AN inquiry into a university professor who sexually abused his students and got away with it for more than a decade has been condemned by one of his victims.
Kevin O’Gorman was last year convicted of sexually assaulting seven men at Strathclyde and Heriot-Watt universities between 2006 and 2017.
Strathclyde University launched an inquiry into his time at the Glasgow institution after it came to light that he faced disciplinary proceedings in 2012 but agreed on a compromise, allowing him to leave with a £40,000 payout.
He also received a reference, allowing him to go on to take up a post at Heriot-Watt.
A report on the inquiry, carried out by Craig Sandison QC, was published on Tuesday and found that Strathclyde officials were not aware of the full scope of O’Gorman’s behaviour, so could not be criticised for failing to tell the police.
Mr Sandison also found that there was no evidence to suggest that the decision allowing O’Gorman to leave was intended to “draw a veil” over the investigation.
However, Fraser Blevins, a survivor who has waived his right to anonymity, said: “In my opinion the report downplayed the horrendous things O’Gorman did and used dismissive language.
“They also accused some victims of being more helpful than others – well it’s hard for victims to confront their abuse or their abuser so to be attacked like this is a disgrace."
“It was also finished later than promised and then published in secret. I imagine they failed to notify the victims because they knew it was not going to be well received."
O’Gorman, 47, of Milngavie, Dunbartonshire, was reported to police in 2017 while he was working at Heriot-Watt.
At Edinburgh Sheriff Court last year, he was convicted of sexually assaulting seven men and sentenced to community service.
The court heard that two of his victims were beaten, others endured sexual touching and most were pressured over social media to take part in punishment rituals.
O’Gorman’s lawyers argued that the lecturer had been the victim of a “witch- hunt” motivated by “professional jealousy”, however Mr Sandison said this was false.
Kim Leslie, an abuse lawyer at Digby Brown Solicitors who represents several survivors attacked by O’Gorman, said: “We acknowledge the report’s findings but despite its apparent thoroughness there are aspects about the process that have understandably caused upset among those affected.
“Just like criminal trials, these kind of institutional inquiries are landmark events that can play a huge part in a survivor’s healing process so the university’s failure to at least notify victims of their intent to publish is disappointing.
“Equally disappointing is the framing of the report which downplays the scope and severity of the sexual attacks O’Gorman was convicted of last year.
“We will continue to pursue the numerous legal actions already under way to ensure our clients secure the damages and recognition they deserve.”
Sir Jim McDonald, principal of Strathclyde University, said he would implement the inquiry’s recommendations, which included enhancing procedures to safeguard members of the university community and reduce risks, particularly for those most vulnerable to predatory behaviour.
He said: “ Sexual misconduct has no place in higher education, and the safety and wellbeing of our University community is the responsibility of each and every one of us. I would remind colleagues that we actively encourage the reporting of any incidence of inappropriate behaviour so that it can be investigated, challenged as necessary and appropriate support given to those affected.
"This independent report is an important part of this on-going process and I am confident that not only Strathclyde, but our sector at large will benefit from the Inquiry."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here