Religion Pell Guilty!

[TheGreatBarryB]

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.

No the judge was making comment on the sentence, based on the judgment. His job wasn’t to query the judgement. Simply if you’ve been found guilty of this crime then it’s far from minor offence. Rightly so.

 

[RupieDupie]

Hinch, like him or not has been very consistent.

It would be interesting to see what a Royal Commission into The Liberal Party’s shenanigans will uncover... It would be like reading Revelations - finding out the Truth by reading through a whole heap of weird cultish shit

 

[Frank Bunn]

Two trials with presumably the same set of evidence presented.
Jury 1 deadlocked 10-2 in favor of Pell.
Jury 2 unanimous 0-12 against Pell.
Not a great look for trial by jury.

Where's the evidence for these jury verdicts?

Where's the evidence that there were a first and second trial relating to the charges he was eventually found guilty of?

 

[CakeEater]

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

Howard was a lawyer by trade as well, which makes it more remarkable

 

[Cooldude]

1. I know that he is always ALWAYS accompanied by his assistant.

2. I know that the door to the sacristy at St Pats is always ALWAYS locked.

3. I know that the Archbishop almost always talks to churchgoers for a good half hour after Mass.

4. If he doesn't, it's because he has some pressing engagement.

5. I know that the Archbishop can't get out of all his gear without assistance. So if he did have a pressing engagement, then his assistant would have been with him to help him get his garb off. Which also goes to whether he could have whipped out his johnson and demanded a blow job. He couldn't have.

6. I know that there are people milling around everywhere after Mass, and for Pell to have acted as described, even if he could have and for the reasons spelled out above, I don't believe he could have, he would have had to have been so brazenly stupid to have committed the abuse in the manner described. And whatever you think of Pell, he's not brazenly stupid.

7. The evidence wasn't substantial. It was one boy's description of events, denied by the other boy who was allegedly present.

If you know so many things, why aren't you in court giving evidence as a witness for him?

If you are not, then everything you've just said is just make believe BS, c'mon, go and test out the truth of your statements in the court of law

 

[AM]

Don't care much for war monger Howard or dumbo big ears Tony, both *******s . But Hinch has some ******* nerve though , this from a bloke who announced to the world about how a young woman was r*ped via a twitter comment when the victims parents weren't even aware , also over the years putting victims at risk and court cases at risk on naming peados back in the day . Cant stand the bloke just another headline hunting piece of shit .

If it attracts publicity Hinch will be all over it. He's earned the Human Headline tag. An oxygen thief.

 

[Lebbo73]

I get that is your view.

We either have faith in our judicial system or we don't.

Everyone is reading between the lines here because very few people have actually heard the evidence.

However, if Pell's lawyer is arguing that the abuse is on some sort of lower level then that is accepting that the abuse happened. I am not sure how anyone can defend Pell in light of this.

Pell's own lawyer has stated that abuse happened.

They haven’t accepted anything and it doesn’t mean that a judge only trial would have found him guilty. The sentencing hearing is not where you’re allowed to proclaim your client’s innocence. You are there to try and argue for a lighter sentence.

 

[Maggie5]

This is another interesting read on Pell by Father Michael Kelly SJ the CEO of UCAN Services.
https://international.la-croix.com/news/how-did-george-pell-get-to-where-he-was/9554#

As the "numbers man" for a competitor to Pope Francis he needed to be taken seriously.

During the previous two pontificates, he had become a well-known and influential figure in Rome. He was a member of two of the most significant Congregations in the Vatican bureaucracy – Bishops and Doctrine of the Faith – and so became a force to be reckoned with.

That prominence would lead any new pope to the advice of Machiavelli: keep your friends close and your enemies closer!

Having Cardinal Pell in the inner circle means that what he has to say and do was far easier to inspect than it would be from the distance of Australia.

But there was an extra advantage to having him in Rome. A physically powerful character and charmingly persuasive personality when he wanted to be, Pell dominated many of the circumstances he moved in. He towered over the Australian bishops who never elected him to be President of their Conference.

He specialized in tactics that circled around any group that got in his way as he headed for influence over the key decision maker.

Seen to unsuccessful effect at the two Synod assemblies on the family.

At the first of those two Synod gatherings, he organized a letter to Francis from 13 eminent Synod Fathers warning the pope not to soften in the pastoral treatment of divorced and remarried Catholics.

The move unraveled when the letter was leaked and Pell's ruse exposed.

It was living proof that Pell's presence on the world stage and exposure to peers who would call his bluff meant he could no longer hold sway as he once had from the remoteness of Australia. The scrutiny of better qualified and critical peers became another way his power surges and bullying behavior had become contained.

But his arrival in Rome had other reasons than simply containing his impact on a pontificate he never warmed to.

Pell was generally unpopular as archbishop in both Sydney and the See he led before Sydney – Melbourne which is the largest archdiocese in Australia.

His departure from Sydney was a relief to the Catholics of that city and beyond, defusing the Catholic culture wars and allowing the church to regroup after almost two decades during which Pell was the most visible, divisive and controversial Catholic in the country.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

Amazing that there's people still willing to defend the Melbourne Response after the last 48 hours; can only imagine those doing so are the silks making bank over 20 years of railroading and bullying victims on behalf of the Church.

 

[Bombermania]

No the judge was making comment on the sentence, based on the judgment. His job wasn’t to query the judgement. Simply if you’ve been found guilty of this crime then it’s far from minor offence. Rightly so.

That isn't how I read his remarks although I agree in the sense that the judge didn't comment on the verdict.

 

[2Knights]

As a matter of interest where did you get the 10-2 figure in favor of Pell in the hung jury trial?

From 2 Catholic websites (CNA Catholic News Agency and one other), so perhaps I jumped the gun there. Didn't see a 10-2 in the Australian or the ABC.

 

[AM]

They haven’t accepted anything and it doesn’t mean that a judge only trial would have found him guilty. The sentencing hearing is not where you’re allowed to proclaim your client’s innocence. You are there to try and argue for a lighter sentence.

Tell me something I don't know. I was merely expressing a view based on the demeanour of the judge, the strength of his utterances, and the manner in which he cut through RR's submissions. Nothing of that sort was directed at the great "Gibbo" so far as it's been reported in any event.

 

[AM]

From 2 Catholic websites (CNA Catholic News Agency and one other), so perhaps I jumped the gun there. Didn't see a 10-2 in the Australian or the ABC.

Thanks for straightening that out. Judge's generally tell jurors to reveal nothing of jury considerations in such instances. So it appears to have no weight.

 

[Strange Cat]

I thought you had him on ignore?

Back on ignore

Nice to see you defending him regardless

 

[twotooto]

Pell, like every other convicted pedo, absolutely needs to rot in hell, but reading through this thread the amount of ****heads who just cannot resist using an appalling abuse of power by a very senior member of the clergy in what is no doubt the tip of the iceberg in terms of ruining the lives of minors to make it all about a partisan political football tit for tat score fest is an absolute ****ing disgrace. Get a life you miserable campaigners.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Ok - I’m not a lawyer and do not understand the intricacies of these things.

The rest of post still stands though, very few people heard the evidence, Pell was found guilty and we either trust the judicial system or we don’t.

The judicial system has been known to fail though (Lindy Chamberlain for example) so one cannot trust it implicitly.

 

[Taylor]

I really hope he doesn't win this appeal, his reputation is totally destroyed already.

 

[Benny78]

Pell, like every other convicted pedo, absolutely needs to rot in hell, but reading through this thread the amount of ****heads who just cannot resist using an appalling abuse of power by a very senior member of the clergy in what is no doubt the tip of the iceberg in terms of ruining the lives of minors to make it all about a partisan political football tit for tat score fest is an absolute ******* disgrace. Get a life you miserable campaigners.

Lol not our fault that a pedophile is revered by basically all the high authority conservatives in this country.

The fact is nobody on the left admires pedophiles

 

[sideswipe]

Amazing that there's people still willing to defend the Melbourne Response after the last 48 hours; can only imagine those doing so are the silks making bank over 20 years of railroading and bullying victims on behalf of the Church.

I thought the Melbourne Response pretty readily paid out applicants? Genuine question.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Taylor]

Lol not our fault that a pedophile is revered by basically all the high authority conservatives in this country.

The fact is nobody on the left admires pedophiles

I think it's a symptom of a culture that judges people on what they see, and these sorts of people hide behind a really nice public image.

People would be shocked to find out Hugh Jackman beat his wife and r*ped every young woman on his shows. That might sound ridiculous but they usually do until it's come out.

Now that's a completely made up example, but your gut reaction would be to not believe it - it comes from the same place, especially if part of your own identity is rooted in Hugh Jackman being an upstanding nice guy.

 

[Strange Cat]

I think it's a symptom of a culture that judges people on what they see, and these sorts of people hide behind a really nice public image.

People would be shocked to find out Hugh Jackman beat his wife and r*ped every young woman on his shows. That might sound ridiculous but they usually do until it's come out.

Now that's a completely made up example, but your gut reaction would be to not believe it - it comes from the same place, especially if part of your own identity is rooted in Hugh Jackman being an upstanding nice guy.

Having said all that there’s been plenty of rumours and controversy surrounding Pell for decades that should had given pause for those that followed him and stood up for him.

You don’t have to look too hard to see that there was a dark history lurking behind the facade

 

[darklake]

I think it's a symptom of a culture that judges people on what they see, and these sorts of people hide behind a really nice public image.

People would be shocked to find out Hugh Jackman beat his wife and r*ped every young woman on his shows. That might sound ridiculous but they usually do until it's come out.

Now that's a completely made up example, but your gut reaction would be to not believe it - it comes from the same place, especially if part of your own identity is rooted in Hugh Jackman being an upstanding nice guy.

I think you owe Hugh Jackman an apology.

 

[Forward Press]

The judicial system has been known to fail though (Lindy Chamberlain for example) so one cannot trust it implicitly.

Planes sometimes fall out of the sky but this does not mean you cannot trust that it works.

Everything has failings, especially the justice system, because humans are humans. The point is that the process is strict and very thorough to ensure that mistakes are minimised, and even then Pell has the right to appeal his verdict, as every other convicted criminal does. Sure, an appeal may overturn the decision but in the meantime it is safe (and legal) to call him a convicted criminal.

 

[Tiges1229]

so when will the appeal be heard ?

 

[Bont2Bruce]

As a matter of interest where did you get the 10-2 figure in favor of Pell in the hung jury trial?

Amanda Vanstone mentioned 10-2 in favour of acquittal in the hung jury was the "going gossip" (can't recall exact wording) on ABC radio this afternoon.

I thought the Melbourne Response pretty readily paid out applicants? Genuine question.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

That was because they capped any single payout at $50k.