Religion Pell Guilty!

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

RupieDupie

Guru
Jun 30, 2017
4,228
3,499
AFL Club
GWS
Ultra-Conservative-Voltron - “We have all the power, connections, legal-and-bureaucratic-know-how, and munny to reveal an evil conspiracy in a “democratic” “non-corrupt” and “fair” country... utilising the mechanisms in place to keep this evil at bay... and prevent our best buddy, good bloke, and mentor from going to jail... but we’re not going to utilise this”

o_O:eek::rolleyes::drunk::think::poo::greenalien::sick::(:'(;):thumbsdown:
 

RupieDupie

Guru
Jun 30, 2017
4,228
3,499
AFL Club
GWS
Bolt, Devine & co are playing the game that sees Pell getting acquitted and never having to answer because the "media" have made it impossible for him to get a fair trial.

It gets a bit weird when a newspaper which usually writes articles such as;

“EXPOSED - black people” on their front page, apparently have the story of the millennia - an evil force permeating our society - but they keep this to their editorial arm of their news media... I would have thought they would have made this more substantial... it’s like they don’t even believe it...
 

Sainteric

Cancelled
Aug 5, 2016
3,738
2,128
AFL Club
St Kilda
I've never excused Ridsdale. Ever.

And someone has to stand up against the mob.

You are not standing up against a mob you are not a victim.

You are standing up for the church against the tens of thousands of victims which like the entire church heirachy you believe they are liars and no priest is guilty, even though we all know that is far from true.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Demosthenes

Premiership Player
Jun 9, 2015
3,364
3,074
AFL Club
Melbourne
A few experts (Gans being one) have pointed out that unreasonableness is the 'go-to' grounds of appeal. If they don't have anything else one could conclude that they are merely clutching at straws.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...inning-appeal-against-convictions-expert-says
Experts spoken to by Guardian Australia agreed that while the latter two appeared flimsy, an appeal on the basis of unreasonableness may have a high chance of success.
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts RIP
Feb 18, 2003
16,498
2,744
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
To be fair, the jury verdict came as a bit of a surprise to a lot of experts. A number of well-respected legal minds (such as Jeremy Gans) have come out and said that they think an appeal on the grounds of unreasonableness stands a decent chance of success. I can understand people harbouring reservations about it.
Equally, believing that Pell should not have been convicted doesn't necessarily equate to believing that the victim's lying and the guy didn't do it. It's more a commentary on the inherent difficulties of proof in sexual assault cases.
Let's be real - whatever the result of the appeal, a substantial number of people will think it's wrong. That's just the nature of he said/he said cases. Personally I am okay with that. Judges and juries strive for fairness and truth, but they shouldn't ever be treated as the sole arbiters of it.

You are not allowed to be far too sensible on this thread.
The mob will now turn on you.
 
Jan 13, 2007
14,553
17,676
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
You are not standing up against a mob you are not a victim.

You are standing up for the church against the tens of thousands of victims which like the entire church heirachy you believe they are liars and no priest is guilty, even though we all know that is far from true.

If you could perhaps direct me to one single other priest or brother I have declared innocent I’d be grateful.
 
You are not allowed to be far too sensible on this thread.
The mob will now turn on you.
Replace Cardinal with Imam and your veneer of respect for judicial process would vanish in an instant. The Curtis Chen killers are still entitled to appeal their case, do they deserve the same sort of support given that it hasn't yet run it's full course?
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts RIP
Feb 18, 2003
16,498
2,744
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
You are not standing up against a mob you are not a victim.

You are standing up for the church against the tens of thousands of victims which like the entire church heirachy you believe they are liars and no priest is guilty, even though we all know that is far from true.

please quote the post in which bb makes this argument.
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts RIP
Feb 18, 2003
16,498
2,744
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
Replace Cardinal with Imam and your veneer of respect for judicial process would vanish in an instant. The Curtis Chen killers are still entitled to appeal their case, do they deserve the same sort of support given that it hasn't yet run it's full course?

Ah - Gough the moderator. Is this the lie for the day in service of the baying Mob?

For the record - the Curtis Chen killers are entitled to the same due process as anybody else.

Also FTR - there were direct eyewitnesses to the Chen killing.

In contrast, there no supporting eye witnesses to the alleged Pell abuse. Not one.

That's why reasonable doubt has emerged as the key issue.
Very similar to the Chamberlain case - and you know how that ended.
 

RupieDupie

Guru
Jun 30, 2017
4,228
3,499
AFL Club
GWS
Seems the conspiracy theory certain vast and powerful organisations are fighting against is... the truth

A wise man once said "when a conspiracy theory is so pervasive that even the people in power cannot fight against it, it is most likely the truth"
 

Demosthenes

Premiership Player
Jun 9, 2015
3,364
3,074
AFL Club
Melbourne
"May" is a word lawyers use that sounds definitive but really isn't.
Look, it's a disclaimer, but if you talk with the legal eagles most of them will admit to being pretty surprised that the jury convicted on the basis of what was presented to them. All I'm saying is that nobody should be shocked if his appeal is upheld.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts RIP
Feb 18, 2003
16,498
2,744
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
The post you quoted was a direct response to a question posed of me.

https://en.mogaznews.com/World-News...s-robes-mean-he-could-not-have-molested-.html


b3231e32b9.jpg

Full screen
b3231e32b9.jpg



Are these fair representation of what Pell's vestments would have looked like?
 

chelseacarlton

BLUE it's the Magic Number
10k Posts Sensible Type Chess Club Member Pantskyle
Apr 13, 2008
23,737
33,143
So Frang
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
The Anti-Theists
Let’s face it, it’s most definitely been a witch hunt, the only ones absurdly stupid enough to believe in witches are christians!
 

Craven Morehead

I really don't care what you think.
Jan 2, 2019
4,103
5,411
AFL Club
Gold Coast
With respect, Ms Last might alternatively be characterized as a disgruntled former employee with a history of raising dubious claims, eg. at the Vic Inquiry into child sexual abuse, she claimed a barrister, Tim Seccull, had settled 300 survivor claims with the Church. The correct number was 1.

Regarding the article from which you have quoted, the reporting of that particular claim by the Age as another allegation against Pell is patently unfair. The article itself describes "Joe" as "not a strong witness", a very soft way of saying, "he was clearly a bullsh-t artist" (note, I am not suggesting anything about other witnesses, other allegations, just "Joe"). The supposed photos were apparently very amateurish photoshop attempts at putting priests faces onto bodies in sex scenes. Leaving aside everything else, this re-hashing of a clearly bogus claim to add on as a further suspicion around Pell was pretty ordinary IMO.
Were these dubious claims before or after she was in the employ of the catholic church?
The article also raised far more claims against Pell than the 'Joe" issue. Joe was clearly after a quid and needs an uppercut, but what about the rest of them?
I fully understand that Pell, to this day, is not guilty of any of the accusations, however his obstinate defence and support of priests who were quite clearly paedophiles, and well known throughout the church, paints him in a very, very poor light indeed.
One could say that he was doing more than just protecting his own, he was protecting himself!
 
Jun 10, 2014
13,808
35,307
AFL Club
Collingwood
Were these dubious claims before or after she was in the employ of the catholic church?
The article also raised far more claims against Pell than the 'Joe" issue. Joe was clearly after a quid and needs an uppercut, but what about the rest of them?
I fully understand that Pell, to this day, is not guilty of any of the accusations, however his obstinate defence and support of priests who were quite clearly paedophiles, and well known throughout the church, paints him in a very, very poor light indeed.
One could say that he was doing more than just protecting his own, he was protecting himself!
The claim I referred to was made to the Inquiry long after she had finished with the Church. On my reading, that article raised no other substantive claims - just Ms Last saying she had been told things - but no further elaboration.

Her being asked to return files is consistent with someone who has been relieved of their position. But the Age tries to make it look sinister.
 

Craven Morehead

I really don't care what you think.
Jan 2, 2019
4,103
5,411
AFL Club
Gold Coast
The claim I referred to was made to the Inquiry long after she had finished with the Church. On my reading, that article raised no other substantive claims - just Ms Last saying she had been told things - but no further elaboration.

Her being asked to return files is consistent with someone who has been relieved of their position. But the Age tries to make it look sinister.

Perhaps we are reading it differently? However it seems clear enough to me that whenever she did raise in issue with regards to Pell and others she was effectively blocked which made her position untenable.
I fully understand why she would then go so hard at them after being relieved of her duties if she truly believed that an active cover up was taking place and she was effectively rubbed out for being a nuisance whistle blower.
That's my take on it anyway.
 

M Malice

Hall of Famer
Aug 31, 2015
31,433
72,027
By the Gabba.
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Valleys. Chelsea.

AM

The standard you walk past is the one you accept
Aug 18, 2006
24,579
23,475
Here there and everywhere
AFL Club
Geelong
To be fair, the jury verdict came as a bit of a surprise to a lot of experts. A number of well-respected legal minds (such as Jeremy Gans) have come out and said that they think an appeal on the grounds of unreasonableness stands a decent chance of success. I can understand people harbouring reservations about it.

Equally, believing that Pell should not have been convicted doesn't necessarily equate to believing that the victim's lying and the guy didn't do it. It's more a commentary on the inherent difficulties of proof in sexual assault cases.


Let's be real - whatever the result of the appeal, a substantial number of people will think it's wrong. That's just the nature of he said/he said cases. Personally I am okay with that. Judges and juries strive for fairness and truth, but they shouldn't ever be treated as the sole arbiters of it.

I was responding to a person who was not present at the incidents, heard none of the evidence at the trial yet claimed in many posts to know Pell was not guilty. That sort of arrogance is breathtaking.

The legal process is working. A jury has unanimously found Pell guilty on the whole 5 counts and he is taking it to appeal.

Legal opinions are no different from any others, they can be quite varied. That said, in my experience, the overwhelming view is that only one of the 3 grounds has any hope of success and that is marginal. We'll see.

I return to my point, which was a character with no primary evidence saying he knows Pell is innocent. That persons view will not change should the appeal process validate the jury verdict.
 

AM

The standard you walk past is the one you accept
Aug 18, 2006
24,579
23,475
Here there and everywhere
AFL Club
Geelong
Guessing you aren’t a lawyer Freddie. I am. Regardless, the lawyers who told me their version of events know far more than me or you.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
I've always suspected the letters after his name meant Lazy Loud Bastard. :rolleyes:

*You're wrong*
 
Jan 13, 2007
14,553
17,676
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
https://en.mogaznews.com/World-News...s-robes-mean-he-could-not-have-molested-.html


b3231e32b9.jpg

Full screen
b3231e32b9.jpg



Are these fair representation of what Pell's vestments would have looked like?

Yes. He was apparently able to access his Johnson through all of these with one hand. I wonder whether he carefully removed his headwear and carefully placed down his walking stick thing too before the act or whether he was still wearing/holding them throughout. Because even that process is done so slowly and carefully it takes at least a minute. But he can't have. He must have just tossed these items aside because he blocked the door and prevented escape.
 
I don't get the 'many layers' as it seems to me there are only two of any meaning - the Alb and the Chasuble. The other two items a rope and long scarf/stole, neither of which would restrict from lifting the other two up. Unless of course they weigh a ton.

Jury members had ample time to (look at and I wouldn't be surprised try on) consider these garments in the jury room and given their verdict, rejected that it may have been relevant.

Edit: Have just checked what the outer garments are made from and found that the Alba is usually made in Linen which would seem to me lightweight and even in cotton, wouldn't weigh a lot.
The chasuble seems to be made of wool with appliqué motifs in linen, with silk thread embroidered details. Again, the advancement in wool textiles is not like centuries ago and one can buy lightweight wool. Even if velvet, also comes in lightweight. The embroidery may differ as some can be in metals.
 
Last edited:
Jun 10, 2014
13,808
35,307
AFL Club
Collingwood
I don't get the 'many layers' as it seems to me there are only two of any meaning - the Alb and the Chasuble. The other two items a rope and long scarf/stole, neither of which would restrict from lifting the other two up. Unless of course they weigh a ton.

Jury members had ample time to (look at and I wouldn't be surprised try on) consider these garments in the jury room and given their verdict, rejected that it may have been relevant.

That is the nub of it. Don’t forget that there would have likely also been belt pants and jocks to negotiate whilst holding up robe - not sure whether kid was being held as well. The testimony must have been compelling.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
That is the nub of it. Don’t forget that there would have likely also been belt pants and jocks to negotiate whilst holding up robe - not sure whether kid was being held as well. The testimony must have been compelling.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Actually we don't know what he wore underneath, could have been nothing, trousers and belt or trackie pants.

I guess this is why we can question but only those in court actually know what the evidence is.

I suppose in the end you just have to place your belief in the system and I don't envy anyone on that jury.
I wonder how they must be feeling reading Bolt and co?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back