Chapter 15 — Daingean

Physical abuse

The Brother thought he was telling lies and told him to take the boots off, which he did, and the Brother then handed them to the Gardaí and said: ‘He took them from Marlborough House’.

Another boy described being questioned about some stolen car keys: It was in the spud shed. The spud shed was actually at the back of the kitchen, at the back of the boot shop ... I had stolen some keys from a technical teacher in an attempt to abscond in his Volkswagen Beetle car and [the Brother] was told that I was the one who had the keys or had stolen the keys ... He was asking me where the keys were and I said I didn’t have them. He just choked me unconscious, he got me on the pile of potatoes and I thought this is it ... He got both his hands around my throat ... I was gone, I thought I was dead. I felt myself go.

He recalled that when he regained consciousness he was cold, and he remembered ‘waking up shaking, maybe it was from fear, I don’t know ...’.

Another complainant told of a beating he received after an accident: there is one occasion where I was painting up a ladder. Now, I had to carry the paint in one hand, and the brush in my other hand and climb the ladder. I think I was about twelve foot high when I missed my footing and fell off the ladder ... I got an unmerciful beating for that ... there was no rhyme or reason to beat me for that.

He added: Now, how can you hit somebody if they fall off a ladder? The first normal reaction of anybody would be to go to their side and say “are you all right” not go and knock hell out of them.

Br Abran who appeared before the Committee talked about this policy of hitting children. He said that there were times when staff would have to administer punishment on an ad hoc basis: if there was a fight going on or some weapons being used or if somebody got head butted ... In many cases the boys preferred to be punished in those circumstances rather than be sent to the disciplinarian because they would be deprived of films which was more important in their life than ordinary things. I know that sounds weird, that was their mentality.

He explained he used a strap, which was made in the boot shop and was issued to him, until a boy stole it from him and threw it down the toilet. He didn’t bother to get another in case it happened again, and also because he was no longer on duty in the square. From then on, he said, ‘If such a situation did arise I might have given a slap or something like that for whatever serious infringement would be involved’.

Under questioning he added: I might have used the hands occasionally sometimes it might be instead of using a fist, it would be on the shoulders, never on the face ... The occasion demanded immediate action at that point in time.

When asked if he denied punching a boy in the face he said: I could say – I could deny that, normally it would be an open hander or a back hander ... it was purely on the shoulders or chest. If I had to, that would only happen twice a year or three times a years, never frequently.

He was again pressed if he was talking about fists. He replied, ‘Yes’.

This Brother was named by a number of complainants as being excessively harsh and violent. He denied some of the specific allegations, such as giving an uppercut that led to a boy’s nose pumping blood, or that he had boxed and kicked a boy in the handball alley, but he nonetheless confirmed the policy of ad hoc punishments giving slaps or punches, believing that boys preferred to be dealt with in this way rather than being put on report.

The Oblates referred to this practice of ‘on-the-spot’ punishments and asserted that it was no more than that which occurred in schools around the country. Complainants, however, made a clear distinction between what could be described as ‘normal’ corporal punishment and the ill-tempered and violent outbursts described above.

The Oblates went further. They stated: In the context of a reformatory where fights and altercations did break out, it was sometimes the only efficient means of keeping control on unruly boys.

In each of the incidents described above, none of which would come within the description of a fight or altercation, the violence was an inappropriate and unnecessary response.

Corporal punishment was a first response by many of the staff in Daingean for even minor transgressions. It was often violent and black eyes, split lips and bruising were reported by complainants. Violence was not the ‘only efficient means of keeping control on unruly boys’ but, because management was inept and staffing inadequate, it was undoubtedly convenient.