Currency Lad: Beech of Trust

‘How can you accept someone you once thought you’d share the rest of your life with is this liar, this horrible person?’

Dawn Beech, well educated longtime friend and nursing colleague, then lover and wife (for four years) of Carl “Nick” Beech; also mother of his son.

There was nothing in the men whom I began to meet … that made me think that any of them were not telling the truth.

Louise Milligan, ABC journalist and vague acquaintance of Cardinal George Pell’s accusers. The claims of all but one these men have now been officially abandoned.

This entry was posted in Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to Currency Lad: Beech of Trust

  1. stackja

    There are lies. And there are ‘lies’.

  2. Tintarella di Luna

    From an organisation which in the past its Managing Director proposed that pederasts be understood. the lauder, applauder and promoter of none other than Peter Roebuck and the organisation which refuses to take questions in relation to a certain Jon Stevens, one of their own, convicted of child sexual abuse.

    Perhaps, as with Jimmy Saville and the BBS perhaps the ABC is on a quest to distract from examinations its own shortcomings with respect to child sexual abuse that has seen a doubling down to appear virtuous and blameless in its pursuit whiffs down rabbit holes.

  3. Tintarella di Luna

    I mean BBC

  4. Ivan Denisovich

    Hendo:

    ERRORS REMAIN IN LOUISE MILLIGAN’S POLEMIC CARDINAL AFTER FOUR PRINT-RUNS
    In Melbourne last weekend, Gerard Henderson picked up the very latest edition of Louise Milligan’s Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell (MUP, 2017 – reprinted with corrections 2017, 2018 and 2019).

    The 2019 edition of Cardinal – which is said to contain what MUP calls “New Revelations” even though it is not clear what they are – is replete with endorsements. First up, there are the high profile sneering secular commentators – mainly from the ABC, Nine Newspapers (Sydney Morning Herald and The Age), The Guardian Australia, The Saturday Paper and The New Daily. They include Annabel Crabb, David Marr, Peter FitzSimons, Kate McClymont and Quentin Dempster. Most have no special knowledge of either criminal law in general or the Pell case in particular…………..

    In view of all this praise – and in view of the fact that MUP has reprinted Cardinal on three occasions with corrections – it’s surprising that a number of factual errors remain in the book – along with numerous dubious and evidence-free claims.

    The foreword to the most recent edition is by author Tom Keneally……………………..

    In a strange claim in his foreword, Keneally asserts that Cardinal “is not a polemic”. It is. When Peter Craven reviewed Cardinal in the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age on 5 June 2017, he wrote that it was a “racketing case for the prosecution”. He also referred to “plenty of inaccuracies” in the book and described Milligan as “a writer of flaming convictions and sensationalist prose who backs her intuitions in the face of any notion of evidence or scruple”.

    In any event, Tom Keneally’s foreword concentrates not so much on the crimes for which Cardinal Pell has been convicted – and which he is appealing – but on Pell’s political, social and religious views. The foreword refers to George Pell’s relationships with Tony Abbott and John Howard and mentions climate change, asylum seeker policies and so on. In short, Keneally described Pell as “a notable neo-conservative” and stated that his conviction had resulted in “an inestimable loss…to the forces of the right when they find themselves uniquely out of fashion with the Australian electorate”. Note, Tom Keneally’s piece was written before the May 2019 federal election. Today it is by no means clear that what Keneally describes as “the forces of the right” are “out of fashion” in Australia. However, such political considerations should have no relevance to a criminal conviction – as Keneally should know.

    Tom Keneally concluded his foreword by criticising George Pell’s (alleged) “flawed response to child sexual abuse by clergy” – this despite the fact that he was one of the first Catholic leaders in the world to address the crime. A reader of Keneally’s foreword might get the impression that Keneally is not convinced by the guilty verdict in the second trial – but believes that someone high in the Catholic Church had to be punished for its errors of commission and omission with respect to clerical child sexual abuse over the decades.

    In the original and subsequent editions of Cardinal, Louise Milligan writes that it has always been her journalistic practice to send “a list of questions” to people she is writing about. She sent such a list to Cardinal Pell’s staff before completing the first edition of her book. Before reviewing Cardinal in The Sydney Institute Review Online, Gerard Henderson sent a list of questions to Ms Milligan. She did not reply. Instead she sought the protection of her publisher at MUP – then Louise Adler. Ms Adler emailed Gerard Henderson advising him that Cardinal was a good book – in other words, go away.

    As it turned out, Ms Milligan has never replied to the questions about such issues as the use of anonymous sources, constructed quotations created decades after conversations allegedly took place, the fallibility of memory, hearsay, the use of the word “if” and so on. These are all important issues which any writer should be able and willing to discuss. Nor has Louise Milligan corrected the historical errors drawn to her attention by Gerard Henderson in his questions and in his review – or to those identified by Peter Craven and others.

    Presumably, Louise Milligan refused to answer Gerard Henderson’s questions because she had no plausible responses. After all, Ms Milligan told ABC TV News Breakfast on 17 May 2017 that Cardinal was written “from the complainants’ point of view”. In other words, it is a book about advocacy – not scholarship. That’s possibly why Ms Milligan regards queries about evidence as not requiring an answer or even an acknowledgement………………

    And now for an example of some of the errors which still remain in Cardinal after four editions. They indicate a degree of laziness, or denial in the face of criticism, on the author’s behalf…………………..

    RTWT

    https://thesydneyinstitute.com.au/blog/issue-453/

    Heaven forfend that anyone would suggest Milligan has an agenda.

  5. cuckoo

    A search of the ABC news website turns up exactly zero mentions of the Beech conviction. They fulsomely covered his accusations when they were originally made.

  6. Dr Fred Lenin

    When Pell is declared innocent in ten years ,(the law grinds smalll and exceding slow ) the msm will play it down ,be on page 32 , to cover these leftist liars and haters ,cant have the proles knowing important things now can we? What arethese appeal judges doing ? Cant take this long to know the trial was a real fut up ,we all knew before it started . They should get performance based salaries , they would need food oarcels fron the Sallies the amount of work they do .

  7. roger

    A search of the ABC news website turns up exactly zero mentions of the Beech conviction. They fulsomely covered his accusations when they were originally made.

    A cat got your tongue, ABC?

  8. Shy Ted

    Tried to post about this the other day but spaminator. As this has been going on for weeks/months to years my post merely wondered where the reporting had been. Court order or doesn’t fit the agenda? Matters little which, same club.

  9. C.L.

    Doing some research for a longer piece, I discovered the ABC has deleted both video and transcript of the Monument/Dignan accusations. This was a half-hour special 7.30 Report run by Milligan. The men’s accusations have now been dumped by Victoria’s courts. By removing their bullshit stories, the ABC now concedes the broadcast was defamatory.

  10. roger

    Can that lowlife who accused Pell be jailed?

  11. Terry

    “not so much on the crimes for which Cardinal Pell has been convicted…but on Pell’s political, social and religious views. “

    No, no. I think Pell was very much “convicted” for his “political, social and religious views. “

    In a Totalitarian Police State (much like the Peoples’ Republic of Victoriastan), it is very important that the “correct charges” are laid so as to facilitate the “correct verdict” when dealing with enemies of “the state” and committers of crimes against “authorised thought”.

  12. roger

    No, no. I think Pell was very much “convicted” for his “political, social and religious views. “

    Pell was convicted as a “fall guy”, used to drag down the conservative side of politics, rather than anything about him personally. Pell, for the Left, was expendable for the Left’s political games.
    Everyone, for the Left, is.

  13. Nob

    Tintarella di Luna
    #3118150, posted on July 29, 2019 at 2:36 pm

    Perhaps, as with Jimmy Saville and the BBC perhaps the ABC is on a quest to distract from examinations its own shortcomings with respect to child sexual abuse that has seen a doubling down to appear virtuous and blameless in its pursuit whiffs down rabbit holes.

    No “perhaps” about it with the BBC – not just the BBC, but the police, overcompensating like crazy by pointing the finger elsewhere, anywhere, as long as it was at their political enemies.

    They already believe and promote the idea that “Tories” are evil so it was one small step for mediakind.

    Not sure if the ABC are overcompensating because I’m not sure they even acknowledge their own role in child sexual abuse.

    They just wanted to get a Catholic.

  14. thefrollickingmole

    The ABC has its own little history..

    Phatty Addams had a number of perverts on over the years including Gore Vidal.

  15. JC

    Pell was convicted as a “fall guy”, used to drag down the conservative side of politics, rather than anything about him personally. Pell, for the Left, was expendable for the Left’s political games.
    Everyone, for the Left, is.

    Roger , it was a jury verdict. A verdict on a case that should never have gone even close to being tried because he’s innocent. However it’s still a jury verdict, which invalidates part of the claim the leftwing did it. The leftwing brought it to trial taking a shot they would find an agreeable jury, which of course they did.

    The scumbags on the jury wanted to convict someone high up in the church because they’ve been brainwashed to hate the church. They did the left’s work.

  16. roger

    it’s still a jury verdict, which invalidates part of the claim the leftwing did it.

    The Left did it.
    A combination of Police which made statements to the effect that the accuser is a ‘victim’ (while he is no such thing, but rather nothing more and nothing less than the Australian answer to Carl Beech), the ABC campaigning to convict Pell, created an atmosphere where it only took one small mistake on part of the Pell camp to create this travesty. Pell’s lawyer decision not to put Pell on the stand was the fatal mistake which tipped this whole case into the catastrophe it became. The jury did get it wrong, to be sure, but when 12 people get it wrong, you got to look further than just, “oh, the jury were a bunch of scumbags”. Pell was set up by the Left, his defence team was dumb, and the jury fell for the con.

  17. C.L.

    I now believe the ‘swimmers’ tranche of the accusations against Pell – aired by the ABC with reckless, illegal abandon – was deliberately designed to publicise a bogus ‘pattern of behaviour’. This, in turn, was meant to assassinate Pell’s character and pollute the minds of potential jurors should the cardinal sue. The ABC and others in the media were swamping an old man with what they believed was an overwhelming array of slurs. It’s no coincidence that Graham Ashton allowed himself to be interviewed on radio the following day and chose to react to Milligan’s 7.30 Report feature. He unlawfully described this pair of ex-con, drug-fucked knuckleheads as “victims” of Pell. A decision to push ahead with the loony-tunes ‘choirboy’ charges was made thereafter. Coincidence? And if the one tranche of accusations failed, they could then pursue the other. Even after the unexpected conviction (second time’s a charm), an attempt was made to gin-up a generic ‘swimmers’ trial. They wanted to ensure they would still Get Pell even if he was acquitted. Justice Kidd squashed that plan.

    That means Milligan/Ashton are dangling with no safety harness. If Pell is acquitted, they’re fucked.

  18. Roger

    Roger , it was a jury verdict.

    You’re addressing roger, not Roger, JC.

    Just for the record.

  19. roger

    That means Milligan/Ashton are dangling with no safety harness. If Pell is acquitted, they’re fucked.

    Notice how straight after the verdict, when the Pell camp announced immediately it is lodging an appeal, Milligan ran an ABC show titled “Guilty”, knowing full well that the case is essentially before the court yet.
    This was the very same bitch who wrote a book about the “fall” of Cardinal Pell before the verdict. In both case she is trying to preempt the outcome. What a bitch. But then again, it’s not her. It’s the ABC and the Left.

  20. stackja

    Allan Ashbolt’s ghost still haunts conservative-free ABC
    Gerard Henderson’s Weekly Column

    As Ken Inglis acknowledged in his sympathetic history This is the ABC, the leftist takeover of the public broadcaster began in the late 1960s when self-proclaimed Marxist Allan Ashbolt began stacking the organisation with young leftists. This coterie was affectionately labelled “Ashbolt’s kindergarten”.

    It is this culture that has led to the reality that the ABC is a conservative-free zone without a conservative presenter, producer or editor for any of its prominent TV, radio or online products.

  21. The scumbags on the jury wanted to convict someone high up in the church because they’ve been brainwashed to hate the church. They did the left’s work.

    Brainwashing works.
    My dad, the most cynical khunt I know, and who has more then enough adverse experience with “the system” to know that what the govt or the mob has to say may be bullshit, has without question swallowed the “Colombaris is a baddie” line and wants to see him hung drawn & quartered.

    (Just as an example of how what is in the newspapers can affect even the most sceptical of minds – Pell never had a chance)

  22. I am grateful for all of those who have spoken up to support Pell.

  23. I now believe the ‘swimmers’ tranche of the accusations against Pell – aired by the ABC with reckless, illegal abandon – was deliberately designed to publicise a bogus ‘pattern of behaviour’. This, in turn, was meant to assassinate Pell’s character and pollute the minds of potential jurors should the cardinal sue.

    It worked on my accountant, a dutiful Roman Catholic who harbours a healthy scepticism regarding any allegation emanating from an ALP jurisdiction, & believed the case against Pell was a political hatchet job.
    …. right up until he saw a 3rd-hand party discussing the ‘swimmers’ allegations on TV. That convinced him.
    “There’s no way someone can fake the way that was repeated, I thought instantly ‘You old so-and-so, you actually did do it'”

    This is a strong-willed bloke who knows his own mind. More gullible or less enquiring minds would fall for it One Hundred times easier.

  24. Up The Workers!

    Ivan Denisovitch at 2.55 pm says:

    “Heaven forfend that anyone would suggest Milligan has an agenda.”

    In relation to A.L.P.B.C. hate-preaching Bung-Journo, Louise Milligan’s waste of newsprint and half a forest on her crap-filled third reprint of a book damning a man who, on the facts – and on the testimony of genuine witnesses who actually did have the courage to show up and give their testimony in Court – could not possibly have committed the offence for which he was convicted.

    Being an A.L.P.B.C. fact-phobic hate preacher, Milligan doesn’t just have “an agenda”; at last count, the diverse luvvies at the A.L.P.B.C. have around 73 different genders to choose from.

    I hope Pell sues for every cent his persecutors have got.

    The only thing that Jizzy Smellitt, Stormy Daniels and Christine Blatant Fraud did wrong, was that they didn’t grant an exclusive to Louise Milligan of the fact-phobic, muck-slinging A.L.P.B.C.

    She even believes in gerbil worming.

  25. Andre Lewis

    If Pell is exonerated by his appeal the damage to his reputation and personal well being has already been done. What would be as galling is if the appeal finds, as it must, that the accusation from a single accuser was false but nothing happens to him. By bringing the accusation and testifying under oath that included claims of another boy being abused by Pell, since dead so unable to support or refute it, the person has committed perjury. What are the odds of him being charged?

  26. cuckoo

    They wanted to ensure they would still Get Pell even if he was acquitted. Justice Kidd squashed that plan.

    Thanks, I was wondering what had happened to the plan to pursue the ‘swimmer’ case as a civil suit.

  27. Beachcomber

    That means Milligan/Ashton are dangling with no safety harness. If Pell is acquitted, they’re fucked.

    If only! Such a corrupt and manipulated judicial system will never allow an acquittal for Cardinal Pell. Even if Pell is acquitted, the ABC-TASS media will protect the likes of Ashton and Milligan. They are inner party elites. Ashton’s role in the Lawyer X travesty has had no consequences for him. The media have protected him with a shroud of invisibility.

  28. That means Milligan/Ashton are dangling with no safety harness. If Pell is acquitted, they’re fucked.

    I really hope this becomes so.

  29. A similar (but not the same) tactic was pulled against Rolf Harris. Allegations, even charges were laid, regards child pron on his computa. “20,000 images are on his hard drive” or somesuch statement (note, there was never any direct claim the images were illegal, of “children” or anything, other than the images “contained” women – der mate, big yawn)

    All charges relating to those allegations were withdrawn a few seconds before the trial commenced.
    A tactic designed to influence the jury.

    Unlike Cardinal Pell, Rolf’s past was somewhat blemished – though criminality was not apparent.
    He was convicted by a jury because they did not like him.

    (Based on the evidence reported in the news Rolf should never have been convicted)

  30. roger

    Great idea, comparing Rolf Harris’ case to Cardinal Pell’s one.
    On behalf of Pell’s team, thanks a lot for your contribution.
    /sarc

  31. JC

    Yea, excellent idea comparing Pell to Harris. Now, who is the genius doing that. Oh yea.

  32. JC

    Which got me thinking..Pell’s case also has similarities to the Jeffrey Dahmer case where charges were initially brought against him on a couple of murders and later dropped for lack of evidence.

    On July 25, 1991, Dahmer was charged with four counts of first-degree murder. By August 22, he had been charged with a further 11 murders committed in the state of Wisconsin. On September 14, investigators in Ohio, having uncovered hundreds of bone fragments in woodland behind the address in which Dahmer had confessed to killing his first victim, formally identified two molars and a vertebra with X-ray records of Steven Mark Hicks. Three days later, Dahmer was charged by authorities in Ohio with the murder of Steven Hicks.

    Dahmer was not charged with the attempted murder of Tracy Edwards, nor with the murder of Steven Tuomi. He was not charged with Tuomi’s murder because the Milwaukee County District Attorney only brought charges where murder could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt[186] and Dahmer had no memory of actually committing this particular murder, for which no physical evidence of the crime existed. At a scheduled preliminary hearing on January 13, 1992, Dahmer pleaded guilty but insane to 15 counts of murder.

  33. Gab

    Which got me thinking..Pell’s case also has similarities to the Jeffrey Dahmer case where charges were initially brought against him on a couple of murders and later dropped for lack of evidence.

    The only difference being the DPP didn;t drop the Pell case despite the lack of evidence.

  34. roger

    Which got me thinking..Pell’s case also has similarities to the Jeffrey Dahmer case

    Shhhhhh.
    Don’t give Victoria Police any ideas.
    Next thing you know they will establish another taskforce which will call on members of the public to come forward with any knowledge of Pell being a serial killer.
    I predict at least a dozen witnesses coming forward with details.
    Louis Milligan will be all over this one as well, no doubt.

  35. JC

    Oh Louise – an extraordinary researcher and investigative journalist.

  36. roger

    Oh Louise – an extraordinary researcher and investigative journalist.

    What would the title of her next book?
    “A Cardinal by Day, a Serial Killer by Night: the Secret Life of Cardinal Pell”?
    “Martin Bryant, Ivan Milat an Cardinal Pell: a Study into The Minds of Australia’s Worst Killers”?

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.