Hi there Mr. OPINION...

I'd be surprised if the H.C. doesn't overturn PELL'S Conviction despite the two to one against, at the Court of Criminal Appeal. My experience (which is none) of the Full Bench of the H.C, they tend to adhere to the full letter of the law, & if there's even a fraction of doubt, they'll usually come down on the side of the Appellant. As I said, I know nothing of the vagaries or machinations of the processes of the H.C. Nevertheless, I think you're right Cardinal PELL might just walk?

Dear o sung wu,

I have degrees in several of the humanities but I made a choice to select sociology as my field because I seem to have an intuitive knack of seeing things differently to other people and I have a pretty good history of getting it right. My intuition as a sociologist tells me that the decision of the High Court will be determined along lines of social class and consequently Pell will walk. I might turn out to be wrong but it's my gut feeling as a sociologist.

PS Are you watching Netflix's 'Mindhunter' series?

http://www.smh.com.au/national/suffer-the-perpetrator-pell-and-the-twisted-inversion-of-victimhood-20190823-p52k1e.html
The link, rightly, questions Conservatives are they confronting justice
o sung wo while it is my view he is guilty, and that his Church is too he may well get off
Our justice system can be bought by the rich and powerful

Hi Belly,

A very good article, the conservatives of society are outraged and shocked that their high priest has been carted off to jail for a crime that society views as vile and disgusting. The Bolts and Devines, just like this conservative bunch on OLO, are pontificating in their ignorance as if they are some sort of legal experts on the matter. Should Pell's lawyers pull a rabbit out of the hat and get him off in the High Court, so be it.

As things stand at the moment; Pell's heading for Hell!

.

To all and sundry,

.

I think we can agree that nobody can affirm beyond all reasonable doubt who is right and who is wrong.

A first popular jury in September 2018 was unable to reach a verdict. A second popular jury in December found Pell guilty. Then the Victorian Supreme Court dismissed his appeal by a two to one majority.

Not one of these three courts found him innocent – despite the combined efforts of the very best (and highly expensive) specialist lawyers in the land in respect of each type of court.

At this stage of what has been a laborious and exhaustive judicial process, the scales of justice have clearly tipped in favour of Pell’s guilt.

Of course, nothing is perfect. Justice is not a hard science. Democratic justice by popular juries whose decisions are scrutinised and confirmed by competent, experienced, professional Supreme Court judges is the best we can do.

I should be very surprised if the High Court of Australia thought otherwise.

.

Keith Windschuttle gives a possible source of inspiration for the witness.

http://thesestonewalls.com/gordon-macrae/will-fr-charles-engelhardts-prosecutor-take-a-plea-deal/

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/04/the-fanciful-testimony-that-convicted-george-pell/