The whole world is watching

From George Weigel at First Things: The Pell Affair: Australia is now on trial. He begins:

Has it occurred to anyone else debating the perverse verdict rendered against Cardinal George Pell, which convicted him of “historic sexual abuse,” that the cardinal did not have to return to his native Australia to face trial? As a member of the College of Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church and a Vatican official, Pell holds a Vatican diplomatic passport and citizenship of Vatican City State. Were he guilty, he could have stayed put in the extraterritorial safety of the Vatican enclave, untouchable by the Australian authorities. But because Cardinal Pell knows he is innocent, he was determined to go home to defend his honor—and, in a broader sense, to defend his decades of work rebuilding the Catholic Church in Australia, the living parts of which owe a great deal to his leadership and courage.

This entry was posted in Australian Story, Ethics and morality. Bookmark the permalink.

148 Responses to The whole world is watching

  1. Nob

    Unlike the real creeps, he left the court with face uncovered.

  2. stackja

    ‘Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.’

  3. NB

    ‘Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.’
    They do.

  4. stackja

    NB – They think they know.

  5. Lysander

    Have spoken with a friend in Rome this eve who is a lapsed Catholic (for two decades) and believes in Lazio more than God. He asked me if the media here were reporting the absolute trashing the “justice” system in Australia is getting on secular media outlets in Rome but also elsewhere in Europe.

    He said he knows Australia was a laid back country where people like beers but was the whole country drunk. It made no sense to him at all. Rich, coming from an Italian who has lived through Berlusconi Mark I, II and III.

    But I couldn’t help think he had a point.

  6. The BigBlueCat

    I think this is a significant point made by Weigel – Pell’s return to Australia might not be the actions of a man risking incarceration, but rather someone who believes he could be successful in defending against the charges. Pell might be guilty, but equally might not. If he’s guilty in his own mind, it takes some bravado to face up to a trial like this one.

    I remain “on the fence” since I don’t have the benefit of being in the courtroom listening to the evidence. There has been much commentary from those with friends in the legal profession (barristers) who are amazed that Pell could be found guilty on the evidence given. Pell could be guilty, but does the evidence support a guilty verdict?

    I mean, on one side you have just the accuser and few or no corroborating witnesses or evidence to support his accusation, while on the other side evidence suggesting it couldn’t happen because of the nature of the robe, being accompanied by others, unlikely to have been in the room unsupervised, great risk of being caught, being directly after a Catholic mass (who is going to be randy after that?), no-one saw the choirboys leave their cohort, one of the alleged victims denying anything happened to his mother, not red wine in that period of time, unlikely to be any wine left after the mass, no prior behaviour consistent with how other priests groomed their victims and created opportunity for their offending, etc, etc.

    The jury was asked to believe that Pell attacked the choirboys purely opportunistically, at high risk, with no witness to the event other than the accuser, with Pell in a garment that would make the alleged attack extraordinarily difficult if not impossible, and without direct knowledge of people there to oversee and escort Pell’s activities on the day. Plus we have Pell’s strenuous denials during recorded police interviews, no prior record or pattern of such behaviour (only further accusations not strong enough to make a legal case, but not admissible as evidence here) and now the knowledge that he appears in Australia purely voluntarily and without coercion (he didn’t have to be here). I would like to understand how the jury arrived at their decision – I may never know.

    But then, the case was decided by a jury who determined that Pell’s guilt is beyond a reasonable doubt. They have had to discard all of the defence’s arguments as less-than-reasonable and accept the testimony of the victim more than 20 years after the alleged event. But I repeat, I wasn’t in the courtroom listening to the evidence and the general conduct of the trial. Let’s see if the appeal reverses the decision, or if a retrial is ordered.

  7. stackja

    Lawyer X to be unmasked this afternoon.
    Vic Police ‘finest hour’.
    How many convictions will be overturned?

  8. The BigBlueCat

    Let’s see if the appeal reverses the decision, or if a retrial is ordered.

    I should have added … Or if he is remains convicted of the crimes he is charged with.

  9. stackja

    We are asked to believe a jury exposed to years of MSM attacks on Pell didn’t influence them?

  10. stackja

    How many who ‘investigated’ Pell also ‘worked’ with Lawyer X?

  11. None

    The video of his first interview where he was finally told of the charges after one yet has been released. Pell is incredulous and angry. “In the sacristry after mass?” The interviewing detective who later laid charges sounds like he is 10. Blood oath I hope the Rome papers are absolutely trashing the Australian judicial system. Even the mafioso have a code of honour and know a stitch up when they see one.

  12. stackja

    None – Again the Lindy case comes to mind. So much implausible ‘evidence’.

  13. struth

    What a shit hole.
    What an absolute shit hole.

    Ned Kelly was right.
    The Irish Catholics have always been hated in this country by the political elites.

  14. Hugh

    Here’s another aspect. The Mass was either his first Sunday as Archbishop in the Cathedral (which had just been reopened after renovation) or his second. Let’s imagine it was the former. At his first Sunday Mass in the Cathedral as Archbishop, he doesn’t stop to talk to congregation members on the steps outside the West Door, but walks back to the sacristy, finds the two boys, rapes them over at least six minutes with the sacristy door open, then, still in his vestments, walks back to chat with congregants at the West door, as was his wont every other Sunday after that. “Hey, it’s my first Sunday Cathedral Mass as Archbishop of Melbourne … I think I’ll go rape a couple of choir boys for a few minutes.”

    … and no-one of Cathedral staff or ministers or altar boys or choir boys saw any aspect all this? Now that’s what I call a bloody miracle.

  15. Clearly the jury were judging a different matter other than the evidence before them.

    Pell was the representative of all Catholic abuse and the sole witness represented all the victims. They chose the victims side.

    Hugh makes very good points above. Simply unbelievable scenario.

  16. Jonesy

    …why the hell did QC Richter come out with a bombshell statment yesterday. He is appologising and backpedaling like crazy…but…for a guy whoes armoury is words…the damage has well and truely been done. Describing this case as a pure vanilla sexual penetration case…he may as well tell Pell to plead guilty.

  17. Win

    Cardinel Pell like Lindy Chamberlain will have a strong spiritual strength to help him and thanks to him and Tommy Robinson we may yet break this pernicious link between a Marxist MSM and the politico legal professionals blatantly using corrupted cops to target individuals.

  18. Neil

    Describing this case as a pure vanilla sexual penetration case…he may as well tell Pell to plead guilty.

    Apparently it is not an admission of guilt. I read somewhere that the defense has to go along with the courts findings. Pells lawyers cannot say the court was wrong or something like that

  19. Nighthawk the Elder

    stackja
    #2946999, posted on March 1, 2019 at 1:56 am
    How many who ‘investigated’ Pell also ‘worked’ with Lawyer X?

    I tried posting similar questions in the comments in the MSM and they would not get past moderation.

    We could treat it as a question a-la Tanya P (One does have to ask what role Lawyer X had in all this), but in reality it’s no joke and severely taints the whole justice system.

    I smell a future Royal Commission, but not until the liars party are back on the opposite benches.

  20. Behind Enemy Lines

    Irrespective of the merits (or not) of the allegations, this has been a years-long trial by media in collusion with the police. It’s a witch hunt, plain and simple. And remember the first principle of a witch hunt: the witch gets destroyed, regardless of any facts.

    Australia’s had a problem for quite some time with witch hunts. I don’t see it getting any better. But answer me this: in the day of the official witch hunt, what options remain for the person who’s been targeted as the next witch?

    Our masters don’t seem to have given that much thought.

  21. Mother Lode

    The whole world is watching

    Good.

    They get away with so much because no one outside Australia really pays much attention.

    Fatty Ashton finding out, while pleasuring himself in his house by rubbing his member against a cheese grater, that the world is judging him, and the rest of Australia judging him for that, should give him some stabbing pains in his chest.

    The venal and perfidious politicians he sought to ingratiate himself with over decades will turn on him in a heartbeat once they realise they could be seen as complicit (which, of course, they actually are).

  22. Cassie of Sydney

    “Neil
    #2947046, posted on March 1, 2019 at 7:16 am
    Describing this case as a pure vanilla sexual penetration case…he may as well tell Pell to plead guilty.

    Apparently it is not an admission of guilt. I read somewhere that the defense has to go along with the courts findings. Pells lawyers cannot say the court was wrong or something like that”

    That’s right, I had to explain this to a friend last night that Pell’s lawyers, headed by Richter, had to go on the verdict.

  23. egg_

    The whole world is watching

    The Victoriastan witch trials?

  24. People forget, this is Cardinal Pell’s life here.

    Richter has to do what he can regarding sentencing to present a case for a lowest possible sentence, and as such appear to be accepting the guilty verdict.

    We all hope and pray it gets reversed on appeal.

    But if it doesn’t then it to may well be a death sentence.

  25. a happy little debunker

    I wasn’t in the courtroom listening to the evidence

    Neither were the Jury – they watched a video of the complainant giving his lastest version of events, that excluded any cross examination.

  26. a happy little debunker

    Again the Lindy case comes to mind

    Stackja, the chamberlain case was cast as either you believe ‘the dingo did it’ OR you must convict.
    It wasn’t so much that she was proven guilty, but that the Jury didn’t believe the dingo could have done it.

    It was a perversion of justice and to this day people still think she must have done it.

  27. Nob

    Chamberlain was unknown to the public before Azaria’s death.

    Pell has been relentlessly vilified for twenty-five years, and social media has amplified that x1000 in the last ten.

    Everybody was saying Pell was “vile” in lockstep on social media – on zero evidence.

    It’s spooky, and would be even if he was or is a real criminal.

  28. Peter O'Brien

    In 1996 Cardinal Pell was a public figure, a mature man in his mid fifties. This was a time when priestly abuse had gained such public awareness that Pell, himself, set up the Melbourne Response. If, at that stage of his life, Pell were so cavalier in his offending, so lacking in self control, as to perpetrate an assault on the spur of the moment in a very public place and at the same time coping with the impediment of his vestments, wouldn’t you think his past (when presumably his libido would have been in full swing) would be littered with abuse incidents considerably more serious and credible than that he exposed himself or touched up some boys in a swimming pool? Or maybe he suffers from late onset paedophilia?

  29. Jonesy

    No! Richter’s job is to minimise the damage of a sentence by subtly reminding the judge of the evidence presented, the manner of its presentation and precident cases involving similar verdicts…he doesnt refer to the procedings as trivial. He must honour the verdict of the jury. To say what he did, trivialises any attempt at getting an acquittal.

  30. stackja

    a happy little debunker
    #2947100, posted on March 1, 2019 at 8:35 am
    Again the Lindy case comes to mind

    Stackja, the chamberlain case was cast as either you believe ‘the dingo did it’ OR you must convict.
    It wasn’t so much that she was proven guilty, but that the Jury didn’t believe the dingo could have done it.

    It was a perversion of justice and to this day people still think she must have done it.

    People believed dingoes were cute and could not kill a baby. While Lindy was a ‘religious fanatic’. Oh, the gullibility of some!
    Meanwhile:

    Dingoes are a protected species in the Northern Territory (NT).

    And

    French boy, mother bitten by dingoes on Fraser Island
    Brisbane Times-1 hour ago
    A nine-year-old French boy has been bitten on the face, arms and legs while his mother received leg injuries as they were attacked by a pack of …

    Cute again:

    The survival of the Fraser Island dingoes relies on three management factors—education, engineering and enforcement. Fraser Island dingoes are part of the island ecology, and are protected by law.

  31. stackja

    The dishonourable jury got it wrong.

  32. Viva

    This Australian travesty gives a whole new meaning to the term “Kangaroo Court”.

  33. Viva

    This is where the “you must believe the victim” mantra has got us in this country. The same hysteria gripped Britain after Jimmy Seville died.

  34. candy

    Lindy Chamberlain was Seventh Day. Yes, people were very suspicious of minor religions then.
    I believe that was a really big issue, plus her cooler seeming nature, both of which had nothing to do with evidence. Because there was no evidence she killed her baby – none.

    Catholics are now the hated ones, presumed guilty, and there’s no evidence in this case. Simply none, just the word of someone from a long time ago, the public has never seen, never went to Court, and no-one knows anything about, after years and years of media abuse of Pell and Catholics in general.
    Secret trials. Get Pell finally came to fruition.

  35. Pete of Freo

    The Shorten sexual assault accusers should take heart at this decision and go after him in a Victorian court, perhaps the Victorian police could now go after Gillard and Co for fraud and perjury given that there is some actual evidence to test.

  36. It seems odd that not even two jurors out of 12 were not able to find reasonable doubt in a case so lacking in evidence and with many witnesses to say to totally improbable as described by witness.

  37. dover_beach

    Here’s another aspect. The Mass was either his first Sunday as Archbishop in the Cathedral (which had just been reopened after renovation) or his second. Let’s imagine it was the former. At his first Sunday Mass in the Cathedral as Archbishop, he doesn’t stop to talk to congregation members on the steps outside the West Door, but walks back to the sacristy, finds the two boys, rapes them over at least six minutes with the sacristy door open, then, still in his vestments, walks back to chat with congregants at the West door, as was his wont every other Sunday after that. “Hey, it’s my first Sunday Cathedral Mass as Archbishop of Melbourne … I think I’ll go rape a couple of choir boys for a few minutes.”

    I believe this was presented as a working draft for the beginning of Brides of Christ, but was rejected as being too fanciful even for the ABC.

  38. dover_beach

    He asked me if the media here were reporting the absolute trashing the “justice” system in Australia is getting on secular media outlets in Rome but also elsewhere in Europe.

    It is all very strange that our sycophantic media, that usually falls over itself to tell us what this or that will mean to our international reputation, is ignoring the almost universal disbelief and derision that this verdict is being met with overseas. Could you imagine what further contempt they would feel if they viewed the reception by our local media to this verdict?

  39. a happy little debunker

    Fraser Island dingoes are part of the island ecology, and are protected by law

    The species was introduced to Australia (by environmental vandals, nee terrorists) within the last 3000 years.

    They are not native to Australia, like the Cane toad, the Rabbit, the Deer, the Camel and the Brumbies, and should be eradicated to preserve our ‘unique’ environmental balance.

    But – don’t expect Di-Nutella or his pack of eco-worriers to give ever damn about these pests.

    ( Did I win the Oxford Comma competition today?)

  40. stackja

    candy – Catholics have always faced persecution. Just not so openly.

  41. Iampeter

    Has it occurred to anyone else debating the perverse verdict rendered against Cardinal George Pell, which convicted him of “historic sexual abuse,” that the cardinal did not have to return to his native Australia to face trial?

    Yes, but what hasn’t occured to the author of this, typifying today’s disintegrated “thinking,” is that Cardinals are not going to be very rational or intelligent people. Possibly Pell wouldn’t have had even the animal cunning of others, to stay in Rome.

    A possible reason his defense didn’t let him take the stand, because all his past statements would’ve been a disaster to re-air, plus who knows what else he would’ve said to make things even worse.
    In short, he may have simpy never fully understood what’s actually going on.

  42. hzhousewife

    Managed to point out to a “Get Peller” this morning that the paedo crowd must be pretty pleased with themselves, shutting down one of the priests who was actually doing something good for abuse victims. I said I hoped he wasn’t one of them (inferring paedo supporter). He went a bit quiet. Didn’t bring up the matter of Vatican money, I’ll save that one up for another time.

  43. candy

    Possibly Pell wouldn’t have had even the animal cunning of others, to stay in Rome.

    I think Iampeter, that when worst comes to worst, everyone has “animal cunning” to survive. It’s innate.

    He chose to clear his name the proper way. He may not have completely understood the hatred of Catholics in Australia though. If he converted to Islam or climate change religion the verdict could well have been different.

  44. Iampeter

    The jury was asked to believe that Pell attacked the choirboys purely opportunistically, at high risk, with no witness to the event other than the accuser,

    Which is why this should’ve been an open and shut case for Pell, but his defense didn’t produce a single witness to say they were with him the entire time.
    Not his master of ceremonies, not any of his aides, etc.

  45. Iampeter

    I think Iampeter, that when worst comes to worst, everyone has “animal cunning” to survive. It’s innate.

    Tell that to suicide bombers.

    If he converted to Islam or climate change religion the verdict could well have been different.

    In which case, I can assume no one here would be crying about mischarriage of justice or some such.
    Funny that.

  46. dover_beach

    Which is why this should’ve been an open and shut case for Pell, but his defense didn’t produce a single witness to say they were with him the entire time.
    Not his master of ceremonies, not any of his aides, etc.

    Yes, they did, IamMengele. It was part of their exculpatory evidence. Brennan: The prosecution case was that Pell at his first or second solemn Sunday Mass as archbishop decided for some unknown reason to abandon the procession and his liturgical assistants and hasten from the Cathedral entrance to the sacristy unaccompanied by his Master of Ceremonies Monsignor Charles Portelli while the liturgical procession was still concluding. Portelli and the long time sacristan Max Potter described how the archbishop would be invariably accompanied after a solemn Mass with procession until one of them had assisted the archbishop to divest in the sacristy.
    No, shoo you know-nothing.

  47. Pyrmonter

    @ candy (and the others fostering RC victimhood)

    The chorister was, presumably, at 13 Roman Catholic as a scholarship-holder at an RC school and member of the choir. An alto (one of two leads – hence the defence suggestion that his absence from the choir would have been noted), so his voice had presumably not broken.

    He gave evidence, albeit at the first trial. Evidence you won’t ever hear in full, because while evidence is still given on oath or affirmation and subject to cross examination (and Richter is supposed to be very good at that) our criminal justice system no longer requires complainants to undergo the humiliation of recounting their evidence in open court.

    We can infer that that jury was persuaded of the truthfulness of the complainant’s evidence; it’s devlishly difficult to be convinced they got it wrong without reviewing that evidence. The CCA will; but in the meantime, we’re left with the fact that a jury – the embodiment of the populace’s commonsense – has been perusaded beyond reasonable doubt that Pell committed the acts of which he’s accused.

  48. Makka

    George Pell: This saga has a long way to go yet

    While Cardinal George Pell is under lock and key, awaiting sentencing for guilty verdicts on five serious child sexual abuse charges, ongoing unease in some quarters about the soundness of those verdicts makes them worthy of scrutiny.

    Only two options present themselves — first, that Pell is a sacrilegious hypocrite, with the agility of Houdini; or second, that an alarming miscarriage of justice has played out at the hands of the Victorian justice system. There can be no middle ground. The saga now shifts to the Victorian Court of Appeal.

    The guilty verdict was delivered in December by a unanimous jury, in a properly constituted court, after an earlier jury was dismissed on September 20 because it split 10-2 in Pell’s favour. Hence the second trial, in which many people, whether they like or loathe Pell and all he stands for, believe went badly wrong.

    If so, the jury were not the only ones to get it wrong, nor the most culpable. Hard questions need to be asked about police and judicial processes, including how and why certain allegations ever made it to court, let alone to trial.

    During the first trial, observers in the gallery claimed: “Even if he didn’t do it he deserves to be punished. He was in charge of the whole show’’. How much did such sentiments influence the verdicts, if at all? Australian justice cannot sink so low.

    Studied closely, the five convictions of child sexual abuse are grotesque, implausible and break the bounds of credulity. In religious terms, they would be grave sacrileges.

    Four offences purportedly took place over a six minute period in the sacristy (robing room) of the cathedral in late 1996, against two 13 year-old boys, immediately after the Sunday Solemn Mass. The fifth supposedly took place at around the same time of day, also on a Sunday Mass, in the cathedral corridors about a month later, against one boy.

    The logistics were incredible. When Pell became archbishop of Melbourne in August 1996, St Patrick’s was closed for renovations, leaving only two dates on which he celebrated Sunday Mass at the Cathedral — December 15 and December 22nd. Yet the charges, initially at least, related to incidents in 1996, allegedly “a month apart”.

    Pell’s counsel, Robert Richter QC raised the issue of timing at the opening of the second trial, noting that the police investigation failed to establish proper dates and that after the defence did so, the prosecution changed the date of the fifth alleged offence to February the following year.

    Throughout the ordeal, not a single witness backed the accuser, a man now in his mid-30s who also, sources close to the cardinal claim, reported another Melbourne priest for abuse. One senior legal figure, with no connections to the case, told Pell he had never heard of such a trial proceeding without a single witness.

    Because the renovations were incomplete by the end of 1996, Pell did not use the relatively private Archbishop’s sacristy. He was in the busy priests’ sacristy, with priests, altar servers and others coming and going.

    It is extremely unfortunate, some of Pell’s friends believe, that the two juries hearing the case were taken around the cathedral on a quiet weekday when it is usually all but deserted, rather than having the chance to see its hustle and bustle on Sunday mornings.

    Four witnesses, appearing for the prosecution, testified that Pell was never alone in the sacristy, the door of which was open. The witnesses were Monsignor Charles Portelli, who was the Archbishop’s Master of Ceremonies and the former Cathedral sacristan Max Potter and two former servers.

    In May last year, during the Committal hearing, Magistrate Belinda Wallington, who sent the Cardinal to trial over the Cathedral charges noted that “If a jury accepted the evidence of Monsignor Portelli and Mr Potter that the archbishop was never in the sacristy robed and alone, and that choirboys could never access the sacristy keys because they were always locked when unused, then a jury could not convict.’’

    The fifth charge was even more bizarre. It claimed that more a month after the initial incident, again after Mass as the liturgical procession was returning to the sacristy area, Pell lurched across to the complainant and briefly grabbed the complainant’s genitals through the complainant’s robes. Not a single witness corroborated that allegation, either, although such behaviour would have been seen by dozens of people and provoked uproar.

    According to the evidence, Pell was fully vested when he committed the crimes of which he was found guilty. Over his trousers and shirt, he wore an alb — a long, straight white garment, extending from shoulder to the floor, with no openings and no splits at the front or sides that would have allowed the garment to be moved aside, as alleged. Over the alb, Pell wore a cincture — a thick cord tied several times around his waist, and over that a heavy chasuble (the outer robe). Those garments, worn by every priest at Mass, have spiritual significance. The choir boys were also vested in robes over their shirts and trousers.

    The timing was odd for another reason. The scandal of clerical abuse was a major issue in the news in late 1996 in Melbourne after the inglorious legacy of Pell’s predecessor, Archbishop Frank Little. Pell had launched the Melbourne Response in October 1996, a system to deal with the problem led by an independent QC and the first of its kind for the Catholic Church in the world. In that atmosphere, the notion of Pell committing grotesque offences in a semipublic place with an open door (a point not disputed by the prosecution) at a busy time defies logic.

    During the committal hearing, Ms Wallington dismissed even more grotesque charges against Pell, dating back decades before 1996 to provincial Victoria. As Richter said in his summing up in the Committal hearing, one charge that was subsequently dismissed owed “more to the watching of Satanist movies’’.

    It was extreme, violent and satanic, lending weight to the view that Pell has been the victim of a vile stitch up. If so, it needs to be uncovered. In the committal hearing, Richter said had the police made proper investigations (as the defence did) they would have discovered no evidence that Pell was ever at the institution where the alleged Satanic incident occurred.

    Questions also need to be asked about why Victoria Police, set up a “get Pell’’ Operation Tethering in March 2013 — a year before he was appointed Vatican Treasurer. At the time the operation started no complaints had been made against the Cardinal.

    However grim things look for Pell today, this saga has a long way to unravel yet.

    Tess Livingstone’s biography of George Pell was published in 2002. She was asked for and provided a character reference for his trial that was not tendered.

    – Oz.

  49. Roger

    …in the meantime, we’re left with the fact that a jury – the embodiment of the populace’s commonsense – has been perusaded beyond reasonable doubt that Pell committed the acts of which he’s accused.

    Juries can get it wrong.

    From the evidence that’s been reported, this one has.

    Why? How could they give more credence to the witness’s uncorroborated and unlikely story over the credible evidence presented defending Pell’s innocence? I’m sure more will come out after the appeal.

    In the meantime, it seems there was, in fact, little common sense present in the jury room.

  50. Harriet

    The victims of sexual abuse usually are so screwed up for life that they turn to drugs or alcohol or take their own lives. This is what has saved the clergy up until now. But the prosecution found just one young man who held it together – university degree, career, relationship, supportive family and ego intact. It just takes one courageous person to speak out and the power of his statement and the strength of his character was enough to convince the jury. Bravo to this brave nameless victim who has changed everything for so many!

  51. stackja

    Roger
    #2947186, posted on March 1, 2019 at 10:21 am

    The jury members before the trial had never read or heard anything about Pell? The jury weighed the arguments of both the defence and prosecution? Probably neither. Hopefully the appeal process will be more impartial.

  52. Infidel Tiger

    25 witnesses. Not one corroborated the Prosecutions claim.

    Pell has been convicted for the crimes of others.

  53. hzhousewife

    It would be nice to think that some of the 12 Victorian jurors are reading all this and having a deep think about what has come to pass.
    At least Pell has followed his conscience. He had trust in the rule of law, sadly.

  54. max

    We may not know the details of the complainant’s testimony, true.

    What we do know is the substance of his accusation. Given the short six-minute time interval, the open door, the vestments, the age of the accused and his incipient heart problems, the testimony that he was never alone and that altar wine was never left out in the sacristy, we can form our own judgements.

    We don’t need his detailed accusation. It’s a gruesome stitch up.

  55. Iampeter

    No, shoo you know-nothing.

    Dover you are stupid beyond words.
    Their case is not in dispute.
    I’m pointing out, that while claiming how unlikely this entire situation was because of how many witnesses there must’ve been and then failing to produce a single, actual witness, to testify to that, kills their defense.

    Cretin.

  56. Iampeter

    Pyromonter, I think the issue is that a single testimony, regardless how compelling, with no supporting evidence or witness, shouldn’t pass the required legal tests, to find anyone guilty of anything.

    It’s all just he-said/he-said.

  57. dover_beach

    I’m pointing out, that while claiming how unlikely this entire situation was because of how many witnesses there must’ve been and then failing to produce a single, actual witness, to testify to that, kills their defense.

    They did produce the witnesses, 25 witnesses, you witless fool. Now, shoo, IamMengele.

  58. max

    peter, I think you have it the wrong way round.

    25 witnesses were called. Not one supported the complainant’s story.

  59. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Hopefully the appeal process will be more impartial.

    Is any appeal heard in front of a jury, or a judge alone?

  60. HZHousewife:

    It would be nice to think that some of the 12 Victorian jurors are reading all this and having a deep think about what has come to pass.

    Personally, I wouldn’t give you the proverbial snowballs chance in hell of survival if one of the jurors were to speak out publicly of the details of the decision making – no matter what way they wanted to vote.

  61. dover_beach

    It will be three judges, Zulu.

  62. None

    Actually it’s not just he said she said ; it’s also plausibility and credibility.

  63. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    It will be three judges, Zulu.

    Thank you, db.

  64. Infidel Tiger

    It will be three judges, Zulu.

    Three Victorian Judges.

    This is just a horrible situation.

  65. None

    Has anyone who’s managed to get a transcript been able to tell us what the judge instructed the jury because in any other circumstances that judge would have instructed the jury to acquit. Apparently too as reported by those who were in the courtroom at the time even the judge was surprised at the verdict of the second jury so there’s something clearly amiss here

  66. Iampeter

    None of the witnesses cleared Pell by testifying they were with him.
    So the defense, including all their witnesses, testifying to how many witnesses there should be to clear Pell, didn’t produce such a witness. It looks bad.
    Why is this confusing?

  67. Rayvic

    In Wednesday’s Oz, Greg Craven makes the following observations:
    “This is where the Pell case has gone terribly wrong. Impartial judge and jury accepted, parts of the media — notably the ABC and former Fairfax journalists — have spent years attempting to ensure Pell is the most odious figure in Australia. They seemed to want him in the dock as an ogre, not a defendant.

    Worse, elements of Victoria Police, including Chief Commissioner Graham Ashton, co-operated in this. Ashton’s repeated announcements of impending charges and references to “victims” rather than “alleged victims” were matched only by the coincidences in timing between police pronouncements and favoured media exclusives. …

    But the most significant challenge to the court’s attempts for due process was ABC journalist Louise Milligan’s book, Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell, which was rushed into publication last May by Melbourne University Publishing, apparently to get it on the streets before any trial and suppression order could commence.

    Of course, when the suppression order was made, MUP withdrew the book from sale in Victoria. But it remained available in other states, and on the internet.

    So what we have witnessed is a combined effort by much of the media, including the public broadcaster, and elements of Victoria’s law enforcement agency, to blacken the name of someone before he went to trial. And remember, Victoria’s prosecutorial authorities never determined to proceed. They returned the police brief three times, before the police forced the case to go forward.”

  68. None

    Richter’s choice of words was beyond poor and I’m glad he saw fit to apologise about Richter is not the one on trial here and to focus on him is to lose the focus on everything that is wrong with this verdict. On the other hand Richter was right in that even if this verdict was just which I believe it wasn’t being shoved against the wall and having your balls squeeze is probably is offensive as somebody giving you a wedgie full stop on the same day as the sentencing hearing another man was convicted of rape. He got seven years minimum for keeping a Woman trapped in a hotel room for 6 hours and repeatedly raping her while also on a crazed drug Bender at one stage. Her ordeal was so brutal and violent that at one stage she begged to die. I have absolutely zero trust in the Victorian judicial system and I will not be surprised if pill gets given more than 7 years for a wedgie. Remember the Victorian legal system has led convicted rapiss go free to rape and murder while a 77 year old man with a walking stick convicted on the basis of some nutters video testimony is considered a danger to the community. Oh but remember justice Kidd thinks his chances of rehabilitation are excellent. I can’t even write this without being totally outraged at the otter Injustice and absurdity of the Pell conviction.

  69. None

    Richter’s choice of words was beyond poor and I’m glad he saw fit to apologise about Richter is not the one on trial here and to focus on him is to lose the focus on everything that is wrong with this verdict. On the other hand Richter was right in that even if this verdict was just which I believe it wasn’t being shoved against the wall and having your balls squeeze is probably is offensive as somebody giving you a wedgie. It may be distasteful but one needs to retain a sense of perspective.

    On the same day as the sentencing hearing another man was convicted of r_pe. He got seven years minimum for keeping a woman trapped in a hotel room for 6 hours and repeatedly raping her while also on a crazed drug bender at one stage. Her ordeal was so brutal and violent that at one stage she begged to die. I have absolutely zero trust in the Victorian judicial system and I will not be surprised if Pell gets given more than 7 years for a wedgie. Remember the Victorian legal system has let genuine convicted r-pists go free to r-pe and murder while a 77 year old man with a walking stick convicted on the basis of some nutters’s video testimony is considered a danger to the community. Oh but remember justice Kidd thinks his chances of rehabilitation are excellent. I can’t even write this without being totally outraged at the otter injustice and absurdity of the Pell conviction.

  70. Clam Chowdah

    Apologising for the vanilla statement was stupid.

    And most of the commentary on the statement are stupid. The counsel must make an argument for mitigation of sentence on the basis of the actual conviction. People who crap on about this being a personal admission of guilt are retards.

  71. None

    R-chter’s choice of words was beyond poor and I’m glad he saw fit to apologise about R-chter is not the one on trial here and to focus on him is to lose the focus on everything that is wrong with this verdict. On the other hand R-chter was right in that even if this verdict was just which I believe it wasn’t being shoved against the wall and having your b-lls squeezed is probably is offensive as somebody giving you a w3dgie. It may be distasteful but one needs to retain a sense of perspective.

    On the same day as the sentencing hearing another man was convicted of r_pe. He got seven years minimum for keeping a woman trapped in a hotel room for 6 hours and repeatedly r-ping her while also on a crazed drug bender at one stage. Her ordeal was so brutal and violent that at one stage she begged to die. I have absolutely zero trust in the Victorian judicial system and I will not be surprised if Pell gets given more than 7 years for a wedgie. Remember the Victorian legal system has let genuine convicted r-pists go free to r-pe and murder while a 77 year old man with a walking stick convicted on the basis of some nutt3rs’ video testimony is considered a danger to the community. Oh but remember justice Kidd thinks his chances of rehabilitation are excellent. I can’t even write this without being totally outraged at the otter injustice and absurdity of the Pell conviction.

  72. None

    Mulligans book only sold 9000 copies and her swimming pool allegations were tossed out of court. All that effort for nothing ay fatso?

  73. None

    Question for lawyers if the appeal fails ( I do have zero trust in the Victorian judicial system) what is the next step? Is there any other option available or are we going to have to sit there silent with an innocent man in jail?

  74. daggers

    The hysteria will be ramped up again on Monday e evening’s 4 Corners. Trying to boost her book.

  75. max

    1 Timothy 3:

    Qualifications for Overseers and Deacons

    3 Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full[a] respect. 5 (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.

    8 In the same way, deacons[b] are to be worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

    11 In the same way, the women[c] are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

    12 A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13 Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

  76. daggers

    None, that will put the Vatican in an interesting position.

  77. Rusty of Qld

    Question to someone who knows:
    Is a lie detector test accepted in a court?
    Would such a test have any credibility in proving guilt or innocence?

  78. Leo G

    None of the witnesses cleared Pell by testifying they were with him.

    Witnesses attested that no opportunity occurred for the events described by the alleged victim. Moreover, the alleged victim initially attested that the dates for the first two offences were a month apart, then changed that to successive Sundays. The third event was alleged to have been committed at some uncertain date and in full view of many people, but seen by none.

  79. Seco

    I noticed “devout catholic” Christopher Pyne sat on the fence again when asked about Abbott and Howard supporting Pell. Every time his Catholicism puts him in an uncomfortable position he squibs. Gay marriage, Archbishop Wilson and now Pell. It makes you wonder why he bothered putting his daughter through the same sacramental program I put my three girls through last year.

  80. max

    Catholic priest sexual abuse found that unlike in the general population, where most victims of sexual abuse are female, four out of five victims of Catholic priests are male.

  81. Infidel Tiger

    Pyne is as Catholic as he is heterosexual.

  82. Dr Fred Lenin

    To, my mind the Pell case raises very important points for the law trade ,its conduct and excecution was a travesty of the law . it raises many important things .
    Vicpol comes out of it looking diminished in respect ,the team desparately trying to find exidence where none existed
    , having to submit the whole thing to the DPP three times before it was acccepted.
    The DPP in prosecuting this very thin case after refusing it twice , in the trial refusing to expose the only “witness “to the jury for assesment of veracity,doctoring the video they presented to the carefully selected jury,the same one that failed before the first jury ,using hearsay and innuendo in contravention to rules .
    The msm which had him guilty on total hearsay and raved on and on influencing anyone who believed their fake news ,a disgracefull episode of socialist hate .
    Richter for his totally damaging vanilla statement , if a jury member was not convinced that would swing it.
    The legal questions raised are much more important than the case its self .
    The appeal judges are in a spot ,do they defy the baying crowd and squash this on proper legal grounds , or avoid oporbium and msm abuse by upholding the verdict .
    The solicitor general a suppository of the law for the government of fourth rate lawyers .
    The Bar council of Victoria or lawyere union which is charged wih upholding the public image of the law trade , they have already expressed surprise at the verdict , joined by eminent law teachers .
    This could turn out nasty for the government and the lawtrades persons involved if the verdict is reversed Or conversly for the future of law in the state of Victoria if the verdict is up held . Either way a lot of the law trade will be thinking of the points I made and the old saying. “The law must mot only be done ,it must be seen to be done “.o0

  83. Lysander

    Dunno why but this whole saga reminds me of the corruption of the entire British establishment when they convicted the innocent Guildford Bombers. Everyone from the Commissioner of Police to the judge (and rumoured even higher) just needed to convict some scapegoats in the face of immense public pressure. I’m amazed no police officers, judicial members, parliamentary members were ever brought to justice.

  84. max

    April 2002

    Friends,
    The cascade of reports about pedo… in the Roman Catholic priesthood was long overdue, since members of the Roman Catholic clergy have perpetrated and covered-up child mole… for decades, if not centuries. At long last the victims of this outrage, the Roman Catholic laymen and their children, are making reports and filing lawsuits against the church leaders – as well they should. But it is imperative to understand the causes of this widespread outrage.

    First, the Roman Church does not recognize any authority outside itself – not even the Word of God. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church claims that it wrote the Bible, and that it is the sole determiner of its content and meaning. When any institution thus claims to be a law unto itself, accountable to no man, and not even to the Word of God, it will produce untold sins and atrocities. Pedo… is a small portion of the outrageous acts committed by the Roman Church over the centuries.

    Second, since it claims to be the sole legitimate interpreter of Scripture, the Roman Church has disobeyed the clear Biblical requirements for church leaders: that they be married, heterosexual, family men.

    http://www.trinityfoundation.org/horror_show.php?id=17

  85. littledozer

    Is a lie detector test accepted in a court?
    Would such a test have any credibility in proving guilt or innocence?

    No to first Q

    Police use lie detectors to eliminate suspects so that if a suspect passes they concentrate resources on the remaining suspects. If a test had been administered and passed before charges then it would have bearing on bringing charges.

  86. The BigBlueCat

    I am wondering if Iampeter believes that Pell should have been convicted on the evidence presented or if the presumption of innocence (given the conflicting evidence) should have weighed in Pell’s favour.

    It seems that the alleged victim wasn’t cross-examined under oath in the courtroom before the accused, the jury and the judge. So his evidence may not have had the appropriate scrutiny. Pell has 25 witnesses describing procedure, environment, requirements, ceremonial clothing, wine, character, opportunity (or lack thereof), etc. All sworn and subject to cross-examination.

    On first-take, there seems reasonable grounds for an appeal. Time will tell …

  87. George Gell

    That statement:-
    “Were he guilty, he could have stayed put in the extraterritorial safety of the Vatican enclave, untouchable by the Australian authorities”
    is inconsistent with Pell exercising his right of silence— not getting into the witness box.

    He has spent his life “preaching the Gospel” which translates as “telling the truth”.

    His barrister may be the most eminent QC but if he thinks that a Pell had the option of exercising his right to silence in front of an Australian jury after a lifetime of making his living as a preacher of the Gospel— teller of truth” then that QC is a fool.

  88. Viva

    Pell has been convicted for the crimes of others.

    Yes
    Just asked my sister what she thinks of the verdict

    She just launched into a recitation of Pells supposed lack of sympathy for victims and said she doesn’t care if he is a sacrificial lamb

  89. None of the witnesses cleared Pell by testifying they were with him.

    How could they?

    “Witness, the prosecution alleges that on some unidentified Sunday over 20 years ago shortly after 10.30 am Mass, in a period of six minutes, Pell forced the accuser to play the pink oboe on him. Were you with Pell during that six minutes?”

    If any witness had testified “yes”, they’d unquestionably be committing perjury by swearing to something of which they couldn’t possibly be certain. And their credibility would be torn to bits by any basically competent cross-examiner.

    As I understand it, the witnesses testified that the procedure required that Pell be accompanied at all relevant times (though there wasn’t one single person who was required to do all the accompanying every single minute) and that they weren’t aware of any failure to do so.

    I don’t see how the defence can be criticised on that score, nor how a competent jury could draw any inference in favour of the prosecution from that testimony.

  90. He has spent his life “preaching the Gospel” which translates as “telling the truth”.

    You can’t be this stupid surely.

  91. The BigBlueCat
    #2947338, posted on March 1, 2019 at 12:17 pm

    As I understand it, the trial judge refused to permit evidence to be led as to the general credibility of the accuser.

    Given that the accuser’s testimony seems to be the only evidence from which guilt could possibly be inferred, I’d have thought that that refusal should inexorably lead to the conviction being overturned. (Not saying it will, just that it should.)

  92. Infidel Tiger

    She just launched into a recitation of Pells supposed lack of sympathy for victims and said she doesn’t care if he is a sacrificial lamb

    This is the whole vibe of Australia right now.

    It’s going to lead us into some very dark places.

  93. Lysander

    it has been revealed due to an irregularity Pell was never able to enter a “not guilty” plea.

    this is one of three irregularities to be pursued in appeal.

  94. Clam Chowdah

    People are shit.

  95. Linden

    Yes, she is the daughter of a former Supreme Court Judge and former Victorian Governor, it’s not such a huge secret.

  96. Dr Faustus

    The whole world is watching.

    It is.
    But what is watching is a victory lap in the MSM on behalf of those who have been offended by the Catholic Church. The press in the UK, US, Ireland, France and Germany is fairly consistent and uncritical: Schadenfreude and further evidence of institutional failing.

    Outside of some commentators in the Catholic press, there is no interest in the bizarre Victorian police investigation, the improbability of Pell’s apparent high-risk precision-timed offending, the contradictory findings of separate trials on the same evidence, or the difficulty in securing an untainted jury. Most of the limited commentary on the legal issues is dribble.

    The world is certainly not examining the awesome majesty of the Victorian justice system.

  97. Neil

    Richter for his totally damaging vanilla statement , if a jury member was not convinced that would swing it

    It was stated earlier that since the court had made its findings Richter cannot question the courts findings. His statement was not an admission of guilt. It was to get the punishment reduced for the courts sentence

  98. a happy little debunker

    Richter for his totally damaging vanilla statement , if a jury member was not convinced that would swing it.

    The jury rendered it’s verdict long ago, Richter’s comment was made 2 days ago during the sentencing phase.
    But, the ‘vanilla’ comment was carefully edited & presented by the MSM so as to exclude Richter’s phrasing of the comment in relation to the severity of the now convicted crimes.

    It was done to reinforce & convince members of the public as to the guilt of Pell – rather than the severity of his crime (being a difference in the range of severity between violent rape & torture to a pat on the behind).

    It also applies pressure on the Judge to over sentence, as to assuage purposefully manipulated public angst.

    Also, Richter acknowledges his poor choice of words to describe the severity of the convicted crimes.

  99. jrm

    Given that when the real p*dos were doing their thing at Catholic churches at Ballarat it was, reportedly, Catholic cops who prevented anything being done about it, I want to know how many of the cops who pursued this thing were or are Masons.

  100. Makka

    She just launched into a recitation of Pells supposed lack of sympathy for victims and said she doesn’t care if he is a sacrificial lamb

    That’s exactly what has transpired. There was no presumption of innocence for Pell. He was convicted by the public long before his last trial began, courtesy of VicPol, the Vic Govt, the Australian media and the gaynazi lobby. Yes, the gaynazi lobby who are desperate to avert attention from homos being the root cause of the Church’s abuse problem and instead maintain focus on nasty “p3do priests”.

  101. Notafan

    That trinity foundation thing is utter rubbish

    Just what you would expect from that particular corner of the universe who have recreated the bible in their own image

  102. Speedbox

    ……said she doesn’t care if he is a sacrificial lamb

    And that is entirely how the baying crowd feel. Innocence or guilt is irrelevant. The Cardinal, as the previously most senior Australian catholic and a ‘big deal’ in the Vatican will be/has been crucified for the sins of others. His is a big scalp and nothing will stand in the way of the ill informed masses from securing their satisfaction.

    If Pell is acquitted on appeal, there will be riots in the streets over the ‘injustice’. Never mind the law, the noisy crowd want blood and if this was just a couple of hundred years ago, he would already be drawn and quartered.

  103. None

    None, that will put the Vatican in an interesting position.

    The Vatican so far has done the right thing. And it is quietly standing by awaiting the appeal. If their network is as effective as they claim it to be, they would know that Australia is home to the biggest anti-Catholic bigots in the world. Almost our entire mainstream press and media, a fair swathe of academia and politicians and god knows how many lawless bogans.
    Seeing Daniel Andrews presented as a ‘practising Catholic’ on the front page of today’s Australian. The man who pushed for forcing doctors to perform abortions, euthanasia and teaching anal sex to pre teens. Hypocrisy can only apply to a cardinal.

  104. Beachcomber

    Infidel Tiger at 12:39 pm
    ….. she doesn’t care if he is a sacrificial lamb

    This is the whole vibe of Australia right now.

    It’s going to lead us into some very dark places.

    We are already there.

  105. Infidel Tiger
    #2947301, posted on March 1, 2019 at 11:55 am
    Pyne is as Catholic as he is heterosexual.

    The MSM is saying that Pyne may not seek re-election.

    That means that the Trumble government paid an extra $20 billion (and in return are getting worse subs delivered a lot later) just to keep Pyne in Parliament for three years.

    Could have been worse I suppose. Could have kept the little ponce in Parliament for even longer.

  106. egg_

    Seeing Daniel Andrews presented as a ‘practising Catholic’ on the front page of today’s Australian.

    Quasimodo leads the witch hunt.

  107. egg_

    That means that the Trumble government paid an extra $20 billion (and in return are getting worse subs delivered a lot later) just to keep Pyne in Parliament for three years.

    Lemon Frogs for nought?

  108. Ros

    Just as with every event involving those believed to be of the right or just not their sort the piling on to Pell has become even more ferocious. Not a fan myself, but that is of course irrelevant. And from what I am reading here and elsewhere this is possibly a monstrous miscarriage of justice, or a truly evil conspiracy of the dumb.

    What those condemning the likes of Howard and Brennan and seeking the destruction of Pell display is the sense of anti vaccers. The world has looked at a nasty piece of work called Jussie Smollett and some have sussed he has done terrible harm to those who are subjected to racist and homophobic abuse. Or another sod Phillips who has managed to make liars of all Indians who complain of abuse. But now we have the possibility that the same awful outcome might be looming here. If Pell has been convicted by lies and incompetence, and malice, what does that do for the next victim of clergy sexual abuse.
    Do they care.

  109. ArthurB

    Cats will not be surprised that Waleed Aly has joined the mob piling on to Pell. He begins by talking about “George Pell’s powerful friends came out of the woodwork”, and goes on to say “I always understood Pell’s sexual puritanism and even his antipathy to Islam … what I couldn’t grasp was his fiercely vocal support of climate denialism”. He doesn’t seem to understand that a lot of people have grave doubts about the process by which Pell has been convicted.

  110. dover_beach

    None of the witnesses cleared Pell by testifying they were with him.

    IamMengele, you have never sat in a court or are in any way familiar with criminal procedure. This is plainy obvious. Witnesses do simply clear the accused by claiming they were with them. The jury can simply disregard the testimony they have given. As has been repeated to you, now for the third time, at least two of the exculpatory witnesses testified to being by Pell’s side on those days or words to that effect during the Mass and immediately after in the sacristy in order to assist Pell in the removal of his vestments. Others gave testimony that they did not recall two choir boys missing from the choir just after the Mass and then at the beginning of the recording session that commenced immediately following the solemn Mass. The organist testified to never seeing the two boys either entering or departing the sacristy immediately following the Mass even though they have a direct line of sight of the door to the sacristy. And on and on. What part of this don’t you understand?

  111. dover_beach

    Witnesses do not simply clear…

  112. Linden

    Well blow me down, she is the daughter of a former judge and Governor of Victoria, who would have guessed that.

  113. vlad

    No, Linden, sorry, she’s the niece of one.

  114. Linden

    Years ago he got a bloke off on a murder charge involving an young child, the one they found in the dam in the Latrobe Valley. Just a pity the copped who pulled that bloke up that day didn’t look in the boot of his car.

  115. Linden

    ah well still family!!

  116. Linden

    thanks for correction any how

  117. Crossie

    Catholics are now the hated ones, presumed guilty, and there’s no evidence in this case. Simply none, just the word of someone from a long time ago, the public has never seen, never went to Court, and no-one knows anything about, after years and years of media abuse of Pell and Catholics in general.
    Secret trials. Get Pell finally came to fruition.

    This is what is so scary, today it’s Pell, tomorrow it could be any one of us. Precedent has been set that proof is not required, all that matters is the allegation.

  118. Crossie

    If he converted to Islam or climate change religion the verdict could well have been different.

    Many years ago when Pell had a column in the Sunday Telegraph he wrote that he did not believe in anthropogenic global warming and copped a lot of abuse for it. I wouldn’t be surprised if that didn’t contribute to the his present woes.

  119. Ros

    I find these 2 reports of the first jury’s decision interesting.

    “In Cardinal Pell’s first trial, held under the media-suppression order, the defense dismantled the prosecution’s case while shedding light on the inadequacy of the police investigative process; that trial resulted in a hung jury, which voted 10–2 for acquittal. The foreman and several other members of the jury were in tears when the verdict was read”.
    National Review.

    “And everyone involved in the case, bar the jury, had been here before. The first jury to hear the case had to be discharged, some of them in tears, when they were not able to reach a unanimous decision”.
    ABC

    One tells us that the jury in the first trial was gut wrenched by the trial they were subjected to. The ABC let’s it float out there that the jury was gut wrenched by the abominable Pell.

    Was called for jury duty once, escaped it because I sincerely had an important role in grand child care for an offspring who would have been very hurt financially by me serving on this jury. Obviously I would have to be selected, but they accepted my argument about my role and excused me from the trial and any further calls. It was a murder trial of prominence and if I had been put on the jury it could have been a very long obligation. Boring story but it being my first ever call I did reflect on responsibilities and obligations on citizens and mine. Which leads me to wonder at the pain of the first jury who decided 10 to 2 that Pell was innocent, and cried, and now must look in horror at what is being done to him. I am sorry for them.

  120. Old Lefty

    This case gets wierder and wierder the closer one looks. They have convicted Pell of an offence against a dead man who, in addition to not only being unable (obviously) to testify now, had never complained to the police when alive and indeed had denied to his family that he had never been abused. This is like something out of thet Soviet Union. Next, I suppose, they’ll convict Howard and Abbot for the assassination of John For Kennedy.

  121. Old Lefty

    Sorry: John F Kennedy. Autocorrect strikes again.

    And since when, Harriet, is an anonymous accuser ‘brave’? When I was brought up, we were taught that it was a pillar of British justice that justice should not only be done but be seen to be done. Unless the so-called victim stops sniveling in the cowards’ castle of anonymity, I will regard him as nothing but a lying political rent boy. And unless I can see the transcript of his so-called evidence and evaluate it for myself, I will regard the when process as a grubby political stitch-up.

  122. Old Lefty

    There is cause for hope, however. My legal acquaintances tell me that it is highly likely that the conviction will be quashed on appeal – if not in Yarragrad, then certainly by the High Court in a bollocking that will recall the judgement on the Barrister X case.

    Another silver lining: if a future Victorian treasurer needs to cut spending, they can economise on building lavatories in Victorian police stations. If VicPol members feel the need for a leak, they already have a special delivery luxe urinal called Milligan.

  123. ‘de luxe’ – damn autocorrect!

  124. Mal Thomas

    I detest George Pell as much as the next atheist and ‘reasonable’ theist, for his Melbourne response that put the Church before victims, for lying for a living, as do all clergy, and for putting “the fear of God” into the minds of vulnerable children, itself a form of psychological child abuse.

    Nevertheless, having read about the trial and now watched the Pell interview with police, I have very grave doubts about his guilt in this instance. His responses at interview, while perhaps seeming cold in the slow and detached way he typically speaks, seemed to me to be extremely genuine and credible. And he returned voluntarily, where a guiltly man may well have stayed away. Of course, without the benefit of seeing all the evidence, it is hard for an outsider to know. But, as I said, I fear that Pell – as much as he might warrant ‘punishment’ for his other appalling acts – may well be in jail tonight for a crime he did not commit.

  125. Iampeter

    That was really well put Mal Thomas, I agree completely.

    Hopefully this can get quashed on appeal, then Pell can go back on trial for the real reasons, he and other leaders within the Church should actually be on trial for, in any country that respects the rule of law.

    The fact that this hasn’t happened, nor is ever going to happen, is a real mischarriage of justice, on a truly grand scale.

  126. candy

    he and other leaders within the Church should actually be on trial for,

    He has a coolish personality and was not as empathetic, or was seemingly unempathetic to abuse victims. Slow in responding and coming to grips with the terrible situations.

    It seems that he has to take the rap for the crimes, though he did not rape boys himself, in my opinion.
    That it is his destiny to take responsibility for all the Catholic priest rapists in the world, is what I am seeing of general opinion. It’s not how the law works usually.

  127. candy

    I detest George Pell as much as the next atheist and ‘reasonable’ theist,

    Mal Thomas,
    I understand that Cardinal Pell is in jail for his seemingly unempathetic personality, when he was slow to respond to the revelations of crimes against children in the Catholic system. I am completely sure he would do things differently if he could go back in time, that mistakes were definitely made in handling these terrible situations.

    I understand that someone has to take the rap for the crimes by Catholic priests against children, and it is Cardinal Pell, though he did not abuse/r.pe those boys himself (in my opinion). I understand that as the prevailing general public opinion. would that be a reasonable assumption of how things stand?

  128. dover_beach

    I detest George Pell as much as the next atheist and ‘reasonable’ theist, for his Melbourne response that put the Church before victims, for lying for a living, as do all clergy, and for putting “the fear of God” into the minds of vulnerable children, itself a form of psychological child abuse.

    I see IamMengele has been joined by another witless fool.

  129. dover_beach

    I understand that Cardinal Pell is in jail for his seemingly unempathetic personality, when he was slow to respond to the revelations of crimes against children in the Catholic system.

    The Melbourne Response was the first institutional, religious or secular, response to claims of child abuse. You cannot be faster than first. He instituted it as soon as he became an Archbishop, in Melbourne. It received support from the state government and VicPol. To say that he was slow is just absurd.

  130. Notafan

    People seem to think Cardinal Pell was Archbishop from birth.

    He instituted a no questions asked process for victims very soon after he became Archbishop.

    I would also mention that Catholic Church compensation was more generous that that offered by the state government,

    Funny how no-one is hot under the collar ALL THE TIME about abuse in state institutions and all the others.

  131. Notafan

    Indeed DB

    teaching children about the Catholic faith is now abuse

    teaching them about ssm (with explicit details) being exactly the same as mummy and daddy marriage is just dandy

  132. Iampeter

    I see IamMengele has been joined by another witless fool.

    Yes, this is the kind of thoughtful and rational response to people with different opinions, we’ve come to love and expect from the unhinged, hillbillies, at the cat.

    The Melbourne Response was the first institutional, religious or secular, response to claims of child abuse.

    This is what I mean about delusion from cultists and their defenders. Someone at the rank that Pell has achieved, would be even further removed from reality.
    Aside from the obvious allegations of hush money being paid and dissuasion of further victims from going to the police, that itself needs to face police investigation, is the little problem of their actually being a “response unit” of some kind. How is that even possible?
    What other organization can stand accused of thousands of cases of child molestation, with allegedly thousands of perpetrators and thousands of victims, stretching on for who knows how long and allegedly covered up extensively from within, then be able to reluctantly setup it’s own “response unit,” with the blessings of the police no less?

    This is a massive miscarriage of justice and it also shows how nonsensical any accusations of vilification of Pell and Catholics actually are. The church seems to be so protected in our society and so corrupt, that it has been protected from even the most basic police procedures. It operates above the law.

    This is why people are furious at Pell and taking it out on him. This is also what is incomprehensible to Christian cultists, who have no grasp of reality, or how the world actually works. They don’t see what the big deal is.

  133. dover_beach

    Yes, this is the kind of thoughtful and rational response to people with different opinions, we’ve come to love and expect from the unhinged, hillbillies, at the cat.

    I’ve given you many, many thoughtful responses. For instance, I’ve already told you three times in this thread that there were 25 exculpatory witnesses. You responded that they failed to produce one that cleared the accused. I informed you that the jury can simply disregard the exculpatory testimony. You have remained mute about these facts.

    This is what I mean about delusion from cultists and their defenders. Someone at the rank that Pell has achieved, would be even further removed from reality.
    Aside from the obvious allegations of hush money being paid and dissuasion of further victims from going to the police, that itself needs to face police investigation, is the little problem of their actually being a “response unit” of some kind. How is that even possible?

    So the Church is now guilty of responding too? How is a response unit possible? Because the problem appears to be more than a single instance. Do you imagine, for instance, that there is no such unit covering cases of sexual abuse in the public education system or any other large scale organisation dealing with children? Do you think there are no units in corporations that cover instances of sexual harassment or abuse? It didn’t do so reluctantly, and given the evidence presented in the recent Royal Commission, the instances of sexual abuse in the Church are significantly less as a proportion of its size in comparison to other religious and secular institutions.

    What other organization can stand accused of thousands of cases of child molestation, with allegedly thousands of perpetrators and thousands of victims, stretching on for who knows how long and allegedly covered up extensively from within, then be able to reluctantly setup it’s own “response unit,” with the blessings of the police no less?

    The public education system of every state and I can’t even recall if they’ve set up a response unit at all.

    This is a massive miscarriage of justice and it also shows how nonsensical any accusations of vilification of Pell and Catholics actually are. The church seems to be so protected in our society and so corrupt, that it has been protected from even the most basic police procedures. It operates above the law.

    Yes, so ‘institutionally protected’ that it was publicly vilified and set apart by the media since the 1990s, when the figures suggest you were less likely to be sexually abused in the Church than in any other religious or secular institution over the same period of time.

  134. Iampeter

    Oh, I wasn’t responding to you Dover. You are an imbecile with whom no conversation is possible. Even this idiot post of yours proves this point again. It’s like you didn’t even read what you’re responding to.
    I was just using your inanities as a springboard to prove the point I was making in my original post in this thread.

  135. None:

    Question for lawyers if the appeal fails ( I do have zero trust in the Victorian judicial system) what is the next step? Is there any other option available or are we going to have to sit there silent with an innocent man in jail?

    The innocent man in gaol is probably having a quiet chuckle to himself at how he’s managed to pull the screeching covens out into the light of day as well as exposing a rather sinister government, a corrupt judicial system, and a politicised police force.
    He has, by being in gaol, exposed the schism in Australian society between the rulers and the ruled.
    So which side of the bollards are we on?

  136. dover_beach

    Oh, I wasn’t responding to you Dover. You are an imbecile with whom no conversation is possible.

    You quoted me directly, IamMengele. Not only are you a witless fool, but you have confirmed you are a brazen liar. And a coward.

  137. Iampeter

    You quoted me directly, IamMengele. Not only are you a witless fool, but you have confirmed you are a brazen liar. And a coward.

    *facepalm*

    I was just using your inanities as a springboard to prove the point I was making in my original post in this thread.

    Even this idiot post of yours proves this point again. It’s like you didn’t even read what you’re responding to.

  138. dover_beach

    No, you replied to what I had written. And you were too stupid to even notice your formatting failure. Much like your arguments in general. They were born in failure, recognized as failures, and perish as failures.

    N.B. You did not ‘springboard’ from what you had quoted, you replied directly to it. To ‘springboard’ is to move from one topic to another. You really are poorly educated.

  139. Iampeter

    AHAhahaaha, you’re a spastic and I’m going back to ignoring you’re clueless, insane ass.

  140. JC

    Which is why this should’ve been an open and shut case for Pell, but his defense didn’t produce a single witness to say they were with him the entire time.
    Not his master of ceremonies, not any of his aides, etc.

    And that makes him guilty in a case going back 30 odd years?

    You fucking moron, Mengele. No, change that. You poisonous sack of shit.

  141. Mal Thomas

    NOTAFAN: Indeed DB, teaching children about the Catholic faith is now abuse

    I actually said that putting “the fear of God” into the minds of vulnerable children is itself a form of psychological child abuse.

    And yes, it is. Catholocism is a fundamentally corrupt and evil enterprise from which much misery, bigotry, discrimination, inequity and abuse have emerged and, indeed, been nurtured. Of course, teaching people including children about what Catholocisms says and how it behaves and effects the world need be nothing worse than a waste of time, but indoctrinating children (as in, putting the fear of God into them) into the Catholic faith is absolutely abuse. Catholics in the past had the excuse of ignorance for being party to such abuse. They no longer have that excuse.

  142. dover_beach

    AHAhahaaha, you’re a spastic and I’m going back to ignoring you’re clueless, insane ass.

    I own you mentally, IamMengele. You keep saying you won’t respond further and then you do. You can’t help it because I reduce your ‘arguments’ to dust.

  143. dover_beach

    I actually said that putting “the fear of God” into the minds of vulnerable children is itself a form of psychological child abuse.

    The only response to this nonsense is to dare you to criminalize the religious education of children. It’s clear that liberalism leads directly here but it is always instructive to have you admit it.

  144. Iampeter

    I own you mentally, IamMengele. You keep saying you won’t respond further and then you do. You can’t help it because I reduce your ‘arguments’ to dust.

    You are a raving imbecile, who has zero comprehension and no arguments about anything.
    You respond to every post of mine in every thread because you’re an insane person.
    I’m ignoring you because I don’t really want to be yelling at a mentally disabled person.

  145. dover_beach

    No, IamMengele, you pretend to ignore me and then you go ahead and respond. Those are the actions of liars and madmen. I respond to your ridiculous arguments in this and other threads because I won’t let absurdity and delusion go unremarked, particularly, from a clown such as yourself. I have beaten you bloody on many threads, this is true, but I do not apologize. You will either learn the hard way or perish.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.