Religion Cardinal George Pell

Status
Not open for further replies.

Schneebly

Debutant
Mar 28, 2015
55
123
AFL Club
Richmond
The HC should knock it back, the CA judgment was an absolute shellacking.
I don't know much about Weinberg, but I wouldn't be surprised. His dissenting judgment was weak.
Weinberg is retired from full time judging and is brought back occasionally for use as reserve judge. That may mean he is not as fully up to date on the latest legal principles in force as the other two appeal judges and the trial judge.

Weinberg was a full time appeals court judge for 9 years. Chief Justice Ferguson has been an appeals court judge for 5 years and a trial judge for 9 years. Justice Maxwell is the most experienced of the lot being an appeals court judge for 14 years.

Two justices, one with an equal amount of judging time as Weinberg and one with far more time appeals court judging time than Weinberg, overruled his decision.

The law was changed in Victoria recently so the evidence of a victim can be used if the jury is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the victim is truthful. That’s something that Weinberg and all the legal “experts” whinging about this decision haven’t realised or choose not to mention. There’s no way the HC will overturn it on that point because that’s what the legislation says and the trial and appeal judges were acting in accordance with it, Weinberg wasn’t.

If Pell’s supporters want that legal principle gone and Pell to have a hope of being released they’re going to have to go to parliament and pass new legislation removing the allowance of that evidence standard in a criminal trial. But I don’t think a political party will be too popular in the electorate if they tried to pass a law making it harder for child molesters to be convicted.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Schneebly

Debutant
Mar 28, 2015
55
123
AFL Club
Richmond
Interesting read on the appeal court judges and judgment.

https://insidestory.org.au/judges-doubts/
A telling fact from that article:

Much has been made of Mark Weinberg’s criminal law experience. It’s true that he has an extensive career in criminal justice and has heard eighty unsafe verdict appeals compared with Anne Ferguson’s five. But Chris Maxwell, the Court of Appeal’s president, has heard eighty-five.
So, despite other pundits claiming Weinberg was by far the most experienced Justice, it is actually Maxwell who has heard more unsafe verdict appeals.
 

Cooldude

Hall of Famer
Dec 12, 2003
44,838
22,594
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Bombers/Liverpool FC
This whole Pell/Catholic thing and all these Royal Commission findings should show that religious environments, no matter Christian or Islam or whatever, are fundamentally unsafe. It's a predatory culture that aims to elevate certain individuals as above accountability and decency, and cults of personalities form around them. Then they wonder why these people abuse such powers for sexual or financial gains

These are just the ones we hear about as well, there are loads of ugly s**t going on that certainly hasn't seen the light of day. Religious organizations just aren't safe, and if you put your kids in them and something happens to them, you should bear some of the responsibility
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
12,334
7,594
AFL Club
Hawthorn
This whole Pell/Catholic thing and all these Royal Commission findings should show that religious environments, no matter Christian or Islam or whatever, are fundamentally unsafe. It's a predatory culture that aims to elevate certain individuals as above accountability and decency, and cults of personalities form around them. Then they wonder why these people abuse such powers for sexual or financial gains

These are just the ones we hear about as well, there are loads of ugly s**t going on that certainly hasn't seen the light of day. Religious organizations just aren't safe, and if you put your kids in them and something happens to them, you should bear some of the responsibility
Please stop posting. You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. If you’ve stepped inside any Catholic institution or school in the last 5 to 10 years you would realise that they’re even safer than any public institution.
It’s a shame and horrific that it usually takes terrible tragedies to force change for the better. We all operate under different processes and protocols these days. The training involved, the different processes and procedures put in place have left no stone overturned to protect children. Your beliefs couldn’t be further from the truth.
 

Johnny Bananas

Club Legend
Sep 10, 2010
2,266
2,665
A sugar refinery
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Please stop posting. You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. If you’ve stepped inside any Catholic institution or school in the last 5 to 10 years you would realise that they’re even safer than any public institution.
Yeah, I'm sure the religious happy clappers said the same thing in the 70s, 80s and 90s too. Power corrupts, and it gives people the means to carry out abuses. I'm willing to believe many religions have learned from the abuses and taken adequate steps to prevent more abuses and cover-ups, but we can't be certain of this. It's going to take time to earn back trust amongst the public.
 

Cooldude

Hall of Famer
Dec 12, 2003
44,838
22,594
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Bombers/Liverpool FC
Please stop posting. You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. If you’ve stepped inside any Catholic institution or school in the last 5 to 10 years you would realise that they’re even safer than any public institution.
It’s a shame and horrific that it usually takes terrible tragedies to force change for the better. We all operate under different processes and protocols these days. The training involved, the different processes and procedures put in place have left no stone overturned to protect children. Your beliefs couldn’t be further from the truth.
No need to sound so offended, I know exactly what I am talking about because I have been in those institutions, and also know people who suffer abuse at the hands of those institutions, of many different age groups, and also of several different denominations

Religious organisations have always enphasized how "safe" their community is and how thorough they are at handpicking their volunteers, workers and leaders, how there are many safeguards yada yada. At the end of the day, these kind of abuse keeps happening, again and again. It's a fundamental culture issue, not a protocol issue.

Just look at the news littered about the new age charismatic church movements and the ridiculous amount of abuse stories make your eye water

I noticed you were liking Bruce's ridiculous posts defending Pell so I am not surprised one little bit, always the ones who are involved in the Catholic church already who end up defending those monsters
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
12,334
7,594
AFL Club
Hawthorn
No need to sound so offended, I know exactly what I am talking about because I have been in those institutions, and also know people who suffer abuse at the hands of those institutions, of many different age groups, and also of several different denominations

Religious organisations have always enphasized how "safe" their community is and how thorough they are at handpicking their volunteers, workers and leaders, how there are many safeguards yada yada. At the end of the day, these kind of abuse keeps happening, again and again. It's a fundamental culture issue, not a protocol issue.

Just look at the news littered about the new age charismatic church movements and the ridiculous amount of abuse stories make your eye water

I noticed you were liking Bruce's ridiculous posts defending Pell so I am not surprised one little bit, always the ones who are involved in the Catholic church already who end up defending those monsters
I’m not offended. I wouldn’t blame anyone who doesn’t want to put their children in a Catholic school, institution, etc because of their history with pedophilia. However, stating that nothing has changed is patently false.
I can’t speak for any other religious or government institutions though as I don’t know.
I’m sure if you checked the other George Pell thread you will see that I only liked a small percentage of Bruce’s posts. There were plenty that I disagreed with. Not that I have to explain my likes to you. If you have a problem with me liking any of Bruce’s posts, that is more a reflection on yourself. Not me. Maybe you need to review your approach and response to those who you disagree with. Most of what Bruce believes doesn’t mean he is wrong. He mightn’t be right on some things also. That’s why we have discussion threads. One less obviously because of the way you and others responded to him.
 

western royboy

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 30, 2008
10,381
10,720
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
Please stop posting. You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. If you’ve stepped inside any Catholic institution or school in the last 5 to 10 years you would realise that they’re even safer than any public institution.
It’s a shame and horrific that it usually takes terrible tragedies to force change for the better. We all operate under different processes and protocols these days. The training involved, the different processes and procedures put in place have left no stone overturned to protect children. Your beliefs couldn’t be further from the truth.
Explain to me how the Priesthood has changed? How has the Vatican changed? How have their attitudes changed to dealing with victims? I’m really interested to know...
 
Last edited:

Cooldude

Hall of Famer
Dec 12, 2003
44,838
22,594
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Bombers/Liverpool FC
I’m not offended. I wouldn’t blame anyone who doesn’t want to put their children in a Catholic school, institution, etc because of their history with pedophilia. However, stating that nothing has changed is patently false.
I can’t speak for any other religious or government institutions though as I don’t know.
I’m sure if you checked the other George Pell thread you will see that I only liked a small percentage of Bruce’s posts. There were plenty that I disagreed with. Not that I have to explain my likes to you. If you have a problem with me liking any of Bruce’s posts, that is more a reflection on yourself. Not me. Maybe you need to review your approach and response to those who you disagree with. Most of what Bruce believes doesn’t mean he is wrong. He mightn’t be right on some things also. That’s why we have discussion threads. One less obviously because of the way you and others responded to him.
No one really cares about the "changes", we'd be worried if they change nothing, we only care whether that environment is safe or not. My original point was that these churches are fundamentally unsafe for children. They can "change" however they wish, but after such systematic abuse that spans such a long length of time, parents should have their kids in there at their own risk

Also, the common theme every time I have to deal with any one of the victims of these churches are always the same things: they thought he was a good man, a powerful man of faith, that the place was safe, but before they know it, the abuse happened. Abusers always brand their place as "safe", that is the way they lure in victims. Whether it is safe or not depends on the facts, and the facts have spoken for themselves

We don't apologise in anyway about the way people respond to a bloke who thinks the police, the judges, the country and the "mob" are framing a clear convicted pedo. In fact, we'd be worried if we don't respond strongly against a man who talks such bs without an ounce of evidence
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

sorted

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
5,719
7,259
AFL Club
Geelong
Weinberg is retired from full time judging and is brought back occasionally for use as reserve judge. That may mean he is not as fully up to date on the latest legal principles in force as the other two appeal judges and the trial judge.

Weinberg was a full time appeals court judge for 9 years. Chief Justice Ferguson has been an appeals court judge for 5 years and a trial judge for 9 years. Justice Maxwell is the most experienced of the lot being an appeals court judge for 14 years.

Two justices, one with an equal amount of judging time as Weinberg and one with far more time appeals court judging time than Weinberg, overruled his decision.

The law was changed in Victoria recently so the evidence of a victim can be used if the jury is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the victim is truthful. That’s something that Weinberg and all the legal “experts” whinging about this decision haven’t realised or choose not to mention. There’s no way the HC will overturn it on that point because that’s what the legislation says and the trial and appeal judges were acting in accordance with it, Weinberg wasn’t.

If Pell’s supporters want that legal principle gone and Pell to have a hope of being released they’re going to have to go to parliament and pass new legislation removing the allowance of that evidence standard in a criminal trial. But I don’t think a political party will be too popular in the electorate if they tried to pass a law making it harder for child molesters to be convicted.
No one wants to make it harder for child molesters to be convicted but there has to be a balance with the rights of those who are accused. In this case the prosecution case was based solely the uncorroborated testimony of the victim, 23 years after the events were alleged to have occured. If you were accused of such crimes could you state what you were doing on a given day 23 years ago? If you can't then you are in the hands of a jury or appeal judges, who may or may not find the victim's testimony credible, and who may or may not be influenced by the #metoo socio-political movement. Your defence is 'I didn't do it' but there's no point (in theory) getting on the stand to say that because you are already entitled to be regarded as innocent until proven otherwise.

As a public official Pell's defence was able to call on witnesses who could give contrary evidence about the events on the dates in question. They stated that Pell could not have been alone at the time of the alleged offending, he would have been greeting parishioners at the time of the alleged offending, the garments he wore could not have been manoeuvred to expose his penis in the way the victim said, the choirboys would not have access the sacristy corridor, the choirboys could not have broken away from the procession undetected, the altar wine was white not red or 'murky' as the victim said.

The appeal case hinged upon whether the judges found the evidence from the different witnesses credible. Ferguson and Maxwell found that the inconsistencies and gaps in the victim's evidence increased his credibility. No one has perfect memory from 23 years ago, right? But they seemed to go out of their way to discredit each of the defence witnesses for similar lapses. And they needed to discredit every defence witness because if they had entertained a reasonable doubt about any one of the issues mentioned above they should have acquitted.

I reject your assertions about Weinberg. His judgment statement was twice as long as that of Ferguson and Maxwell and fully conversant with all modern legal principles. He just didn't find the victim's testimony at all credible.
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
12,334
7,594
AFL Club
Hawthorn
No one wants to make it harder for child molesters to be convicted but there has to be a balance with the rights of those who are accused. In this case the prosecution case was based solely the uncorroborated testimony of the victim, 23 years after the events were alleged to have occured. If you were accused of such crimes could you state what you were doing on a given day 23 years ago? If you can't then you are in the hands of a jury or appeal judges, who may or may not find the victim's testimony credible, and who may or may not be influenced by the #metoo socio-political movement. Your defence is 'I didn't do it' but there's no point (in theory) getting on the stand to say that because you are already entitled to be regarded as innocent until proven otherwise.

As a public official Pell's defence was able to call on witnesses who could give contrary evidence about the events on the dates in question. They stated that Pell could not have been alone at the time of the alleged offending, he would have been greeting parishioners at the time of the alleged offending, the garments he wore could not have been manoeuvred to expose his penis in the way the victim said, the choirboys would not have access the sacristy corridor, the choirboys could not have broken away from the procession undetected, the altar wine was white not red or 'murky' as the victim said.

The appeal case hinged upon whether the judges found the evidence from the different witnesses credible. Ferguson and Maxwell found that the inconsistencies and gaps in the victim's evidence increased his credibility. No one has perfect memory from 23 years ago, right? But they seemed to go out of their way to discredit each of the defence witnesses for similar lapses. And they needed to discredit every defence witness because if they had entertained a reasonable doubt about any one of the issues mentioned above they should have acquitted.

I reject your assertions about Weinberg. His judgment statement was twice as long as that of Ferguson and Maxwell and fully conversant with all modern legal principles. He just didn't find the victim's testimony at all credible.
Why did you do this? You’ve put yourself in a lose/win situation. It is impossible to discuss this with certain posters on BigFooty.
 

Gough

Moderator
Sep 29, 2006
42,967
70,296
AFL Club
Hawthorn
If it was an Arab immigrant that had done what Pell did would we here impassioned defences of the man that we have? I very much doubt it.
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
12,334
7,594
AFL Club
Hawthorn
If it was committed by a Catholic priest or a Muslim I know where your outrage lies.
I despise Pell. However, the evidence falls short of a conviction in this case. Hopefully, he really is guilty of this or some other offence so the incarceration is justified.
 

western royboy

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 30, 2008
10,381
10,720
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
If it was committed by a Catholic priest or a Muslim I know where your outrage lies.
I despise Pell. However, the evidence falls short of a conviction in this case. Hopefully, he really is guilty of this or some other offence so the incarceration is justified.
Believe me he is guilty of offences, I await your response to my earlier ? With baited breath
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
12,334
7,594
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Believe me he is guilty of offences, I await your response to my earlier ? With baited breath
You won’t get an answer.
One, I would be wasting my time and I’m not in the business of advertising Catholicism. For starters, the last thing I’m interested in is advertising why others should go to a Catholic school or church. I’m a Catholic by birth and I work for them. Otherwise, organised religion doesn’t float my boat. Also, I haven’t forgiven them for pedophilia carried out by priests but mostly so called Christian Brothers.

Two, it would be a waste of my time as you and others wouldn’t believe it anyway. All I’ll say is that the proper processes are in place to make sure that as much as is humanly possible to stop pedophiles from having access to children in Catholic schools and churches.
Btw, I was never interfered with as a child. However, a Christian Brother forced me to have a cold shower naked in front of him when I was 11. Punishment for misbehaving. I had to face him while I did it. I never thought much of it until after I finished school.
 

western royboy

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 30, 2008
10,381
10,720
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
You won’t get an answer.
One, I would be wasting my time and I’m not in the business of advertising Catholicism. For starters, the last thing I’m interested in is advertising why others should go to a Catholic school or church. I’m a Catholic by birth and I work for them. Otherwise, organised religion doesn’t float my boat. Also, I haven’t forgiven them for pedophilia carried out by priests but mostly so called Christian Brothers.

Two, it would be a waste of my time as you and others wouldn’t believe it anyway. All I’ll say is that the proper processes are in place to make sure that as much as is humanly possible to stop pedophiles from having access to children in Catholic schools and churches.
Btw, I was never interfered with as a child. However, a Christian Brother forced me to have a cold shower naked in front of him when I was 11. Punishment for misbehaving. I had to face him while I did it. I never thought much of it until after I finished school.
You literally dodged a bullet there - nothing has changed in the 3 areas I identified
 

AM

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2006
21,718
18,662
Here there and everywhere
AFL Club
Geelong
Interesting piece on Pell and the manner in which the church has handled the mess. Quite taken with the following para.

The slowness to act on Pell contrasts with the treatment of ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick whose red hat was removed after allegations that he abused minors were deemed credible. Like Pell, McCarrick was accused of perpetrating abuse in a cathedral sacristy.
Although not directly pertaining to the matter at hand, the keen Pellists are all too ready to look the other way in relation to the "other allegations"

 

Number37

24.96
Oct 5, 2013
13,797
14,042
AFL Club
Sydney
No one wants to make it harder for child molesters to be convicted but there has to be a balance with the rights of those who are accused. In this case the prosecution case was based solely the uncorroborated testimony of the victim, 23 years after the events were alleged to have occured. If you were accused of such crimes could you state what you were doing on a given day 23 years ago? If you can't then you are in the hands of a jury or appeal judges, who may or may not find the victim's testimony credible, and who may or may not be influenced by the #metoo socio-political movement. Your defence is 'I didn't do it' but there's no point (in theory) getting on the stand to say that because you are already entitled to be regarded as innocent until proven otherwise.

As a public official Pell's defence was able to call on witnesses who could give contrary evidence about the events on the dates in question. They stated that Pell could not have been alone at the time of the alleged offending, he would have been greeting parishioners at the time of the alleged offending, the garments he wore could not have been manoeuvred to expose his penis in the way the victim said, the choirboys would not have access the sacristy corridor, the choirboys could not have broken away from the procession undetected, the altar wine was white not red or 'murky' as the victim said.

The appeal case hinged upon whether the judges found the evidence from the different witnesses credible. Ferguson and Maxwell found that the inconsistencies and gaps in the victim's evidence increased his credibility. No one has perfect memory from 23 years ago, right? But they seemed to go out of their way to discredit each of the defence witnesses for similar lapses. And they needed to discredit every defence witness because if they had entertained a reasonable doubt about any one of the issues mentioned above they should have acquitted.

I reject your assertions about Weinberg. His judgment statement was twice as long as that of Ferguson and Maxwell and fully conversant with all modern legal principles. He just didn't find the victim's testimony at all credible.
What a load of codswallop.



Weinberg questioned parts of the victims testimony he didn't find the victims testimony 'at all credible' as you claim.

Your distasteful post completely ignores the FACT that it is for the a jury to decide guilt, based on the evidence. Which they were content to do, just as 2 appeal court judges did.

The worst part of your distasteful post is that it would make every historical sexual abuse claim unable to clear the reasonable doubt bar.
 

sorted

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
5,719
7,259
AFL Club
Geelong
Why did you do this? You’ve put yourself in a lose/win situation. It is impossible to discuss this with certain posters on BigFooty.
I can understand why some people have an emotional view on the topic whether they have been victims, or are pro-Catholic, or anti-Catholic for that matter. I don't have any skin in the game. I'm happy to chew the fat on the case but I'm not going to get into any slanging matches.

There's been some disgraceful abuse within the Catholic church (and other institutions). I don't find Pell a particularly likeable man. I thought the court discussions around the Cathedral mass day practices and the complexity of Pell's garments only served to show what a ridiculous establishment the Catholic church is.

But none of that is relevant to the Pell court cases. The jury trials are a mystery to understand because we don't have an insight to their thinking but the extensive appeal judgments can be evaluated and discussed.
 

JW Frogen

Premiership Player
Nov 29, 2004
3,098
394
Australia
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Collingwood
Weinberg is retired from full time judging and is brought back occasionally for use as reserve judge. That may mean he is not as fully up to date on the latest legal principles in force as the other two appeal judges and the trial judge.

Weinberg was a full time appeals court judge for 9 years. Chief Justice Ferguson has been an appeals court judge for 5 years and a trial judge for 9 years. Justice Maxwell is the most experienced of the lot being an appeals court judge for 14 years.

Two justices, one with an equal amount of judging time as Weinberg and one with far more time appeals court judging time than Weinberg, overruled his decision.

The law was changed in Victoria recently so the evidence of a victim can be used if the jury is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the victim is truthful. That’s something that Weinberg and all the legal “experts” whinging about this decision haven’t realised or choose not to mention. There’s no way the HC will overturn it on that point because that’s what the legislation says and the trial and appeal judges were acting in accordance with it, Weinberg wasn’t.

If Pell’s supporters want that legal principle gone and Pell to have a hope of being released they’re going to have to go to parliament and pass new legislation removing the allowance of that evidence standard in a criminal trial. But I don’t think a political party will be too popular in the electorate if they tried to pass a law making it harder for child molesters to be convicted.

You nailed it, it is why the legal changes introduced by the parliament are an assault against presumption of innocence or basic Western traditions of rule of law. (However imperfectly practiced by the great unwashed who end up on juries.)

If one word against another is enough to convict without other evidence being considered, a lot of innocent people are going to jail.
 

western royboy

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 30, 2008
10,381
10,720
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
You nailed it, it is why the legal changes introduced by the parliament are an assault against presumption of innocence or basic Western traditions of rule of law. (However imperfectly practiced by the great unwashed who end up on juries.)

If one word against another is enough to convict without other evidence being considered, a lot of innocent people are going to jail.
Welcome back Justice Frogden - I have been looking forward your return from the Vatican or the dark ages. If you read the Judgements of all 3 (Three) Judges you would understand how they arrived at their decisions. I most situations of csa or indeed all sa there are no witnesses.

You are entitled to your view on the changes to the legal system - but as a survivor of one of these turds - I applaud what they’ve done. I’d really like to tel you what I think of the likes of you, but in the words of the modern day poet/philosopher JT (Justin Timberlake) “sometimes the greatest way to say something is to say nothing at all”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Bottom