Mother and babies homes information sealed for 30 years

TheChizler

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

One lady said she gave a full testimony to the commission but that they selectively put her responses in a Q&A type format in the report even though they had never asked her specific questions during her testimony. She was furious because she felt they belittled her actual testimony. I think that was on Radio 1 last night (Leap of faith). There were other similar accounts during the week on the radio and Corless brought it up too.

Interesting. A common and standard academic technique when making reports from interviews and statements is to categorise responses for analysis of common themes. Is it possible that something like that happened here? Or did they change the context and meaning entirely?

Cluedo Monopoly

stockshares wrote: »

You don't believe them.

I wouldn't bother. Wum. Pathetic.

walshb

the kelt wrote: »

Are you honestly that ignorant?

Do you believe that people carrying out untold in humane acts of cruelty went around documenting these things? Survivor x recalls being beaten whilst pregnant, well do you have any evidence of that, pictures, written report etc, eh no obviously. Well didn’t happen then, next!

That’s basically what your saying

Do you expect there to be evidence for everything and if not then just dismiss what people say, you do realise this isn’t a court case?

No one should be allowed say what happened to them if they can’t prove it, “statements like accusations being flung around” as if it’s social gossip from Twitter.

Eh, I simply said that claims that the report was not reporting accurate and correct testimony needs investigating/corroborating..

I never mentioned any inhumane acts..

And of course there wouldn’t be detailed accounts/documentation of these inhumane acts..

So steady on.

Cluedo Monopoly

Hard to believe the women and children are still be stigmatised in 2021.

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

You don't believe them.

If it makes your crusade happy, so be it..

I’d rather offer a fair and balanced approach

3000 pages of reporting.. was there inaccuracies in parts of it? Quite possibly..

You, and others here were not privy to the testimonies, context, and investigations...

It would ignorant to claim to know exactly what happened here..

walshb

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Hard to believe the women and children are still be stigmatised in 2021.

By who?

How?

Cluedo Monopoly

Mother and Baby homes being covered on Katie Hannon now. Specifically the right to identity it seems.

the kelt

walshb wrote: »

Eh, I simply said that claims that the report was not reporting accurate and correct testimony needs investigating/corroborating..

I never mentioned any inhumane acts..

And of course there wouldn’t be detailed accounts/documentation of these inhumane acts..

So steady on.

You know, the inhumane acts carried out by people on our most vulnerable in society, or are you denying it happened at all now at this stage, well let’s be honest you’re not really far off it! If you know that there wouldn’t be any accounts or documentation then why do you dismiss people’s accounts without it or are you just on a wind up?

It’s not a court of law your dealing with, if people believe or dis believe the report that’s entirely up to each individual.

The issue is that people weren’t given that choice because their testimony was either dismissed or altered by the people compiling the report. There have been numerous people have attested to that over the last few days, you were commenting last night on one of them on the late late show, is she a liar?

I mean how easy would it have been to include people’s testimony with a proviso in the report that there was no documented evidence in this situation etc rather than simply dismiss or alter that statement.

Basically what your saying is you believe that thousands of people should have their suffering dismissed just in case one member of the clergy or other got named in the wrong. You do know the majority of people have no interest in naming people or calling them out, they want answers about their family, that’s it.

You know damn well what you’ve been saying, you’ve been saying “show me the evidence, if not your a liar”

stockshares

walshb wrote: »

If it makes your crusade happy, so be it..

I’d rather offer a fair and balanced approach

3000 pages of reporting.. was there inaccuracies in parts of it? Quite possibly..

You, and others here were not privy to the testimonies, context, and investigations...

It would ignorant to claim to know exactly what happened here..

To see Justice being done is not a Crusade.

You want to see the Church and State let off the hook for committing crimes which is what they did.

Regarding proof.
At the outset of this Inquiry it was decided that the Survivors would not be given copies of their Transcripts.

We now know why.

Maeve O Rourke commented on this here in Point 1. You will need to Scroll down the page to see.
https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/maeve-orourke-analysis-mother-and-baby-homes-5240049-Oct2020/

Quote
The Government has not explained why denying individuals who were subjected to forced family separation access to their own transcripts of evidence and personal and family records is a necessary and proportionate measure to safeguard the effective operation of this or any Commission or the future cooperation of witnesses.

Surely, such a blanket denial of access to personal data does the opposite: it undermines the purpose of this Commission, which was to respond to complaints of unlawful interference with private and family life, denial of personal and family identity, and denial of information about loved ones who are disappeared or deceased.

Barring access to one’s transcript of evidence is unlikely to encourage future cooperation of witnesses, particularly where they must recount traumatic or deeply personal events and without a transcript will have to repeat them again in future.

For the above reasons I believe the Commission was wrong to reject all requests for access to personal data

walshb

Seems obvious to me..

Any these types of historical reports are always going to throw up disagreements..

The passage of time, lack of records, difficulty to corroborate and prove, as well as people having died...

What exactly were people expecting?

And of course, the very important aspect of context...Memory, subjectivity..

Even people genuinely giving testimony about old events from many years back will present challenges. It’s part of life

What bugs me is the then rush to slate the report...

And worse, anyone who “defends” the report for reasons above, is seen as being against the women. Absurd. And damaging

stockshares

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Mother and Baby homes being covered on Katie Hannon now. Specifically the right to identity it seems.

She gave it the last 15mins which is fair considering the other topics in the news this week.

Brid Smith said the Report should be rejected and I agree with her.

The Report dismissed the Women's Testimony and is nothing more than a Whitewash.

stockshares

walshb wrote: »

Seems obvious to me..

Any these types of historical reports are always going to throw up disagreements..

The passage of time, lack of records, difficulty to corroborate and prove, as well as people having died...

What exactly were people expecting?

And of course, the very important aspect of context...Memory, subjectivity..

Even people genuinely giving testimony about old events from many years back will present challenges. It’s part of life

What bugs me is the then rush to slate the report...

And worse, anyone who “defends” the report for reasons above, is seen as being against the women. Absurd. And damaging

I'm starting to think you are Trolling for the sake of it.

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

I'm starting to think you are Trolling for the sake of it.

Trolling because I haven’t labeled the report a whitewash?

Or because I disagree with your views?

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

She gave it the last 15mins which is fair considering the other topics in the news this week.

Brid Smith said the Report should be rejected and I agree with her.

The Report dismissed the Women's Testimony and is nothing more than a Whitewash.

That woman probably read a couple paragraphs, chose the usual anti everything stance and then shooting for the report to be withdrawn in its entirety..

Her views on everything should be viewed very skeptically.

stockshares

walshb wrote: »

Trolling because I haven’t labeled the report a whitewash?

Or because I disagree with your views?

I don't expect you to agree with my views.

You do not believe what the women have said and are suggesting that the passage of time has affected their memory.

You have a total lack of empathy for them.

In the way that you defend the report and the language that you use it would not surprise me if you are connected to it or know someone who is.

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

I don't expect you to agree with my views.

You do not believe what the women have said and are suggesting that the passage of time has affected their memory.

You have a total lack of empathy for them.

In the way that you defend the report and the language that you use it would not surprise me if you are connected to it or know someone who is.

What’s the point in us discussing it if you cannot comprehend that not believing here with certainty can’t be achieved?

The claims are that the report gave inaccurate testimony and altered testimony

One would need to actually investigate these claims to believe

Why can you not comprehend this?

And why are you pressing this narrative that not automatically believing means a categoric disbelieving...?

We would need to hear all the testimony and see the notes and interview both the women and the reporters...

See, this is more than just being about the women..

walshb

As for Brid Smith and her likes: why on earth any professionally educated and decent people would want to put their names to any reports now when you have people reading bits here and there and throwing around calls for whitewash and removal in its entirety.

Unreal. Who do people want to write the reports?

Is Brid offering any alternatives?

TheChizler

anplaya27 wrote: »

My owm father was born in Bessborough after his mother was forced to go there by the church authorities.

He was never asked to give a testimony nor was his mother.

He didnt even receive a copy of the report, instead having to see it like everyone else.

How did they find people for the report? Was it through birth records or through victim support groups or some other method?

stockshares

walshb wrote: »

As for Brid Smith and her likes: why on earth any professionally educated and decent people would want to put their names to any reports now when you have people reading bits here and there and throwing around calls for whitewash and removal in its entirety.

Unreal. Who do people want to write the reports?

Is Brid offering any alternatives?

Are Survivors not professionally educated and decent?

Are people who criticise the report not professionally educated and decent?

Is it necessary to be professionally educated in order to be decent?

There are many professionally educated people who are anything but decent .

Earlier in this thread it was pointed out that the Chair of this Commission is Justice Yvonne Murray and that many members of the report are Barristers with the assumption being that because of their professions they are above reproach.

I can think of a couple of members of the Law Society who recently brought the Legal Profession into disrepute and I can think of one Judge in particular who's decisions have been called into question by members of the Dail.

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

You have a total lack of empathy for them.

Another falsehood..

Everyone has empathy here..

Just because some aren’t as hellbent on dissing a report doesn’t change that.

Your comment here is out of order..

Can people not just disagree? Without being accused of lacking empathy here?

I suppose McAleese has no empathy either?

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

Are Survivors not professionally educated and decent?

Are people who criticise the report not professionally educated and decent?

Is it necessary to be professionally educated in order to be decent?

What?

Doesn’t matter where you’re from or what education you have

Decency and goodness is either in you or not..

You are going into some odd and unnecessary places here. Like you want to trip me up or want me to say something that you can use to throw at me..

stockshares

I wont respond to you anymore as our to and fro is derailing the thread.

walshb

stockshares wrote: »

I wont respond to you anymore as our to and fro is derailing the thread.

I don’t think it’s derailing it

We are simply offering differing g views..

But, if you want to leave it, fine..all civil and friendly here.

Cluedo Monopoly

I missed the LLS last night but one of the survivors Noelle Brown was on. She spoke well from all accounts.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/noelle-browns-passionate-discussion-mother-23328782

"It was really upsetting, I think the most upsetting thing about it was the webinar I attended on the Tuesday when the report was released, it became apparent that with 500 people attending, the Taoiseach made a speech and Roderic O'Gorman spoke, but it came apparent very quickly that the phrases being used were "there is no evidence of," including vaccine trials incarceration in Mother and Baby homes, abuse in Mother and Baby Homes.

"I think everyone's heart as a survivor of Mother and Baby Homes sank because all those testimonies went in there as part of the Confidential Committee - I was one of those people - and they weren't being taken on board. The evidence was there and they never drew the conclusions from the evidence and ten- times more horrific things are contained in our testimonies."


"I wasn't heard and all along the way, I was told that it would be a survivor-centred approach and that hasn't happened. The opposite has happened, our testimonies have changed and they were altered. So many people had the same experience and in the end, we weren't listened to. The report was about us, it was our stories and we've already had our identities and stories taken from us."

"I got very angry and I've been very calm over the years. I was angry with the State and the Church. The collusion that happened to create this absolute horror and not just that, the fact that it was attempted to be hidden. It was tried to be kept a secret, tried to pretend it didn't happen. That is the most offensive thing to survivors, that they're not being believed. For people to give those testimonies and then say that there's no evidence in these testimonies, that's a re-traumatising of people. To do that to people is inhuman, we've already been traumatised by what's happened to us and our treatment in terms of searching for our identities and mothers, sisters, and brothers searching for babies in mass graves."

walshb

There was a lady on RTE today. Think she gave birth in 1977..

Bonded for 7 weeks with baby..imagine that. Then had to give baby away..

Now, she seemed to imply it was her father who made her go to the home.

But the interviewer never asked why, or what were her/his/family reasons for this..

1977 is not that long ago..

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-40208147.html

Conall Ó Fátharta: Narrative of report on mother and baby homes needs to be challenged
Much has been made already of the basis for the conclusions of the Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation, its choice of language and tone, and the discrepancy between the testimony and lived experience of the women and the report’s conclusions.

The reaction was visceral. The women had heard this before. Often whispered behind their backs. Having lived it, the women did not accept this view of how power operated in Ireland. They were not alone.

As we learned this week, all narratives should be open to challenge and scrutiny, even those of a State inquiry.

saabsaab

I don’t know if the report is a ‘whitewash’ but it is even from its outset limited in many ways. Like all tribunals and inquiries it seems to say something bad happened in the past but there is no concrete evidence to prove it and it is now too long ago to do anything about it. Apart from discussion about the issue little becomes of it.

Well that isn’t enough. The worst seems to predate 1965 and any concrete evidence is now probably destroyed or those involved dead. Most Gardai of the time would not have recorded any crimes of the religious then anyway.

However, there are cases from 1970 on that with a proper criminal investigation could show illegal activities. A special Garda forensic investigation should be done on the most likely cases to provide proof. If institutions or departments and individuals can be prosecuted then they could do so. That would be something.

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-40208147.html

Jackie spent years gathering a paper trail to prove what happened to her when she found herself in the Bessborough mother and baby home as a pregnant teenager in 1974.

She was just 16 when she signed a consent form to have her son adopted. She didn’t sign her own name. Instead, under instruction from a nun, and in the presence of a solicitor and her mother, she was forced to write a different name — Micheline Power* — a woman who does not exist. Because it was not her own name, she remembered asking how to spell it before she signed the form.

As a result, all of the documentation created in the wake of this act — including her son’s baptism certificate, birth certificate, and indeed the adoption order itself — were created on the basis of these false identities. All of this is documented.

In short, Jackie’s memory is borne out by the records. Her records. Her other overwhelming memory around the day she was told to sign the consent form was fear.

“I was terrified,” she said. "I remember my behind twitching and sticking my knees together to stop my ass twitching.

And that was it. I was put into the car and brought home. I don’t remember anyone saying to me: 'You’re signing a baby away. You are never going to see your baby again.' Nobody ever explained anything to me."

The Supreme Court judgment in G v An Bord Uchtála is a key ruling on what constitutes a valid consent. It states that “a consent motivated by fear, stress, or anxiety ... does not constitute a valid consent”.

In 2017, Tusla staff handling Jackie’s case were instructed in emails not to refer to situations like hers as “illegal”, but instead as “possible illegal registrations”.

Reference is made to having to “hold our powder” because “that stuff is FOI’able ... and it could be used against us if someone takes a case”.

In its recommendations, the commission noted that criticism of how Tusla — by the people who engage its services to access their personal information — was “unfair and misplaced”.

Jackie said she spoke with the committee for around two hours, but that it did not ask to see or copy any of the records she had with her in two boxes.

I think the government will regret how they set up this commission. The truth will eventually get out. It already is thanks to long suffering survivors.

CrazyFather1

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

I missed the LLS last night but one of the survivors Noelle Brown was on. She spoke well from all accounts.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/noelle-browns-passionate-discussion-mother-23328782

I listened to the interview and Tubs been his usual gobsh*t self and trying to make it more about him

My question, does RTE not have any questions to answer?

saabsaab

Puts me in mind of the RIC (and Tan) commemorations a bit.

Cluedo Monopoly

Catherine Connolly's speech in the Dail

She said to the government.. 'you are actually placing abuse on abuse'. She is exasperated. 'Either we believe the women or we don't.'

She said that institutionalised people tend not to come forward to speak about their experiences. Nearly 500 vulnerable survivors found the courage to do so but they were not listened to and the commission drew incorrect conclusions. She cannot fathom how.

She hammers Martin on the spin and leak around the report. Repulsive indeed.

.

stockshares

saabsaab wrote: »

I don’t know if the report is a ‘whitewash’ but it is even from its outset limited in many ways. Like all tribunals and inquiries it seems to say something bad happened in the past but there is no concrete evidence to prove it and it is now too long ago to do anything about it. Apart from discussion about the issue little becomes of it.

Well that isn’t enough. The worst seems to predate 1965 and any concrete evidence is now probably destroyed or those involved dead. Most Gardai of the time would not have recorded any crimes of the religious then anyway.

However, there are cases from 1970 on that with a proper criminal investigation could show illegal activities. A special Garda forensic investigation should be done on the most likely cases to provide proof. If institutions or departments and individuals can be prosecuted then they could do so. That would be something.

Maeve O Rourke has said that there is an obligation on the coroner to investigate the cause of deaths in Tuam and that this is covered in the Coroner's Act. I linked to the Interview with Mary Wilson earlier in the thread .

However the Gov are trying to prevent an inquest. I'll post more on this later.

Btw the fact that those children are still in that Well says it all.

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Catherine Connolly's speech in the Dail

She said to the government.. 'you are actually placing abuse on abuse'. She is exasperated. 'Either we believe the women or we don't.'

She said that institutionalised people tend not to come forward to speak about their experiences. Nearly 500 vulnerable survivors found the courage to do so but they were not listened to and the commission drew incorrect conclusions. She cannot fathom how.

She hammers Martin on the spin and leak around the report. Repulsive indeed.

.

She went a bit further in her Interview on the Echo Chamber.

She said Martin colluded with the Leak in order to set the tone for the week .

After trying trying to distance himself from it and claiming he would investigate the leak, he gave an interview on the Sunday and repeatedly quoted from it.

stockshares

Solicitor Simon McGarr has a template that can be used by people to request their data before the Commission closes.
https://twitter.com/Tupp_Ed/status/1350499677532266498?s=19

It is intended to provide a guideline template letter for anyone who would like to access any data held relating to them by the Commission of Investigation Into Mother and Baby Homes.

It should be sent immediately, given the short timeline before the Commission is scheduled to complete its work.

whisky_galore

saabsaab wrote: »

Puts me in mind of the RIC (and Tan) commemorations a bit.

Can't blame "the Brits" for this one. We did this to ourselves.
Home rule was Rome rule, the loyalists got that 100% correct.

stockshares

stockshares wrote: »

Thanks, just catching it now. It's over now but will be repeated on Sunday at 10.30am Radio 1.

Programme is called Leap of Faith.

This was not on this morning but it can be found here
https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/#/radio1/11271921

Also Weekly Playback on Rte 1 which was recommended earlier by Cluedo_Monopoly
https://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/html5/#/radio1/11272048

Also the Echo Chamber Podcast with Vicky Conway
https://tortoiseshack.ie/tortoise-shack-live-the-mother-and-baby-home-report/

The echo chamber podcast Hosted by Dr Vicky Conway, has Historian, DR Sarah-Anne Buckley, Law Lecturer, Máiréad Enright, Solicitor, Fionna Fox, Journalist, Conall Ó Fátharta and Legal Academic, Dr Sinéad Ring.
It also features activist Izzy Kamikaze who is calling for the right for adopted people to their birth certs.
https://my.uplift.ie/petitions/birth-certs-now-for-adoptees

Cluedo Monopoly

Wow. Regina Doherty on Radio 1 now has just slammed the report. Slammed it to the point that the state needs another response.

The decent people of Ireland nees to reject this whitewash report. The survivors and all the dead victims deserve better.

Still on Radio 1.

stockshares

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Wow. Regina Doherty on Radio 1 now has just slammed the report. Slammed it to the point that the state needs another response.

Catriona Crowe on now. Fair play to Brendan for having her on.

She has said that what had to happen now I'd that the Women need to be given copies of their Transcripts and then the Women will have to search the report and verify their Testimony . If that can't be done then the report will have to be reviewed.

She said the commission need to tell the Women and the Irish people the reasons for the Methodology used in the report.

She said what the Commission did was paraphrase the women's testimony in order to tell the Commission's narrative of what happened

Cluedo Monopoly

stockshares wrote: »

Catriona Crowe on now. Fair play to Brendan for having her on.

Another excellent speaker.

JeffKenna

stockshares wrote: »

Catriona Crowe on now. Fair play to Brendan for having her on.

She has said that what had to happen now I'd that the Women need to be given copies of their Transcripts and then the Women will have to search the report and verify their Testimony . If that can't be done then the report will have to be reviewed.

She said the commission need to tell the Women and the Irish people the reasons for the Methodology used in the report.

She said what the Commission did was paraphrase the women's testimony in order to tell the Commission's narrative of what happened

I can understand that an interview would have to be paraphrased in order to fit into a report but if that paraphrasing moves away from the initial statement then that's concerning.

Cluedo Monopoly

Many survivors have asked for transcripts of their testimonies. Only 1 has succeeded in getting it and she was appalled at how they formatted it in a checklist. Noelle Brown.

Beechwoodspark

Must say I find it slightly Wierd how there has been this almost coordinated backlash against the report by various politicians and media etc.

The latest is Brendan connor has asked when will the commissioners who wrote the report come forward and “explain themselves”

stockshares

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Another excellent speaker.

Yes she has real authority and doesn't waffle .

Hugh O Connell has a piece in the info which was referenced a few times by the panel. I haven't read it but I'll try and find it and out it up here. It might not be on the website yet.

Mad_maxx

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Wow. Regina Doherty on Radio 1 now has just slammed the report. Slammed it to the point that the state needs another response.

The decent people of Ireland nees to reject this whitewash report. The survivors and all the dead victims deserve better.

Still on Radio 1.

Doherty is a shameless careerist who knows what will play well in the media and ultimately for her own interests

Beechwoodspark

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Doherty is a shameless careerist who knows what will play well in the media and ultimately for her own interests

That’s exactly the sense I got from her
contribution.

She had zero details, zero specifics, all broad brush strokes there.

She was thrown out on her ear in the last election.

All attention seeking and shamelessly exploiting this issue to garner praise

steddyeddy

whisky_galore wrote: »

Can't blame "the Brits" for this one. We did this to ourselves.
Home rule was Rome rule, the loyalists got that 100% correct.

Indeed. The way you move forward from these things is to acknowledge they happened, our responsibility as a society and by bringing the church and the medical establishment who assisted in this to justice.

TheChizler

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Many survivors have asked for transcripts of their testimonies. Only 1 has succeeded in getting it and she was appalled at how they formatted it in a checklist. Noelle Brown.

I'd like to look into this cause it's one of the only specific claims I've seen so far, has she published it anywhere? Was the transcript modified or just the report entry or both?

Mad_maxx

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

That’s exactly the sense I got from her
contribution.

She had zero details, zero specifics, all broad brush strokes there.

She was thrown out on her ear in the last election.

All attention seeking and shamelessly exploiting this issue to garner praise

That's her

Quintessential careerist hack but she is laying the groundwork for favourable media coverage in the coming years

CrazyFather1

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

That’s exactly the sense I got from her
contribution.

She had zero details, zero specifics, all broad brush strokes there.

She was thrown out on her ear in the last election.

All attention seeking and shamelessly exploiting this issue to garner praise

Is that not every politician?

steddyeddy

If there's one article you read to day it's the article from the Sunday Times on the human experimentation that was carried out without consent on children in these homes. A British doctor in GSK sent this letter to a company official in Ireland.

In November 1969, William Burland, a doctor at Glaxo’s head office in England, wrote to the company’s official in Ireland about plans for testing an experimental baby milk formula. The letter was marked “highly confidential”. “I am looking for establishments such as homes for illegitimate babies, etc where these investigations could be set up and where there are sufficient numbers to enable us to have two groups of babies, one fed with experimental milk, and one to act as controls,” it said. “Do you think it would be possible to set up a trial of this nature in Eire?”

Following a meeting between Burland and nuns at Bessborough, the trial went ahead in March 1968. The babies lined up for it had to be more than 7lb in weight. It was conducted simultaneously with trials of the same experimental milk in Malaya and Argentina.

In the Cork home, 14 children were recruited as subjects. Eithne Conlon, a GP to whom Glaxo offered a free airline flight in return for her participation, reported that the infants “experienced moderate to severe vomiting, moderate to severe wind, loose stools and green stools”. Severe vomiting, regurgitation and irritableness were noted in nine other children used for the trial at St Patrick’s. Glaxo’s L14 milk was discontinued “due to the severity of the side effects”.

stockshares

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Must say I find it slightly Wierd how there has been this almost coordinated backlash against the report by various politicians and media etc.

The latest is Brendan connor has asked when will the commissioners who wrote the report come forward and “explain themselves”

Politicians tend to go whichever way the wind is blowing.

Theres an obvious problem with the report that can't be defended so they are getting out first.

It's a mark of Micheal Martin's incompetence that he leaked the report thinking it would be beneficial to him. He also disrespected Survivors by not providing them with a copy of the report or at least a summary before the Webinar on Tuesday.

It did not require much thought or effort to make sure copies of the report were given to survivors but he didn't even care to get that right.