Religion Pell Guilty!

[AM]

I have occasionally wondered whether there’s an element of hubris in that advice.

I don’t think it would have helped Pell though. If they were going to ignore the significant weight of evidence in his favour, they were going to ignore his own words.

No hubris. RR publicly stated Gatto acted against his advice in that regard.

Significant weight of evidence? The significant weight of evidence the Police, DPP, the Committal hearing, the trial Jury and the majority Court of Appeal decided was not sufficiently 'significant'. That "weight" you mean?

Will you be popping in to see your buddy? Always a possibility of bumping into the psuedo journo and the Mad Monk. Perhaps even the Parrot. If so, be sure and post a selfie.

 

[Strange Cat]

Ummm, you're not rendering unto Caeser what is Caesers.

And you are spitting in the face of the Court - you said two judges KNEW they were locking up an innocent man.

“Ignoring favourable significant evidence ”

As delusional as it gets

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Ummm, you're not rendering unto Caeser what is Caesers.

And you are spitting in the face of the Court - you said two judges KNEW they were locking up an innocent man.

So did Weinberg.

And I pay my taxes.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

No hubris. RR publicly stated Gatto acted against his advice in that regard.

Significant weight of evidence? The significant weight of evidence the Police, DPP, the Committal hearing, the trial Jury and the majority Court of Appeal decided was not sufficiently 'significant'. That "weight" you mean?

Will you be popping in to see your buddy? Always a possibility of bumping into the psuedo journo and the Mad Monk. Perhaps even the Parrot. If so, be sure and post a selfie.

Unfortunately you have to leave your phone in a locker.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

The judges were not deliberating on whether Pell was guilty or not, that was up to the original jury to decide. They were instead deliberating whether the original jury acted reasonably in coming to a decision beyond reasonable doubt. Big difference.

Yes but very contrasting views on the witness. Weinberg seemed to have a lot of doubt. Big contrast to other two judges

 

[AM]

Unfortunately you have to leave your phone in a locker.

When you're leaving for a beverage would suffice.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Yes but very contrasting views on the witness. Weinberg seemed to have a lot of doubt. Big contrast to other two judges

I’m waiting for the mob here to label Weinberg “delusional” and every other abusive name I’ve been called on this forum.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

When you're leaving for a beverage would suffice.

I’ll leave childish selfies to the likes of Lucie Morris Marr.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

I’m waiting for the mob here to label Weinberg “delusional” and every other abusive name I’ve been called on this forum.

Well it’s certainly not a conspiracy like you claim.

 

[Cooldude]

I’m waiting for the mob here to label Weinberg “delusional” and every other abusive name I’ve been called on this forum.

Jesus H Christ, what an arrogant narcissist you must be to actually believe you are the victim. Get over yourself

Boohoo wah wah woe is me, everybody's mean to me and muh church, that's been your entire routine

 

[Gavin Excell]

Bruce your views on Commensolis position?
Would have to put personal views aside and acknowledge courts decision.

 

[Strange Cat]

I’m waiting for the mob here to label Weinberg “delusional” and every other abusive name I’ve been called on this forum.

Aren’t you a poor little victim

Imagine having some consequences for the disgraceful shit you write

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Jesus H Christ, what an arrogant narcissist you must be to actually believe you are the victim. Get over yourself

Boohoo wah wah woe is me, everybody's mean to me and muh church, that's been your entire routine

Mate I can’t by definition be a victim of people like you. You’re a complete lightweight who’s only strength is in the mob.

I’m simply remarking that much of what Weinberg has written is very similar to what I have written for which I was labelled delusional.

 

[AM]

I’m waiting for the mob here to label Weinberg “delusional” and every other abusive name I’ve been called on this forum.

Not likely regarding His Honour. After all he did swat two of the three claims. Unlike yourself who still believes everything the todger wielder has said.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Not likely regarding His Honour. After all he did swat two of the three claims. Unlike yourself who still believes everything the todger wielder has said.

You may recall I similarly swatted those appeal grounds.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Bruce your views on Commensolis position?
Would have to put personal views aside and acknowledge courts decision.

Well he appears to have done that. But he would know better than I the impossibility of this having occurred.

I guess it depends on whether he regards truth or reconciliation as the greater priority.

 

[Strange Cat]

You may recall I similarly swatted those appeal grounds.

Delusions

 

[Craven Morehead]

To my fellow survivors in this thead.

What a day, hey!
It's been shown that with courage, perserverance and TRUTH even the biggest trees in the forest can be felled.

I have no doubt that you, like me, have found this entire episode draining, confronting, yet somehow thrilling in the hope that a day, like today, could actually take place.
Another monster, a very public and vocal monster is, today, going to continue to serve his time for his foul deeds.
A lot of us have communicated privately here in support during a difficult time, and many more, who simply wanted to share empathy and support have come forward via PM.
I thank all of you equally and express an untold amount of hope and good wishes to you all.
A few of you are in your own personal battles in court against these bastards and you have my, and so many others, 100% support and care.
Stay strong, stay true and garner strength from what the incredible individual did in this case against Pell.
And always spare a thought for his late friend who couldn't cope with the shame and humiliation.

Amongst us is an individual who has vilified us all, called us liars, deliberately maintained that Witness X has an agenda and was driven to his confession by corrupt police.

Today is our day and nothing you say or do will change that fact.

 

[AM]

You may recall I similarly swatted those appeal grounds.

I don't recall that. Where, for example, did you say the animation should not have been admitted as evidence?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

I don't recall that. Where, for example, did you say the animation should not have been admitted as evidence?

I said neither of the appeal grounds were strong. I do think it was a bit rich though, that the animation wasn’t allowed when the claimant had been allowed to change not just the date, but the year of the offence.

But it wasn’t a strong appeal ground and I said that at the time.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Well he appears to have done that. But he would know better than I the impossibility of this having occurred.

I guess it depends on whether he regards truth or reconciliation as the greater priority.

Yes mentioned this to you a few months back whether it was better for the Church that Pell take one for the team so to speak.

Dare say Commensoli et al just want to move on

 

[QuietB]

I’m waiting for the mob here to label Weinberg “delusional” and every other abusive name I’ve been called on this forum.

Why would he be viewed delusional? He viewed the evidence and made his call. At the end of the day beyond reasonable doubt is a subjective call.

The other two decided that the evidence was reasonable and they decided that the jury came to a reasonable decision.

That is the process and it has worked. And Pell has more avenues of appeal available to him if he is not happy.

This is all a hell of a lot better than punters who have not seen anything other than rumours giving their entirely prejudiced conclusions from the bleachers.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Yes mentioned this to you a few months back whether it was better for the Church that Pell take one for the team so to speak.

Dare say Commensoli et al just want to move on

Yeah see I’m not really sure. I think in a few cases the water they’ve thought they were pouring on the issue has turned out to be 2-stroke, and they’ve copped to charges which they shouldn’t have copped to. And those “victims” have become some of the loudest and most militant.

I think they should probably be standing a bit firmer.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I've sat in court cases where the accused took to the stand and was quickly convicted. I take it the defence calculated that having him silently sit with a glum look on his face to appear more human would do him better than opening his mouth and reminding the jury that this is the face of the church. He is a very articulate man don't get me wrong, but he has always spoken with a tone of superiority that would never go over well in court.

His decision not to stand for questioning should have no bearing on his guilt.

Talked slowly on purpose to ruin discourse in his Q&A episodes.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Why would he be viewed delusional? He viewed the evidence and made his call. At the end of the day beyond reasonable doubt is a subjective call.

The other two decided that the evidence was reasonable and they decided that the jury came to a reasonable decision.

That is the process and it has worked. And Pell has more avenues of appeal available to him if he is not happy.

This is all a hell of a lot better than punters who have not seen anything other than rumours giving their entirely prejudiced conclusions from the bleachers.

I had seen plenty, including the prosecutors closing live. And I’d said that.

Quote from Shannon Deery in the Herald Sun “Those who has followed the trial closely were stunned at the verdict.” Exactly what I said. The sneering continues today.