Our lives are shattered and now we are to be sued!
By Pippa
Over a year ago, our lives were shattered by the abuse of process by the PSU and their defamatory statements made at the parish church. This announcement was necessary because of the gossip stimulated by the defamatory email sent by Complainant 1 to others in the church with the encouragement to pass it on. They did, and it was posted on Facebook. At this point, Complainant 1 declared himself to be exactly that and did not appear to care who knew it.
In spite of the devastation caused by these actions, we spent 14 months trying every avenue within the Sydney PSU and Diocesan hierarchy to secure justice and reconciliation, but at every point were denied it.
Drew can no longer work in the profession to which he felt called, that he loved and in which he excelled and to which he had committed most of his working life.
The law allows a person to publish their defence and their side of the story when they have been defamed. But, not content with the damage already done to us, Complainant 1 now wants to take us to court for sharing our side of the story!
Surely he must realise that due to his actions we have nothing left for him to take! I almost lost my husband – but we will not let that happen again! He must know about this from reading the articles on this website. How much more damage is he willing to inflict?
And how many lives have been horribly tainted simply because the biblical principles of conflict resolution were not followed. A conversation with Drew or mediation between the two, as we requested, could have resolved this situation. Remember, that although Complainant 1 did not want Drew in ministry any more, the PSU told us that Drew could apply for ministry positions in other denominations or other states, and were surprised when we did not return to our new home and ministry position in Queensland. Now, the PSU directors, who obviously didn’t really know what to do with the complaint, the diocesan hierarchy who are trying to deal with the bungled process, and hundreds of people at the parish church have all been seriously affected by this situation.
First the PSU told us that Drew should make an apology to Complainant 1: Drew, hounded, bullied and broken by the bewildering accusations and by being told he had no defence to them, wrote an extravagant apology. The director had said being innocent and without malevolent intentions was irrelevant. Complainant 1 received a completely unqualified apology at the bidding of the PSU on his behalf, and he rejected it! Then the PSU told us that “conciliation is not possible in these cases”. They meant in cases of child sex abuse. This is not a case of child sex abuse. Once again, another form of misrepresentation by the PSU.
We cannot understand Complainant 1’s actions. He objects to so many things about the articles on this website, according to his lawyer. If you look at Louise’s post ‘Shooting the Messenger’, you will find out how he denies that he has failed to follow the process set down by Jesus (as reported in Matthew 18) in dealing with his complaint against Drew. This is repeated in his lawyer’s letter to us. Louise quotes in her post the actual verses that Complainant 1 has failed to follow. But as Louise indicates we have the text message; it exists; a number of people have seen it.
We have never denied Complainant 1 the right to speak directly to us. Yet in his original text message, he twice stated that he wanted no contact with us. Then the PSU also issued a directive not to contact him. Complainant 1 failed to contact Drew prior to approaching the PSU and he failed to contact Drew prior to approaching a lawyer. Why will this young man not simply contact us? He is 27 years of age and a committed follower of Jesus.
Complainant 1 also objects to having doubts cast on his victimhood: but as Louise has pointed out to his lawyer, this all depends on the findings of the Disciplinary Tribunal that this is a case of child sex abuse. If it is not, and there are good reasons to suppose that the Tribunal will find that a very difficult conclusion to justify in the light of the evidence, then he will not be a victim.
He objects to the implication that he has been misled by the PSU in bringing the complaint: his lawyer says this denies his ability to read the Discipline Ordinance 2006 and make up his own mind. We were trying to protect him from any suggestion of bearing direct responsibility for the shattering of our lives, thinking that he must have been talked into it. Right at the start, he did say to a mutual friend that he didn’t want to hurt Drew. We thought he may have been misled by the PSU as we were. Now he admits that it was all his own unaided idea!
He claims he is defamed, but what about the emails and the Facebook postings that followed, as the email recipients carried out his request for them to spread his defamatory story to everyone they could think of? And yet he denies this by his lawyer, but we have seen the email as have others. Copies have been kept. They exist.
In the next posting you will be able to read in more detail why we came to the point of taking to the internet to publish our story out of desperation because it had been so ruthlessly repressed, and Drew (and me by association) had been defamed at every turn.
We are certainly saddened by this young man’s latest attack on us. These actions of his as an adult bear no resemblance to what we expected of the 16-year-old who, in 2002, was so keen to go into youth ministry and was given the opportunity to be a paid assistant so he could gain experience; who was carefully mentored so that anything that would have been a stumbling block for him to realise his goal of serving God in this way, was renounced and healed; who was trained in the demands of youth ministry and nurtured in his ambition. Where, even, is the young man who, on his wedding day in late 2009 greeted us warmly, who stood at the front of the church with his bride as Drew prayed for them and their happiness together in Christ Jesus?
We do not recognise him in the adult whose actions we are now witnessing. He was an invaluable asset to both the youth ministry and our family. We appreciated him so much and admired his abilities that complemented Drew’s so well. They made a formidable team. What happened?
In spite of the great pain we feel every day, we continue to offer the hand of reconciliation. Sadly, at this point, the Tribunal is now the only way to achieve our goal to have Drew’s name cleared AND to shed more light on the mishandling of the case by the PSU. So we must press on.
We do this with the loving kindness and practical assistance of many friends and supporters and the over-arching love of God and His protection for our young family of four children.