What's troubling about the Pell conviction is how emotion substituted for evidence. If the law says A should not do X to B if B is a certain demographic then emotion doesn't apply. A counter example is the teenage pregnancy of the daughter of a US state governor. The boyfriend was the same age but was not charged with statutory rape. The reason seems to be lack of emotional outcry.

It would have been legally more satisfactory to prosecute Pell for covering for errant priests. I'm not sure the law actually proscribes that. Instead Pell took the hit for those priests based on unsupported 22 year old testimony. According to our ABC it was all very emotional therefore the accused must be guilty.

If the bloke's name was Bill Smith? There'd be no questions put, let alone needing to be answered!

Our jury system is inherently fair but not entirely infallible. However the pope never ever errs and is on the public record in relation to Pell as saying, rigidity hides something, a double life perhaps?

From every angle, our justice system seems to have bent backwards to give this man every chance along with due respect, courtesy and civility. And any way you spin or paint it, a very fair hearing.

If I had my druthers, I'd subject all the allowed testimony and all that wasn't, to be tested by unbeatable, space-age lie detection which can be deployed covertly, to test all witness statements! And I'd offer the facility to Pell first, which I believe, he'd decline and for the most obvious if unstated reasons!?
Alan B.

'It would have been legally more satisfactory to prosecute Pell for covering for errant priests. I'm not sure the law actually proscribes that. Instead Pell took the hit for those priests based on unsupported 22 year old testimony. According to our ABC it was all very emotional therefore the accused must be guilty.'

probably the first time I have ever agreed with you Taswegian.

on another matter now that the Trump collusion has shown to be a total sham I wonder if any justice will come to Clinton for her lies and deceit.

runner: need to run harder mate, the cage/wheel you're spinning isn't spinning hard enough!?

And how you're able to connect Trump and Pell can only be explained by, birds of a feather theory or a very severe case of Sargent Shultz syndrome!?

You'll have a nice day now, y'hear.
Alan B.

'And how you're able to connect Trump and Pell can only be explained by, birds of a feather theory or a very severe case of Sargent Shultz syndrome!? '

just thought i would beat you and the abc to it Alan.

Alan B: “From every angle, our justice system seems to have bent backwards to give this man every chance along with due respect, courtesy and civility. And any way you spin or paint it, a very fair hearing.”

You are grossly misinformed.

If ever there was a case for a judge-only trial, this was it, given the publicised abusive accusations Cardinal Pell has had to endure over many years from the likes of the biased ABC, anti-Catholic media, homosexual activist David Marr, and victim advocates.

The Victorian government acknowledged as much shortly after the verdict was handed down, by calling for judge-only trials to be considered in Victoria in future -- its legal system does not provide for same at present.

Yes indeed the ABC, David Marr, victim advocates
victims themselves, their families, the anti-
Catholic press (?) our legal system, the 12
jurors, are all biased.

Whereas NewsCorp, David Bolt, Miranda Devine,
et al, are as pure as the driven slush?

After all -

Pell did everything to curb pedophile priests in his
years as auxiliary bishop because the predators of
some of the worst of them were being reported to him.
He listened to the pleas of parents and teachers.
He earned his stripes in his war against sexual abuse
in the church - right?

He protected children. He disciplined priests, he
comforted the abused. the allegations against him
were after all not proven (nor dismissed).

John Paul II and Benedict XVI were very impressed with
the Cardinal. Pope Francis takes a rather different
view:

"Behind rigidity something always lies hidden."

"In many cases a double life."

Alan B,

"However the pope never ever errs..."

Got any back up for that statement?

Raycom: Doesn't strike you as passing strange, that we've had unbeatable, space-age lie detection for over a couple of decades now, but have yet to deploy the same!?

Moreover, CAFR and thermal imaging can be deployed completely covertly! Without witness knowledge or consent. If only to assist the Judge and or the jury!

For mine, we should allow the full unvarnished truth to tell the entire story and test the veracity of ALL the evidence.

That said, it's the same jury system we had for hundreds of years and yes, it has convicted a few innocent men.

Some think it is better for a hundred murders or rapists to go free than we convict one innocent man. And basically the state of play in our medieval justice system?

The same one that transported a forbear for the crime of stealing a secondhand pair of shoes and put my Great-grandmother in a workhouse for daring to be poor!

My house, car, shares and bank balance against yours, that Pell if offered unbeatable, space-age lie detection to test the veracity of his, I'm innocent, denials would refuse point blank!?
Alan B.

Is Mise,

As a Catholic you should have been taught about
the infallibility of the Pope.
Ask your local priest to explain it to you
if in doubt. (But it's a good sign on your
part to question it, evertheless - maybe its
a sign things are looking up for you?).

'As a Catholic you should have been taught about
the infallibility of the Pope.'


and yet to stay. Hmmm.

Foxy,

"However the pope never ever errs..."

As a Catholic you should know that the above statement is not true, the Pope can and does err as have all Popes before him, in all probability.

Alan B,

I looked up CAFR and all that I got was,
http://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/auditor/cafr.html

could you steer me in the right direction, please?

I suspect that George Pell will win his appeal against his conviction.

Meanwhile I think that it is good that a cardinal has finally (at last) been brought to trial in a civil court.
Prior to this event the senior members of the "catholic" church seemed to presume that they were beyond the reach of the civil courts.

Why haven't more cardinals, archbishops and bishops been brought to trial before the civil courts? And found guilty of the crimes that they obviously committed. How many were convicted and jailed as a result of the comprehensive inquiry into the well organized systematic cover-up of the decades long brutality/treatment of children in Ireland? Why haven't some of these chaps in the USA been jailed, when it is now quite obvious that they orchestrated a systematic cover-up, with the consequences that their diocese was bankrupted due to billions of dollars compensation payments.

Under the benighted leadership of the previous two popes and going back for a very long time too, the college of cardinals has run a world-wide Rock Spider protection society/racket.

Or a well organized conspiracy to pervert/prevent the course of justice. The two purposes of which were (only) to protect the financial and property assets of the church, and the "good name" (ha! ha!) of the church altogether. This was quite obviously the case with the mechanisms that George Pell put in place while he was in Melbourne.

Everything that these chaps did was inter-related at both a psychic and political level. They all lived in the same toxic can of worms. And contributed to its continuation.
That having been said it could be said that George Pell has become the fall-guy or scapegoat "victim" for this cover-up conspiracy.

Alan B, again, your reasoning that it was “a very fair hearing” is baffling in the light of the improbable verdict reached by the jury on the evidence, namely, the uncorroborated evidence presented by the complainant, and the demolition of same by the defence. It appears the jury members may have been out to ‘get Pell’ regardless of the evidence put before them.

The article by Peter Wales, ‘When a Jury Gets it Ludicrously Wrong’, Quadrant Online, 15 March 2019
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/03/when-a-jury-gets-it-ludicrously-wrong/

is forwarded for your enlightenment.

Yep when Daffy concedes defeat in the appeal you know its all over. Problem will be that the guilty verdict will always stick and the rainbow lobby who use to spit the dummy when Pell would not give them communion have achieved their target (destroy complete confidence in Catholic church). Personally I have no confidence in Catholic church although I know a number of fine Catholics and Priests. What it has done to me and many others is destroy any faith in then Justice system.

ffs the maggot STUCK HIS COCK INTO TWO YOUNG BOYS MOUTHS! IN THE CHURCH VESTRY.. HE WAS STILL IN HIS REGALIA! lets all stop trying to defend the indefensible. He's a maggot. A grub. If there is a hell he should be boiling in oil right now. He got off lightly. Let him rot. Personally I'd let him hang but hey..

The arguments go around in ever decreasing circles that eventually disappear somewhere.
George has a heaven sent opportunity to sweep all of this aside and pursue a point that would make everything else null and void - simply take the word of God to those suffering in prison. He is well qualified and positioned.
To argue the legal 'toss' will only make him a companion of the legal fraternity, which is a no-win without fee looser.