Malone Rejects Diary-Change Allegations

By Ian Kirkwood
Newcastle Herald
July 15, 2013

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1638522/malone-rejects-diary-change-allegations/?cs=305

BISHOP MICHAEL MALONE

BISHOP Michael Malone has disputed suggestions that he altered his personal diary to back up an assertion that he warned the principal of a Catholic school at Branxton about allegations of child sexual abuse against eventually convicted paedophile Jim Fletcher.

In a tense passage of cross-examination before lunch on Monday, Bishop Malone was questioned by counsel for Will Callinan, a principal in the Catholic school system.

Bishop Malone’s evidence is that at the time he gave Fletcher a second parish – against the advice of police officer Peter Fox, who wanted Fletcher stood down – he warned Mr Callinan about a need to keep Fletcher away from the children at his school.

Mr Callinan has not given evidence yet but the commission has heard more than once that he disputes the bishop’s account of events.

Mr Callinan’s counsel, Wllliam Potter, put it to Bishop Malone that he could not have met Mr Callinan on the day he said he did because Mr Callinan was at another school in the area that he was responsible for.

Bishop Malone said he had a clear recollection of the June 20, 2002,  meeting.

Mr Callinan’s counsel then took Bishop Malone to his personal diary of that year, which Commissioner Margaret Cunneen could later be seen holding as she oversaw proceedings.

Mr Potter said that in a September 2003 interview with the NSW Ombudsman’s Office, Bishop Malone said his diary may be able to support his recollection of meeting Mr Callinan.

Mr Potter said Bishop Malone faxed a copy of his diary page the next day to the ombudsman.

He said the page, which has been tendered as evidence, said ‘‘trip to Branxton to see Jim Fletcher’’.

The words ‘‘plus Will C’’ were written in brackets after this.

Bishop Malone said he wrote the note the day of his trip to Branxton but Mr Potter put it to him that the reference to Mr Callinan was written after his interview with the ombudsman.

Bishop Malone disputed this.

Mr Callinan said it was written in a different pen to the ‘‘Fletcher’’ part of the sentence, to which Bishop Malone said he was ‘‘not a calligrapher’’ and ‘‘couldn’t really see it’’.

‘‘To me it all looks the same,’’ Bishop Malone said.

Mr Potter also took Bishop Malone to a telephone call he made to Mr Callinan on March 19, 2003.

Bishop Malone agreed he spoke to Mr Callinan on that day but disputed some aspects of the conversation according to Mr Callinan.

He denied an assertion from Mr Potter that he had rung him to intimidate him.

‘‘Certainly I wouldn’t have done that,’’ Bishop Malone said.

The hearings continue.