American writer and political analyst, friend of George Pell, George Weigle, recently says in an interview that Pell would not have been found guilty had there had not been such a “virulent anti Catholic atmosphere in Australia for decades”, as well as mob hysteria from the public.

He was particularly critical of the ABC’s anti-Catholic propaganda, and the fact that this taxpayer-funded organisation has never had any real challenge from the Australian political class. He also found the Victorian judicial system unreasonable. As many of us would agree, Pell should have had the right of a trial by judge only, given that he had already been found guilty by the media and public.

Weigle’s analysis of the case also suggested that the jury had ignored the judge’s instructions on how to construe evidence. He thinks, too, that the gag order following the conviction prevented open examination of the prosecution’s implausible description of the physical act as described by the complainant.

Victoria Police, unsurprisingly, gets a caning for its so-called investigating techniques. Apart from the fact that they never even attended the scene of the alleged crime, American investigators actually laughed at videos of VicPol interviews in the Vatican with Pell, saying that the man’s body language alone would have told competent investigators/interviewers that he didn’t have a case to answer. They wondered who was behind the fishing expedition for victims before they decided to charge Pell.

George Weigle said that question would have been answered if Australia had decent investigative journalists instead of rabble rousers. He also thinks that there was a deliberate campaign to find suitably convenient victims for a planned witch hunt against the Catholic Church.

It is the Australia justice system that is on trial globally, according to Weigle, who wonders if ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ means anything at all in Australia

the left don't care ttbn. Innocent or guilty they are happy to have got there result and use any means or any pawns in the game. They tried it with Kavannaugh, they tried demonising a boy being bullied by an American Indian, they tried it by making up Trumps collusion with Russia. When found wrong they have already achieved their aim of demonization and move on to their next target.

True, runner, and we also have another problem, as written by someone in the last few days:

“It’s a tough time to be a right-of-centre person in Australia these days. The political class supposedly on our side stinks and seems not to have a principle it wouldn’t sell out for the chauffeur and nice pension”.

The 'Benedict Option’ is becoming more appealing all the time.

Reason is being replaced by 'feelings’ or emotions. In the Pell trial, for instance, the function of reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury gave way to the feelings they held about the credibility of one witness.

Reason in Australian public discourse has been eclipsed.

The question whether or not Pell's trial was fair is irrelevant, because it is simply wrong to throw old harmless people in jail.

Yuyutsu,

The establishment needed to please the jackals and their thirst for the blood of not just Pell, but the Catholic Church. He was always going to jail. Like others of us, he trusted the system, thinking things were still the way they used to be; they are not. He could have stayed in the Vatican, and they couldn't have touched him. We are now all at risk if we ever fall foul of what passes for justice in Australia these days.

Dear Ttbn,

I am not confident that Pell could have remained in the Vatican indefinitely. Likely the pope would have ordered him to return to Australia in order to minimise the damage to the Church. I may have advised him to flee to or even hide in some safe third country, but then he would have to break his ties with the pope and the Church.

I don't know whether or not he did what is claimed about him, but in any case I would have taken a cyanide pill with me because nothing is worse than prison. It is just so cruel, so wrong, even crucifixion would have been more appropriate!

Yes, we are all at risk, yet I don't think this is due to recent changes in the "justice" system, but rather due to this whole sickening concept as if anyone has a right to punish others, especially using such horrendous punishments.