Gentlemen:

http://theconversation.com/how-george-pell-won-in-the-high-court-on-a-legal-technicality-133156

It's should not be that difficult to understand.

Hi Foxy,

The forum goose saying "Pell was found innocent by all 7 high court Judges" is wrong Pell was acquitted. The say goose who said 'Cry Baby' Porter had nothing to worry about, and was in for $10+ million in compensation, a groveling apology from the ABC, and 100 ABC staff sacked to pay for it all. He made similar rants in the 'Beat Up' Bolt case where he declared an arrest was imminent!

It is important to observe that the Court does not criticise the evidence of the complainant and reaches its decision of acquittal assuming that the complainant’s evidence was credible and reliable.The reasonable doubt about guilt is created by the opportunity evidence, and not the evidence of the complainant.

I assume after his acquittal Pell went somewhere private for a celebratory suck of the lolly pop! Anyway, can't now be concerned about a dead paedophile like Pell!

Joe Hildebrand has written an excellent Opinion piece
where he points out that "perhaps it is a sign of
the times that in the lead up to the purest and
happiest holiday of Christmas, the news is awash with
stories of sorrow and shame."

On the global scene we have the horror of war
between Israel and Gaza. We've got the Brittany Higgins
case being brought up again with Bruce Lehrmann seeking
vindication. And we've now got allegations against
Alan Jones - the conservative icon. The once undisputed king
of the media giant's radio arm and a former Liberal
speech writer and star rugby coach.

These sexual assault allegations go to someone who's
been at the very heart of public life in both media and
politics. Who's been brutal against others and held them
up to scrutiny and account.

Hildebrand tells us that the allegations are still untested
in a court of law. And whether they ever will be we have to
wait and see. Yet these allegations have as Hildebrand
says ensnared the most ardent prosecutors of public
debate.

Hilderbrand points out that it is brutal, but aa fair cop.
If anyone in public life believes that they are revealing
ugly truths or are prepared to accuse others of
ugliness - then it is inevitably only a matter of time
before they are cast as ugly themselves and in the case of
Alan Jones - he should be prepared to face his many accusers.

Of course he is like Cardinal Pell was, a very powerful man,
with many powerful friends. It will be interesting to see
if everyone is equal under the law.

There mus be a reason why Justice wears a blindfold.

Dear Paul,

The allegations against Alan Jones have been around
for ages. The fact that he's gotten away with it for so long
speaks to the dark side of society - where power and
money and influence matters.

It will be interesting to see where the case ends up.

I suspect his lawyers will handle it for him.

After all with people like John Howard, Peta Credlin, John Laws,
James Packer, supporting him - how can he possibly lose?

Foxy is correct. Pell was acquitted on a legal technicality that centred on the principle of reasonable doubt. Specifically, the technicality related to whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient for the jury to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt.

Pell was not acquitted because new evidence emerged or because he was found innocent, but because the High Court determined that the evidence at trial was insufficient to meet the high standard required for a criminal conviction, thereby casting reasonable doubt on his guilt.

Those who want desperately to believe that Pell was innocent don’t seem to understand that the above does not mean that he was guilty. It’s possible to acknowledge the above and still maintain your belief that he was innocent.

Syoksya,

So what you are saying is that the evidence was insufficient for a conviction. Just what I was saying. The same was the case for Bill Shorten, except the case was not brought to court, just as the case against Pell should never have been brought to court as there was never enough evidence to convict.

Shorten got off on a legal technicality he was not found innocent.