cases it was not possible to find a way for them to safely share their experiences. As a result, we do not know the full extent of the abuse and neglect the boys suffered at Marylands.

11.       We will never know the full extent of Brother McGrath’s abuse of young people at Hebron Trust. This is because many young people were not formally placed or referred there and the unstructured way in which Hebron was run. We know 28 people reported abuse in Hebron Trust’s care to the Order. However, due to the type of institution Hebron Trust was, its work and how it was run, along with a lack of records for placements, the number of young people who passed through Hebron Trust is probably even higher than the number of children who were placed at Marylands. Many of the young people abused at Hebron Trust were homeless, some were in the criminal justice system and some had substance abuse issues. These factors often lead to a general lack of credibility with authorities and are a known barrier to reporting abuse and neglect. Therefore, the number of victims of abuse at Hebron Trust may be much higher than the figures reported to us.

Ngā wheako o ngā purapura ora mō te tūkinotanga me te whakangongo i te kura o Marylands
Survivors’ experiences of abuse and neglect at Marylands School

Te roanga, te whānui me te tōaitia o ngā hara taitōkai 
Sexual abuse widespread, repeated and prolonged

12.      Sexual abuse was widespread at Marylands from the outset. When it opened in November 1955 there were just 10 students^[249] and five brothers – Brother Thaddeus (William Lebler), Brother Raphael (Thomas Dillon), Hugh Doherty, Celsus Griffin and Brother Berchmans (Martin Moynahan).^[250] Six of those 10 initial students have formally reported abuse at the school. All five of those original brothers have been accused of abuse on students within the first year of opening, and allegations include daily assaults on some boys.^[251]

13.      Survivors from the first group of students say that the abuse started almost as soon as they arrived. Mr DA said:

“When I was 11, which would have been in 1955, I was moved from St Josephs to Marylands, which was run by the Hospitaller Brothers of the Order of St John of God. It was a school for boys and all of the pupils boarded. We were looked after by brothers from the St John of God Order.

Not long after I arrived at the school I started being sexually abused by Brother Thaddeus (also known as Lebler)...

This abuse happened to me right up until the time I was 16 in 1960.” ^[252]

14.      The immediate start of sexual abuse by multiple brothers makes it likely that some of them had already been abusing those in the Order’s care in Australia and took that established culture of abuse to Christchurch.^[253] The culture of sexual abuse was entrenched at Marylands and continued throughout the three decades the Order ran the school.

15.      Boys being sexually abused by brothers, began to abuse other boys, multiplying the number of victims. Knowledge of this was widespread among Marylands students. One survivor, James Tasker, said he was aware from the outset that a “huge amount” of sexual behaviour occurred between the brothers and the boys and between the older and younger boys.^[254] Another survivor, Mr DG, said Brother McGrath and Brother Moloney “normalised” such sexual abuse, and he “became involved in similar sexual activity with other boys”. He said:

“The brothers would make us boys perform sexual acts on each other. This included sexual fondling and oral sex … At the time I thought that this must be exactly what boarding school was like, because it was so common and normal at Marylands. Looking back at it now, I realise that this isn’t normal behaviour… sexual indecencies between the boys were common and this behaviour occurred even when the defendants were not present. It seemed ‘normal’ and I was often involved in this type of behaviour.”^[255]

16.      Another survivor said:

“[Brother Lebler] told one boy that he would get in trouble if he disclosed the abuse because Brother Lebler had made the boy have sex with a younger boy, so the boy was ‘like him’ now – that is, an abuser. Brother Lebler also told the boy that the sexual abuse was fine in God’s eyes, and that everyone else at Marylands was doing it anyway.”^[256]

17.      Frequently, abuse took place without any attempt at secrecy and sometimes deliberately took place in plain view of others. One survivor said boys were also sexually abused in front of all the other boys as punishment:

“I can remember standing with all the other boys outside, watching another boy be forced to strip naked. Then a brother pushed him onto the ground and masturbated him. He also put the boy’s penis in his mouth and gave him oral sex. I saw this happen to other boys on other occasions too.”^[257]

18.      Many survivors told us about public sexual abuse in the school’s television room. Edward Marriott said Brother Ambrose would put him on his knee when he was young because he apparently “screamed too much” while others were watching television:

“I remember always having a sore back afterwards because Brother Ambrose would hold me on his lap in his arms, playing ‘Horsey’ and I could feel the hardness of his erect penis behind my back. I was about six or seven years old [when] this was happening. Others were around when this was happening.”^[258]

19.      A boy known to have been abused by one brother would become ‘easier prey’ for another brother. Mr IR told us how Brother Delaney sexually abused him several times, and on one such occasion another brother entered the room. The second brother subsequently used this knowledge as a pretext for abuse:

“Brother Delaney took me to a spare room in the hospital, saying that he wanted to speak with me … I cannot remember what it was about. He fondled my penis over my trousers then placed his hand inside and masturbated me. He then made me do the same to him. This went on for about half an hour. I was scared that if I did not comply, he would punish me. I did not know how because he had diverse ways of punishing boys. He could either punch me or take some privileges from me. He told me not to tell anybody, and I was too scared to tell anybody. He asked if I liked it and I told him I did not, but [I] did as he told me to. This happened on two further occasions in the same room.

On the last occasion, Brother Delaney was doing to me. I was told to leave the room which I did. The following day, Brother [IU] stopped me in the hospital and took me to the same room and asked what had happened between myself and Brother Delaney. I was too scared to tell him. Brother [IU] then placed his hand down my trousers and masturbated me. He asked if this was same as what Brother Delaney had done, and I told him it was. He said that he would deal with it. I heard no more after that.”^[259]

Tūkino ā-whakapono
Religious Abuse

20.     Brothers would use religious language or commit abuse as part of religious activities. A survivor told police that two days after his arrival, he was taken to the church and forced to masturbate brothers. He said they “pulled out a Bible and told me this is what God means by love.”^[260] He said he found the experience utterly frightening, and there was more such abuse to come, mostly inside the church. A week later, Brother McGrath took him into the chapel and made him lie on his back on top of the marble altar: “He started rubbing me and rubbing himself and pulled his pants down and sodomised me. The pain was terrible. I felt like I was being ripped to pieces. I was bleeding.”^[261]

21.      One survivor described how the brothers would say such things as “God wants you to do this – if you’re a good little boy, you’ll do as God tells you” or “if you be a good little boy, you’ll get to heaven.”^[262] Sometimes, brothers told their victims the sexual assaults were acceptable to God or even thanked God during the assaults.^[263] One survivor said the brothers would describe the sexual abuse as a form of spiritual cleansing:

“Brother Bernard told me that having erections was normal, but then told me that it meant I had the devil in me. Brother Bernard told me that I needed to be clean. He also told me that I was special and that he wanted to help me ... He went away and came back with a bowl of water. I remember I had an erection at this stage. Brother Bernard explained that the water was blessed. He said he would help me be clean and stay clean. Brother Bernard then went on to tell me that stuff has to come out of me. He helped me to masturbate. I am very clear that this was the first time I had ever masturbated, and it was the first time I had an orgasm on my own.”^[264]

22.     Another survivor of the orphanage, Mr IY, was told the sexual abuse he suffered would cleanse him. He said a brother told him he was “bad, evil and full of demons” before sexually abusing him: “His penis was erect and he ejaculated on me – which I did not understand at the time. He told me the semen was the seed of God to cast the demons from me.”^[265]

Te whenumitanga o te hara taitōkai me te tūkino ā-tinana

Combined sexual and physical abuse

23.     Survivors described physical abuse and violence occurring at the hands of the brothers at Marylands and on many occasions, survivors experienced combined physical and sexual abuse. One survivor recalls a particularly traumatic experience:

“McGrath walked over to me next with his robe still open and rubbed his penis in my face. I was trying to pull away, but he told me to stay there. He grabbed me by the head and tried to force his penis into my mouth. He picked up the bat and started swinging it at my face when I pulled away. He hit me so hard that it made my nose bleed. It was all very frightening.”^[266]

Tūkinotanga hinengaro – he wāhi matawhawhati, he wāhi whakamataku te kura      
Psychological abuse – the school was a terrifying and unpredictable place

24.     Amid so much physical violence and sexual abuse, life at the school was terrifying and unpredictable, especially since the boys had no means of escape. Young boys talked about ending their lives. Cruelty and fear permeated the air. One survivor told us how a brother made him kill a litter of puppies – an incident that has stayed with him for the rest of his life:

“One of the Brothers made me gas puppies in a barrel [after] [o]ne of the dogs had puppies. I had to put the puppies in an old tin rubbish bin. The brother put the hose in and I had to sit on the lid while the puppies died. Then I had to take the bin down to the dump. It made me feel really bad.”^[267]

25.     Many who were abused also had their needs neglected. Neglect includes the failure to provide, the failure to meet standards and the failure to meet needs. Although there were few complaints or reports of stand-alone neglect, many of those who suffered physical, psychological and sexual abuse at Marylands also had their needs neglected.

He iti ngā taunaki mō ngā mahi akoako 
Little evidence of any schooling

26.     The law in Aotearoa New Zealand required that children be sent to school and receive an education. The age requirements changed over the relevant time period, but was usually between the ages of six and 14 to 16 years.^[268] There was clear neglect of educational needs at Marylands.

27.      We have received little evidence about the schooling provided by the Order. The Order told the Inquiry that school records were left at the school when the State took over from the Order. The evidence from available records and survivors is that the school failed profoundly in its core task: to educate the boys sent there.^[269]

28.     Instead, there was a focus on training for low-skilled occupations. Some children at Marylands were put to work in the laundry, kitchen and on the land and were not in class at all.

29.     Few of the brothers responsible for educating the boys had formal teaching qualifications, or experience in teaching students with learning disabilities. In 1981, the brothers employed a qualified teacher to assess admissions to identify deficiencies in boys’ learning and help classroom teachers with remediation programmes.^[270] However, the level of teaching was still poor in 1984 when the State took over the school.

Te whakangongo i ngā matea ā-tinana, ā-hauora 
Neglect of physical and health needs

30.     Neglect of the children’s general health was pervasive. One boy developed dysentery and had constant diarrhoea. He was locked outside the school both as punishment and so he would not defecate inside.^[271]

31.      Mr DO’s sister described what it was like when her brother came home in the holidays:

“Every school holidays he had to go to the dentist because his teeth were just totally neglected, and that‘s an example; they were just revolting. And even though we packed toothbrushes along with toothpaste there was obviously no care for dental hygiene … and the dentist said, “I don’t know what they’re doing there but there’s something … he’s not got good oral hygiene habits.” And he got trench mouth, which is just like from the trenches from the First World War, that’s how bad it is.

It was just horrible … his personal hygiene … he’d go to the toilet and he’d empty his bowels he always seemed to have problems with it when he came home initially, and then he didn’t understand about using toilet paper. He didn’t understand about washing his hands. He’d … smear his hands on the towels and we tried really hard to address that with him.^[272]

Prior to him going to Marylands, he was just one of the … family, and he just did what we did, maybe a bit slower, but he went to the toilet like we did and ate his meals like we did.”^[273]

Te Toihara me ngā wheako o ngā tama hauā
Discrimination and disabled boys’ experiences

32.     Marylands was established for boys with learning disabilities, although, in reality, it took in boys with a wide variety of needs, whether disabled or not, and eventually also took in boys with high support needs. We have received no information to suggest that there were any disabled brothers at an operational or governance level. Disabled boys were treated with no more care than that given to other boys, as little as that was. The Order kept no records in any form that would identify the type of disability and range of disabilities the boys had. We heard from only a small number of Marylands survivors who have a disability. The Inquiry acknowledges the trauma likely to have been experienced by many at Marylands whose experiences are not, and will probably never, be known.

33.      Mr CB, a Marylands survivor described himself as having an intellectual disability, neurofibromatosis, and Barrett’s disease. He was sent to Marylands at age 10 because he could not read or write. He said he was in class for only three days. The brothers never tried to understand why he couldn’t read and write or help him to do so. Instead, he said, he was put to work in the kitchen in order to save the money. He described a regular day at Marylands:

“I had to get out of bed to go to the kitchen to do the breakfast (porridge) for the boys, then cook bacon and eggs for the brothers and the hospital, in the oven with the big gas cookers. Then take the trolley over for breakfast then bring it back. Same with the lunch, take the trolley over there and bring it back. I was there washing all the dishes, pots and pans, mopping the floors, cleaning the fridges out.”^[274]

34.     Mr DO was also put to work in the kitchen. Mr DO’s sister told us he had no formally diagnosed disability. Their parents, placing great weight on a good education for all of their children, sent him to Marylands in the expectation he would be educated there. He was not. His parents withdrew him from Marylands when they learned he was not receiving any education there. They made the discovery in an unusual way – they were browsing through a publication produced by the IHC when they saw a photo of their son working in the school’s laundry.^[275]

Te Kaikiri i roto i ngā whakahaere me te whakahahani i te ahurea Iwi Taketake 
Institutional racism and denigration of indigenous culture

35.     The Order consisted only of white males. There is some evidence of racism within the Order. When the Order was exiting Marylands in 1984, it expressed strong opposition to Department of Education officials over the suggestion the school would be given a Māori name. The Order’s December 1983 letter stated:

“In no way does our school identify with Maoritanga. We have only five Maori boys in the school. My belief is that many people will associate a maori named school such as ours, with backward deprived and delinquent maori children. If this occurs the repercussions may be irrevocable(sic).”^[276]

36.     The brothers were not educated about te ao Māori, or about the cultural needs of any other groups.

37.      Adam Powell talked specifically about cultural neglect and how as a Māori, the lost opportunities to learn about his whakapapa:

“I was never taught anything about my Māori background at school. I think if I was taught more about my Māori whakapapa and te reo it would have helped me cope more and made me more stable at Marylands. It would have been a positive thing.”^[277]

38.      There were discriminatory and negative attitudes toward Māori students, reflecting the widespread discrimination and racism in society.

39.     Māori students at Marylands experienced cultural abuse as well as other types of abuse.

“One Māori man stands out in my mind. He told us a devastating story of being one of the few Māori children at Marylands. As such he was made to dress in grass skirts and perform ‘dances’ in front of the brothers, with no underwear on beneath the grass dress he was given to wear. He was aged about nine or 10 years of age at that time. He was made to ‘act like a Māori’, display poi balls, and entertain the brothers with Māori songs. After the performance those brothers present would routinely engage in group sex with this boy. As a man this victim wept deeply as he told his story. I remember the deep sense of shame that he held on to.”^[278]

40.     Several survivors also described how some of the abuse they suffered at Marylands was racially targeted. Survivor Darryl Smith shared how he witnessed Māori boys being called ‘niggers’ as well as one being forced to scrub a toilet on his hands and knees because he was Māori.^[279]

41.      Māori survivor Mr HZ was at Marylands for four years in the 1970s, after spending time in Lake Alice. Not long after he was discharged from Marylands at age 14 (in 1977) he returned to Lake Alice and then Kimberley. He described the label given to him by social welfare as ‘mentally retarded”.^[280]

42.     He told the Inquiry about the racism he experienced at Marylands:

“There was only three Māoris(sic) in the whole school, I was fighting a lot of Pākehā people because I was a native because I was a different colour and they were picking on me and I’d fight back.”^[281]

43.     Mr HZ told us his about his memory, as an 11 year old, of Brother McGrath taking him to the hospital morgue and being shown a tūpāpaku, dead body, as a way of threatening Mr HZ to keep quiet:

“When he took me down there, I thought he was going to kill me, because he was grabbing me roughly and pulling me by my hair, and we had to go up the stairs and down the stairs into the morgue room, and Brother McGrath said, ‘You’re going to end up there’.”^[282]

44.     Others from Marylands were aware of abuse by the brothers in a morgue. Two of the lay teachers that Brother Burke spoke to in January 2002 told him that things happened in the Christchurch hospital morgue, with three boys and brothers. There was a corpse in the morgue at the time.^[283]

45.     Mr HZ also gave evidence of being abused by Brother McGrath and Brother Moloney together. Mr HZ was made to watch the two brothers naked in Brother McGrath’s room and then they tried to make Mr HZ perform oral sex on them. Brother McGrath threatened Mr HZ with a baseball bat, including pointing it at Mr HZ’s head.^[284] On another occasion, Brother McGrath whacked the baseball bat over Mr HZ’s head when Mr HZ would not hurry up and take his pants off so that Brother Moloney, “could put his thing in my bum”.^[285]

46.     The existence of a culture of racist abuse at Marylands is supported by
photographic evidence from the late 1950s gathered during the police investigation, where about 10 Marylands residents are pictured acting in a stage show with their faces painted in what is known as ‘blackface’, with the handwritten annotation ‘Nigger Minstrels’.^[286]

Ngā matenga i te Kura o Marylands
Deaths at Marylands School

47.      According to the school’s attendance register, six boys died while at the school or shortly after leaving it.^[287] These children were aged between nine and 14.

48.     Some survivors described incidents that ended in suspicious circumstances, such as: “a number of boys … who died as a result of the beatings [and] as far as I know they were covered up. The boys were there one day given a severe beating by the brothers and then they disappeared.”^[288]

49.     One survivor, Mr AL, describes seeing an incident relating to a disabled child:

“The boys at Marylands were of various levels of intellect and included some Down syndrome children. There was one disabled boy younger than me and we all looked after him because he had trouble understanding things … I saw Brother Thaddeus rush at that boy. We were standing on the porch that was by the concrete quadrangle area. I couldn’t see exactly what had happened, but Brother Thaddeus had said something to that boy and he hadn’t responded. Next thing I knew, Brother Thaddeus had decked that boy on the concrete porch. He either had fallen or been pushed over but he hit his head on a concrete step. He was knocked unconscious and was bleeding heavily from his head. Brother Thaddeus picked him up and took him to the medical room. Soon after, the school’s doctor, Doctor Cameron, arrived.

We never saw nor heard about that boy again after that incident. The last time I saw that boy he was laid out and he wasn’t moving. That’s always something that’s worried me – wondering what happened to that boy. The way he was hit I just knew he wouldn’t make it. He was helpless.”^[289]

50.     One former student described a boy who was deliberately pushed into the school pool by a brother who became annoyed after the boy began playing up and ignored his direction to stop. The former student said the boy was sitting on the pool’s edge when the brother went up to him and pushed him in. The boy was fully clothed and sank to the bottom of the pool, the former student together with other boys, asked if they could help him, but were told he was fine and to leave the pool area.  The next thing that this former student knew was there was going to be a funeral for the boy, and so presumed he had drowned.^[290]

51.      Information about the deaths is scarce. The Ministry of Justice has no electronic database for coronial matters before 1979. Inquest records before that date are stored at Archives New Zealand, and the Coroner’s Office has not located any relevant records there. Coronial records for deaths for which no inquest occurred have generally been destroyed. In the absence of such records, we are unable to investigate allegations that boys died from abuse at Marylands or that their deaths were covered up.

52.     Detective Superintendent Peter Read confirmed that the police “have not located any records of deaths of children while at Marylands” and do not “hold any information about the circumstances of these deaths.” As to whether there had been a police investigation into deaths of children at Marylands, Detective Superintendent Peter Read stated:

“I am not aware of any Police criminal investigations into deaths of any children while at Marylands. Police would have been involved in attending any sudden deaths at Marylands on behalf of the Coroner but I have not had access to those files.”^[291]

53.     Our Final Report will discuss further the death of individuals while in care.

Ngā tūkinotanga i te whare whakapani o Hato Hōhepa

Abuse at St Joseph’s Orphanage

54.     Children at the orphanage were aged anywhere between birth and 11 years. Survivors have told us that brothers from the Order, as well as other adults who spent time at the orphanage such as priests and trainee priests, gardeners and a handyman sexually abused boys living there. Survivors from the orphanage were often confused about the identity of their abusers and have spoken about being abused by either a brother or a priest, or another adult male at the orphanage. Due to the survivors’ young ages, they did not know their abusers’ names.^[292]

55.     In relation to the frequency of visits to the orphanage by other men, including priests, the Sisters of Nazareth told the Inquiry that a priest would visit the orphanage every day of the week, except Saturday. On Sunday a priest would “visit the orphanage to say Sunday Mass for the children and sisters at the orphanage”, and “to say Mass for the sisters early each weekday”. The priest would then stay to have breakfast in the parlour. It was also recorded that a trainee priest, a member of the Redemptorist congregation (not yet ordained), “ran a Scouts group out of the gymnasium at Nazareth House and occasionally took some boys from the orphanage out on day trips”.^[293]

56.     One survivor told us a nun took him down a hallway and left him with a brother or priest as punishment. The brother or priest fondled his genitals.^[294] He said the nuns would threaten to take him next door to Marylands where this brother or priest lived and worked if they misbehaved.^[295] Another survivor from the orphanage said his older brother warned him that you didn’t want to be sent across to St John of God (Marylands), and he lived in fear of going over the Heathcote River.^[296]

57.      Mr IY, who lived at the orphanage, recalls that the brothers “took care of the discipline”.^[297] He once had his feet beaten for threatening to run away from the orphanage. The pain from the resulting welts was so intense he had to walk on the sides of his feet for several weeks.^[298] He was also sexually abused by brothers from Marylands.^[299]

58.     Another survivor of the orphanage said nuns took him from his bed and he was forced, by brothers or priests, to carry out sexual acts with them. His lawyers, Cooper Legal, told us their client said he was 10 years old when Brothers McGrath and Moloney repeatedly sexually assaulted him. They raped him and forced him to engage in mutual oral sex. This happened in an old wooden house in the suburb of Wigram. They also said several nuns took him from his bed on “a number of occasions” and led him down a gravel path to the chapel at Marylands where other boys from the orphanage and several brothers or priests were present. The pews had been removed, and candles and incense were burning. He recalled being given red wine and injected with a sedative in a sick bay next door before being forced to carry out sexual acts on the other boys, nuns, and brothers or priests.^[300]

59.     Despite the evidence we have received from survivors that detail the interaction between the brothers at Marylands and the orphanage, including the Sisters’ reliance on the brothers to discipline children living at the orphanage, Sister Mary Monaghan, Regional Superior of the Congregation of the Sisters of Nazareth, said that “the sisters I spoke to have no recollection of any of the Order’s members ever visiting the orphanage, nor having any ongoing contact with the residents at the orphanage”, with the exception of one occasion where the brothers offered to help the Sisters with a fire that broke out.^[301] In responding to the experiences of abuse suffered by children in the care of the orphanage, Sister Mary told the Inquiry that there are “only a few living sisters who had roles at the orphanage – most sisters who would have been present at the orphanage during the relevant period are deceased.”^[302]

60.     Another resident said a man who seemed to be in a position of authority at the orphanage sexually abused him. He was taken to the man’s office several times where the man fondled his genitals, gave him sweets and told him “not to tell anyone what had happened”.^[303] In about 2006 or 2007, he read a newspaper article about a brother facing charges of sexual abuse and believed he recognised the photograph as the brother who abused him.^[304] The Order refused to consider his claim for redress on the basis that the abuse took place in the orphanage, not at Marylands.^[305]

61.      Another survivor said a brother or priest made him and several other boys strip naked on a stage at the orphanage. The brother or priest fondled the boys’ genitals until a nun interrupted them. He said he was raped twice while walking by the Heathcote River that separated the orphanage from Marylands. He did not see the man or men who raped him.^[306]

62.     Survivor Mr AU said two priests sexually assaulted him days after he told one of them during a confession that his stepfather had sexually abused him. He said he believed the priests targeted him once they learned he had been abused before arriving at the orphanage. He said that during confession, the priest asked whether he got an erection during the abuse and kept seeking details about exactly what happened during masturbation and penetration:

“He kept asking me to describe what happened and how it felt. I was shocked that I was being asked for such details. This seemed completely unnecessary to me, and I felt very uncomfortable with these questions. I ran out of the confession booth. I told Sister Xavier about this. She told me that that was between me and God.”^[307]

63.     Mr AU said that two days after the confession, a nun took him to a room where he was forced to sodomise a young boy in front of two priests. Not long afterwards, he was “shipped out” of the orphanage, but not before being punished for trying to disclose the abuse.^[308] Mr AU remembered drawing a picture later at another institution, of how he had been abused because he “could not talk to anyone about it. A nurse thought I was just being dirty and erupted about this. I was placed in isolation for two weeks with only a mattress.”^[309]

64.     The Inquiry heard from other orphanage survivors who had similar experiences. Mr IY described being taken to a storeroom, where he was raped by a priest.^[310] Another survivor recalled being told by the sisters that it was time for him to ‘take confession’: “We would go to the church and be sitting there, and next thing the father’s hand was down your pants. This happened in a little room near the chapel.”^[311]

Whakarāpopotonga o ngā tūkinotanga i te whare whakapani

Summary of abuse at the orphanage

65.     Several survivors describe being physically and sexually abused by the brothers from the Order. Some survivors told us they were also physically abused by the nuns at the orphanage.

66.     Several survivors recall being abused by other people at the orphanage such as priests or trainee priests from the Diocese of Christchurch, however because they were young children and the abusers’ names were not known, the abusers cannot be definitively identified.

67.      Survivors told us that, at times, they believed some nuns at the orphanage were aware of the physical and/or sexual abuse of the children. Survivors said that, at times, they were taken to Marylands as a punishment.

Ngā tūkinotanga i te Tarati o Hebron
Abuse at Hebron Trust

68.     The abuse at Hebron Trust was pervasive and inescapable for many residents and for those that passed through the properties related to Hebron Trust seeking shelter and food. Brother McGrath, the director of Hebron Trust and referred to by the other staff as ‘the boss’,^[312] led the organisation in an operational sense, and was largely unsupervised by the Order and any State agency. This contributed to Brother McGrath’s ability to have unfettered access to vulnerable and marginalised young people who were often struggling with substance abuse issues, homelessness and isolation from their whānau and wider community.

69.     Cooper Legal, who acted for many Hebron Trust survivors, spoke to the severe nature of the abuse at Hebron Trust in comparison to their other work over the years. They said, “we have dealt with literally thousands of victims”, and that the “brutality and severity” of Brother McGrath’s abuse towards Hebron Trust victims was “at the top of the scale in terms of its nature, severity and long-term damage”.^[313]

Next page --->