Play Nice Random Chat Thread: Episode III

[Val Keating]

He is now officially a convicted child rapist. He was responsible for the relocation pedo priests. How the **** can people stand up for someone this evil?

Do we need to get into his relationship with Gerald Ridsdale?

 

[SpiderBurton22]

We don't have a full transcript, however, the evidence sounds suspect.

If I was a betting man, my money would be on the other boy that took his life being the real victim, but was likely a bad witness due to his life unraveling post abuse. My guess would be that Pell wasn't the one who abused the other boy but they probably brought it to his attention and he didn't do anything about it which later saw the boy who was abused take his own life. That probably pushed this guy over the edge and wanted justice for his friend but stringing up the lower end priest for what he did wouldn't be enough, the entire system needed a shake up because the leadership did nothing about the abuse, it would take someone important in the church to get strung up for something significant to change. So my guess is that he used some of the details of what happened to his friend and said Pell did it to both of them, heresay wouldn't get a conviction. The problem is Pell isn't directly comparable to a lower end priest in a smaller church so the evidence doesn't quite match up as it should. It does sound compelling because he knows of the abuse that happened, I am not sure why the details would be off if it went down exactly as described.

But that is just my tinfoil hat theory.

Also Tas, if you're going to try and discredit the victims based on a guess, you might want to get some facts right. The victim didn't commit suicide, he died of a drug overdose.

 

[SpiderBurton22]

He is now officially a convicted child rapist. He was responsible for the relocation pedo priests. How the **** can people stand up for someone this evil?

Do we need to get into his relationship with Gerald Ridsdale?

He does have the right to an appeal and may eventually be found not guilty but at this stage no one can claim that Pell is truly innocent as they have not had access to the whole evidence.

What has amazed me is how certain commentator have been saying that the evidence is flimsy and that he has a very good chance of appealling the verdict. This reminds me of the * situation and the commentary around their verdicts.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

We bought French nuclear submarines without the nuclear power plants and put in some noisy disesel engines which then had to travel at paddling speed so as not to be submersible coffins. We do not spend our military budget wisely.

Submarines are ancient technology. The future is drones, drone carriers. We need to custom build a frigate sized drone carriers, a fully combat operational drone is a fraction of the cost of a combat aircraft, in a war of attrition you don't lose your drone pilots because they are in some bunker rather than in the planes.

You can even have submersible drones so you can combat enemy ships/subs with smaller, more disposable units suited for a war of attrition.

We are in the process of buying new long range drones for recon and EW, with the promise of fitting them for strike capabilities, which we won’t as a signatory to multiple anti-missile agreements.


Ultimately what we need is a long range sovereign strategic strike capability, regional stabilisation capabilities to secure our region and a few conteniental capabilities like AA and anti-ship missiles. Ultimately, we need to wean ourselves off the yanks, easier said than done.

 

[DarwinRoo]

He is now officially a convicted child rapist. He was responsible for the relocation pedo priests. How the **** can people stand up for someone this evil?

Do we need to get into his relationship with Gerald Ridsdale?

Because they are ****ing campaigners!

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Why the judgement of all those who cast doubt on the verdict is worth pretty much nothing

Devils Advocate:

You're aware that tweet is commenting on both sides of the debate though right? They're not taking aim at people saying it was wrong, they're also taking aim at those who are vehemently defending the decision.

Whats being expressed is that the evidence was heard in a closed court so ANY opinion on the outcome is flawed at best.

It's actually a surprisingly fence riding comment from a journalist for once.

 

[kangaspurs]

Devils Advocate:

You're aware that tweet is commenting on both sides of the debate though right? They're not taking aim at people saying it was wrong, they're also taking aim at those who are vehemently defending the decision.

Whats being expressed is that the evidence was heard in a closed court so ANY opinion on the outcome is flawed at best.

It's actually a surprisingly fence riding comment from a journalist for once.

I'd maybe agree with that if we weren't at a point where he has been found categorically guilty. The 12 jurors removed all semblance of doubt from that side of the fence when they delivered their verdict imo.

The thing is, the verdict doesn't need to be defended. I think you're making a false equivalence on this, mate (although I acknowledge you're playign devil's advocate) . One side of the fence is dismissing the word of the jury with no knowledge of all the evidence. The other is reacting to a decision that came in the proper course of justice.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Devils Advocate:

You're aware that tweet is commenting on both sides of the debate though right? They're not taking aim at people saying it was wrong, they're also taking aim at those who are vehemently defending the decision.

Whats being expressed is that the evidence was heard in a closed court so ANY opinion on the outcome is flawed at best.

It's actually a surprisingly fence riding comment from a journalist for once.

All the journalists who were actually there for the whole thing have been very circumspect.

We were due to be at St Pats for a school welcome Mass last night. Our wonderful principal pullled the pin - too much media and protest at the site to put the boys in the middle of it, and it’s not a day for a church party when you think about those poor boys, now men. I’m not a Catholic but my partner says it’s kind of devastating to recall praying for Pell in the script of every Mass.

 

[Val Keating]

Richter has apologised for his comments about Pell only being guilty of vanilla sex offences. For the top dog defence lawyer in Melbourne he really bottled this. I’d be surprised if he represents him in the appeal. He compared Pell to Darth Vader ffs. Apparently he was full of drama through the whole thing, probably a ploy to try and draw the jurors away from what was apparently a very compelling statement from the victim.

He might go from $15k a day to 10k after this.

 

[SpiderBurton22]

Richter has apologised for his comments about Pell only being guilty of vanilla sex offences. For the top dog defence lawyer in Melbourne he really bottled this. I’d be surprised if he represents him in the appeal. He compared Pell to Darth Vader ffs. Apparently he was full of drama through the whole thing, probably a ploy to try and draw the jurors away from what was apparently a very compelling statement from the victim.

He might go from $15k a day to 10k after this.

View attachment 627248

Good on him. That takes some guts.

He was trying to say it was at the lower scale of assaults and used a terrible phrase. He's learnt a lesson.

 

[Val Keating]

Food for thought

 

[Val Keating]

Good on him. That takes some guts.

He was trying to say it was at the lower scale of assaults and used a terrible phrase. He's learnt a lesson.

Has he learned his lesson? Or did he just put an apology out there because he had to for his image? There’s a difference between being sorry and trying to protect your reputation

 

[Snake_Baker]

Food for thought

The state protects their gangsters.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Richter has apologised for his comments about Pell only being guilty of vanilla sex offences. For the top dog defence lawyer in Melbourne he really bottled this. I’d be surprised if he represents him in the appeal. He compared Pell to Darth Vader ffs. Apparently he was full of drama through the whole thing, probably a ploy to try and draw the jurors away from what was apparently a very compelling statement from the victim.

He might go from $15k a day to 10k after this.

View attachment 627248

LOL, for $10,000 a day he'll call his mother a whore.

 

[Tas]

Wow, what an average post.

As someone who has had to testify at a case involving 3 people very close to me that were subjected to abuse when they were children and seeing what they had to go through, from reporting the crime and then the whole court process, it is this sort of attitude that sees so many sexual assaults go unreported.

Have a read of this story to see through the victims eyes. Hopefully this will enlighten you a bit.

Yeah, I am sure it is traumatic for anyone even being involved in child abuse.

Sad to read about anyone's plight, irrespective of the circumstances.

Not sure about enlightened, it is probably not too dissimilar to a lot of self-destructed teens

Mary was overcome with a hot rush of anger. Not at The Kid, but at her son, for not telling her. Because Mary had asked her son. Not just once. Something inside of her, some mother’s intuition perhaps, born in the shock after her boy went so quickly and spectacularly off the rails, had made her suspect that he had been a victim of abuse.

“I asked [him], I can’t remember the words I used, whether he was touched up, or played with, and [he] told me ‘no’.”

So he was asked out of the blue by his mother a number of times if he had been touched, wtf? And this came as a complete shock to her, even though she had asked her son a number of times about being abused before his death. The book is also ironically evidence that he denied being abused, for what it is worth. Does the book even explore the impact of his parents divorcing have on him? Young boys often struggle if they do not have a father figure around. He was into Heroine at 14? How does a 14 year old get Heroine? Perhaps I lived a dull and sheltered life.

All very sad and if Pell did do what he has been accused of, I hope there is actually a Hell for him to burn in for all eternity.

The only one who has said anyone was abused was "The Kid" though, at the end of the day he was found guilty due to nothing other than his testimony, it is exceptionally hard to get a conviction on testimony alone, approximately 3% of cases that are reported to police result in a conviction, the majority that get convictions have physical evidence, an eyewitness, a confession, something.

I am just not sure how anyone on a jury can without any reasonable doubt in the circumstances described is just mind-boggling. Even if I thought he did it, or most likely did it, there is plenty of reason cause reasonable doubt and this article added another one, a confession that he denied being abused.

My attitude doesn't matter for shit, less than 10% of reports of abuse to police make it to trial and only 3% of those get a conviction, the burden of proof is extremely hard to achieve without evidence and it only requires the most minor of discrepancies to trigger reasonable doubt. At the end of the day, these have to be decisions of the mind, not of the heart because as unbearable as it is, sometimes people tell lies for ****ed up reasons, even in abuse cases.

 

[tazaa]

I see what’s happening here with the Liberals and their attitude towards immigrants - and now the Pell case.
I see what’s happening in the UK with Jeremy Corbyn and the antisemitism smear campaign against him so to keep him from taking government.
I see what’s happening in the US with the continued wall push and the campaign to get into Venezuela to take hold of it’s assets.
I don’t even need to touch on the ongoing Gaza crisis and of course Syria and Libya.

Western politics is at an all time low to the point the main stream media is not even trying to hide the sickening agendas conservatives are willing to act on to get what they want.
Life, if ever - has been cheapened to the point of such ruthfulness that it’s inhumane to ignore it any longer.

The fact a convicted peodaphle is now being defended and lauded as unjust is the tip for me. Rolf Harris and Harvey Weinstein fell on their swords. Why not Pell? Because of religion?
Call it the twilight zone, call it a paradox - the media and the puppets it controls have finally lost it. Defending the undefendable.

 

[The Other Dean]

Now, I have no doubt that here were some people who prematurely cast their judgement, and others who were hoping he would be found guilty from a position of cynical schadenfreude, and I would expect that a lot of that has to do with his disgraceful conduct during the Royal Commission and his past attitudes to sexual abuse in the church.

Yeah, you got me on the bolded, spurs.

 

[The Other Dean]

He was into Heroine at 14? How does a 14 year old get Heroine? Perhaps I lived a dull and sheltered life.

Sheltered enough to keep misspelling 'heroin'.

In answer to your second question - easier than you think, and there are also a number of places throughout Melbourne (as it is in any large city) where you can cop heroin from the street with minimal fuss and not a whole lot of money in your pocket.

 

[Val Keating]

Sadly lots of kids younger then 14 can and do get access to heroin. These days though most of them go for ice

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

I see what’s happening here with the Liberals and their attitude towards immigrants - and now the Pell case.
I see what’s happening in the UK with Jeremy Corbyn and the antisemitism smear campaign against him so to keep him from taking government.
I see what’s happening in the US with the continued wall push and the campaign to get into Venezuela to take hold of it’s assets.
I don’t even need to touch on the ongoing Gaza crisis and of course Syria and Libya.

Western politics is at an all time low to the point the main stream media is not even trying to hide the sickening agendas conservatives are willing to act on to get what they want.
Life, if ever - has been cheapened to the point of such ruthfulness that it’s inhumane to ignore it any longer.

The fact a convicted peodaphle is now being defended and lauded as unjust is the tip for me. Rolf Harris and Harvey Weinstein fell on their swords. Why not Pell? Because of religion?
Call it the twilight zone, call it a paradox - the media and the puppets it controls have finally lost it. Defending the undefendable.

Global politics in general is in an average state, not just the west; the West isn’t stopping garbage trucks to deny Venezuelans even the most basic form of food. Is the USA taking advantage of the Venezuelan situation, sure; but stealing food from kids mouths and using the military to retain socialist control by firing on protestors doesn’t make Maduro the good guy in this story.

The world is as cruel as it has ever been, arguably less so considering the lack of state-on-state warfare in the last few decades. As for the Pell stuff, I guess some people just want to confirm that true justice is being upheld and those truly evil are held to account as, there is not much more we can do about the other evils of the world.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Sadly lots of kids younger then 14 can and do get access to heroin. These days though most of them go for ice

It has gotten to the stage where we need to have a serious discussion about the merit of legalising all drugs and bringing the drug trade under public control.

 

[SpiderBurton22]

Yeah, I am sure it is traumatic for anyone even being involved in child abuse.

Sad to read about anyone's plight, irrespective of the circumstances.

Not sure about enlightened, it is probably not too dissimilar to a lot of self-destructed teens



So he was asked out of the blue by his mother a number of times if he had been touched, wtf? And this came as a complete shock to her, even though she had asked her son a number of times about being abused before his death. The book is also ironically evidence that he denied being abused, for what it is worth. Does the book even explore the impact of his parents divorcing have on him? Young boys often struggle if they do not have a father figure around. He was into Heroine at 14? How does a 14 year old get Heroine? Perhaps I lived a dull and sheltered life.

All very sad and if Pell did do what he has been accused of, I hope there is actually a Hell for him to burn in for all eternity.

The only one who has said anyone was abused was "The Kid" though, at the end of the day he was found guilty due to nothing other than his testimony, it is exceptionally hard to get a conviction on testimony alone, approximately 3% of cases that are reported to police result in a conviction, the majority that get convictions have physical evidence, an eyewitness, a confession, something.

I am just not sure how anyone on a jury can without any reasonable doubt in the circumstances described is just mind-boggling. Even if I thought he did it, or most likely did it, there is plenty of reason cause reasonable doubt and this article added another one, a confession that he denied being abused.

My attitude doesn't matter for shit, less than 10% of reports of abuse to police make it to trial and only 3% of those get a conviction, the burden of proof is extremely hard to achieve without evidence and it only requires the most minor of discrepancies to trigger reasonable doubt. At the end of the day, these have to be decisions of the mind, not of the heart because as unbearable as it is, sometimes people tell lies for ****** up reasons, even in abuse cases.

I well aware of the numbers for prosecution of sexual offenders.

I am also aware that it may be a case of one person's word against the other but you basically said that he was probably abused by someone else and used Pell as a scapegoat for the Church's wrongdoing. What is that based on?

Nothing but your predujices, I'd say because you don't know the facts.

You follow up in this post still trying to downplay the victim. E.g., what 14 year old does heroin? young boys without father figures etc.

Have you met a sexual abuse victim? Do you know the shame they go through? How tough it is for them to admit they were abused because the sick ****s make them feel so worthless. If you had then I think you would realise that denying it to your parent when your life has spun out of control is not that unusual.

Enough of demonizing the victims, I'm done with attitude.

 

[Tas]

Sheltered enough to keep misspelling 'heroin'.

In answer to your second question - easier than you think, and there are also a number of places throughout Melbourne (as it is in any large city) where you can cop heroin from the street with minimal fuss and not a whole lot of money in your pocket.

That is pretty sad, both about my spelling and about the heroin.

 

[Tas]

I well aware of the numbers for prosecution of sexual offenders.

I am also aware that it may be a case of one person's word against the other but you basically said that he was probably abused by someone else and used Pell as a scapegoat for the Church's wrongdoing. What is that based on?

Nothing but your predujices, I'd say because you don't know the facts.

You follow up in this post still trying to downplay the victim. E.g., what 14 year old does heroin? young boys without father figures etc.

Have you met a sexual abuse victim? Do you know the shame they go through? How tough it is for them to admit they were abused because the sick ****s make them feel so worthless. If you had then I think you would realise that denying it to your parent when your life has spun out of control is not that unusual.

Enough of demonizing the victims, I'm done with attitude.

Firstly, you should take with a grain of salt any opinion that is clearly marked as a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. Does that make sense?

I don't have any prejudice, when a point of evidence sounds suspect then it gives me cause for concern. I don't know what other evidence was presented though so the public is left to speculate. It was similar to Majak Daw's case where important evidence seemed to change, I thought he was cactus after there was an eyewitness but some of the evidence that was reported gave me cause to have some doubt. Was I victim blaming his accuser? Do I just believe every accusation? Do you think Majak is guilty? The evidence matters and when you only have testimony then it has to be beyond reasonable doubt. I am sure much of the precise detail would be blurry given how memories work, however, something critical like how he got his willy out I would assume would be something horrific you wouldn't forget.

I just think it is dangerous for people to form absolute opinions part way through a process. As I said, what I threw out was a tin hat conspiracy to try and explain why someone would make an accusation if there was doubt about the evidence. When you look at all these infamous false rape claim incidents that happened in US Colleges that were heavily publicised everyone had a motive to make the claim. The person who accused Daw had a motive to accuse him. I was just exploring what possible motive there might have been had there been no satisfactory reason to explain the issues other clergymen have raised with the evidence, which will likely be explored on appeal.

This will be appealed and go to the supreme court and from there it will end up in one of the higher courts and the evidence will have gone over again and again and different groups of peers will evaluate the evidence, when the appeals end then we will have a final verdict. Am I to enrage about Pell being a rapist now... what if the Supreme Court overturns it? I then have to accept he is innocent? What if the prosecutors appeal and he is convicted again in a higher court. It seems kind of silly to get caught up into the rollercoaster of emotions until a final verdict is made.

You seem passionate that he is guilty, will you accept that he is innocent if a higher court overturns the conviction? It can be a dangerous thing to form a mob, be it a physical one or a virtual one. i don't think this drama is remotely close to it's conclusion.

All I hope that is if he was guilty that the final verdict remains guilty and he is given an appropriate punishment.

 

[SpiderBurton22]

Firstly, you should take with a grain of salt any opinion that is clearly marked as a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. Does that make sense?

I don't have any prejudice, when a point of evidence sounds suspect then it gives me cause for concern. I don't know what other evidence was presented though so the public is left to speculate. It was similar to Majak Daw's case where important evidence seemed to change, I thought he was cactus after there was an eyewitness but some of the evidence that was reported gave me cause to have some doubt. Was I victim blaming his accuser? Do I just believe every accusation? Do you think Majak is guilty? The evidence matters and when you only have testimony then it has to be beyond reasonable doubt. I am sure much of the precise detail would be blurry given how memories work, however, something critical like how he got his willy out I would assume would be something horrific you wouldn't forget.

I just think it is dangerous for people to form absolute opinions part way through a process. As I said, what I threw out was a tin hat conspiracy to try and explain why someone would make an accusation if there was doubt about the evidence. When you look at all these infamous false rape claim incidents that happened in US Colleges that were heavily publicised everyone had a motive to make the claim. The person who accused Daw had a motive to accuse him. I was just exploring what possible motive there might have been had there been no satisfactory reason to explain the issues other clergymen have raised with the evidence, which will likely be explored on appeal.

This will be appealed and go to the supreme court and from there it will end up in one of the higher courts and the evidence will have gone over again and again and different groups of peers will evaluate the evidence, when the appeals end then we will have a final verdict. Am I to enrage about Pell being a rapist now... what if the Supreme Court overturns it? I then have to accept he is innocent? What if the prosecutors appeal and he is convicted again in a higher court. It seems kind of silly to get caught up into the rollercoaster of emotions until a final verdict is made.

You seem passionate that he is guilty, will you accept that he is innocent if a higher court overturns the conviction? It can be a dangerous thing to form a mob, be it a physical one or a virtual one. i don't think this drama is remotely close to it's conclusion.

All I hope that is if he was guilty that the final verdict remains guilty and he is given an appropriate punishment.

I'm not passionate about Pell's guilt, I take offence to people making up crackpot theories that make the victims out to be frauds without knowing the full evidence, whilst a jury who heard the ALL of the evidence found him to be guilty.