Hi Nathan,

Thank you for your comments. I have read Banjo's comments
and I agree with what he is suggesting. in reforming our
justice system - it does need to be reformed especially in
sexual abuse cases as Banjo points out.

________________________________________________________________________

Hi Maverick,

I agree that the Cardinal placed the protection of the
Church above that of the victims and survivors of sexual abuse.
His actions speak for themselves.

I think that his personal ambition may also have played
a large part in some of the decisions that he made.

Hi Yuyutsu,

Regarding the state funerals question?

I believe that it arose out of questions driven by the
media. The state premiers merely responded to the inquiries
in which Cardinal Pell's brother - David Pell played a part.
He may have wanted a state funeral - not sure.

In any case - the state premiers made it clear that they did not
want to distress the victims of abuse and their families.
Glad to read that you think that a state funeral would not be
appropriate in the case of Cardinal Pell.

shadowminister,

To convict Cardinal Pell the jury had to believe
without doubt that the complainant was reliable,
and honest, and telling the truth. The jury believed that.
This was supported by a Court of Appeal by two majority judges.

However the high court found that belief in the complainant as
a compelling witness was not enough to convict. This decision was
the result of the current legal process in Australia.

That is why
as Banjo pointed out our legal system needs to be reformed.
Especially in sexual abuse cases.

Foxy,

You claim that the complainant was truthful without a jot of supporting evidence? I have a bridge you might like to buy.

shadowminister,

Victim's advocate Helen Last said that "she felt numb,"
when she heard about Pell's death.

"It's a tragedy of great proportions. There's so many
survivors in Victoria still who have not been able to come
forward about abuse by him, on them."

"I personally believe on the basis of evidence and testimonies
by so many, that George Pell has been involved in a network of
sexual offending clergy that goes right back."

And at least one complainant was believed by a jury, by
a majority judgement and by a substantial body of public opinion.

So, you've got a bridge you want to sell?

Brooklyn or London?

I don't believe that anything actually happened between Cardinal Pell and these two naughty "victim" boys whose only reason to be in that room (it indeed they were), was to steal wine.

All evidence showed that Pell could not have possibly been alone with them at the time.

But there is one more scenario, albeit without evidence, which cannot be completely discarded as impossible:

Accordingly, there were other clergy present in the room with Pell and the boys.
Accordingly, while Pell's act would technically be viewed today as sexual, he had no sexual intentions whatsoever.
Accordingly, the motive of his act was to punish the boys for trying to steal and drink the sacred blood of Jesus Christ - the most horrendous and inconceivable atrocity according to Catholic thought.
Accordingly, since the boys were going to use their mouths for that crime, Pell wanted to teach them how bitter-tasting the result could be so they never ever attempt it again.
Accordingly, Pell's only motive was to defend Lord Jesus and the Church.
Accordingly, the other clergy present approved of that bizarre punishment.
Accordingly, Pell would never disclose anything about it and would not testify in order to protect the other clergymen who were present there.
Accordingly, the surviving accuser failed to mention the presence of the other clergymen because he wanted to depict Pell as a low-life sex maniac for maximal revenge and also to conceal his own crimes in that room.

There. An alternate possibility.

.

Dear NathanJ,

.

You wrote :

« That [“putting justice back on the drawing board] should include all crimes. I would also argue how the police and connected entities work and operate »
.

Yes, Nathan, nothing is static, especially criminal activity.

Reforming every aspect of our response to criminal activity is a vast and never-ending project.

Unfortunately, sex crimes (together with domestic violence) are by far the most frequent and widespread of the major crimes committed in Australia.

According to a Brisbane psychotherapist, Merryl Gee, less than 1% of perpetrators of sexual assaults in Australia are found guilty. She notes that sexual assault has among the highest rates of acquittal and lowest rates of proven guilt compared with other offences.

Jane Gilmore, an award-winning journalist, indicates that 1 in 150 rapes result in a rapist in jail and that for every single false allegation, there are over 220 rapes not reported to police :

http://janegilmore.com/rape-and-sexual-assault-in-australia-2019-2020/
.

I understand your concerns regarding the exposure of the members of a jury to outside influence from social media etc. Well-seasoned professional judges/magistrates are undoubtedly less influenceable in that respect.

The pros and cons of judge and/or jury are well known. Judgment by one’s peers randomly selected from the electoral role seems more democratic to me. The human aspect of justice is also important from my point of view. A professional judge is essentially a technician of the law. In many respects, he could almost be replaced by a computerised electronic logarithm.

I, personally, place a high value on the humanity of justice and should not see kindly the judge/magistrate eventually replaced by a robot of some sort, no matter how intelligent and efficient it may happen to be.

.

(Continued …)

.