The Law Cardinal Pell

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Procrastinator35 said:
Did I argue that he won't be getting it in a court of law?.....No.....I'm not presenting a case to extinguish that ipso facto.

But lets keep sight of all that has preceded this case.....Things don't just occur in isolation, external to a context.
Click to expand...
Lol. You are the poster child for why this case should be tried anywhere but in Australia.
 
tony dragun said:
Lol. You are the poster child for why this case should be tried anywhere but in Australia.
Click to expand...

How so?....I'm not anti-religious.

It'll take a while to find 13 impartial jurors on this one....To be sure.

They'll be looking to stack the jury with Catholics.....Forgiveness n all.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

tony dragun said:
No. But that if people like you get on the jury the presumption of innocence goes out the window. Suddenly becomes presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that both the judge & the defense lawyer will be reminding the jury ad nauseum about that.

My query would be over reasonable doubt in Pells' case.....To my way of thinking, he's already extinguished those parameters.
 
Procrastinator35 said:
I'm sure that both the judge & the defense lawyer will be reminding the jury ad nauseum about that.

My query would be over reasonable doubt in Pells' case.....To my way of thinking, he's already extinguished those parameters.
Click to expand...
Yes of course. Because you obviously know every detail of the alleged offenses.

Keep digging.
 
tony dragun said:
Yes of course. Because you obviously know every detail of the alleged offenses.

Keep digging.
Click to expand...

At least this time it'll be a little more honest....All Pell will be interested in, is covering his own hide.....Now where have we seen that before?
 
tony dragun said:
No. But that if people like you get on the jury the presumption of innocence goes out the window. Suddenly becomes presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...
Any person with a preconceived view as to either the guilt or innocence of a person before the court would ask to be excused I would have thought. Failing that ethical test, be the subject of challenge by the prosecution or the defence.
 
AM said:
Any person with a preconceived view as to either the guilt or innocence of a person before the court would ask to be excused I would have thought. Failing that ethical test, be the subject of challenge by the prosecution or the defence.
Click to expand...
Many people like pro out there. Good luck with that.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

tony dragun said:
Many people like pro out there. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

Just because I think that he's guilty as sin, doesn't mean I'm against the tenets of a Democratic jury system....Presumption of innocence & all.

You need to learn to separate those 2 concepts.

What I will say, however....Is that if the case for the prosecution even does a half-arsed job, then old Georgy Porgy, should be spending some time behind bars.

But as we all know. Those in high positions of power seldom do!
 
Procrastinator35 said:
Just because I think that he's guilty as sin, doesn't mean I'm against the tenets of a Democratic jury system....Presumption of innocence & all.
Click to expand...

So if you were not very sure he is guilty based only on what you heard in court you'd find him not guilty? You'd put all your preconceptions of his absolute guilt to the side?
 
HairyO said:
So if you were not very sure he is guilty based only on what you heard in court you'd find him not guilty? You'd put all your preconceptions of his absolute guilt to the side?
Click to expand...

It's pretty simple.....I wouldn't make the jury.

Because of the level & nature of the publicity surrounding this case, following on from the Royal Commission; And given his standing & position in the general community & the RCC itself.... Then finding 13 unbiased jurors is going to prove very difficult.

I'd find it impossible to separate the man from his connections with & enabling of, serial pedophiles under his auspices.

So would I be both biased & compromised?.....You betcha.
 
Procrastinator35 said:
It's pretty simple.....I wouldn't make the jury.

Because of the level & nature of the publicity surrounding this case, following on from the Royal Commission; And given his standing & position in the general community & the RCC itself.... Then finding 13 unbiased jurors is going to prove very difficult.

I'd find it impossible to separate the man from his connections with & enabling of, serial pedophiles under his auspices.

So would I be both biased & compromised?.....You betcha.
Click to expand...

You really have only read the ABC/Fairfax headlines, haven't you. Even Counsel Assisting didn't conclude as you have, not even close, despite desperately trying to achieve that outcome.
 
Procrastinator35 said:
It's pretty simple.....I wouldn't make the jury.

Because of the level & nature of the publicity surrounding this case, following on from the Royal Commission; And given his standing & position in the general community & the RCC itself.... Then finding 13 unbiased jurors is going to prove very difficult.

I'd find it impossible to separate the man from his connections with & enabling of, serial pedophiles under his auspices.

So would I be both biased & compromised?.....You betcha.
Click to expand...

Well, in your defence, at least you are being honest about it. Which you would hope every potential juror is.
 
BruceFromBalnarring said:
You really have only read the ABC/Fairfax headlines, haven't you. Even Counsel Assisting didn't conclude as you have, not even close, despite desperately trying to achieve that outcome.
Click to expand...

There's plausible deniability & then there's Pell levels of denial.....What he would have us all believe, is that he has achieved the highest office in Oz, encompassing the levels of awareness & responsibilities that come with that office for the RCC, while at the same time, being completely ignorant of all that transpired around him.

"I don't recall" & "I don't remember" simply will not do, as any kind of a defense on his behalf.

Complete & utter hogwash.
 
evo said:
It comes with a lot of psychological baggage. Image being born into sin and having to apologise to a sky tyrant for the rest of your life.
Click to expand...
Not a Catholic, I got the hillbilly Proddy version but despite rejecting it all at a young age due to basic ******* logic the fear of hell still hung around. campaigner of a thing to deal with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top