Father Tom Knowles admitted to having a sexual relationship. Credit:Newcastle Herald Ms Herrick will not be at the service. She lives in another state and finds the idea of being there traumatic. The public apology is the culmination of a seven-year battle Ms Herrick has waged against the Catholic Church to obtain redress for an ordeal that began when she was a vulnerable young woman with a disability in Sydney. Knowles, who was later to become the Australian head of his order, was working there as a priest. Ms Herrick's story was first told publicly in early 2013 when Fairfax Media revealed how the church had first stood down, and then reinstated Knowles despite evidence he had sexually preyed upon Ms Herrick for 14 years. It encapsulates a critical question to arise from abuse scandals involving religious institutions: how should the church and the state make amends? Ms Herrick and another victim, former Melbourne schoolboy Marcus Lindsay, have decided to tell their stories to highlight the ongoing struggle and uncertainty that some victims face.

Jennifer Herrick (pictured on right) who was 22 years old when she was a victim of abuse by priest Tom Knowles (pictured at front). This photo was taken at a housewarming with relatives around 1981 when Jennifer was 27 or 28. Credit:Tamara Dean Ms Herrick was a shy 19-year-old with bilateral congenital hip dysplasia – a condition causing her to walk with a highly abnormal gait – when Knowles, who was her family's priest, cultivated a relationship with her at his church, Our Lady of Dolours, in Chatswood, Sydney. Subsequent psychological reports assert she was being groomed. When she turned 22, Ms Herrick allowed Father Knowles, who as a Catholic priest had taken a vow of celibacy, to have sex with her during a 14-year period. The sex was often hurried, aggressive and sometimes painful. And she told no one about it. Jennifer in 1973 at age 20, during the 'grooming period'. Credit:Tamara Dean In a report, Ms Herrick's psychologist, Ana Grant, said the priest's conduct had caused her patient serious post-traumatic stress disorder and fell "within the criteria for clergy-perpetrated sexual abuse".

The apology in St Francis in Melbourne's CBD on Sunday, along with a confidential payout, was offered recently to Herrick to settle court action she launched against Knowles and three senior members of his Catholic order in mid-2013. The church initially sought to block her case by using the controversial "Ellis defence" – a legal precedent that means the church is not liable for the conduct of a priest. The church also argued that Ms Herrick's case lacked merit, as she had previously accepted a confidential settlement as part of the Towards Healing process, an internal complaint handling system run by the Catholic Church. But Ms Herrick insists she was under "extreme duress" when she initially signed a settlement with the church in late 2011. As with many of the cases reviewed by the Royal Commission, Ms Herrick says that the settlement was on terms dictated by the church, rather than those of the victim. She says it did not acknowledge the tremendous impact of Knowles' conduct on her life, a claim reinforced by the decision of the church to allow Knowles to return to work as a priest in 2013. That decision was over-ruled by Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart when the Sunday Age ran a front page photo of Knowles delivering mass. Ms Herrick's story ran alongside that picture.

Last year, as Herrick battled on in the NSW Supreme Court, Knowles was quietly "laicised" – defrocked – though Ms Herrick only discovered this by accident. That decision has not been made public until today. Ms Herrick says she agreed to settle her court action in return for a public apology in church and further compensation. "It was the church's attitude - and their refusal to accept that I was abused - that prompted me to fight. I decided they needed to be accountable. They just wanted to give me some money and for me to go away," she says now. Ms Herrick believes there may be many vulnerable women who have been abused by priests but who have never come forward. "I also took the case forward on behalf of those women," she says. MARCUS LINDSAY has his own story of fighting for justice.

Over 15 years, he tracked down a paedophile Anglican priest who in 2001 police insisted was dead. He has identified fellow victims to help bring a successful prosecution against the man, former father William Richard Dowel. This year, Lindsay testified before the Royal Commission into Institutional Sex Abuse. And yet he fights on. Mr Lindsay, who was one of at least three boys repeatedly abused by Dowel while he was reverend at St Philip's Heidelberg West in the 1970s, wants an apology from the Anglican Church's Melbourne Archdiocese and compensation. But he has been frustrated by the church's internal complaint process. Having found it bewildering and bureaucratic, he feels further traumatised by having to deal with an institution he believes is responsible for failing to protect him. "They design their words and methods to defeat people like me," says the 52 year old.



Mr Lindsay says he first approached the church for an apology in 2009. His lawyer, Viv Waller, says his experience is typical and shows why the system of redress needs an overhaul.

"He has had a poor experience in dealing with the Anglicans on his own, including lengthy delay. It's important to level up the playing field with legal representation," Dr Waller said. The Royal Commission into child abuse has exposed numerous religious organisations seeking to shirk responsibility and liability, as well as cover-ups to protect clergy. In response, the federal government recently proposed a national redress scheme for child victims of sexual abuse, with compensation capped at $150,000. Details of how the scheme will operate remain sketchy, and some lawyers say the cap will be far too low in some cases. Some states, including Victoria, are wary about committing without further detail. Ms Herrick would not benefit from a redress scheme for child abuse, because she was over 18 when Knowles began a sexual relationship with her. Nevertheless, her story powerfully underlines the merit of a truly independent scheme that provides a clearly defined path for victims to seek compensation and genuine acknowledgement of their suffering.

Mr Lindsay, however, could claim compensation and seek an apology via the scheme in a process that is not controlled by the church. However, he would forgo his chance of receiving higher compensation through the courts, itself an uncertain and lengthy process. Lawyers such as Dr Waller are pushing for reforms to make it easier for victims to sue if they can prove negligence. "The proposed national redress scheme may be of assistance to Mr Linsday and others in his situation. It will still be critically important for survivors to receive independent legal advice. There may be a viable claim for compensation that might exceed the cap of $150,000," said Dr Waller, pointing to a recent Victorian court decision ordering more than $1 million in compensation to a woman abused by her principal in a religious school.



Churches seem, at long last, to be heeding the need for change.



Both the Catholic Church and the Anglican Church's Melbourne Archdiocese have released public statements this month detailing their efforts to inject more independence into the way they handle victims' cases. Both are creating "independent" companies, directed by senior legal figures to play a greater role in how they respond to abuse cases. Anglican Church chancellor Michael Shand, QC, noted the reforms were about recognising that "survivors may wish to have nothing to do with the particular church" which hosted their abuser. "This proposed company will stand apart and will seek to provide a redress in a holistic way, one that will seek to look after the well-being of a survivor and not simply write out a cheque".

The Melbourne Anglican and Catholic archdioceses have also announced they are increasing the amount of compensation to be paid to victims to $150,000, following the federal government's indication of what is a reasonable compensation payment. A spokesman for the Anglican Melbournce diocese said the church "reiterates its sorrow and distress for any abuse and remains willing to provide financial redress and counselling and other support". But the true test of any future redress schemes will lie in the experience of the victims and their sense that they don't have to fight for justice. "I'm 52 now and but I have only now just started living," says Mr Lindsay of the impact of his abuse several decades ago. "I am speaking out to improve the process. And I want victims to know that you can overcome abuse."