John Smyth, Church Scandal, Channel 4 9pm

butterandjam

fancythat

From AI Justin Welby has stated that he first became aware of the specific, serious allegations of abuse against John Smyth in August 2013, shortly after he became Archbishop of Canterbury. The findings of an independent review, however, concluded that it was "unlikely" he would have had no knowledge of concerns regarding Smyth in the 1980s

Especially as Welby was on the adult staff ( in the dormitory) at the camps where Smyth abused the attendees.
Welby was there in residence at the same time as Smyth.

But apparently doesn't recall the conversation which it is alleged he had with Mark Ruston , with whom Welby was lodging in 1978, about Smyth even back then.
The ‘Ruston report’ which was written in early 1982 details much of Smyth’s abuse to that date and clearly states that offences had been committed. Makin notes that there was also ‘evidence of what amounts to “victim blaming” in some of the correspondence’.

There were probably a majority of boys being abused at some time or another at Winchester
Do you mean all 750 on the roll, keepingquiet? Can you point us to these figures?

Iam64

BlueBelle, the children have spoken out as adults and only as a result of the investigation triggered by complaints by others.
I absolutely understand the anger being directed at Mrs S but she appears to have been living the life of a surrendered wife. She met him when aged 16, a shy inexperienced teenager, he was a powerful older man.
The financial cost of prosecuting her would imo be better spent educating young women on the dangers of controlling relationships.
Not to mention working with boys and men who are the group most involved in abusing others

* She met him when aged 16, a shy inexperienced teenager, he was a powerful older man. *

That is inaccurate.

Anne S is 81, born in 1944 . John S was born in 1941.

They met in 1966 and
married in 1968 when she was 24 and he was 27.

So she was not "a shy teenager" and he was not a "powerful older man.".

What Iam64 wrote is not inaccurate.

The wife said in the documentary that she was 16 years old when she met her husband.

MartavTaurus

What Iam64 wrote is not inaccurate.

The wife said in the documentary that she was 16 years old when she met her husband.

The couple's birth and marriage dates are on public record. The enquiries into Smyths education, activities and social contacts produced incredibly detailed timelines of his entire life.

TakeThat7

His wife enabled horrible abuse and took part in cleaning up blood why has she not been arrested

I agree. She was an enabler of such terrible abuse. To witness the injury and mop up the blood and not report anything is beyond my comprehension.

MartavTaurus

What Iam64 wrote is not inaccurate.

The wife said in the documentary that she was 16 years old when she met her husband.

I'm not sure she is someone I'd trust given what she was involved with. I think I'd trust public records rather than what she says.

I ve just watched on you tube an interview of the son
I inaccurately thought he had only been beaten once but he was beaten regularly from the age of 7 He’s a very articulate man and has terrible memories
I have even lass sympathy for a mother who let her small son be beaten regularly by a monster who she went to bed with, slept with, cuddled, and had more children by
Words fail me

Have her children broken off contact with her?

Maremia

Have her children broken off contact with her?

As is stated upthread, one is dead and the other was not in the documentary. The remaining two appear to have forgiven her.

Why is that relevant, though? I’m sure many people forgive family members for dreadful crimes. That doesn’t make a difference to their illegality or seriousness.

I cant have sympathy for what she allowed, but I feel we are not taking into account enough the power of the abuse that she suffered constantly from her early marriage, and had been isolated and brainwashed to the extent she did what she did, if we take her to court.

We need to get into a position where it can never happen again like this.

Threats of court will not help women to speak up, can you not see
It will just induce further silence.

correct, not early marriage, but from 16 the early association. He is likely to have hidden much from her until they were married - it's common for that to happen.

The two children in the interview I believe have had extensive therapy I thought the daughter who died had cancer but according to google she committed suicide ??? Anyone know if that’s true
The third daughter who didn’t appear in the channel 4 docu seems to have been similar in thoughts to the other two, but perhaps she didn’t want any publicity

I think it was the total lack of passion of any emotion that did it for me with the mother
How many beaten women risk their lives daily for their children??? the refuges are full of them She put nothing of her life on the line at all even allowing her own son to take the beatings WOW I don’t care how much under his spell she was to allow him to beat her boy is totally unforgivable

I cannot accept anything about her feelings, his hold on her, Stockholm syndrome, age or anything else except her total ineptitude to save her own children from a monster

Thanks Doodledog.

theworriedwell

MartavTaurus

What Iam64 wrote is not inaccurate.

The wife said in the documentary that she was 16 years old when she met her husband.

I'm not sure she is someone I'd trust given what she was involved with. I think I'd trust public records rather than what she says.

So who to believe? Anne Smyth's own words or information collected about her?

IF the wife lied in the documentary about when she met her husband to be, (16 years old), what else is she lying about?

Anne Smyth refused to contribute any information to the enquiries mentioned.
The documentary is the first time she has ever spoken. Why might she lie that she was 16?

This, however, does appear to back her giving the correct information of being 16 years old:
The documentary features Mrs Smyth recalling her first meeting with her future husband on holiday in Norfolk, when she was 16. This is in contrast to the chronology set out in Keith Makin’s review of Smyth’s abuse, which describes the couple meeting when she was in her early twenties in Swanage.

We could go round and round in circles discussing her age, but what I am saying is that mine andIam64's ears did not deceive us. She said 16 years and that he had just finished at Cambridge.

I thought the daughter who died had cancer but according to google she committed suicide???
That's very, very sad, if so.
She was the eldest I think.

It has been asked why does a very, very, lifelong severely abused person lie?

Do we really, really even have to ask that?

So if he was three years older than her and they met when she was 16 and he'd just finished at Cambridge does that mean he graduated at 19?

Just to deal with the rumours about google and the daughter apparently committing suicide, well I asked google since the rumour came from there

"There is no evidence in the search results that John Smyth QC's daughter committed suicide.

The user's query likely stems from news coverage of the John Smyth abuse scandal, which has been widely reported.

The news reports mention that one or more of John Smyth's male victims attempted suicide due to the trauma of the abuse.

I think we should be wary of spreading rumours!

theworriedwell

So if he was three years older than her and they met when she was 16 and he'd just finished at Cambridge does that mean he graduated at 19?

Apparently he received his BA in 1963 which by my reckoning would make him 22 years?

Wikipedia shows him getting his BA when he was 22. Her timeline doesn't seem to add up.

Unless she were actually born in 1948 as is also written in some online reports?
I don't know, or really care too much. I can't get into public records to check. I don't have Ancestry, and anyway there'd be 1000s of Smyths to dig through!
It will remain unresolved here unless anyone can check. Personally I find her untrustworthy, but who knows?

MartavTaurus

Unless she were actually born in 1948 as is also written in some online reports?
I don't know, or really care too much. I can't get into public records to check. I don't have Ancestry, and anyway there'd be 1000s of Smyths to dig through!
It will remain unresolved here unless anyone can check. Personally I find her untrustworthy, but who knows?

Her version doesn't seem very reliable.

She was born in 1944 I believe as she’s one year older than me
It says they met for the first time when she was 16 but that means nothing they could have met briefly gone their own ways and then re met when she was older It doesn’t mean she started seeing him when she was 16
She’s certainly a strange and cold woman when he was stopped in the street for an interview, she was smiling all the time, at one point she laughed a very strange reaction while he seemed only concerned with how they d known where he was.
A cold and detached women linked to a serial abuser not a good mix

According to a Channel 4 interview with PJ Smyth (available on YouTube) AS kept a book of her son's 'misdemeanours' when his father was away, so that they could be 'addressed' by beatings when he got home. On one occasion he had had a school report that criticised him in six subjects, and he was given 36 strokes of the cane - six for each subject. He was a child, and his mother allowed it. Apparently (according to PJ) his mother was 'specially kind' to him after he was beaten, administering first aid and giving him cushions to sit on.

Is that normal behaviour? Not in my world.