Religion Pell Guilty!

[Del191229]

I gave an answer. Judge only trials.

Who are these hundreds of cases before him with the same publicity?

Great, Diplock Courts for kiddy fiddlers.

Or put another way, one person entirely removed from normal day to day experience who dresses up in funny clothes, uses deliberately obtuse language and wields power over people's lives deciding the fate of another person person entirely removed from normal day to day experience who dresses up in funny clothes, uses deliberately obtuse language and wields power over people's lives.

Of course, if the Judge in a judge-only trial is Catholic, it will be the worst, 50s style anti-Kafflickism to bring that up, why should we pay for state schools, the Labor Party is beset by Communists, the prophecy of Medjugorje will by fulfilled, just this verty morning on Points of View we learned about how sexual excess blah blah blah.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Great, Diplock Courts for kiddy fiddlers.

Or put another way, one person entirely removed from normal day to day experience who dresses up in funny clothes, uses deliberately obtuse language and wields power over people's lives deciding the fate of another person person entirely removed from normal day to day experience who dresses up in funny clothes, uses deliberately obtuse language and wields power over people's lives.

Of course, if the Judge in a judge-only trial is Catholic, it worst be the worst, 50s style anti-Kafflickism to bring that up, why should we pay for state schools, the Labor Party is beset by Communists, the prophecy of Medjugorje will by fulfilled, just this verty morning on Points of View we learned about how sexual excess blah blah blah.

Judges and priests certainly both dress up in funny clothes.
Judges don't deliberately use obtuse language, they are careful to say what they mean and only what they mean, which sometimes makes it complex, not obtuse, and certainly not deliberately so.
Priest use deliberately obtuse language because they are chocolate-coating a pig.
Judges who have practised as criminal lawyers, and who then sit on criminal trials deal with more day-to-day nauseating human depravity than the normal person would come across in 3 lifetimes. I suspect the same is true of priests. I don't know whether that makes them "entirely removed from normal day to day experience", but it certainly means that they know more than most about certain parts of human nature.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Great, Diplock Courts for kiddy fiddlers.

Or put another way, one person entirely removed from normal day to day experience who dresses up in funny clothes, uses deliberately obtuse language and wields power over people's lives deciding the fate of another person person entirely removed from normal day to day experience who dresses up in funny clothes, uses deliberately obtuse language and wields power over people's lives.

Of course, if the Judge in a judge-only trial is Catholic, it will be the worst, 50s style anti-Kafflickism to bring that up, why should we pay for state schools, the Labor Party is beset by Communists, the prophecy of Medjugorje will by fulfilled, just this verty morning on Points of View we learned about how sexual excess blah blah blah.

You know Victoria is the only state with mandated juries for criminal trials?

Fred has answered the Judge stuff better than I can.

It does seem as though the Church is on the rise in Russia and on the decline in the West. Whether that means the "Medjugorje Prophecy" is coming true or not I don't know. The ALP was most certainly beset by Communists in the 1950s. That is a fact.
And I'm not sure why Catholics shouldn't have 10 minutes on TV to talk about their thing. Financial charlatans do. In fact everybody does who wants to really. And I'm not sure Santamaria was wrong about sexual excesses. There are certainly a bloody lot of fatherless children in our court system at the moment.

 

[FredLeDeux]

You know Victoria is the only state with mandated juries for criminal trials?

Fred has answered the Judge stuff better than I can.

As far as I'm concerned, on the question of judge v jury, the jury is still out.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

As far as I'm concerned, on the question of judge v jury, the jury is still out.

That's very good.

I don't think Judge Only is ideal. I think that would lead to more political judicial appointments much like they have in the US and we increasingly have in the Magistrates Court. I do, however, think that in circumstances like this one there needs to be that option. Some of the hatred directed at Pell on this thread alone shows why it needs to be considered particularly where that hatred seems to have its justification founded in beliefs that are verifiably false.

Eg. It is absolutely false that Pell was ever responsible for any decision to place Ridsdale in a pastoral role with access to children.

 

[western royboy]

That's very good.

I don't think Judge Only is ideal. I think that would lead to more political judicial appointments much like they have in the US and we increasingly have in the Magistrates Court. I do, however, think that in circumstances like this one there needs to be that option. Some of the hatred directed at Pell on this thread alone shows why it needs to be considered particularly where that hatred seems to have its justification founded in beliefs that are verifiably false.

Eg. It is absolutely false that Pell was ever responsible for any decision to place Ridsdale in a pastoral role with access to children.

What did George do about Ridsdale / Searson? In his view it was a mass conspiracy against him to keep him in the dark! I look forward to the redacted sections of the RC final report becoming public and George’s evidence in the umpteen civil trials that will follow.

 

[western royboy]

What did George do about Ridsdale / Searson? In his view it was a mass conspiracy against him to keep him in the dark! I look forward to the redacted sections of the RC final report becoming public and George’s evidence in the umpteen civil trials that will follow.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

What did George do about Ridsdale / Searson? In his view it was a mass conspiracy against him to keep him in the dark! I look forward to the redacted sections of the RC final report becoming public and George’s evidence in the umpteen civil trials that will follow.

He sacked Searson. And ignored the Vatican’s orders to reinstate him.

He was never in a position to act on Ridsdale.

 

[Craven Morehead]

He sacked Searson. And ignored the Vatican’s orders to reinstate him.

He was never in a position to act on Ridsdale.

He certainly was in a position to support him, or walk away, though.
And he made the quite public choice to support the bastard.

Don't tell me that Pell was completely unaware of Risdales goings on, even anecdotally.
That, in itself, is more than enough for someone who proclaims to be cleaner than the driven snow, to stay away.

Yet there he was, cheek by jowl, walking beside the filth into court as a supporter and defender.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

He certainly was in a position to support him, or walk away, though.
And he made the quite public choice to support the bastard.

Don't tell me that Pell was completely unaware of Risdales goings on, even anecdotally.
That, in itself, is more than enough for someone who proclaims to be cleaner than the driven snow, to stay away.

Yet there he was, cheek by jowl, walking beside the filth into court as a supporter and defender.

Someone had to. And I think the continued outrage over that particular act epitomises what I consider to be an overblown level of hate towards Pell and a desire to make him the central figure of blame in all of this.

Can I ask why you added “and defended” at the end there?

 

[Chief]

View attachment 695477

Because priests never serve at a mass outside their fiefdom.

People never get the year wrong when remembering events from a decade or more ago.

Bolt’s a paedo-apologist.

 

[Craven Morehead]

Someone had to. And I think the continued outrage over that particular act epitomises what I consider to be an overblown level of hate towards Pell and a desire to make him the central figure of blame in all of this.

Can I ask why you added “and defended” at the end there?

No, someone didn't HAVE to at all.
There has been plenty of instances where clergy who have been attending court for similar charges went in alone, including Pell himself.
Hence, I don't think it's too longer bow to draw that Pell's attendance with Risdale was not only a show of support but also an attempt at defending the grub and the church.

 

[western royboy]

He sacked Searson. And ignored the Vatican’s orders to reinstate him.

He was never in a position to act on Ridsdale.

I think when the report is redacted both those statements will prove to be incorrect - you don’t need to be in a position to act - you do it because you know it is wrong - it’s always been about George and he made a decision based on was best for George rather than doing the right thing - and therein is the Catholic Church in an absolute nutshell

 

[HairyO]

Because priests never serve at a mass outside their fiefdom.

People never get the year wrong when remembering events from a decade or more ago.

Bolt’s a paedo-apologist.

Insignificant events maybe. Life changing? Pretty sure I can list all of mine. I bet you can list all of yours too. Particularly if you had plenty of time to walk through timelines with family and friends and lawyers and police.

 

[Craven Morehead]

Insignificant events maybe. Life changing? Pretty sure I can list all of mine. I bet you can list all of yours too. Particularly if you had plenty of time to walk through timelines with family and friends and lawyers and police.

I'm sure you could, if they weren't as traumatic as being molested as a child.

 

[HairyO]

I'm sure you could, if they weren't as traumatic as being molested as a child.

So the memories are unreliable?

 

[Chief]

Insignificant events maybe. Life changing? Pretty sure I can list all of mine. I bet you can list all of yours too. Particularly if you had plenty of time to walk through timelines with family and friends and lawyers and police.

This is interesting and informative and not political or religious:

Revisionist History Podcast - Malcolm Gladwell Podcast - Pushkin Industries

Revisionist History is Malcolm Gladwell's journey through the overlooked and the misunderstood. Click now to listen to the Revisionist History podcast on Pushkin Industries.

revisionisthistory.com

People argue over the details of war stories all the time. Including whether they were even there.

I started back at Uni the year my second child was born, and I still have to think for a bit to remember the year.

 

[Craven Morehead]

So the memories are unreliable?

Unreliable, or deeply, deeply buried until such time that the survivor is strong enough to confront, and deal, with them?
Courts/Judges have a certain understanding and compassion for historical sexual abuse.

We are not dealing with a documented, white-collar, (pun unintended), crime here.

 

[HairyO]

This is interesting and informative and not political or religious:

Revisionist History Podcast - Malcolm Gladwell Podcast - Pushkin Industries

Revisionist History is Malcolm Gladwell's journey through the overlooked and the misunderstood. Click now to listen to the Revisionist History podcast on Pushkin Industries.

revisionisthistory.com

People argue over the details of war stories all the time. Including whether they were even there.

I started back at Uni the year my second child was born, and I still have to think for a bit to remember the year.

Eventually get the year right though, yeah? Particularly if you chat to uni friends, or parents, etc?

The Michael Jackson documentary had victim claims rebuffed when it turned out some of the parts of the house where the abuse took place didnt even exist until years after the abuse was said to happen. After the last time the guy had actually met Jackson (presumably because he got too old for Jackson).

Does it mean it didnt happen? No. Does it throw enormous doubt? Absolutely.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Eventually get the year right though, yeah? Particularly if you chat to uni friends, or parents, etc?

The Michael Jackson documentary had victim claims rebuffed when it turned out some of the parts of the house where the abuse took place didnt even exist until years after the abuse was said to happen. After the last time the guy had actually met Jackson (presumably because he got too old for Jackson).

Does it mean it didnt happen? No. Does it throw enormous doubt? Absolutely.

Yeah it took a few cracks with the Cathedral matter before they finally settled on a time and date (even year) where they could place Pell at the scene.

 

[BlueE]

Any news yet? Six weeks for the Appeal Judgement seems a very long time to wait. Possible reasons for this?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Any news yet? Six weeks for the Appeal Judgement seems a very long time to wait. Possible reasons for this?

Chief Judge is holidaying overseas.

 

[Bunkdar]

Any news yet? Six weeks for the Appeal Judgement seems a very long time to wait. Possible reasons for this?

his getting out
they will drop it in a busy news week

 

[AM]

I guess Melissa bumped into BruceFromBalnarring

While on the general question of open justice, agree with the following. So kudos to Justice Kidd for his making his sentencing judgement open to the public.

Attacks on the justice system do not come out of nowhere—it's time for the UK to fight for openness - Prospect Magazine

Open justice is not only about opening the courtroom doors. It's about public understanding and access to proper legal rights

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I guess Melissa bumped into BruceFromBalnarring

Yeah. Except I never said Pell gave evidence.