Religion Pell Guilty!

[Maggie5]

LOL at you of all people complaining about whatabout bullshit. You are notorious for posting whataboutism kidd vicious.

nice whataboutism. i thought you were against that.

i havent seen that comment

Lol right! Immediately after Gough's post.

Hmm selective reading of posts?

 

[TimmeT]

No, Timme. "But, Clementine".

Anyway, it's conservative ex PMs and media pundits who have inserted themselves into the Pell defense committee. If you don't want this political, tell them.

LOL yes Kidd.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

LOL yes Kidd.

That's not a response Timme. It's just you using lol/rofl again when you have nothing to offer.

 

[BRWB]

I like the idea of no longer recognising the Vatican as an independent state. Maybe if countries started doing that.

Australia could or at the least suspend their status until they implement the Royal Commission's recs - like the one on outlawing mandatory celibacy.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Australia could or at the least suspend their status until they implement the Royal Commission's recs - like the one on outlawing mandatory celibacy.

Yes, and the mandatory reporting of child abuse to the police.

 

[Maggie5]

Yes he did. Was in an interview.
Said he knew all about it etc.

https://www.thecourier.com.au/story/4261818/pell-knew-about-abuse-but-failed-to-act-inquiry-told/

Just one of the many articles.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Good reason not to put him on the stand as prosecutor may have had fun.
Priests 'misbehaving"?

More good reporting from The Guardian. Questions that have been asked on here, answered.

Eg.The robes
The inner sheath and cream and purple outer layer were held up, and jurors were able to examine and hold these robes in their jury room during deliberations.

Monsignor Charles Portelli, who was Pell’s master of ceremonies at the time of the offending, demonstrated to jurors how the cincture was tied around the waist. Prosecutors pointed out that having a cincture around the waist did not restrict movement from the waist down. The defence gave evidence that the robes would be too heavy to lift and that Pell would not have been able to move the robes aside to expose his penis because they did not have slits.

The jurors saw the robes, were able to hold them, and heard the evidence from both parties as to their manoeuvrability.

What does ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ mean?
Why didn’t Pell take the witness stand?
What does ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ mean?
Was Pell convicted on the evidence of one person, and is this fair?

 

[gordo2016]

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/aust...e-george-pell-case/ar-BBUgUt9?ocid=spartandhp
"At the end of the retrial the jury did not rush to judgement. If they really wanted to "get Pell" as some have claimed, as soon as the evidence was completed they could gathered in the jury room, counted to ten, marched back into court and delivered their verdict.
Instead they took three and a half days to deliberate. Hardly a rush to judgement. And all 12 of them found him guilty on all charges."

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Independent verification (impossible in most sexual abuse cases) is where you can, through the production of a passport or some other document, prove you were not at a place you were alleged to be at.

Or it’s video footage.

Or it’s DNA.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Independent verification (impossible in most sexual abuse cases) is where you can, through the production of a passport or some other document, prove you were not at a place you were alleged to be at.

Or it’s video footage.

Or it’s DNA.

What the **** are you talking about.

If Pell was out of the country at the time, I'd imagine his attorney would have used this.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

What the **** are you talking about.

If Pell was out of the country at the time, I'd imagine his attorney would have used this.

You can actually hit the arrows to see what I’m talking about, which was not the St Pats matter.

But that’s probably not really the point is it. The point is to post as many angry responses, irrespective of their relevance, to drown out the counter argument.

For instance, Giant’s link above doesn’t respond to what I said. At all. It certainly doesn’t evidence his contention. But it doesn’t matter. It’s a counterpoint. With a link. It’s loud noise. The mob wins. And an innocent bloke goes to gaol.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

And an innocent bloke goes to gaol.

Maybe someone can write a gospel about it.

 

[gordo2016]

Pells's quote on the piece of shit Gerald Ridsdale speaks volumes of just what Pell is.
"I knew but it didn't really interest me. "
It shows Pell has no form of human decency. Any normal human being would be sickened of the atrocities Ridsdale committed, but to Pell it meant nothing. It also shows Pell's contempt and utter disregard for the victims. A survivor told the Royal Commission he heard Pell say " Gerry has been rooting little boys again." Pell was present at several meeting between priests, but instead of speaking up all they did was send Ridsdale to another Parish. So he continued his rampage.
Pell. A convicted pedophile who is responsible not only for raping one child, but responsible for the pain and suffering of hundreds of victims by ignoring the hideous crimes of his peers. A monster.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Another point worth noting. Not only is the sacristy locked when not in use, the altar wine is always locked away as well. How did the boys get into a locked sacristy and through another locked cupboard to supposedly drink the altar wine? Having just watched the police interview with Pell I am even more amazed this made it to court. Very weak evidence indeed.

 

[yodellinhank]

...an innocent bloke goes to gaol.

Are you living somewhere the verdict is still under suppression?

 

[gordo2016]

Another point worth noting. Not only is the sacristy locked when not in use, the altar wine is always locked away as well. How did the boys get into a locked sacristy and through another locked cupboard to supposedly drink the altar wine? Having just watched the police interview with Pell I am even more amazed this made it to court. Very weak evidence indeed.

I was an altar boy and we didn't have too much trouble finding it and scoffing it down. It was left everywhere, most priests were total pissheads and they let us have a drink. It could have easily been unlocked, it was left somewhere in the room or the boys got their hands on it earlier and hid it somewhere to drink it later. What a pathetic point you make.

 

[AM]

Great explanation of the process in the THE GUARDIAN

The speculation that Richter would not lead the appeal proved to be correct.

 

[AM]

It's primarily about the evidence but there is certainly an allowance made for the 'advantages enjoyed by the jury' ie seeing and hearing witnesses in person, as opposed to the written transcript of what was said.

Absolutely!

 

[BRWB]

Independent verification (impossible in most sexual abuse cases) is where you can, through the production of a passport or some other document, prove you were not at a place you were alleged to be at.

Or it’s video footage.

Or it’s DNA.

So on the one hand you state you don't believe Pell's guilt because it isn't independently verified.

On the other hand you say that independent verification is impossible in most sex abuse cases.

It seems that you think its pretty much impossible for Pell (and most sex abusers) to be guilty as independent verification is mostly impossible.

Wow.

 

[AM]

So on the one hand you state you don't believe Pell's guilt because it isn't independently verified.

On the other hand you say that independent verification is impossible in most sex abuse cases.

It seems that you think its pretty much impossible for Pell (and most sex abusers) to be guilty as independent verification is mostly impossible.

Wow.

It's called a closed mind I think.

 

[Royal Flush]

And people wonder why some of us think Pell may have been wrongly convicted. People want him behind bars regardless of whether he is guilty of this crime or not. As someone once said, whatever it takes. That is not justice.

Didn't he give an admission of guilt

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

I'm sure they would of had access points so he could "go" while he was dressed.

That's a shocker of a defense.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

No they don't. That's the whole point the defense was trying to make, it would not be possible for Pell to do what was alleged wearing those robes. It's not like the priest wears that get up all day, it's just for mass.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Didn't he give an admission of guilt

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

No, otherwise there wouldn't have been a trial.

 

[Royal Flush]

No, otherwise there wouldn't have been a trial.

I haven't been following this case, just snipets.


Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

I was an altar boy and we didn't have too much trouble finding it and scoffing it down. It was left everywhere, most priests were total pissheads and they let us have a drink. It could have easily been unlocked, it was left somewhere in the room or the boys got their hands on it earlier and hid it somewhere to drink it later. What a pathetic point you make.

But not at the cathedral apparently, it's locked away.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

But not at the cathedral apparently, it's locked away.

You should let his appeal team know.