The testimony of the victim must have been utterly believable. From what i understand he was cross examined for over a day by one of the best and aggressive. Pell has his legal right to appeal but is now a guilty man showing no remorse as the Judge said.
That article was long but worth reading. Also the swimming pool charges which the aborted trial was about. They weren't allowed to introduce some evidence so withdrew the charges.
Yes its clear you feel Pell is a victim, but dont you worry about all the true victims who have led a life of misery at Pells and Catholic churches doing.
Why do you minimise the actions of the church, then call me mental for caring.
Only problem I have with this is that I don't believe its an issue of which scenario is more probable, or more believable; but rather whether, in the realm of human experience, an alternate explanation put forward is, or is not, reasonably possible. If it is a reasonably possible explanation, then in my mind that would constitute reasonable doubt. It's for this reason that I look forward to learning more about the basis, and eventual result, of the appeal.
Thats right. There is a fiscal pressure not to rock the boat or you could be out of school.
Let me see if I am understanding you correctly, are you implying that the underlying motive for the Catholic Church's offering of scholarships, is to groom the scholarship recipients for future abuse?
Think it is more the perpetrating priest being aware that they have a victim who is vulnerable due to the fact they are on a scholarship and could not afford the schooling without it.
Priests as in typically, a majority, a minority, some, all; what precisely?
That may be because it is now an Administrative Law matter.
Is that a fact?
