The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The cardinal can do no wrong: George Pell's defenders > Comments

The cardinal can do no wrong: George Pell's defenders : Comments

By Binoy Kampmark, published 11/3/2019

The Pell conviction is an example of defenders running to barricades in the name of protection, hoping that faith prevails over evidence.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Alan B, I was unaware of any previous convictions of Pell? Surely on appeal these can all be bought up and I would think that is a pertinent piece of evidence. Evidence of not just one incident but a pattern of illegality.
Posted by JBowyer, Monday, 11 March 2019 6:49:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
J B. five previous convictions, December 2018. And all over the news as soon as the suppression order was lifted.

And suppressed it was claimed, so as not to affect the jury verdict/deliberations of the most recent 2019 trial?

You were unaware? What planet are you living on?

The suppression and its stated reasons almost sure to impact on the appeal judges deliberations and later sentencing!?

Pell, it was reported, showed absolutely no remorse? And that won't help if the appeal fails and Pell has to stand and receive his sentence?

One wonders, should it come to that, if he will be judged less harshly than paedophile Rolf Harris?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 11 March 2019 8:37:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alsn B

You really are a dill. The five 'suppressed' convictions that you suppose may have influenced the jury were the convictions that the jury actually delivered. They were suppressed because of an ongoing case elsewhere against Pell which was dropped because of lack of evidence - which in the current circumstances is a miracle unto itself.

You've got the time-line utterly confused but as usual act as though you're the only person in step.
Posted by mhaze, Monday, 11 March 2019 8:51:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lol Allan B, you really need to keep up. The only convictions against Pell, ever, are the ones he was found guilty of, with no evidence, on just the word of one man. He has never even been tried for any other offences.
Posted by Big Nana, Monday, 11 March 2019 11:30:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.

Cardinal George Pell has been found guilty of sexually penetrating a child under the age of 16 as well as four charges of an indecent act with a child under the age of 16. He no longer has the benefit of the presumption of innocence and will spend the next three months in jail while waiting for a decision on his application for a repeal trial due to be announced on the 5th June. If accorded, the repeal trial will take place immediately on the 5th and 6th June.

The twelve members of the jury judged unanimously that he was guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, on all five counts, on the sole testimony of his accuser. There was no decisive material evidence and no witness. It all boiled down to “my word against yours”.

For this reason, it is a foregone conclusion that the appeal trial will be granted and there is a good chance it will succeed.

In cases of “my word against yours” there is necessarily doubt as to who is telling the truth. In such cases, the benefit of the doubt must go to the accused by virtue of the sacrosanct principle of the presumption of innocence. The accuser is presumed to be lying.

Also, justice in modern democracies such as Australia commands that “all are equal before the law”, irrespective of social status, religion, or any other consideration.

As for “divine justice”, the bible indicates (Matthew 18:6, King James Version) :

« But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea »

Unlike human justice, there is nothing in the bible about a right of repeal in the event of conviction.

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 2:56:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am going into bat for Alan B now. The original trial was hushed up which is far more common than you would believe. I visit the courts and there are many trials where there are conditions of entry or no entry at all.
I remember the furore about a famous man and soon found on the overseas net it was Pell. I thought it was because of an additional upcoming case but I forgot that lol. I also thought I had missed something but because of these absurd secrecy laws it all gets confused.
The courts are literally a law unto themselves but our courts are very fair even when the accused is probably undeserving.
You either like Georgie or hate him as is obvious. I do think we can leave it to the Court but anyway his reputation is totally ruined. He will not be welcome in polite society but most importantly his sanctimonious attitude will be severely dented now.
Posted by JBowyer, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 5:06:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy