Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Roy Catchpole's Reputation Remains In Prison.

Roy catchpole

Senior Patron
Verified
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
281
Reaction score
199
Status
Other
Acquitted and Vindicated - but my Reputation is Still in Prison.

I have posted this on 'Public' in my Facebook page.

I want to express my gratitude to my supporters for their kind words about my Innocence Issue and the ongoing struggle to clear my name of the implication by the Church of England and Methodist Church’s Safeguarding Industry, who are firmly supported by the bishops, that despite the courts having no evidence against me, the allegations of abuse having been the product of a deluded mind, these unproven and entirely discredited allegations are still depriving me of the rights, social and professional status, privileges and positions of my former condition.

My wife is being treated by both of these powerful institutions – the Methodist Church and the Established Church - as if she were Captain Dreyfus’s wife, and had been summoned to a press conference given by the French Army, which had there admitted that it had condemned her husband on paltry evidence after an incompetent and prejudiced court martial, and that the case against him could not stand – but that nevertheless he would have to remain indefinitely imprisoned on Devil’s Island because the Commanders in Chief still feel there was a ‘cloud’ over his name. This is the effect of the current Safeguarding Industry’s demands.
And I am saying, as Captain Dreyfus himself declared,

“The (government) court has given me back my freedom. But it is nothing for me without my honour.”

The Reputation of Roy Catchpole is still on Devil’s Island.
No formal action has been taken to reverse the Stalinoid process by which my name was removed from the College of Clergy List in Sherborne Abbey’s entrance lobby, and from the Diocesan Directories, all service sheets and numerous committees and group leaderships, being banned from attending my church’s Bible Studies and pastoral support groups, excluded from attending and voting at my church’s parochial committees and annual general meetings, dismissal from my trusteeship of the Sherborne Food Bank, which I alone founded, and more painful and unjust than any of these grave dishonours, my Permission to Officiate as a clergyman being withdrawn along with the spiritual and temporal appurtenances associated with that role and still not restored, and my standing in these institutions being reduced to nothing; the very memory of my ecclesiastical existence being almost totally blotted out – rather like that of the innocent Bishop George Bell - three years after my complete exoneration by the courts - by the Church of England and Methodist Church aficionados.

And yet, in the global picture, these are in a way small matters that concern only me and my close family

- in themselves -

But the restoration of all of these things now becomes hugely important as a sign that the presumption of innocence once more prevails in this land...


Yet neither my name nor my permission to practice in my vocation have been restored. All the bodies involved mumble that they are willing to consider the matter, but only on condition that I agree to undergo a ‘Third Trial’ – this time an ecclesiastical one – under the guise of a ‘Risk Assessment’.
Apart from the total absurdity of this suggestion – considering that I have in fact done nothing wrong - neither I nor my wife, both now being elderly and ill, would neither physically nor emotionally survive the extreme stresses involved in the trial process – which brought me to suffering such a catastrophic breakdown of my immune system that led to the development of pneumonia and sepsis, and most recently to an incurable Multiple Myeloma Cancer, plus bringing me to the verge of suicide and my wife to despair.

But in any case, what is there to discuss?

An injustice has been done. The UK courts – that is, the government of this land - have declared not only that I am not guilty of the charges brought against me to the high standard of the legal system’s requirements, but that in fact my accuser had made a series of deluded, lying, and false allegations, so that the prosecution had to admit that it had no evidence to bring against me. Further, that those same courts have apologised for a wrongful prosecution, and, in token recognition of all of these facts have actually provided a small amount of compensation.

What more can I say?

Imagine if, after the Appeal Court had ruled that (say) the convictions of the Birmingham Six or Guildford Four or Maguire Seven could not stand, the governors of the prisons involved said,
“OK We will consider the matter and have a Risk Assessment and Safety Agreement for the seventeen applicants. After which we will decide whether we might or might not release them at some stage depending on what we feel about it.”


What would be your response to that?

Nevertheless, these prelates and their functionaries in the safeguarding industry unceasingly proclaim their concern for complainants (in my case, ‘false accuser and fantasist’), “…an elderly woman deserving courtesy and consideration…”, as Archbishop Welby said of the woman who alleged an unproven claim against the innocent Bishop George Bell – although at the time of writing my false accuser is deceased. But while my false accuser ‘complainant’ was always until her death anonymous, (and by my compassionate choice continues to be so), I and my family have had to endure this – and continue to do so - in the blazing light of total publicity.

I would like to know whether the bishops – through their new power-holders, the Safeguarding Teams, to whom they seem to have ceded most of their recruitment powers, still think of my false accuser as a ‘survivor’ and a ‘victim’, and me as a ‘perpetrator’.

I would like to know how they talk about me and brief against me in their covert consultations when I write to them asking about my standing in the organisation. Do they consider me guilty, despite the ruling of the court? And if not, what is their justification for demanding a new trial, an ecclesiastical inquisition?
I am willing to submit to the temptation to quote the somewhat cynical but wise words of my friend Jonathan King (real name Kenneth), himself falsely accused and imprisoned for an offence he did not commit, as follows: -

“Long ago Mary was a nice person, too, but someone said something about her and she was forced into the local pond.
Unfortunately, she could not swim. Many could not, in those dark days.
So she sank and drowned.
Which sadly proved she was innocent.
Everyone in the village was very upset. How dreadful.
But, really, there wasn’t much they could do, was there?
Where oh where is Matthew Hopkins (the Butchering Religious Witchfinder) when you need him?
Probably making highly rated TV shows about dead celebrities, that’s where.”


Regarding my treatment by the two Church Institutions, and the unjust and unwarranted continued deprivation of my rights, name, standing and powers in these churches, I would remind them in the words of Peter Hitchens that,

"Even the Soviet Union eventually rehabilitated those whom it had unjustly condemned in unfair show trials (whose memories, names and pictures were removed from buildings, streets, photographs, encyclopaedias and so forth). The Church of England and Methodist Churches are surely judged by (and should regulate themselves by) a higher standard than an atheist secret police state."
 

Roy catchpole

Senior Patron
Verified
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
281
Reaction score
199
Status
Other
It goes without saying that when a combatant enters into a conflict there will be casualties. It's part of the deal. Part of the deal also is that after each battle you go to the battlefield and carry or drag your injured comrades to the safety of hopefully healing hands. What organisations do you know, apart from Isis, that retreat from the field of war and move on, leaving their broken and injured to die in agony of their wounds? Worse still, what organisation do you know who publicly proclaims that it has an impeccable morality, but in fact ignores the men and women dying at its gates?
 
Top