The Forum > General Discussion > Pell: Disgraceful Decision
Pell: Disgraceful Decision
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- ...
- 58
- 59
- 60
-
- All
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 28 February 2019 11:35:20 AM
| |
Strange how, if this info is true did the defense not demonstrate it in court.
Both Bolt and Devine point out the attack is meant to have happened after Mass, when Pell would usually have spent time speaking to worshippers and that it happened in the sacristy, which is a busy room that someone could have walked into. They also note Pell was normally accompanied everywhere he went by the master of ceremonies, Monsignor Charles Portelli. Their views echo an article written by Father Frank Brennan who also pointed out his concerns with some of the evidence presented. “Anyone familiar with the conduct of a solemn Cathedral Mass with full choir would find it most unlikely that a bishop would, without grave reason, leave a recessional procession and retreat to the sacristy unaccompanied,” he wrote in Eureka Street. He also noted that the priest’s garments could not have been pushed aside in the way described and it was “impossible to produce an erect penis through a seamless alb”. An alb is a long robe which is worn with a belt called a cincture. It doesn’t have any zippers or buttons but has small slits on the side to allow access to trouser pockets underneath. It is worn underneath an ornate vestment called a chasuble. “The complainant’s initial claim to police was that Pell had parted his vestments, but an alb cannot be parted; it is like a seamless dress,” Father Brennan wrote. “Later the complainant said that Pell moved the vestments to the side. An alb secured with a cincture cannot be moved to the side. “The police never inspected the vestments during their investigations, nor did the prosecution show that the vestments could be parted or moved to the side as the complainant had alleged.” Father Brenann said the idea that the offences were committed right after Mass by a fully robbed archbishop in the sacristy with an open door and in full view of the corridor “seemed incredible to my mind”. http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/courts-law/why-the-complainant-in-george-pells-trial-was-so-compelling/news-story/c2737320de6619d82f101973eb02e96f Posted by Philip S, Thursday, 28 February 2019 11:40:03 AM
| |
Oh come on people, when the bloke's own defense lawyer talks about the offending only as a 'plain vanilla sexual penetration case' any consideration of whether or not he did it must surely go out the window.
This is not someone protesting his innocence through his lawyer but rather one seeking to excuse the act as a minor transgression. Not rocket science. Posted by SteeleRedux, Thursday, 28 February 2019 12:26:31 PM
| |
Foxy,
The trial is now over, so why is not the accuser's statement available verbatim? Plus what he told the police. The accuser did not give any evidence at the trial, his statement to the first trial was accepted and as far as I know he was not cross examined. The fact is that there were no third party witnesses or other evidence presented by the prosecution, yet a guilty verdict was given. We must question how this is possible and it speaks poorly of our legal system when guilt can be found without evidence. That should be of concern to all. It is one thing to be worried about the welfare of possible victims but quite another if an innocent man is hung. Posted by HenryL, Thursday, 28 February 2019 12:30:58 PM
| |
It's not about the Catholic church or Pell himself; it's not about how horrible child abuse or paedophilia is. It's about JUSTICE. If an appeal does not right this massive breach of justice, then Australia is not a very good place anymore. None of us will be able to rest easy. HenryL has summed up the evidence issue, and the necessity of the prosecution proving guilt. No other accused person has ever been subjected to trial by media, police incompetence, and the hatred of nasty activists like Pell has been in my lifetime.
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 28 February 2019 12:31:01 PM
| |
Dear Is Mise,
You wrote; "Moral: don't upset the alphabet crowd." The moral must surely be leave our kids alone. And further why are you trying to defend a convicted pedophile? Is your hatred of the left so pervasive that this is what you are reduced to? Shame. Posted by SteeleRedux, Thursday, 28 February 2019 12:31:57 PM
|
I very much doubt this, or any such rape case, if it is more than a few months before it is reported.
The way our law now is, any clown/life failure can get some attention simply by claiming someone of some person of public interest raped them in some dim dark distant time.
What a pile of garbage.