Religion Pell Guilty!

[Present Not Past]

George Pell is appealing because he, and anyone, is entitled to because it is well known that our judicial system is not faultless.
And Pell has said that if his appeal fails then he will serve his full sentance.

 

[FredLeDeux]

George Pell is appealing because he, and anyone, is entitled to because it is well known that our judicial system is not faultless.
And Pell has said that if his appeal fails then he will serve his full sentance.

That's good of him.

 

[Present Not Past]

That's good of him.

You can't fault George

 

[BlueE]

The investigators admitted at the committal there were no complainants at the time the investigation was opened.

So is that because the evidence the complainants gave to the royal commission was redacted?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

So is that because the evidence the complainants gave to the royal commission was redacted?

No. Operation Tethering was commenced in March 2013. A full year before it received it's first complainant.

 

[BlueE]

No. Operation Tethering was commenced in March 2013. A full year before it received it's first complainant.

Really? Are you saying this is all from some ad in a news paper? Good for them.

The Royal Commission has evidence from complainants against George Pell for personal abuse and him being a witness in ritual abuse of children. This is separate from the RC stating Pell personally did not pass on complaints from victims who were abused by other Priests.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Really? Are you saying this is all from some ad in a news paper? Good for them.

The Royal Commission has evidence from complainants against George Pell for personal abuse and him being a witness in ritual abuse of children. This is separate from the RC stating Pell personally did not pass on complaints from victims who were abused by other Priests.

Do you have a link to these? Or is this more of the old "gossip about allegations and trust people won't actually read the material."

EDIT: And are you comfortable with VicPol opening investigations into people in the absence of complainants?

 

[Poor Form]

That's good of him.

Didn't he come back to the country to fight the charges? That's pretty good of him, he said he wont attempt another appeal which he would have the right to should the charges be upheld.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Didn't he come back to the country to fight the charges? That's pretty good of him, he said he wont attempt another appeal which he would have the right to should the charges be upheld.

Where did he say he wouldn't appeal against the C/A decision?
He didn't appeal against the sentence, because there was simply no case, and that's finished.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Where did he say he wouldn't appeal against the C/A decision?
He didn't appeal against the sentence, because there was simply no case, and that's finished.

Correct. This seems to be a widely misunderstood distinction.

There are two distinct matters. The convictions and the sentence. The sentence follows the convictions. The sentence is entirely reasonable given the convictions.

Pell has appealed the convictions. And will likely appeal them to the HCA if unsuccessful at the SCA.

So will the prosecution as best as I can tell.

But if the convictions stand, the sentence won't be appealed. It's not an unreasonable sentence, notwithstanding he's mostly in solitary confinement.

Leaving aside my own feelings about the matter, if I was the prosecutor, I wouldn't appeal. There is a serious question to be tried as regards the existence or otherwise of advantages held by the jury in assessing evidence. In this particular case, the jury holds almost no advantage. Indeed, the publicity surrounding Pell might lead to a suggestion that they were in fact at a disadvantage particularly given the comments made by Justice Weinberg as to whether they decided on possible/impossible rather than beyond reasonable doubt.

If the prosecution wanted to set in stone law around the supremacy of jury verdicts, they would be better trying a matter less public.

 

[Poor Form]

Where did he say he wouldn't appeal against the C/A decision?
He didn't appeal against the sentence, because there was simply no case, and that's finished.

Yeah could be correct I just recall reading he stated he will not appeal if the conviction is upheld thought that must be the conviction as the sentence is certainly light.

 

[Schneebly]

Didn't he come back to the country to fight the charges?

That’s pretty fishy to begin with. Why would you come back to the country if there was a chance of you going to prison?

My theory is he was advised by the Vatican that it was certain he would be found not guilty in a court trial, which would allow the church and its powerful media and government allies to run with the “Pell is now innocent, you must stop attacking him” line. It would also take some heat off the church from the abuse scandal.

They just didn’t plan on him getting found guilty, but I believe they have put pressure behind scenes on the Victorian legal system to overturn the verdict, and then they will run with their initial line.

 

[Poor Form]

That’s pretty fishy to begin with. Why would you come back to the country if there was a chance of you going to prison?

My theory is he was advised by the Vatican that it was certain he would be found not guilty in a court trial, which would allow the church and its powerful media and government allies to run with the “Pell is now innocent, you must stop attacking him” line. It would also take some heat off the church from the abuse scandal.

They just didn’t plan on him getting found guilty, but I believe they have put pressure behind scenes on the Victorian legal system to overturn the verdict, and then they will run with their initial line.

So it's less likely that he came back because he believed he was innocent and would be proven so? Seems pretty conspiratorial to suggest it was all a plan to clear his name.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Can’t believe the jury didn’t just believe pells mate Portelli that he was with him and it didn’t happen.

What’s the world coming to when you can trust a catholic priests denials of sexual abuse

 

[western royboy]

So it's less likely that he came back because he believed he was innocent and would be proven so? Seems pretty conspiratorial to suggest it was all a plan to clear his name.

Lots of conspiracy theories and people in high places who may have overstepped their authority in order to help old mate George. Hopefully justice is done.

 

[ShanDog]

For the record, GuruJane has been perma-banned from this thread due to some very inappropriate comment (to put it kindly). And also for the record, the poster has asked for their sincere apology to all those that were hurt by the comment to be posted on their behalf.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

For the record, GuruJane has been perma-banned from this thread due to some very inappropriate comment (to put it kindly). And also for the record, the poster has asked for their sincere apology to all those that were hurt by the comment to be posted on their behalf.

That was seriously the most offensive thing posted on this thread?

 

[NSWCROW]

That was seriously the most offensive thing posted on this thread?

Nah he just posted it as a joke

 

[BlueE]

Can’t believe the jury didn’t just believe pells mate Portelli that he was with him and it didn’t happen.

What’s the world coming to when you can trust a catholic priests denials of sexual abuse

Or you can't trust the Pope denying he was told about his former Cardinal's serial homosexual abuse including soliciting sex while hearing confession.

In fact Archbishop Vigano is saying the Pope is lying as he's denying he didn't know about the sexual abuse.
https://catholicismpure.wordpress.c...pe-is-lying-in-latest-denial-about-mccarrick/

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Nah he just posted it as a joke

Maybe the mods should have a closer look at some of the language and insults directed at those who dare to hold the view that Pell’s innocent.

For what it’s worth, if it’s the question I think it was that got her banned, it was a legitimate question. Horseplay in the local public pool has no power imbalance to it. Irrespective of age. You choose to get thrown only because it’s fun. If it’s not fun, you don’t get thrown.

I appreciate the difficulty many young (especially) boys found themselves in in believing they had no choice but to accept their abuse, but I don’t accept it in this case.

And for the bullshitartists who come on here with their anonymous local knowledge that “everyone knew” Pell was an abuser, they’re full of shit. The Ballarat list was well known decades ago, and Pell was never on that list until it was politically useful for him to be.

 

[NSWCROW]

Maybe the mods should have a closer look at some of the language and insults directed at those who dare to hold the view that Pell’s innocent.

For what it’s worth, if it’s the question I think it was that got her banned, it was a legitimate question. Horseplay in the local public pool has no power imbalance to it. Irrespective of age. You choose to get thrown only because it’s fun. If it’s not fun, you don’t get thrown.

I appreciate the difficulty many young (especially) boys found themselves in in believing they had no choice but to accept their abuse, but I don’t accept it in this case.

And for the ********artists who come on here with their anonymous local knowledge that “everyone knew” Pell was an abuser, they’re full of ****. The Ballarat list was well known decades ago, and Pell was never on that list until it was politically useful for him to be.

Boy....that escalated quickly

 

[BlueE]

Do you have a link to these? Or is this more of the old "gossip about allegations and trust people won't actually read the material."

EDIT: And are you comfortable with VicPol opening investigations into people in the absence of complainants?

Save your game playing for Court with the hypotheticals. Remember there were other victims that didn't get justice in this particular case. One died before the case could get to trial and another who was so viciously cross examined in the pre trial by Richter than he was too unwell to continue.

I haven't read the redacted evidence of the Royal Commission but there are statements that are fairly easy to find on the Internet stating victims have given evidence against Pell to the RC.

There are also statements fairly easy to find that I considered improbable or impossible against other Priests. However, Pell has signed statements admitting the abuse or lawyers for the Catholic Church have signed statements that the accounts are substantially correct.

So improbability or impossibility for me is now reasonably easy to accept.

 

[BlueE]

Maybe the mods should have a closer look at some of the language and insults directed at those who dare to hold the view that Pell’s innocent.

For what it’s worth, if it’s the question I think it was that got her banned, it was a legitimate question. Horseplay in the local public pool has no power imbalance to it. Irrespective of age. You choose to get thrown only because it’s fun. If it’s not fun, you don’t get thrown.

I appreciate the difficulty many young (especially) boys found themselves in in believing they had no choice but to accept their abuse, but I don’t accept it in this case.

And for the ********artists who come on here with their anonymous local knowledge that “everyone knew” Pell was an abuser, they’re full of ****. The Ballarat list was well known decades ago, and Pell was never on that list until it was politically useful for him to be.

You are seriously ignorant of the fact that pedophiles use swimming pools with groping under and through bathers of young children as a common grooming tool.

Also ignorant that most sexual abuse is more about an abuse of power rather than the actual sex act. In the case of being sexually abused by a Priest who would believe them anyway and almost nobody did at the time.

I don't know about any list but allegations against Pell went back a long way before he rose to positions of power in the church.

 

[HairyO]

Save your game playing for Court with the hypotheticals. Remember there were other victims that didn't get justice in this particular case. One died before the case could get to trial

According to only 1 person.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

You are seriously ignorant of the fact that pedophiles use swimming pools with groping under and through bathers of young children as a common grooming tool.

Also ignorant that most sexual abuse is more about an abuse of power rather than the actual sex act. In the case of being sexually abused by a Priest who would believe them anyway and almost nobody did at the time.

I don't know about any list but allegations against Pell went back a long way before he rose to positions of power in the church.

Your first paragraph is bullshit.

Your second paragraph is irrelevant.

Your third paragraph is also bullshit.