Big Nana,

Your claims about lack of evidence is wrong
as Steele Redux points out in this
discussion.

The following link explains:

http://theconversation.com/george-pell-has-lost-his-appeal-what-did-the-court-decide-and-what-happens-now-118054

Perhaps now more victims will have the courage to come forward.

Dear Foxy,

What do you reckon his chances are of getting into heaven?

SR,

To paraphrase Foxy, we all

"... need to do more research on the suppression orders that were in place - and the journalists who sat in court for months and were not allowed to report on what was going on."

So we're to be kept in the dark ? Well, justice is blind, I suppose. But it certainly shouldn't be. He who asserts, must demonstrate: 'asseritur gratis, negatur gratis'.

Yes, as you point out, a testimony can count as 'evidence'. So, when they come for you, on the basis of someone's 'testimony', what do your reckon we should do ? Do you think that's impossible ?

Joe

Dear Mr Opinion,

I imagine he's had his "heaven" on earth all
these decades.

Joe,

The courts have done their job. They've rendered
their verdict and that's the system of justice
in this country and as the OM stated - that must be
respected.

There's more at the following link:

http://theconversation.com/george-pell-has-lost-his-appeal-what-did-the-court-decide-and-what-happens-now-118054

Obviously the evidence of the witness is considered to be very credible, but we in the peanut gallery have to take that on faith. I would prefer a more transparent process, especially when the outcome is to stick people in the clink for a few years.