The Vatican. They are behind the scenes as efficient as the best security systems in the world. One of the advantages of age is the contacts you make, the friends who rise in rank and the positions they reach.
I wondered why Peter Saunders, the man who founded the charity NAPAC, had forced his way onto the Vatican committee on sex abuse and had even got to meet The Pope as a “survivor”. Many survivors are genuine but the vast majority who claim to be survivors are liars like Carl Beech or exaggerators and charlatans, often after money but sometimes after other things - fame, sympathy, revenge, child custody. Saunders was very visible in the media talking about false accusers being “vanishingly rare” - a lie perpetrated by some for their own reasons.
Like many false accusers, his own claims of abuse always smelled to me. They grew over the years, never sounding quite true. When I saw that Beech had worked closely with NAPAC (and with the NSPCC) I started to wonder about the legitimacy of Saunders.
When I saw him on TV defending Beech - or, rather, saying Beech was not the tip of an iceberg but an example of the “vanishingly rare” liars, I inveighed further.
I found that he’d been discreetly removed from the Vatican panel investigating sex abuse.
I wondered why. He made a lot of fuss at the time, saying he had been “too open and honest”.
If you Google his name, you’ll find out.
Saunders is just another tip of the iceberg that is the False Allegations Industry.

And do read this from a couple of years ago...

jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.com/2019/08/for-petes-sake.html

By the way - Saunders did not just wander into a toilet for a few brief seconds of drunken sex; by his own admission he was in there for an hour - so long that his teenage son had to come up to look for them.

I see that that Mail on Sunday article was written by David Rose. He's now at the Jewish chronicle and, judging from recent pieces he has written there, he no longer seems to be covering false abuse claims/Savile claims, etc.

www.thejc.com/author/david-rose-david.rose
twitter.com/davidroseuk

I forget which of the pro victims is which. They all seem to have the same personality.

Jo wrote:
I see that that Mail on Sunday article was written by David Rose. He's now at the Jewish chronicle and, judging from recent pieces he has written there, he no longer seems to be covering false abuse claims/Savile claims, etc.

www.thejc.com/author/david-rose-david.rose
twitter.com/davidroseuk

All MSM journos are not to be trusted.

Peter Saunders, famously filmed for Australia's "60 Minutes" claiming "Cardinal George Pell is a psychopath " (not that he had ever met him over so-called actions on priestly child abuse.

This was when Pell could not make it back to Australia because of illness for a Royal Commission into abuse but did give evidence via TV link-up.

Claimed a "coward" by Saunders and several ABC TV commentators, one Yapping Head who said "he'll never come back but hide in The Vatican".

When told by Victorian Detectives ( Victoria being a Mafia infiltrated state for decades) that he was to be charged with serious crimes Cardinal Pell hopped on a plane to return to his feat.

Compensation? Pell was roundly condemned despite setting up the world's first compensation scheme for Catholic accusers. No questions asked..no demand to make a police statement but promises of support if the accuser did..was falsely painted as an attempt to stop accusers going to police (many did with their $$$)

Peter Saundner's "psychopath" claim resonated throughout every aspect of Australia's media..after all he was at The Vatican. Front page stories, top TV news.."Pell the Psychopath". Saunders participated in dozens of interviews.

And when Saunders himself was accused?
Not a word in the Australian media. Not a peep. The forgotten man.

With perfect timing re the Mafia in Australia the ABC runs a tale.

Saunders was booted from the Vatican committee on abuse for allegedly bullying other members.

My Italian investigative journalist pal says the Cardinal Pell prosecution was driven by corrupt Oz cops in league with the Italian Mafia to derail George Pell who had been tasked to clean up Vatican finances..riddled with Mafia input.

Often studied, rarely prosecuted: How the mafia gets away with it in Australia

The Australian Federal Police media release about the extent of the Italian mafia in this country sounded impressive. Until you realise how many similar exercises it has run.
In mid-2015 in Melbourne’s north, a small group of wealthy businessmen left their phones at a nearby property and walked into a shipping container to talk. They really did not want anyone to hear their discussion.

But a clue to the business at hand may have lain in the identity of the most senior of them.

www.smh.com.au/national/often-studied-ra...20220609-p5asjj.html

Yes the Vatican is and was keen not to destroy people without solid evidence although one would think that not destroying priests against whom the only evidence was one person's word should still apply (but media was less powerful in the old days). They knew the allegations were true and had been admitted to by Saunders but he claimed - in a glorious piece of Victim Blaming learned by running his charity - that it was all HER fault. Since there had been no prosecution or trial (why not?) they allowed the rumour to be put about that he'd been "bullying" other panel members. I don't think even he was aware of the truth. But the truth is they were deeply shocked by his behaviour - considering it might well reflect that of many other trusted survivors". As indeed Carl Beech later illustrated - the "tip of the iceberg" reality.
In fact this really helped the current Pope - a decent man - to begin considering the other side of many possibly false allegations against Catholics.
Before Saunders many had gotten away with it.
Since then, the falsely accused have been quietly assisted (like Cardinal Pell).
It's still difficult to go against the media which will always support a good story.
But Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice is getting to be a great story too.

The Vatican, of course, had obtained a copy of Saunders' police interview in which he gives a detailed admission of his appalling crime but says he was "too drunk to stop her" (they were in the toilet for over an hour - he must have been VERY drunk). He must have known this when the story broke eventually so could not deny it. And remember he had (and still has) a network of legal contacts who also want to defend their position. They make fortunes from False Allegations (as did he). Remember the Savile case where "victims" made next to nothing because all Savile's money had been used up - by LAWYERS!

£16k+ for the Lawyers of the Complainants and the same for the lawyers appointed by NatWest the Executors.

Still have the official letter informing me his Estate stood at £Nil.

When in Court Justice Sales said "I will not stand for a Lawyer feeding frenzie"
Costs for that Court appearance were an eye watering amount well in excess of £100k. My expenses £109, bus and taxi fares.

The shocking abuse of innocent dead people (innocent until proven guilty) by the legal system and the media is just a part of the appalling False Allegations Industry. Assumption of Guilt (as it's a better story) is even easier if the victim is dead and thus cannot sue. But I think we can start to destroy this by beginning to prosecute false accusers who are either deliberately lying for money or for other reasons. Not everyone. Not the genuinely deluded or those genuinely abused. But those who say they were 15 when they were 17 or 17 when they were 18. Those who shout RAPE years later when it was consensual (if stupid, drunk or on drugs). Those innocents but misguided (often by media hype) should not be prosecuted unless deliberate malice can be proved. Which is often far easier than you would imagine. False accusers are often incredibly stupid. If only I'd known that in 2001.