Religion Pell Guilty!

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Now we wait until the Vic DPP's charging of up to 71 Australian journalists for contempt of court hits the media (they've been sitting on it for weeks, unable to report it until the suppression order is lifted)...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Mofra said:
Now we wait until the Vic DPP's charging of up to 71 Australian journalists for contempt of court hits the media (they've been sitting on it for weeks, unable to report it until the suppression order is lifted)...
Click to expand...
Bf was ahead of the game as usual , broke essendon story months before too
 
Satan said:
Bf was ahead of the game as usual , broke essendon story months before too
Click to expand...
The news industry leaks like a sieve.
Suppression orders in Australia for high profile people are virtually worthless. American Christian Monitor was breaking the Pell story as it happened while suppression orders were being drawn up.
 
Mofra said:
Now we wait until the Vic DPP's charging of up to 71 Australian journalists for contempt of court hits the media (they've been sitting on it for weeks, unable to report it until the suppression order is lifted)...
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...al-suppression-order-face-possible-jail-terms
Dozens of journalists have been threatened with a charge of contempt of court – and could face possible jail terms – over reporting of the Cardinal George Pell trial.


Victoria’s director of public prosecutions, Kerri Judd QC, has written to as many as 50 individual publishers, editors, broadcasters, reporters and subeditors at the media giants News Corp Australia, Nine Entertainment, the ABC and several smaller publications, accusing them of breaching a nationwide suppression order imposed during the case.


Show-cause notices were sent to the journalists in early February saying that they had potentially interfered with the administration of justice and scandalised the court.


The ones who do not have a strong enough explanation could be prosecuted.
Click to expand...
 
This! From the victim. Really sad, I hope that the press accepts .

Thank you for your interest in this case.
Like many survivors I have experienced shame, loneliness, depression and struggle. Like many survivors it has taken me years to understand the impact upon my life.
At some point we realise that we trusted someone we should have feared and we fear those genuine relationships that we should trust. I would like to thank my family near and far for their support of me, and of each other.
I am witness in a case brought by the state of Victoria. I have put my trust in the police and the criminal justice system. The process has been stressful and it is not over yet.
I need space and time to cope with the ongoing criminal process. I understand this is a big news story but please don’t reveal my identity.
I ask that the media respect my privacy. I don’t want to give any interviews. Please don’t come to my home. I want to protect my young family and my parents. I don’t want them swept into the spotlight.
I am not a spokesperson about child sexual abuse. There are many other survivors and advocates who bravely fill this role.
I am just a regular guy working to support and protect my family as best I can. Thank you for your support and understanding.
 
Appeal lodged.

Pell’s barrister, Robert Richter QC, filed an appeal against the conviction on 21 February. That could obviously take some time to play out, but the appeal is based on the following grounds:

1 - The verdict of the jury was unreasonable, in contrary to the evidence before them
2 - It was not right that defence were not allowed to present jurors with a digital animation they intended to screen during their closing address
3 - The way the jury was constituted was unfair
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Maggie5 said:
Appeal lodged.

Pell’s barrister, Robert Richter QC, filed an appeal against the conviction on 21 February. That could obviously take some time to play out, but the appeal is based on the following grounds:

1 - The verdict of the jury was unreasonable, in contrary to the evidence before them
Click to expand...

Surely this is not a legal avenue for appeal? Or it would be tried after every case right?

In other news - high profile member of catholic church touches kids - shocked to be sitting here
 
iluvparis said:
Surely this is not a legal avenue for appeal? Or it would be tried after every case right?

In other news - high profile member of catholic church touches kids - shocked to be sitting here
Click to expand...
Yeah I thought that and 3 were strange ones.
 
The Department of Public Prosecutions said it would discontinue its prosecution of the second trial, known as the Ballarat or swimmers trial, and that therefore the suppression order, which was in place to ensure that the second trial was not prejudiced, could be lifted.
 
Satan said:
Is he a no win no fee lawyer type?
Click to expand...
Doubtful, he probably commands hideous fees I’d imagine. The kind of lawyer who would represent literally anyone for a buck is the impression I get.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top