Josephus,

Only statements of fact can be libel.

Jokes, opinions, and even statements that an
author mistakenly believes to be true are
protected. It's tough to prove a libel claim.

Dear Foxy,

I could get mhaze to defend me and get me off on the grounds of insanity plus I don't think there is a jury in Australia that would find me guilty. I don't think there would be too many citizens serving as jurors who would side with the judiciary on any matters related to Pell; I think Australia's judges have really put themselves against society after they are perceived to have orchestrated the acquittal of Pell.

But apart from that Pell could avenge his 'good' name by putting a medieval spell on me and get his buddy Il Papa to excommunicate me or have me burned at the stake or whatever it is those sort of people like doing to other people. That'll be alright by me just as long as I'm dressed for the occasion.

Foxy's. Steelies, Mr O and Pauls pile on an innocent man says far more about their characters then Pell. Their hatred, lies and misrepresenting is consistent with the abc.

.

Pell’s legal battles are not yet over.

The deceased choir boy’s father’s lawyer has confirmed that his client’s claim in the civil court against the Catholic Church will now go ahead on the basis that it was the [alleged] sexual abuse his son suffered from George Pell that resulted in his son’s drug addiction and death by overdose.

His lawyer emphasized that the civil case is not reliant or dependent on the outcome of the criminal case.

The major difference is that the standard of proof required for conviction in a civil case is “on the balance of probabilities” (more than 50% certainty), whereas in a criminal case the standard of proof required is “beyond reasonable doubt” (at least 95% certainty).

It will be interesting to see the outcome of the civil case :

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/survivors-in-shock-after-high-court-quashes-george-pell-s-sexual-abuse-convictions
.

In the meantime, Pope Francis tweeted (on 7 April 202) :

« In these days of #Lent, we've been witnessing the persecution that Jesus underwent and how He was judged ferociously, even though He was innocent. Let us #PrayTogether today for all those persons who suffer due to an unjust sentence because of someone had it in for them. »

The Holy See issued the following statement :

« The Holy See, which has always expressed confidence in the Australian judicial authority, welcomes the High Court’s unanimous decision concerning Cardinal George Pell, acquitting him of the accusations of abuse of minors and overturning his sentence.

« Entrusting his case to the court’s justice, Cardinal Pell has always maintained his innocence, and has waited for the truth to be ascertained.

« At the same time, the Holy See reaffirms its commitment to preventing and pursuing all cases of abuse against minors. »

Neither the Pope nor the Holy See could have ignored that the deceased choir boy’s father had already instigated the civil court action when they published their declarations.
.

And the moral of the story according to the bible is :

Isaiah 57:21 New King James Version (NKJV) :

“There is no peace,”
Says my God, “for the wicked.”

.

There really is some ignorant garbage spouted by posters. Only 3% of Catholic priests have been found to have been in involved in child abuse. The claim that "Paedophilia in the Catholic Church is a global social pandemic …. " Is the biggest garbage of the lot. Despite what Josephus suggests, the idiot who said this is unlikely to be done for defamation because the idiot is anonymous, and the Catholic church is highly unlikely to want to waste time on an idiot anyway; it is far above such juvenile nonsense.

If the idiot could be identified, and the Catholic church was so minded, he could be sued for defamation, and he would be found guilty because he has made an untrue statement. Only if a claim is true and can be proven to be true, can the person making the claim be safe from defamation proceedings.

Unlike professional journalists and the media, who can be readily identified - and sued - there is nothing stopping posters on social media saying what they like. This fact comes up regularly in the media, often driven by lawyers and, if certain idiots are not more circumspect, it would not be surprising to see a crackdown, or even the total loss of a valuable outlet for ordinary people to express their views.

It would be good to hear what Graham Young has to say about this.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

What happens next remains unclear.
Pell's position as Vatican treasurer was filled in
his absence putting him effectively in retirement.

Archbishop of Melbourne Peter Comensoli said he hoped
people would consider the high court judgement and see
the decision in its legal context but he expects people
will keep their original positions about the cardinal.

Certainly we can expect that victims and survivors
and their families will find it hard to face the
fact that there were people who moved predators across
parishes.

I agree that despite Pell's criminal conviction being
overturned Pell's legal tests may not yet be over.
Further civil cases may be brought against dioceses
of Ballarat and Melbourne and Pell could be a witness
to those cases. If those battles ensue they will
ensure that Pell's life will not be a peaceful one.

"No rest for the wicked" as the old adage says.

Perhaps it would have been better if the Church
would have followed a different direction rich
in human and spiritual tradition:

"I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd is one who
lays down his life for his sheep." (John 10,11).