What I find fascinating and surprising is the rising amount of support for Pell, as is being slowly spreading, according to those so called informed journo's and academics, some of which even Foxy has quoted.
I believe the moral of the the story is reasonable doubt, with a touch of forgiveness.
Then you add what I can only imagine is, over-reaction on the part of the accuser, when comparing the alleged acts to a test of seriousness and relativity.
Was this act so severe as to be treated with such over-reaction.
Is it because the 'boy' in question, has now decided to come forth and ruin an old man's life, only to promote his justification as 'his' life was ruined by this man and this act.
As those of us who have been in this same position, (pun intended) can attest, it meant nothing at the time to many and in some cases I can say with experience, came away with smiles as big as houses.
So what is different when we are told one person goes all sobby and allegedly suffers somehow, and another simply 'pulls up their pants' (pun intended) and gets on with life as if it was just another experience in his life, as one commentor has explained, and good for him.
He is the other end of the line from this snivelling little twat who decided to make use of his psychosis.
In case you don't know the true meaning of the word, look it up, it's very possible from what is known so far about this guy, that this is best case scenario, describing him and his justification for this witch hunt.
And so this might go a little way to understanding why there is this rising public sympathy and support for Pell.
Foxy, stop going on about your love and faith in the judiciary, juries, and so on.
Your wasting your breath, and stop repeating the obvious, as if we don't know what has happened to Pell, by going over and over again and again, jees, enough, we know it all by now.

ALTRAV, how about you stop going on as the number one paedophiles apologists. Your nonsense is making you a laughing stock, what's new there. Do you believe by denigrating the victim you bolster the standing of the perpetrator. //the rising amount of support for Pell// only among the rabid right and the paedophile apologists like yourself.

Just for interest if you believe it was okay for Pell, was it also okay for Pell's mate Gerald Ridsdale who was convinced of the sexual assault of 65 children, the youngest aged four.

Jury trials also have a checkered history and have been banned in several countries after high-profile wrongful convictions or acquittals, especially involving high-profile figures.

Dear Philip S,

You write;

"** Different people sometimes have a different view of what is morally correct. **"

Yes indeed. Some of us feel the act of physically molesting children is deeply morally repugnant and the act of defending those who have been convicted in a court of law of having committed that crime as morally bereft.

And there are those who don't.

I'm going to go with the former I'm afraid.

Steely, sorry mate the position of OLO's resident person/s who keep quoting the obvious, is already taken by Foxy and Paul, so you might have to share the ad-nauseam podium with them as they are also known for repeatedly quoting the obvious.
Paul, at least I am making people laugh.
By comparison you and your team are making people sick by repeatedly quoting the obvious.
We know you guys live in a very small bubble and you don't get out much so your opinions are so very narrow and so few, it explains your continual exaggeration and over-reach on the facts.
Your attempts at virtue shaming are in fact shameful on your part.
I at least attempt to give reasons and explanations of other views and angles.
What do you lot do?
You offer NOTHING, only boorish compliant rubbish about how you have this sick and pathetic faith in the system.
I will keep hounding you till you show some semblance of reason and common sense, and stop spouting the obvious from your soap box pulpit, in the corner of the local kindergarten.
I know you guys don't bother reading my posts, which is OK, because they are intended for the rest of the OLO commentors, as they actually understand the words, and their meaning, which I might add are a very good fit for the 'preachers'.
So please keep on not reading my comments, that way I can have real and intelligent conversations with the others with open minds and a grip on reality.
OH yeah, and just to put the finishing touches on your beloved legal system and juries and so on,I leave you with just one of the many big stuff ups this moronic country and it's moronic people, like yourselves can be so proud of: THE CHAMBERLAINS!

What's that ALTRAV, the Chamberlain case is proof the jury system don't work? By extrapolation it proves Pell is innocent. Your cohorts on this, the other forums ratty old men who are also apologists for Pell, have not gone to the same extent as you have in justifying paedophilia as a man building experience.

I see you brushed the Gerald Ridsdale case aside, I don't expect you would answer that question, a bit to hot even for you. Just for clarity when you // with experience, came away with smiles as big as houses.// What side of the fence were you on?