Religion Pell Guilty!

[Craven Morehead]

But I’m just surprised though that there hasn’t been more accusers come out if he was such a rampant, impulsive, opportunistic offender as this case seems to imply.

I tell you what mate. I'll organise some sick f*** to stick his dick into one of your kids mouths and see how willing they are to come out and tell everyone about what happened.
And then I'll come back in another 10 years and see how willing your offspring is to open up about the incident.
And then in another 10 years.
You offensive arseh*le.

Thanks mate, I am finding it healing in some ways sharing my experiences.

It's a tough road, but we must travel on it. Stay strong.

 

[Present Not Past]

One of the original jurors got challenged on the case I was on, some young bloke wearing scruffy surf gear that looked like he'd been on the bongs.

I was the unlucky campaigner that called up as his replacement, I was spewing as I thought I was going to get out of it.

I made the mistake of being neatly dressed, I should've worn scruffy surf gear and smoked bongs beforehand as I might have been challenged as well.



We didn't get to visit the crime scene either on the case I was on, I don't think it would have made any difference to my decision if we'd visited it though.

What convinced me most to give a not guilty verdict was that the accused took the stand to deny the charges in a very honest, confident manner. Had he not done that like Pell did and stayed silent I wouldn't have been so inclined to go with the not guilty verdict.

The defence lawyer also ran rings around the prosecution lawyer who was hopeless and didn't present a good case at all, that also swayed my decision.

Like you I wasn't one of the original 12 chosen. I was I recall about the 5th replacement. It was weird. My name was called out, I could see they were checking my details on the page they had of everyone, I walked to the recently vacated chair, sat down and waited for the challenge, but it never came.

In the case I was on it was clear that the actions of the perpetrator had resulted in the death of the victim but the defence lawyer was able to introduce just enough doubt as to maybe it was the result of just an accident rather than a deliberate act. So most of the jurors favoured not guilty as there was reasonable doubt. I mean after all we are talking about sending a man to prison.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

I tell you what mate. I'll organise some sick f*** to stick his dick into one of your kids mouths and see how willing they are to come out and tell everyone about what happened.
And then I'll come back in another 10 years and see how willing your offspring is to open up about the incident.
And then in another 10 years.
You offensive arseh*le.

Pattern of behaviour, the fact the mother of the other child said he’d never been abused. Part of the case for the defence, one just couldn’t decide, one could. All matters for discussion.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Body language shouldn't play a "big part" in my view. Are you an expert in body language? If your concentration is on those matters it can only detract from what is being said and the manner in which it is said so you can give those matters appropriate weight. In other words, judge the facts.

That said, it is extremely difficult to listen to issues without involving emotions, personal views and standards and beliefs. Though that's what juries are asked to do.

A mate of mine ended up on a jury awhile back. He was a busy businessman at the time and didn't want to be empanelled. Asked me beforehand if there were any tips that would make it less likely. Said it depended of the case but gave him a couple of suggestions. He ended-up empanelled. And foreman too cos no-one else wanted the task.

It was a defamation case and his dislike for one of the silks was palpable and was a major factor in the person claiming to have been defamed winning the day. It was in the days when juries awarded damages. The amount the jury came up with was extraordinary. Made the tissues the next day. Of course it was overturned on appeal. Pays to focus on the evidence.

Fastest way out of jury is to claim previous close experience with the type of case and so that you would be prejudiced

 

[BRWB]

Pattern of behaviour, the fact the mother of the other child said he’d never been abused. Part of the case for the defence, one just couldn’t decide, one could. All matters for discussion.

You seek 'pattern' - here's another two accusing Pell. ...how many do you want for there to be pattern??

Maybe read this article and see another reason why people don't come forward...you know because they fear not being believed as the powerful shield their friends - and here we are...with your posts.


https://www.theage.com.au/national/...rful-cardinal-supporters-20190301-p51121.html

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

You seek 'pattern' - here's another two accusing Pell. ...how many do you want for there to be pattern??

Maybe read this article and see another reason why people don't come forward...you know because they fear not being believed as the powerful shield their friends - and here we are...with your posts.


https://www.theage.com.au/national/...rful-cardinal-supporters-20190301-p51121.html

You mean a different opinion to yours and others?

I’m far from a Pell supporter as my previous posts on here show. And I’m just as far far from his conservative supporters.

I’m looking at this as a man accused and convicted on yes what may be truthful evidence, but can’t we explore legal issue that a less truthful witness may accuse a man as a vendetta?

Maybe people who want to discuss both sides should start a new thread.

 

[BRWB]

You mean a different opinion to yours and others?

I’m far from a Pell supporter as my previous posts on here show. And I’m just as far far from his conservative supporters.

I’m looking at this as a man accused and convicted on yes what may be truthful evidence, but can’t we explore legal issue that a less truthful witness may accuse a man as a vendetta?

Maybe people who want to discuss both sides should start a new thread.

There are just so many people 'lying' and with 'vendettas' against the Cardinal. How many people accusing would it take for you to believe? We have three

Four, Five?

Ye of little faith.

 

[Jack Gun Cyril Stun]

You mean a different opinion to yours and others?

I’m far from a Pell supporter as my previous posts on here show. And I’m just as far far from his conservative supporters.

I’m looking at this as a man accused and convicted on yes what may be truthful evidence, but can’t we explore legal issue that a less truthful witness may accuse a man as a vendetta?

Maybe people who want to discuss both sides should start a new thread.

Yep BrucefromB and BarryB can chat to each other in there which might help spare the insensitivity, who knows they might even know each other!

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

You seek 'pattern' - here's another two accusing Pell. ...how many do you want for there to be pattern??

Maybe read this article and see another reason why people don't come forward...you know because they fear not being believed as the powerful shield their friends - and here we are...with your posts.


https://www.theage.com.au/national/...rful-cardinal-supporters-20190301-p51121.html

You know the pattern I see. A bucketload of people lining up to make accusations against Pell and all those capable of independent verification turn out to be lies.

 

[darklake]

 

[BRWB]

You know the pattern I see. A bucketload of people lining up to make accusations against Pell and all those capable of independent verification turn out to be lies.

Yeah the pedos always **** children in front of others. ..

The beauty of priests being pedos is that they can confess to each other leaving only the victims word against them. The pedo priests move on to another place and wait for their victims to self destruct or for the handful that go to court, they have people like you and Bolt to lay into them.

What a wonderful feeling it must be to be a convicted pedo's last line of defence against justice.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

It"s been widely reported there were around 25 defence witnesses - choirboys, acolytes, other church functionaries etc - giving evidence for the defense. Contra Mundum also confirmed this.

Yet the key defence witness refused to put himself on the stand.

If you knew you were innocent would you not want to testify as you would have nothing to hide...

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think the accuser is lying.

Well the 12 jurors were convinced he was telling the truth... whilst Pell refused to even take the stand, which is telling!

I would back the jurors who actually heard the evidence over someone who didn't.

 

[gordo2016]

You seek 'pattern' - here's another two accusing Pell. ...how many do you want for there to be pattern??

Maybe read this article and see another reason why people don't come forward...you know because they fear not being believed as the powerful shield their friends - and here we are...with your posts.


https://www.theage.com.au/national/...rful-cardinal-supporters-20190301-p51121.html

Pretty much spot on. In my own experience, we had a class of probably around 25 boys. This prick of a Christian Brother had his way with just about everyone and we never discussed it outside of the room . Not the boys I hung out with. We knew something wasn't right and this guy made us feel dirty and sick to the stomach, but we just never told anyone. This freak was about 60 and I shudder to think how many boys lives he has destroyed. His message was that one little **** up in your life would cause you to burn to hell forever. Being in Grade 3, you believe that. It as a long time ago, but maybe we were too scared to tell anyone. If they thought we were lying, we were doomed to go to hell. The Principal was a bigger pedophile than the teacher, so we were pretty much in one hell of a shithole. We didn't have anyone at school to tell. I did not tell my family until nearly 40 years later.

 

[AM]

Fastest way out of jury is to claim previous close experience with the type of case and so that you would be prejudiced

Suspected ruses are usually tested. So you need to be very good at it.

 

[Strange Cat]

Pattern of behaviour, the fact the mother of the other child said he’d never been abused. Part of the case for the defence, one just couldn’t decide, one could. All matters for discussion.

I can only speak of my own experience but coming forward and making a police statement was frightening and sickening to be telling complete strangers my deepest and darkest shame

It isn’t easy, I’m loathed to take the abusers to court as it will endangered my family as the people involve are dangerous

Maybe try and put yourself in a victim shoes and think about how hard it is to come forward...espically against a senior figuire like Pell who has political ties and unlimited resources to fight and smear your reputation to protect himself and the church.

The shame has caused me to attempt suicide several times because all I hear is comments like yours asking why the victims don’t come forward

It’s a terrible terrible burden I don’t wish on anyone

 

[AM]

Well the 12 jurors were convinced he was telling the truth... whilst Pell refused to even take the stand, which is telling!

I would back the jurors who actually heard the evidence over someone who didn't.

It would be no contest.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Yeah the pedos always **** children in front of others. ..

The beauty of priests being pedos is that they can confess to each other leaving only the victims word against them. The pedo priests move on to another place and wait for their victims to self destruct or for the handful that go to court, they have people like you and Bolt to lay into them.

What a wonderful feeling it must be to be a convicted pedo's last line of defence against justice.

Do you not see a small problem with the numbers of accusations thrown Pell’s way that have been verifiably false?

 

[Strange Cat]

Do you not see a small problem with the numbers of accusations thrown Pell’s way that have been verifiably false?

At least they find some sense of solace and justice that finally Pell has been convicted

It’s a great moment that his past has finally caught up with for all the lives he has ruined

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

I can only speak of my own experience but coming forward and making a police statement was frightening and sickening to be telling complete strangers my deepest and darkest shame

It isn’t easy, I’m loathed to take the abusers to court as it will endangered my family as the people involve are dangerous

Maybe try and put yourself in a victim shoes and think about how hard it is to come forward...espically against a senior figuire like Pell who has political ties and unlimited resources to fight and smear your reputation to protect himself and the church.

The shame has caused me to attempt suicide several times because all I hear is comments like yours asking why the victims don’t come forward

It’s a terrible terrible burden I don’t wish on anyone

Unfortunately there are victims of crime who never come forward no doubt. Men like Pell who were in positions of power should be held directly responsible for failing to act and simply moving the problems from town to town. And then for Pell to treat brave families who did come forward so poorly with only regard for his church’s coffers makes the man a repellent figure to a great many people.

Fortunately there seemed to be enough who came forward judging by how the worst offenders such as Ridsdale were moved about so often during their priesthood.

Pell wasn’t always powerful in the church, so once again for someone, judging by his conviction, to be such an impulsive aggressive offender there’s very little evidence from 60s, 70s and 80s before he started moving his way up. Most of the very few accusations against him came to light once he was well known.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Of course,it's not that hard to be objective.

You only need to skim through this thread, and other sources, to find reasons why people are not objective.

People have suffered abuse at the hands of Christian priests or brothers, some people think Pell protected pedophile priests, some gay people resent his stance on gay marriage and other issues, some people have had personal dealings with him and think he's a prick, some people just hate the Catholic church.

On the other hand some people think Pell was responsible for cleaning up the Catholic church of the abusers, some know him personally and claim he could not have done what he's accused of, some think there's been a media campaign against Pell, against Catholics and against Conservatives.

None of these prior opinions and experiences, however valid in themselves, are relevant to deciding the case. That is why I questioned whether it was possible to find a jury who had no biasing opinions on the case before the trial. I think we are going to see an appeal before judges not jury. Maybe that is how it should have been from day 1 of this double trial.

 

[Frank Bunn]

It's primarily about the evidence though. Let me quote you the summation of a judge to a jury on a criminal matter.

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.

 

[Bombermania]

One general comment about Pell's defenders, they are all going on about how difficult it would be for Pell to undo his clothing yet I wonder how did the guy go to the toilet, surely he didn't wet himself.

 

[Bombermania]

You know the pattern I see. A bucketload of people lining up to make accusations against Pell and all those capable of independent verification turn out to be lies.

The gentleman was cross examined by one of Melbourne's best QC's and his story held fast. The only people that needed to hear and believe the witness were the jury and the judge. In my view Pell made a mistake not taking the stand but that is something he will need to live with. A general comment about the earlier cases, no they were not all found to be liars, in some cases the accuser passed away or the evidence wasn't tight enough for a legal conviction, that in itself doesn't make them out to be liars.

 

[Bombermania]

People have the right to cast doubt on facts of a case as we all did with Chamberlains and other famous cases.

I, like many, believe Pell was indirectly responsible for scores of children being abused by his inaction in particular against Ridsdale but no doubt many other priests. He then tried to limit the cost to the church and hurt a lot of families doing so.

He had decades to do the right thing and he never did. It’s my belief that he didn’t tell the full truth at the Royal Commission. To me the inaction itself should be worthy of jail. Should have thrown the book at him and many other in the Church.

Anyone can understand why so many people would have felt anger and revulsion to Pell as he was the figurehead of the organisation. Even more so to all the poor people who have been abused or had friends/relatives abused and would have been incensed at the lack of action, the opportunities to stop this by men in power who should have known better.

But I’m just surprised though that there hasn’t been more accusers come out if he was such a rampant, impulsive, opportunistic offender as this case seems to imply.

I mean just months after being appointed archbishop and just months after starting the Melbourne ‘limit the damage’ Response, he does this act that could not get any more impulsive or opportunistic. This is on a level that he had no control whatsoever.

I don't think there is anything wrong with questioning the case, that is after all why there is an appeals process however there has been various stories reported over the years and if Pell did commit the act then the small number of allegations may indicate that he is more of a bully like abuser than an actual pedo in other words when angry he would act out in this way, someone made the point that as he was new to the job and had just finished a mass then the occasion might have got to him which is feasible but if that was the case then surely he should have made an effort to reach out to the two boys.

The thing that makes me skeptical with Pell was his willingness to support well known paedophile priests. It is well documented that paedophiles form tight knit groups and the Ballarat Catholic community had a number of cases that Pell was familiar with yet he seemed to be more supportive of the accused than the victims.