The case against the parole board centers on allegations of sexual assault against Michael Glennon, a convicted paedophile, that were never tried in criminal proceedings. The plaintiff, a man in his 50s, claims he was sexually assaulted and raped by Glennon when he was an adolescent attending a youth camp run by the priest. Glennon was on parole for a previous child sex conviction at the time of the alleged abuse, and the man claims that the negligence of the parole board and Glennon’s parole officer allowed him access to children even though senior figures in the Melbourne Archdiocese knew of his offending against children.
Glennon, an ordained priest and self-styled karate teacher, came to the man’s tent in the middle of the night in 1979, sexually assaulted him, and then raped him in the bushland. The man claims he suffered life-long mental health disorders and substance abuse as a result of the abuse. Glennon had served 12 months of a two-year jail term for previous child sex offenses, and it was known that he planned to continue working with children upon his release, yet no measures were taken to prevent this by the parole board or the parole officer, both of whom were accused of negligence.
The Adult Parole Board in 1979, chaired by Justice John Starke, who was known for handing down the death sentence against Ronald Ryan, considered 2,362 cases that year and released 568 on parole. Despite the involvement of Glennon’s parole officer with the youth foundation where Glennon intended to continue working with children, no action was taken to restrict his access to children after his release from jail. The plaintiff claims that both the parole board and the parole officer were negligent in allowing Glennon to access children, leading to his abuse and subsequent lifelong struggles with mental health and substance abuse.
The case is scheduled for mediation in October and trial in December, with the plaintiff seeking justice for the abuse he suffered at the hands of Glennon while under parole for previous child sex offenses. The case raises questions about the responsibility of the parole board and the parole officer in ensuring the safety of the community, especially when it comes to convicted offenders with a history of sexual offenses against children. The involvement of senior figures in the Melbourne Archdiocese who knew of Glennon’s offending against children but took no action to prevent him from working with children after his release from jail adds another layer of complexity to the case.
