No one report I have seen so far in the Italian media presents the second day of the Gabriele hearing in a comprehensive and orderly way. I have chosen this one as the most worthwhile translating, because it comes closest to covering all the important points that emerged today, so I shall merely have to add details the reporter missed from the other reports...
Gabriele now claims inhuman
treatment during his detention
by Andrea Gagliarducci
Translated from
Oct. 2, 2012
Paolo Gabriele does not think he is guilty of aggravated theft, but rather of having betrayed the trust of Benedict XVI.
At the same time, however, the line of defense that appears to be emerging is that of claiming a conspiracy against him.
He denied ever having taken the gold nugget found in his residence during a police search in May, nor ever having taken a check for 100,000 euro made out to the Pope by a Spanish university for his charities, although the check was among the papers confiscated from his home. All he would say was that "as my disorder degenerated" [a phrase he had used in the investigating magistrate's interrogations in June], it was possible that he took the objects.
But he also claimed 'inhuman' treatment while he was in detention, claiming that for 20 days, he was held in a cell so small he could not even open his arms apart.
[Then he must have slept standing up - because if you can't even open your arms wide, how much room would there be for you to lie down unless you curled up real tight in fetal position?]
Moreover, he said, there was no light switch, so the lights were on all the time to the point that, he claimed, his vision has suffered.
The presiding judge ordered the prosecutor to open a case file to determine the truth about the allegations. And to which Vatican police immediately released a detailed statement about the conditions observed during Gabriele's detention, pointing out that space and other basic requirements all met international standards for individual detention cells. If Gabriele's charges are found to be baseless, Vatican Police reserve the right to charge him for false testimony.
The second day of Gabriele's hearing, he was the only one to take the stand without having to swear on the Bible.
[WHY????] The other witnesses who took the stand were Giuseppe Pesci, a Vatican policeman; Cristina Cernetti, a Memor Domini lay nun who is one of the Pope's four housekeepers [she also does some secretarial work in the Pope's study]; Mons. Georg Gaenswein, the Pope's private secretary; and two other Vatican policeman, Gianluca Gauzzi Broccoletti and Costanzo Alessandrini.
Only Alessandrini had not previously testified during the investigative phase. He was one of five Vatican policemen called to testify by Gabriele's defense lawyer, Cristina Arru. The other 4 will be heard when the hearing resumes tomorrow, Wednesday.
There will be no hearing on Thursday, when the Pope is making a pilgrimage to Loreto. Friday and Saturday, the prosecutor and the defense lawyer will make their concluding statements, followed by a verdict from the three-man tribunal.
It will be a short trial, if only because Gabriele was caught
in flagrante, with all the documents he copied from the Pope's study, as well as some originals, found among 82 boxes of documents taken from his house on the evening of May 23.
[More important, he also freely confessed to the theft in the statements he made during the investigative phase, obviously adapting a different strategy now to depict himself as victim rather than criminal. As for the allegations of maltreatment while he was in detention, his lawyers [both Arru and Gabriele's boyhood friend Cesare Fusco who withdrew from the case after the trial date was announced] never once claimed 'inhuman treatment' in the statements they made before the trial, so it is quite dishonest of Arru to suddenly have her client allege that he was abused.
Gabriele also said that, yes, he "knew that sooner or later he would have to pay for the consequences of his actions", and that when he understood that the circle was closing in on him, he thought at first of confessing to his spiritual father (whose name he refused to say, probably because there were newsmen at the hearing, calling him only 'Padre Giovanni').
He did not speak to the Pope about it, even if he had the chance to do so. But he said he decided to confide in four persons - Cardinal Angelo Comastri, Arch-Priest of St. Peter's Basllica; Cardinal Paolo Sardi, for whom he had worked early in his 'career' at the Vatican; Mons. Cavina, Bishop of Carpi since January but who had been an official at the Secretariat of State before then; and Prof. Ingrid Stampa, the Pope's housekeeper when he was a cardinal, who happens to live in the same apartment building as Gabriele.
[When did he 'confide' in them, and what exactly did he confide? After the May 21 meeting when he 'icily' denied that he had anything to with the leaks? And if the confidence was made not as a confession, were the three prelates not duty bound to report the 'confidence' to the police?]
He spoke with pride about his previous work at the Secretariat of State, where he said 'everyone approached him with favors to ask' so that he was forced to go to work in a car to avoid people from approaching him.
[Excuse me! I thought his earlier employment at SecState was as a janitor - which I am not demeaning - but it seems to me the reporter has conflated Gabriele's previous employment at SecState with the routine he claims he followed when he was the Pope's valet.]
But there were contradictions. He said he never took out original documents and that he started gathering them only in 2010, but Mons. Gaenswein would later testify that when he was called by the Vatican police to look at the documents they had confiscated from Gabriele's house, not only did he see "some originals" but that they dated back to the period between 2006-2009.
[Which means he started pilfering documents as soon as he was appointed the Pope's valet on the retirement of Angelo Gugel in 2006.]
The confiscated documents, which included voluminous material that Gabriele downloaded from the Internet about Freemasonry, secret services and intelligence, also showed an obsession with the Vatican police, leading perhaps to his accusation today of having been abused by them during his detention.
The Vatican police immediately issued a statement detailing all the provisions that were made for Gabriele during his detention, including 39 specifics about how they sought to make the detention easier for the inmate.
Another confusing point about Gabriele's new testimony. While both Sardi and Stampa were mentioned in a July 15 article by German journalist Paul Badde naming them as two of the three 'masterminds' behind Gabriele's actions
[the third one was Mons. Josef Clemens, secretary of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, who had been Cardinal Ratzinger's private secretary for 19 years], Gabriele's lawyer, on the first day of trial, had specifically requested the exclusion of the article as evidence of anything. [Another media report said that about the seven names Gabriele gave as persons he spoke with who may have made 'suggestive' remarks to him, he also said his contacts with them had nothing to do with the crime he is accused of.]
Many inconclusive statements therefore, which bring to mind the expert opinion of one of two court-appointed psychiatrists who ruled that Gabriele could not be prosecutable on grounds of mental insanity.
And yet, Gabriele showed he was always aware of what he was doing. He said he made the copies on the office copier in the papal secretaries' room in the presence of other staff, during regular office hours when he was in the room, where he had his own desk with a PC, on which he carried out small tasks assigned to him by Gaenswein (such as registering the gifts sent to the Holy Father and then bringing them to the store room, or preparing pro-forma responses to unimportant correspondence].
Later, when Mons. Gaenswein said that he had always trusted Gabriele "and never once thought he could be capable of betrayal", Gabriele's mouth widened into a smile.
[Too bad the writer did not describe what kind of a smile it was. Was it, perhaps, "Hah! Fooled you, didn't I?"]
Cristina Cernetti said "It was farthest from my imagination that he would be copying private documents", but she said that when, on May 21, Gaenswein assembled the members of the pontifical family to ask each one pointblank whether they had anything to do with Vatileaks, she had already concluded, reasoning from a process of exclusion, that only Gabriele could have done it.
The police who testified about the search and confiscation in Gabriele's home said they did not use gloves during the search, but that their actions were watched at all times by Gabriele, his wife and children.
A strange thing: During the day, despite all the restrictions to keep the pool reporters from making individual reports ahead of anyone, Gianluigi Nuzzi, Gabriele's major 'client', was tweeting information about the ongoing hearing about which he could have no direct knowledge since he is not in the pool (and is not even accredited to the Vatican).
The more I read of Gabriele's statements, the more I am convinced that he is a megalomaniac with messianic delusions. He truly believes that the Pope is too limited as to be able to see and understand things, whereas he, Gabriele, sees and understands everything so much better, so he must be the person to save and redeem the Pope, and with him, the Church. He alone is destined to be the deliverer, 'infiltrated by the Holy Spirit' for the purpose. [It seems the same Holy Spirit who inspires and directs the election of a Pope would then leave the elected Pope on his own, unworthy to be 'infiltrated', because the work of redeeming the Church should fall on Mr. Paolo Gabriele, the new Messiah.]
Monomaniacs like Gabriele are the most frightening of people, because it is impossible to reason with a driving obsession, or to divest someone, who believes himself destined for a singular mission, of his grand delusions. Absolute evil can take many guises, including that of a man in a gray suit basking in his 15 minutes of fame and completely unmindful of all the unnecessary havoc he is causing to the Church he claims to be saving!
Needless to say, even more disgusting and pathetic than Gabriele's messianic pretensions, is the way the media, who will never let an occasion slip by in order to diss the Church, are buying mindlessly into Gabriele's act with a straight face. Consider this reaction from the Irish Times correspondent to the Vatican, quoted by an ABC News report:
One of them [pool reporters present at the court today], veteran Vatican reporter Paddy Agnew of the Irish Times, told ABC News that Gabriele was calm and dignified.
For Agnew there were two critical points that surfaced:
"He points out that -- as the butler -- he is the closest lay person to him. And as example, serving him at the table, he exchanges words and has a chat, and he came to the conclusion that, from those exchanges that the Pope is not as informed as he should be, he does not know things that he should know... about things in the world, in the Vatican, in the church," Agnew said. "We are not talking about football results, we are talking about serious matters of church affairs and state affairs.
[That is just appalling - that a veteran newsman, who certainly knows Benedict XVI is no ignoramus, would quote the words of a valet as though it were Gospel truth. Can he not imagine that one could hardly 'discuss' Church affairs or world affairs, or even a single simple event, when you are ladling out the Pope's soup, even if you had to serve him again for each of the next three or four courses??? Let alone conclude from the pleasantries of table talk that the Pope 'is not as informed as he should be'???
How would the conversation go? Gabrieie: "One ladle or two, Holy Father? And by the way, did you notice what Prime Minister Monti said last night about the economy?" Would anyone in his right mind, being served one's meal, dignify that rude presumptuousness with a serious answer as if one was really going to pursue the conversation? Because by then, Gabriele ought to be going to the next person to be served, and not let his edifying information and opinion get in the way of the Pope's meal! Or maybe, the Pope might just say absently, "No. What exactly did he say?" So, ergo, QED - Gabriele says to himself, "My God! He doesn't even know!"
Besides, if you were the valet, and knew your place, would you tell the Pope while serving him his pasta, "By the way, Holy Father, did you know that Mons. So and So in Such-and-Such a place is said to be embezzling the funds of the diocese?" That's just rude and out of place! What's he really trying to do? Rate the Pope's knowledge of current affairs like a quiz-show participant? Surely, as much as Benedict XVI genuinely has filial affection for his 'pontifical family', he would never use a family meal to discuss serious business. It is not the time and place. He is not holding a cabinet meeting or seeking advice on matters that are his competence alone, not that of his valet or his housekeepers.
It is more likely that he keeps the mealtime chat to small talk that allows interpersonal interaction: "How was the moview you saw last night?" or "Did you enjoy the football game last night?" or "Were you able to talk to your mother?" I doubt he would even refer to the work load of the two secretaries because that would be bringing the office to the dinner table. Gabriele is so beclouded in his self-built cuckoo realm that he does not even realize the sheer improbability of having a serious discussion with anyone under the circumstances? ... Yet someone like Agnew quotes him as if he were Cardinal Richelieu! And does not realize how preposterously silly he is, doing so!]
"The other thing he said... is -- he speaks of the degradation of the church, the degrade, or the dissatisfaction amongst people in the curia, he comes to the conclusion that a person of power, a person of huge decisional power is very open to manipulation," Agnew said. "He doesn't say that the pope is very open to manipulation, but one presumes that is who he is referring to." [Agnew, where are your neurons and synapses? Why exactly would the dissatisfaction of the Curia - someone is always dissatisfied with something somewhere - leave the Pope open to manipulation? Clearly non sequitur!]
It adds up to portrait of a Pope who is not in control of his own church. [Nitwit! It adds up only to the ravings of a messianic moron whom people like you would much rather 'elevate' to being 'the sage of the Vatican', at the very least (or 'putative savior of the Church') if it will help you humiliate the Pope. Bring out the palm and olive branches, and Hosanna to Gabriele! Gee, remind me again why ever did the College of Cardinals elect Joseph Ratzinger in 2005! One would think from Agnew's awe at Gabriele that if they had only known there was such a human wonder as Paolo Gabriele, the cardinals would have elected the first lay Pope in Church history!]
Benedict, now age 85, is clearly frail. [Frail is physical. If he lives to be 150, his mind will still be far more brilliant than any of you, or all of you put together! In fact, all the journalists in the world together could never be equal to one hair in his head.] He returned just Monday from a three-month summer break at his hillside residence outside Rome.
UGGHHHH..... YECHHHHH.... AND GRRRR....
The CNS story, which is based on information given by the pool reporters, is a bit more organized than the Italian accounts, but it falls into the same trap of bandying about the word 'corruption' in the Vatican against the objective fact that there has not been one specific case of corruption brought to light - not in Nuzzi's book, not in any news reports, much less from any bit of journalistic investigation into Vigano's charges, to begin with, or any other that a newsman might independently uncover! The last such revelation of apparent corruption was in 2006-2007 about supposed cozy 'favored and exclusive' dealings between the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples and some Italian government officials and contractors, when the Congregation was under Cardinal Cresencio Sepe in the previous Pontificate. About which Italian media had endless stories, without ever proving that Sepe himself or any of his subordinates was 'corrupt'...
And by the way, this CNS story was headlined 'Papal butler says he's innocent etc' - but quite apart from the fact that Gabriele was never the butler, simply the valet ['aiutante di camara di Sua Santita' - chamber aide of His Holiness - as the Vatican indictment described him, not 'maggiordomo'!] - he is no longer papal anything. But why do the newsmen continue to designate him as if he were still in the Pope's service? Even in little details, the herd mentality [which is really mindless!] among the Vatican reporters is so absurdly obvious.
Gabriele says he's innocent of theft
but guilty of betraying pope
by Cindy Wooden and Carol Glatz
VATICAN CITY, Oct. 2 (CNS) -- Paolo Gabriele,
the papal butler [The Pope's former valet!] charged with stealing and leaking papal correspondence, said he was innocent of charges of aggravated theft, but "I feel guilty for having betrayed the trust the Holy Father placed in me."
"I loved him like a son," Gabriele said of the Pope during the second day of his trial.
[He 'loved' him then, not now?]
The morning session of the trial Oct. 2 also featured brief testimony by Cristina Cernetti, one of the consecrated laywomen who work in the papal apartment; and longer testimony by Msgr. Georg Ganswein, Pope Benedict XVI's personal secretary.
Msgr. Ganswein, who described himself as "extremely precise," said he never noticed any documents missing, but when he examined what Vatican police had confiscated from Gabriele's Vatican apartment, he discovered both photocopies and originals of documents going back to 2006, when Gabriele began working in the papal apartment.
[The fact that Nuzzi chose not to use any of the material before 2009 - or was not given the material by Gabriele - goes to show that perhaps there was nothing particuarly titillating, much less scandalous, about the older documents.]
Taking the stand first, Gabriele said widespread concern about what was happening in the Vatican led him to collect photocopies of private papal correspondence and, eventually, to leak it to a journalist.
"I was looking for a person with whom I could vent about a situation that had become insupportable for many in the Vatican," he testified Oct. 2.
Gabriele told the court that no one encouraged him to steal and leak the documents.
Although he said he acted on his own initiative, Gabriele told the court he did so after "sharing confidences" about the "general atmosphere" in the Vatican with four people in particular: retired Cardinal Paolo Sardi, a former official in the Vatican Secretariat of State; Cardinal Angelo Comastri, archpriest of St. Peter's Basilica; Ingrid Stampa, a longtime assistant to Pope Benedict XVI, going back to his time as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger; and Bishop Francesco Cavina of Carpi, who worked in the secretariat of state until 2011.
[OK, the timeline suggested by this story is different and a bit more precise than the vague context suggested in the Korazym story above. I must check out the various versions about this detail and compare them. Every reporter appears to haev a different take.]
Gabriele said that although he had set aside some documents previously, he began collecting them seriously in 2010 after Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, then secretary-general of Vatican City State, was reported to have run into resistance in his attempt to bring spending under control and bring transparency to the process of granting work contracts to outside companies. The archbishop is now nuncio, or ambassador, to the United States.
Asked to describe his role in the papal household, Gabriele said he served Pope Benedict his meals, informed the Vatican Secretariat of State of the gifts given to the pope, packed the pope's suitcases and accompanied him on trips, and did other "small tasks" assigned to him by Msgr. Ganswein.
"I was the layman closest to the Holy Father, there to respond to his immediate needs," Gabriele said.
Being so close to the Pope, Gabriele said he became aware of how "easy it is to manipulate the one who holds decision-making power in his hands." [Yeah right! Benedict XVI is nothing more than putty at the hands of all and sundry who could easily manipulate him. Who did that, exactly, and how? Even Cardinal Bertone's most egregious apparently power-grabbing moves were all vetoed by the Pope!]
Gabriele had told investigators that he had acted out of concern for the Pope, who he believed was not being fully informed about
the corruption and careerism in the Vatican. [WAbout careerism, surely Joseph Ratzinger who spent almost a quarter-century in the Curia is the last man one has to inform about this! But what corruption, specifically? Certainly, none emerged in any of the documents he pilfered that Nuzzi used. Where were the headlines about such cases, if there had been any? None - except blanket use of the word 'corruption', as though just mentioning it was enough proof it existed. And with not one iota of initiative among Vatican journalists to find out any such specific cases. Probably because there isn't any - financial hanky-panky is not always necessarily corruption, it could be sheer incompetence or mismanagement. I'm not saying there are no cases of corruption at all, just that no one has actually reported one single specific case. Under questioning by his lawyer, he said
he never showed any of the documents to the Pope, but tried -- conversationally -- to bring some concerns to the Pope's attention.
[What documents, exactly? None of the published documents goes to show corruption at all, not even Vigano's letters, and believe me, if he had known of any genuine corruption case, he would have shouted it to the rooftops - and the media would have exploited any such story to high heavens, and repeated it endlessly, even now during the reporting of the trial - not limited himself to the almost ridiculous example of the alleged Christmas manger overpricing! But no, all anyone can point to is Vigano's general accusation not supported by any data. If, in his letter to Bertone, Vigano could go to the details of the supposed personal shady dealings of the persons he perceived to be his enemies - dealings which had nothing to do with the Vatican - surely he could have provided concrete facts about the 'corruption' in the Vatican that he alleges, if he had any such facts at all. If he really wanted to fight this 'corruption', was it not the opportunity to divulge cases that could then be investigated by the press, if not by the Vatican itself? Why don't the newsmen covering the Vatican not see this obvious contradiction at all? Because they don't want to - it's enough for them that someone like Vigano cries 'Corruption!' without demanding he back up his claim, or uncover the facts themselves.
The Vatican prosecutor objected to any further questioning about Gabriele's motives, saying they "don't matter, we must discuss the facts." The judges agreed and ordered the defendant's lawyer to move on.
Gabriele's lawyer also asked him several questions about the 60 days he spent in Vatican detention, including whether or not it was true that he first was held in a tiny room and that, for the first 15-20 days, the Vatican police left the lights on 24 hours a day. Gabriele said both were true.
Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, later told reporters that Judge Nicola Picardi, the Vatican prosecutor, had opened an investigation into the conditions under which Gabriele was detained.
Vatican investigators had said they found in Gabriele's Vatican apartment three items given to Pope Benedict as gifts: a check for 100,000 euros ($123,000); a nugget -- presumably of gold -- from the director of a gold mining company in Peru; and a 16th-century edition of a translation of the Aeneid.
Gabriele denied the nugget was ever in his apartment, and he said he had no idea how the check got there. As for the book, he said it was normal for him to take home books given to the Pope to show his children.
"I didn't know its value," and, in fact, he carried it around in a plastic bag, he said.
Msgr. Ganswein testified that he only began suspecting Gabriele in mid-May after a journalist published documents Msgr. Ganswein knew had never left the office he shared with Gabriele.
When Msgr. Ganswein entered the courtroom and when he left again, Gabriele stood. He did not do so for the other witnesses.
The trial formally opened Sept. 29 and Vatican judges decided to separate Gabriele's trial on charges of aggravated theft from the trial of Claudio Sciarpelletti, a computer expert in the Vatican Secretariat of State, charged with aiding and abetting Gabriele.
Gabriele was arrested in May after Vatican police found papal correspondence and other items in his Vatican apartment; many of the documents dealt with allegations of corruption, abuse of power and a lack of financial transparency at the Vatican.
The former papal valet -- who is 46, married and has three children -- faces up to four years of jail time, which he would serve in an Italian prison.
Aqua called my attention to Robert Moynihan's account of Day 2 as one of the pool reporters present, in his newsletter (sorry I don't have a link). In his usual pfrolix way, he presents no significant details, however, other than what has been reported, but he does tailor his account in order to underscore his apparent belief that, for all the talk of transparency, the Vatican will not allow this investigation to go beyond a certain point. I find that attitude almost malicious, going far beyond journalistic cynicism.
And just to wrap up coverage of this frankly tedious story for Day 2, here's a translation of the Vatican Gendarmerie's statement regarding Paolo Gabriele's detention:
Vatican Police refute
Gabrieles allegations
Regarding the statements made by the accused Paolo Gabriele in response to his lawyer's questions about his detention, let it be stated that Paolo Gabriele, after his arrest, was held in an isolation cell at the headquarters of the Vatican Gendarmerie.
This isolation cell is in accordance with stanrds followed in other countries for analogous situations.
Although the headquarters contains another cell for long-term detnetion, it was at the time in need of renovation which had afready been scheduled. Under the circumstances, and at the urging of the Prosecutor, the work was accelerated, including modifications following the requirements of the Convention against Torture, to which the Holy See is a signatory. [It must be noted that obviously, the long-term detention cell has not been in use at the Vatican.]
During his detention, the detainee, under existing standards,
- ate his meals everyday along with the policemen guarding his cell; = was given his time out in the open, along with moments of relaxation and socialization with his guards, with whom he developed friendship;
- he could use the gym used by the gendarmes themselves (though he refused the offer);
= he was the object of regular medical visits by a doctor designated for the purpose by the Vatican department of health services, during which he told the doctor that he was sleeping well and tranquilly,and that he had even managed to resolve some nervous problems;
- he had constant contacts, especially in the first days, with spiritual assistants;
- he attended Masses with his family;
- he availed of the privilege authorized by judicial authorities of having unlimited conversations with his family members and with his attorneys;
- all this with maximum respect of his person.
Many times, the accused asked to meet with the Commandant to seek words of comfort. Indeed, because of pre-existing links between Gabriele and some members of the Vatican police, Gabriele was granted many instances of special attention so that he might undergo his detention in the most serene way possible.
Regarding the light that was kept on 24 hours a day, this was a measure taken to avoid potential acts of self-injury by the accused and for security purposes. Eventually, he himself requested to keep the lights on all the time because he said it represented 'company' for him.
Moreover, from the start, he was given a sleep mask that would enable him to completely blot out the light. He was always provided with a mattress and clean bed linen that was changed regularly.
Without ever disturbing him, he was discreetly surveilled during the night hours, and he could count, for any necessity, on immediate assistance through a telephone in his cell that was connected to the Oepraitons Room.
The prisoner's rights, even regarding his intimacy, were never violated.
He was moved to the renovated long-term detention cell after 20 days.
Following the statements he made during the proceedings in court this morning, the prosecutor opened Case No. 53/12 to investigate the truth or falsity of the charges made by Gabriele. If the investigation should show that they are groundless, the Vatican Gendarmerie in its turn could file a counter-accusation [for false testimony].
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 03/10/2012 09:55]