Religion Pell Guilty!

[TheGreatBarryB]

Long been a lapsed Catholic (was never my choice to start with). Have disagreed with just about everything Pell has said publicly and I think he should have been punished for covering up for sick priests.

I also believe juries should be abolished and only legally trained people should decide cases whether that be judge(s)/ court officials.

My big concern here is the law and yes we haven’t heard all the arguments of the case, but surely something more compelling would have already been pointed out.

Again to quote Age John Sylvester....

“Which means Pell was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the uncorroborated evidence of one witness, without forensic evidence, a pattern of behaviour or a confession.”

People say jury is better than a mob, I say it’s another mob. Look at the OJ case.

 

[Bombermania]

Long been a lapsed Catholic (was never my choice to start with). Have disagreed with just about everything Pell has said publicly and I think he should have been punished for covering up for sick priests.

I also believe juries should be abolished and only legally trained people should decide cases whether that be judge(s)/ court officials.

My big concern here is the law and yes we haven’t heard all the arguments of the case, but surely something more compelling would have already been pointed out.

Again to quote Age John Sylvester....

“Which means Pell was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the uncorroborated evidence of one witness, without forensic evidence, a pattern of behaviour or a confession.”

People say jury is better than a mob, I say it’s another mob. Look at the OJ case.

To some extent I agree except Justice Kidd was firm in his response to Richer QC when he made the comment about it being a minor offsense so on that basis the judge seems to be in agreement with the jury verdict.

 

[Frank Bunn]

They seem to have gone out of their way to exclude mob rule, with the media blackouts and all that stuff.

Yeah, that went well!

 

[Admiral Byng]

Yeah, that went well!

What's the alternative? Have a live cross from the news room every hour to update the trial, minute by minute updates on Twitter to salivate over every new morsel of salacious gossip?

It does seem to me they've gone out of their way to reduce the pressure and influence of the media on the jury, even indirect pressure and influence. What if the jury were reading Bolt every day?

 

[DaRick]

We know that the Child-Rape Cult otherwise known as the catholic church condones the rape and torture of children. We know this not only from watching them do it for centuries, but more tellingly by their persistent, determined efforts to protect the rapists, relocate them and silence the victims. Raping and torturing children is not isolated, aberrant behaviour for the cult members. It is official company policy. The relevant question is why. Allow me to speculate.

The religion business is a scam designed to separate idiots from their cash and to wield control over them. I believe that the catholic cult's systematic use of rape and torture of children is a deliberate tactic used to crush the spirit of children to ensure that the future broken adult will remain fully controlled and subservient to the church.

catholics - why do you continue to support the Child Rape Cult?

As much as I agree that the Catholic Church has dealt with this issue improperly, just about every faith or non-faith (except maybe agnosticism, which is somewhat difficult to define) has moral/ethical skeletons in its closet. Even Communist atheists have killed tens of millions - and let us not discuss Sinhalese Buddhists and their behaviour towards Hindu/Muslim Tamils.

What adherents of any faith/non-faith need to do is to acknowledge, confront and stamp out improper behaviour by fellow adherents and that includes child abuse. This has been where Catholics and the Catholic Church have too often failed.

 

[AM]

On what basis?

Waiting! Waiting! Waiting!

 

[FredLeDeux]

Waiting! Waiting! Waiting!

The old gut feeling, perhaps.

 

[AM]

A holy wholly independent opinion from someone who provided a character reference for bro Pell.

 

[AM]

 

[nylexbandit]

To some extent I agree except Justice Kidd was firm in his response to Richer QC when he made the comment about it being a minor offsense so on that basis the judge seems to be in agreement with the jury verdict.

Isn’t that because he has to operate on the basis that the verdict provided is the correct statement of facts, and accordingly he’s correct?

Horrible arguments and wording by Richter and they would have been better served saying that if that’s what happened they agree the max sentence is justified.

Why you would say ‘plain vanilla’ rather than simply noting your view that in the context of the offence it is not extreme/out of the ordinary stuns me

 

[Frank Bunn]

What's the alternative? Have a live cross from the news room every hour to update the trial, minute by minute updates on Twitter to salivate over every new morsel of salacious gossip?

It does seem to me they've gone out of their way to reduce the pressure and influence of the media on the jury, even indirect pressure and influence. What if the jury were reading Bolt every day?

What I meant is that the suppression order was effectively breached by most Australian media outlets and by many pundits on social media including Bigfooty.

The judge imposed a blanket suppression order banning reporting of Pell's first trial (the 'cathedral trial') under a generally accepted principle that it would have been impossible for Pell to have a fair trial for the second trial (the the swimmers trial') if the second jury was aware of the details or outcome of a first trial.

This week it was announced that the second trial will not proceed.

 

[gordo2016]

We know that the Child-Rape Cult otherwise known as the catholic church condones the rape and torture of children. We know this not only from watching them do it for centuries, but more tellingly by their persistent, determined efforts to protect the rapists, relocate them and silence the victims. Raping and torturing children is not isolated, aberrant behaviour for the cult members. It is official company policy. The relevant question is why. Allow me to speculate.

The religion business is a scam designed to separate idiots from their cash and to wield control over them. I believe that the catholic cult's systematic use of rape and torture of children is a deliberate tactic used to crush the spirit of children to ensure that the future broken adult will remain fully controlled and subservient to the church.

catholics - why do you continue to support the Child Rape Cult?

Don't be a dick mate. I was abused as a child in country Victoria at a catholic school in the late 70's. This has caused constant depression, at times suicidal thoughts and alcohol abuse. I have always been Catholic and became a teacher in Catholic Schools. We teach teach kids values such as respect, treating people with dignity, empathy and honesty. I believe there is a God and that faith has got me through some dark times. As a Catholic, I cannot control the actions of pieces of shit like Pell and his freaks of mates. Being Catholic and going to a Catholic Church doesn't mean we support the vile crimes of some who have abused their authority. Australia first Saint was a women who taught" never see a need without doing something about it." That is what being Catholic means to me and I will continue to go to Church with that in mind.
It is your business if you think Religion is a scam. This is about the actions of some evil people, who don't represent the millions of good people who truly live out every day what being Catholic means.

 

[nylexbandit]

Long been a lapsed Catholic (was never my choice to start with). Have disagreed with just about everything Pell has said publicly and I think he should have been punished for covering up for sick priests.

I also believe juries should be abolished and only legally trained people should decide cases whether that be judge(s)/ court officials.

My big concern here is the law and yes we haven’t heard all the arguments of the case, but surely something more compelling would have already been pointed out.

Again to quote Age John Sylvester....

“Which means Pell was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the uncorroborated evidence of one witness, without forensic evidence, a pattern of behaviour or a confession.”

People say jury is better than a mob, I say it’s another mob. Look at the OJ case.

This is where I’m sitting albeit I am looking to see an unbiased statement of the facts as many are suggesting there is extremely strong evidence against him.

My bias disclosure is that I think it is almost impossible to truly get a beyond reasonable doubt verdict in sex offence cases without tendency evidence/physical evidence or eyewitnesses, and accordingly that we should legislate a changed standard of proof rather than pretending beyond reasonable doubt is truly being applied.

I suspect most people (me included) agree he deserves prison for the way he treated victims and failed to address the issues. I’m just worried that this has influenced the verdict and what it could mean more broadly

 

[Frank Bunn]

Fantastic show when is the last season out?

I've loved the Rake series over the years but unfortunately the 2018 season when he became a senator in Canberra was a bit shit.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/rake.780698/page-7

 

[Strange Cat]

I've loved the Rake series over the years but unfortunately the 2018 season when he became a senator in Canberra was a bit shit.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/rake.780698/page-7

Haven’t watched it yet

 

[Farm Boy]

I also believe juries should be abolished and only legally trained people should decide cases whether that be judge(s)/ court officials.

People say jury is better than a mob, I say it’s another mob. Look at the OJ case.

I would rather a jury than have the ultimate decision left to the discretion of a judge - especially in Victoria. Judges often assert their on opinion as fact, when in reality its often just speculation. Just because someone is legally trained, it doesn't make them impartial.

 

[skilts]

sure, but the majority involve multiple acts with multiple children - who are groomed for the purpose.
i have relatives and neighbours who's boys/girls have been victims of pedos and that's how it usually works.

You know nothing about the ways of paedophiles. Opportunism is their greatest surprise tactic and is at least as preferred as the situation you describe. Such people will **** anything that moves. And if it doesn't move, they'll kick it until it does, and then **** it. Pell's opportunism, as displayed in this case, tallies exactly with his modus operandi in events leading to similar accusations being levelled at him, dating (pun intended) back to 1961.

 

[RupieDupie]

Most are, but the ACU guy is a knight of the holy see.

...but ...but ...what about the opposite, what are you saying about the conservatives?

 

[Plugger35]

Long been a lapsed Catholic (was never my choice to start with). Have disagreed with just about everything Pell has said publicly and I think he should have been punished for covering up for sick priests.

I also believe juries should be abolished and only legally trained people should decide cases whether that be judge(s)/ court officials.

My big concern here is the law and yes we haven’t heard all the arguments of the case, but surely something more compelling would have already been pointed out.

Again to quote Age John Sylvester....

“Which means Pell was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the uncorroborated evidence of one witness, without forensic evidence, a pattern of behaviour or a confession.”

People say jury is better than a mob, I say it’s another mob. Look at the OJ case.

I've been on a jury and I was surprised how many other people on the jury didn't understand the concept of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Some of them wanted to hand down a guilty verdict just because they thought a crime might have happened or could have happened, took a long time to convince them that there wasn't enough evidence to prove guilt, ie. no witnesses, no CCTV/forensic evidence and just one person's word against another person's word.

Not saying the jury in this case got it wrong but I could see how it could happen if you had enough clueless or easily swayed jurors, they aren't infallible.

 

[gordo2016]

A holy wholly independent opinion from someone who provided a character reference for bro Pell.

No surprise that the Vice Chancellor of ACU will stand by his man. Their universities are full of buildings called "the Pell Centre," the Pell theatre" "the Pell block." Should immediately rename them and take the signs down, but that is too much trouble for now. So the Vice Chancellor came out with the old "failed justice" line in the hope that Pell will win the appeal.

 

[sherb]

I've been on a jury and I was surprised how many other people on the jury didn't understand the concept of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Some of them wanted to hand down a guilty verdict just because they thought a crime might have happened or could have happened, took a long time to convince them that there wasn't enough evidence to prove guilt, ie. no witnesses, no CCTV and just one person's word against another person's word.

Not saying the jury in this case got it wrong but I could see how it could happen if you had enough clueless or easily swayed jurors, they aren't infallible.

12 Angry Men. Great movie.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

The 2nd para of the letter from John Howard is one of the more remarkable things Ive seen written by a former.politician.

 

[FredLeDeux]

No surprise that the Vice Chancellor of ACU will stand by his man. Their universities are full of buildings called "the Pell Centre," the Pell theatre" "the Pell block." Should immediately rename them and take the signs down, but that is too much trouble for now. The Vice Chancellor will spin some crap about failed justice and hope like hell that George will win the appeal.

Added to which he's also a long-time culture-warrior from the Murdoch snake-pit, frequently scribbling drivel for the Catholic Boys' Daily.

 

[FredLeDeux]

The 2nd para of the letter from John Howard is one of the more remarkable things Ive seen written by a former.politician.

Definitely zero juice left in the brainpan of the desiccated coconut.

 

[Lebbo73]

Did you see Kidd get up and walk away from the bench yourself?

Read the ****ing thread. He’s said this already multiple occasions. I’m sure that he said this to you.