Explore the Ryan Report

Chapter 14 — St. Joseph’s Kilkenny

Back
Show Contents

The Group Homes

198

The first report from Inspector Graham Granville was dated 22nd February 1976, and was very positive about all aspects of the School in terms of facilities and care for the children. The Sisters complained to him of lack of follow-up by social workers who requested places for children, had them admitted, and then failed to keep in touch with the child; and they sought Mr Granville’s assistance in tackling this problem.

199

Around this time, the School was experiencing problems with some of the children, in particular with getting them to attend the local schools and to be accepted there.

200

The problem with local schools came up for mention again in a General Inspection Report dated 27th January 1977 carried out by Mr Granville. He noted that, although the children attended local schools and were allowed to join in school activities, there was not good contact between the local schools and the residential home with regard to the children’s progress etc. In a handwritten note on the end of the report, it was decided that the Schools Inspector would meet the Bishop and Sr Astrid to try and resolve the education problem. The author noted that Kilkenny was by far the biggest residential home in the country, and perhaps the unwieldy size was responsible for some of the problems.

201

Mr Granville concluded his report in January 1977 with the following comment: ‘This residential complex has a great deal to offer the South Eastern district if it is properly supported and guided’.

Allegations of sexual abuse in the 1970s

202

In January 1995, a Garda Sergeant, stationed at Kilkenny Garda Station, began an investigation into allegations of sexual and physical abuse at St Joseph’s School in Kilkenny. In the course of his enquiries, he heard allegations of severe sexual abuse, including buggery, and of physical abuse against two men who had been employed in St Joseph’s during the 1970s. The first of these allegations involved Thomas Pleece,20 who was employed in St Joseph’s from 1972 until 1976, when he was summarily removed by the Resident Manager following complaints by boys.

203

The second man was Peter Tade,21 who succeeded Mr Pleece as a care worker in St Joseph’s in 1976.

204

Thomas Pleece admitted sexual abuse in St Joseph’s, as well as in St Augustine’s where he had worked previously, and also to abusing two boys fostered by him after he left St Joseph’s. He was indicted on 271 counts and received a 10-year sentence in October 1997.

205

Peter Tade was indicted on 10 counts and he was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment in June 1998.

206

According to the Congregation,1995 was the first time it became aware of allegations of sexual abuse in St Joseph’s.

207

After the decision to take in young boys in 1966, the Department of Education Inspectors recommended that St Joseph’s should employ male staff to help care for them. The first of these carers was Thomas Pleece.

208

The decision to close St Patrick’s and transfer the boys to St Joseph’s caused a number of problems for St Joseph’s. The girls resented the presence of the boys in the School, and it was difficult to keep boys and girls separated at night.

209

Thomas Pleece completed the course and, on completion, was highly recommended to Sr Astrid, who appointed him with sole responsibility for 16 teenage boys. He was House Parent for Summerhill, one of the group homes in St Joseph’s. According to Sr Úna O’Neill, who gave evidence to the Committee as Superior General of the Congregation: He was the House Parent for Summerhill so he would effectively have been in charge of the house. The manager would have visited as she did fairly regularly all of the houses each day and every evening. She and all concerned thought it was a great achievement to have a man in charge of the boys. In his professional child care capacity it was assumed that he would act as a father figure and role model for them.

210

This was a view echoed by Mr Graham Granville at the time, who wrote of Mr Pleece in an Inspection Report of November 1972: ... he is young – probably 28 years – single and naturally at ease with youngsters whilst unobtrusively maintaining discipline. If he applied and were selected for Oberstown, I understand he would be badly missed at St Joseph’s.

211

Thomas Pleece said in evidence that he first became involved with childcare when he started to work in St Augustine’s Special School in Blackrock. He admitted to sexual abuse of boys in St Augustine’s. He had formerly worked in a factory.

212

From Blackrock he went to the childcare course in Kilkenny in 1971. He said that he did not have the necessary educational requirement for the course, and was therefore surprised to get an interview. He had to provide them with an essay/project to satisfy the educational aspect. He also had a formal interview with three or four persons on the panel. He had the requisite two years’ experience in childcare in St Augustine’s, and he provided three references. He was one of only three lay persons who attended the first course in 1971. The other 17 participants were Religious. The college organised a placement for him in St Joseph’s. He lived in St Joseph’s during the year of the course and, in return for his accommodation, he did a couple of hours each evening doing games with the children. He also attended short placements in the probation service and in a school in the UK as part of the course.


Footnotes
  1. This is a pseudonym.
  2. This is a pseudonym.
  3. This is a pseudonym.
  4. This is a pseudonym.
  5. This is a pseudonym.
  6. This is a pseudonym.
  7. This is a pseudonym.
  8. This is a pseudonym.
  9. This is a pseudonym.
  10. This is a pseudonym.
  11. This is a pseudonym.
  12. This is a pseudonym.
  13. This is a pseudonym.
  14. This is a pseudonym.
  15. This is a pseudonym.
  16. This is a pseudonym.
  17. This is a pseudonym.
  18. This is a pseudonym.
  19. This is a pseudonym.
  20. This is a pseudonym.
  21. This is a pseudonym.
  22. This is a pseudonym.
  23. This is a pseudonym.
  24. This is a pseudonym.
  25. This is a pseudonym.
  26. This is a pseudonym.
  27. This is a pseudonym.
  28. This is a pseudonym.
  29. This is a pseudonym.
  30. This is a pseudonym.
  31. This is a pseudonym.
  32. This is a pseudonym.
  33. This is a pseudonym.
  34. This is a pseudonym.
  35. This is a pseudonym.