The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Pell: Disgraceful Decision

Pell: Disgraceful Decision

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 58
  11. 59
  12. 60
  13. All
Foxy,

"In his succinct but powerful closing comments
the Defense Lawyer asked the jury to consider
how would the complainant have known the layout
of the priest's sacristy, and that there were wooden
panels, a storage cupboard, a kitchenette and
sacramental wine in there?"

That is a perfect example of misleading information, I've been in literally hundreds of Catholic Churchs around the world and never saw one in which the Sacristy was not frequented by altar boys, teachers, parents and anybody else who wanted to see the priest when he was in there, not to mention the cleaning staff and the devoted ladies who usually look after arranging the flowers.

Then there are all the weddings when those immediately concerned retire to the sacristy to finalize the paperwork.

The Sacristy is not 'the holy of holies'.
My answer to the lawyer would be because the witness walked in there and had a look.
Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 28 February 2019 2:14:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont'd ...

runner,

Thank You for asking me your question.

Personally I am still optimistic that Catholicism
in Australia will survive, as it always has.
But to achieve that Catholics will require genuine
leadership and a willingness to confront both the
difficulties and the opportunities that the Church
faces. My feelings is that we are uniquely placed in
Australia to be able to do precisely that - despite
the latest damage to people's trust and to the
reputation of the Church.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 28 February 2019 2:25:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tim Flannery who has often made pathically flawed climate predictions once said of why he thought Lindy Chamberlain was guilty

'Her religion was one factor. The Chamberlains were Seventh-day Adventists and media reports of the strange practices of their "cult" (as we were led to think of it) included inferences of child sacrifice that did not strike me as beyond belief. At the time I was one of many Australian scientists fighting to keep creationism out of the classroom, and fundamentalist beliefs were seen as the enemy.'

To his credit he has apologised for getting it wrong. Maybe one day he will apologise also for his failed predictions. I suspect Pell's 'religion' really influenced the jury more than facts.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 28 February 2019 2:30:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

You may have been in many churches around the
world (so have I) - and yes, the sacristy
is usually a hive of activity. However -
St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne has two
sacristies. There is a general sacristy and then a
priest's sacristy that is off-limits and a
complainant would not be able to describe it in such
detail, (certainly not a choirboy) unless he'd been
in there.

Anyway, be that as it may, ultimately it all came down
to whether the jury accepted Pell's complainant
testimony - beyond a reasonable doubt. After two and
a half days of watching and listening to the evidence,
they did.

The guilty verdict made the complainant a victim and
Australia's most powerful Catholic a convicted child
sex offender.

His lawyers have lodged an appeal against the conviction and
it will be months before an outcome is known. But it will
not stop Pell from being sentenced next week and in the
meantime it is likely he will await his fate from a jail
cell.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 28 February 2019 3:09:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm reminded by an article in Quadrant that both George Pell and Philip Wilson (another one convicted on dodgy, if not non-existent, evidence) were first to instigate action against paedophilia, despite the refusal of the then top man to do anything. Pope John Paul decreed the abuse scandal to be a “communist plot". How strange that two men now declared to be criminals stood up to the Pope on the matter.

James Franklin, the author of the Quadrant article, says of the 'evidence’ against Pell, there is “little of it”; and it “It consists just in the complainant’s account”. Franklin also points out that in the first trial, the jury voted 10-2 for an ACQUITTAL.

Franklin also says that our faith in trial by jury is “naive”. Personally, my skin crawls at the idea of being judged by some of the people I know who have done jury duty.

Something else I'm uncomfortable with is that Pell has to await his appeal in jail.
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 28 February 2019 4:35:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Personally, my skin crawls at the idea of being judged by some of the people I know who have done jury duty.;

yep you are guilty ttbn because you don't believe in man made gw and you say homosexuality is a perversion. Just ask the abc who really have done a pretty good job of covering their own deviants.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 28 February 2019 4:42:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 58
  11. 59
  12. 60
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy