- Jul 30, 2018
- 11,782
- 15,176
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #951
Given Victoria’s record of letting violent rapists back on the streets, maybe their whole concept of what makes a “fair trial” should be revisited.
The Law Cardinal Pell
- Thread starter Happy Mastenator
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Theseventhhamster
Brownlow Medallist
Well from adult/s anyway. I've heard from enough sources he's an utter campaigner by any metric but nothing about him being a rock spider.
- Aug 1, 2008
- 15,149
- 25,675
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #953
Does anyone know when and where G Pell is to be garrotted and disembowed?
I’m after a family pass for 4.
I’m after a family pass for 4.
MacMum, this is an issue close to my heart. I was abused by the notorious Ridsdale in 1982. The effects of that are still with me today and realistically always will be - there is no such thing as closure. I have lost a lot, virtually everything because of the psychological and behavioural effects the incident has had on me.
The reason the suppression order was put in place (by the prosecution - OPP) was to prevent Pell's legal team led by the notorious Robert Richter QC, from running an argument than Pell was unable to receive a fair trial due to the huge media focus. I attend a group session in Ballarat once a month, although I have never had the misfortune of encountering Pell in person, there are fella's in my group involved in the cases. This is a nightmare for them. I agreed with the suppression order because the last thing I want is someone to walk free because of a technicality. It doesn't have anything to do with him getting preferential treatment, it was done to ensure he can be prosecuted fairly and any verdict untainted by public opinion. I am sure there will be consequences as a result of this breach, I just hope George is not he beneficiary of it, that wouldn't be justice and that's all we are after.
Pretty much only in vic and to a degree sa. These two states make up 70% iirc of the suppression orders. NSW etc have reformed, Victoria has not , Andrew's is sitting on a review to reform. Admittedly this wouldn't be first priority of any government. As for SA they are waiting for the interweb to be turned on.
Ant_
Premium Platinum
DPP asks for your details they'll get it. I'd be careful
- Dec 3, 2017
- 17,127
- 55,742
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I meant finding out info about the case online, not breaching the suppression order.
Dear god.
Thank you for explaining it all re the suppression order, I now see the reason, whereas before it came across as hiding his identity for who he was.
Don't be a stranger WR, you know you are part of our BL family....always will be. Have always enjoyed your posts, Cheers
(I've been saying for probably 30yrs that Pell gave me the creeps and looks like he's hiding something......and living up in Nth Central vic, rumours were always around. Hope he gets his whack. Would love to say a lot more, but better not)
owen87
Premium Gold
- Apr 23, 2016
- 30,854
- 43,236
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I do think Pell is a divisive personality aside from anything else, so people tend to dislike him for that. If (and I hope following the next trial the suppression order is lifted so we get to know what's gone on) he is guilty then he deserves to have the book thrown at him.
- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,369
- 19,501
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
No
Sometimes people have to be brave to overcome draconian laws.
Crankyhawk
Brownlow Medallist
I know but cannot say due to suppression orders
Pie eyed
Premium Platinum
- Jun 26, 2007
- 42,587
- 23,325
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Magpies
Firstly I am in no way a supporter of Pell, but the legal reality is that any accused should be protected from the danger their trial may be swayed by media coverage. the average Joe does not attract this attention therefore no suppression orders are usually necessary.
I agree with the suppression order in this case.
It would be a travesty if justice was skirted on the basis of a mistrial.
- Dec 18, 2007
- 10,979
- 6,797
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Non that play Essendon
I can understand a suppression order being issued to ensure a fair trial, but a suppression order on a conviction seems a bit beyond the normal process, the public already knew he was being charged due to the public way he was asked to return and the way he fronted the media and was followed by the media into the court at the start of the trial.
owen87
Premium Gold
- Apr 23, 2016
- 30,854
- 43,236
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I believe there’s another trial pending in March for other charges, so it’s largely based around protecting due process for that I’d guess.
NSWCROW
Make me an Admin!
Admitted to hospital
- Banned
- #968
That's just to have his knees done. Nothing to see.
- Banned
- #969
Was present (had another similar matter running in another court room).
Plenty to say. Obviously can't.
Neither side should go the early crow.
Plenty to say. Obviously can't.
Neither side should go the early crow.
From a pure justice perspective i wonder if Pell does himself no favours with his cold, aloof and superior manner.
That manner doesn't endear him to the public. The hatred displayed this board before the trial is evidence of that.
The word in legal circles last.week was that the case against Pell was considered flimsy. The judge by all accounts a tad surprised when the jury returned the guilty verdict.
That manner doesn't endear him to the public. The hatred displayed this board before the trial is evidence of that.
The word in legal circles last.week was that the case against Pell was considered flimsy. The judge by all accounts a tad surprised when the jury returned the guilty verdict.
Thread closed until further notice.
- Status
