Protecting George Pell

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

blackcat said:
muzzies mohammedans alliterationz
Click to expand...

Mahdi, Moroccans, Mustapha, Mers el Kebir. Mecca, mashed potatoes.

evo said:
Guys like Pell dont seem to have a conscience. Which is kinda ironic given their entire philosophy revolves around the fear that a sky tyrant is watching them.
Click to expand...

How do you sell indulgences if no one sins?

Hate the sin love the sinner (show me the money)
 
Catholic Police officers putting their religous beliefs above the law; from the age website.

Catholic cops involved in cover-up of child abuse by priests

DateJune 6, 2015 - 12:15AM

John Silvester

Crime reporter, The Age


Collusion, cover-ups and conspiracies are usually the domain of Hollywood writers, the naive and the slightly nutty. Except, that is, when they are true.

In recent times senior police have condemned leaders of the Catholic Church for failure to co-operate with investigations into sexual assaults by clergy members.

About two years ago Victoria's then deputy commissioner (and now new Chief Commissioner) Graham Ashton told a state parliamentary inquiry, "The processes of the Catholic Church are designed to put the reputation of the church first and the victims second".

But the terrible truth is that for decades police were part of the problem, with key officers actively working for the church and against fellow officers investigating rogue priests.

They were known as the Catholic mafia – men who covered up crimes, tipped off the church and allowed sex offenders to continue molesting children – all in the name of protecting their religious institution.
 
Lebbo73 said:
This is why ShanDog should close down all discussion on this thread. It cannot carry on with all the emotion attached. JW isn’t saying that the survivor is a liar or the abuse didn’t happen. All he is saying is that when 25 years has elapsed and it becomes one person against another with very limited physical evidence, how can the courts convict Pell taking into account reasonable doubt?
Click to expand...

So a Pell apologist wants to close a lively thread that has enormous public interest because he finds some commentary a little discomforting. How very open minded.

I have enormous respect for the way Shan Dog deals with his 'special powers'. Always found him to be even handed and discerning. And while appreciating that taking the pruners to a thread he considered needed attention can be an arduous task my view is that locking the Pell guilty thread indefinitely - and now a 2nd thread - was were poor calls. The SRP board is very active so rather than waiting for a mod to find the time to do the pruning perhaps a mod from elsewhere could be added in order to lighten the load on the two presently holding the fort.

As Fred LeDeux posted in one of the two closed threads it is very common for courts to hear and decide matters on the basis of the evidence from two opposing points of view.

Twelve jury members having heard all the evidence and concluded unanimously Pell was guilty. And the two most senior appellant court judges agreed with the juries finding.

It has been estimated Pell's interests have spend around $10m on his defence and in so doing engaged the most highly credentialed silks. In the words of statement of Witness 'J' :

I appreciate that the criminal process afforded Pell every opportunity to challenge the charges and to be heard. I am glad he had the best legal representation money can buy. There are a lot of checks and balances in the criminal justice system and the appeal process is one of them.
Click to expand...

Pell still has the opportunity to seek leave to appeal to the High Court.

Oh! And as I posted earlier when linking to the article in The Tablet in one of the closed threads, it's intriguing how the Church has taken a quite different stance in this case to that of ex cardinal McCarrick who was removed after allegations that he abused minors in a cathedral sacristy.
 
AM said:
So a Pell apologist wants to close a lively thread that has enormous public interest because he finds some commentary a little discomforting. How very open minded.

I have enormous respect for the way Shan Dog deals with his 'special powers'. Always found him to be even handed and discerning. And while appreciating that taking the pruners to a thread he considered needed attention can be an arduous task my view is that locking the Pell guilty thread indefinitely - and now a 2nd thread - was were poor calls. The SRP board is very active so rather than waiting for a mod to find the time to do the pruning perhaps a mod from elsewhere could be added in order to lighten the load on the two presently holding the fort.

As Fred LeDeux posted in one of the two closed threads it is very common for courts to hear and decide matters on the basis of the evidence from two opposing points of view.

Twelve jury members having heard all the evidence and concluded unanimously Pell was guilty. And the two most senior appellant court judges agreed with the juries finding.

It has been estimated Pell's interests have spend around $10m on his defence and in so doing engaged the most highly credentialed silks. In the words of statement of Witness 'J' :



Pell still has the opportunity to seek leave to appeal to the High Court.

Oh! And as I posted earlier when linking to the article in The Tablet in one of the closed threads, it's intriguing how the Church has taken a quite different stance in this case to that of ex cardinal McCarrick who was removed after allegations that he abused minors in a cathedral sacristy.
Click to expand...
TLDR
I’m far from a Pell apologist. I’m definitely not losing any sleep over him being in jail. The only one losing sleep is yourself and nearly everyone else in here losing the plot over any posts that go against those of the mob.
Edit: I just realised this was another thread ShanDog
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lebbo73 said:
TLDR
I’m far from a Pell apologist. I’m definitely not losing any sleep over him being in jail. The only one losing sleep is yourself and nearly everyone else in here losing the plot over any posts that go against those of the mob.
Edit: I just realised this was another thread ShanDog
Click to expand...
As per usual you hop in doing your thing of jumping to conclusions - the wrong conclusions.

My posts have been predominantly along the lines of the one you largely avoided ie to support a legal system by which Pell was unanimously found guilty by 12 of his peers and that verdict being confirmed by the 2 most senior appellant court judges. And to inform you - as others have - that it is quite common for conflicting accounts to occur and for the court to find one more credible than the other.

As for locking the Pell threads for clean-up, no one has an issue with that. It's when a thread of quite some public interest is closed with no clear intent to re-open it in a reasonable time or, perhaps, not at all that it's worth being drawn to attention. As I wrote, I've found Shan Dog even handed and I fully appreciate that mods are honorary. That said, I reckon closing a public interest vibrant thread indefinitely is unreasonable. And makes one wonder whether there are other issues at play here as it doesn't appear to me that the same standards are in play with the Trump threads.

Maybe another mod should be co-opted to lighten the load.
 
AM said:
As per usual you hop in doing your thing of jumping to conclusions - the wrong conclusions.

My posts have been predominantly along the lines of the one you largely avoided ie to support a legal system by which Pell was unanimously found guilty by 12 of his peers and that verdict being confirmed by the 2 most senior appellant court judges. And to inform you - as others have - that it is quite common for conflicting accounts to occur and for the court to find one more credible than the other.

As for locking the Pell threads for clean-up, no one has an issue with that. It's when a thread of quite some public interest is closed with no clear intent to re-open it in a reasonable time or, perhaps, not at all that it's worth being drawn to attention. As I wrote, I've found Shan Dog even handed and I fully appreciate that mods are honorary. That said, I reckon closing a public interest vibrant thread indefinitely is unreasonable. And makes one wonder whether there are other issues at play here as it doesn't appear to me that the same standards are in play with the Trump threads.

Maybe another mod should be co-opted to lighten the load.
Click to expand...
It is unreasonable to lock a thread unless posters are abusing others because of their opinion. Discuss the issue and stop hurling abuse at Bruce and others who disagree with the courts ruling.
Lindy Chamberlain says hi.
 
AM said:
the evidence from two opposing points o
Click to expand...
Richter misread the zeitgeist, his junior barrister or assistant barrister(if it was a QC) needed to impress/impart upon Pell this amorphous precipitous shift, not merely evolving on a spectrum, and discernable thru a lens of jury selection/age demographic of jurors/pyschologist consultants brought in for selection purpose. ***

***asterisk qualifier, this may only be evident post-hoc (so did a bear really $h!t in the woods)... and neither would it be discernable in the guilty/not-guilty binary, or hung jury/jury discharged... etc, it could go for Pell and my intuition may have swayed the bloc of 12 into the other camp, yet come down on the side of Pell, or, even if the verdict against Pell, my intuition may be wrong and those 12 it could have worked against the finding on Pell's side. My intuition, if the populace selected as a bloc of 12, it would be better under most unique trials to change strategy. But how would Richter with his unpeered successes and experience and expertise at the bar, be expected to alter strategy because his junior counsel impresses on him, the need for Pell to take the stand. Now my longwinded caveat includes the scenario the unsympathetic Pell creates resent within jury members. Even in this scenario. Pell needed to take the witness box and prepare to be scythed my the prosecution because society wanted its pound of flesh, even if he was to be found not guilty, the activists on William Street would still have been on the barricades like central casting for a Victor Hugo musical. Read the articles David Marr has written on Pell, the screed and bile bubbles over. It is not a brilliant guess to pinpoint il Guardina and the Morry Schwartz imprints.

Another question that overhangs this, a pregnant question, how could Richter possibly try this hypothetical case where it was more than a discrete action on the day concerned. He may have been defending the case proposed with the due rigour that had conferred upon all his successes (and losses) over his 40 year career. It may have been outside the orbit of any member of the bar to have this wherewithal and bring a counterfactual Non-jurisprudence-lens.

Just p'raps the first mistrial/hung-jury was the tell, the poker-indicator to Richter. But still, how can he possibly try that case? 739266
 
Lebbo73 said:
TLDR
I’m far from a Pell apologist. I’m definitely not losing any sleep over him being in jail. The only one losing sleep is yourself and nearly everyone else in here losing the plot over any posts that go against those of the mob.
Edit: I just realised this was another thread ShanDog
Click to expand...
but it should not be about Pell nor a catholic authority, this should be about principle, and the rigour of the law.
 
Lebbo73 said:
It is unreasonable to lock a thread unless posters are abusing others because of their opinion. Discuss the issue and stop hurling abuse at Bruce and others who disagree with the courts ruling.
Lindy Chamberlain says hi.
Click to expand...
he former husband would say hi from 6 feet under if the stress never burdened him with years on his life. What was David Chamberlin, mid 60s?

They keep hammering the psychopath who killed the comedian, murdered and raped her. But why is it still a front page concern for Fairfax? It is Tim Berners-Lee and Zuckerberg and Page/Brin, utterly stuffed the old media press, and the Inverted Totalitarianism thesis from the political economist Wolin is the best lens. Fairfax and GTV9 or Ten, whoever owns the paper, is now mere click-bait algorithm, to mine what remaining ad dollars are out there that Google and Zuckerberg have not swept up.

Inverted totalitarianism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
blackcat said:
he former husband would say hi from 6 feet under if the stress never burdened him with years on his life. What was David Chamberlin, mid 60s?

They keep hammering the psychopath who killed the comedian, murdered and raped her. But why is it still a front page concern for Fairfax? It is Tim Berners-Lee and Zuckerberg and Page/Brin, utterly stuffed the old media press, and the inverted Totalitarianism thesis from the political economist Wolin is the best lens. Fairfax and GTV9 or Ten, whoever owns the paper, is now mere click-bait algorithm, to mine what remaining ad dollars are out there that Google and Zuckerberg have not swept up.
Click to expand...

Take your meds.

Of course the sentencing of the man who committed a horrific rape and murder in a well known part of the city is big news for that city's paper.
 
JeanLucGoddard said:
The Greeks invented it.
Click to expand...
i assume that was rhetoric.

Intuition would be, biology explains the males' sex drive, and before there was any organising systems in ancient times, such acts would have existed. It was not the oral tradition of the Greeks that imparted any biological function, they merely were the first to record it for posterity. Which other organising systems would not-hesitate to marginalise as transgressive because it threatened(for wont of a word) because it threatened an inchoate organising system and society (+ social harmony) to encourage said activity :rolleyes:
 
JeanLucGoddard said:
Take your meds.

Of course the sentencing of the man who committed a horrific rape and murder in a well known part of the city is big news for that city's paper.
Click to expand...

it was horrific.
correct, duly recognised.

criminal/murderer was indeed a psychopath.

but this is reliving the horrific criminal action. Rener Gerard the French philosopher could impart wisdom on this denouement.

I am sober(ly) resigned to the innocent's(the comedian's) loss of her life. I said my peace. (or is it piece?)
 
Lebbo73 said:
It is unreasonable to lock a thread unless posters are abusing others because of their opinion. Discuss the issue and stop hurling abuse at Bruce and others who disagree with the courts ruling.
Lindy Chamberlain says hi.
Click to expand...
That's not even remotely near my point. Nor have I hurled abuse a Bruce - as I've already pointed out. But, hey, let's just keep repeating the same lies.

I should know by now that discussion with you is a fruitless exercise as is illustrated not only by this piece of absurdity but your incapacity to address the issues relating to Pell as put in my earlier post.

As for the refuge of the desperate - the Chamberlain case - no one has put the system is perfect. The term 'beyond reasonable doubt' would demonstrate that to someone with the most base common sense. And to attempt to undermine a system which has stood the test of time by getting the overwhelming matters right and do it in that manner, only someone like you would attempt.

Pell was unanimously tried and convicted in a case where the jury heard all the evidence. 12 people. Pell having allegedly spent around $10m employing the best legal brains to defend him. An appellate court then sifted through the evidence forensically and the 2 most senior judges from the court confirmed the judgement.

To quote the statement of Witness 'J' taken from The Tablet following the appellate court decision. Someone who has been pilloried mercilessly for being in it for money:

Full statement from Cardinal Pell’s victim, known as Witness J, released 21 August 2019


I am relieved by the decision of the court of appeal. It is four years since I reported to the police. The criminal process has been stressful. The journey has taken me to places that in my darkest moments I feared I would not return from.

The justice machine rolls on with all of its processes and punditry, almost forgetting about the people at the heart of the matter.

Despite this, I appreciate that the criminal process afforded Pell every opportunity to challenge the charges and to be heard. I am glad he had the best legal representation money can buy. There are a lot of checks and balances in the criminal justice system and the appeal process is one of them.

I just hope that it is all over now.

Some commentators have suggested that I reported to the police somehow for my own personal gain. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have risked my privacy, my health, my wellbeing and my family. I have not instructed any solicitor in relation to a claim for compensation.

This is not about money and it never has been.

Some commentators have suggested that I am somehow out to cause damage to the Catholic church. I am not on a mission to do anybody any harm. Although my faith has taken a battering, it is still part of my life and part of the lives of my loved ones.

I am not an advocate. You wouldn’t know my name. I am not a champion for the cause of sexual abuse survivors, although I am glad that those advocates are out there. But that is not my path.

After attending the funeral of my childhood friend, the other choir boy, I felt a responsibility to come forward. I knew that he had been in a dark place, I have been in a dark place. I gave a statement to the police because I was thinking of him and his family.

I felt I should say what I saw and what had happened to me. I had experienced something terrible as a child and I wanted some good to come of it. I would like to acknowledge my friend who passed away, the other choir boy.

I would like to acknowledge the courage of those people who reported to the police. For one reason or another, those matters did not proceed. My heart goes out to you.

I would like to acknowledge the Victoria Police and the Office of Public Prosecutions. I am grateful for the steady hand of His Honour Chief Judge Kidd in guiding the trial and his compassionate, balanced and fair sentencing.

In February, due to other cases not going ahead, I ended up in the spotlight alone. The suppression order was to be lifted and I suddenly found myself in the centre of world wide media interest. I asked Viv Waller to help me manage the considerable media interest in the case.

I could not afford legal representation but that did not matter to her. I will be forever grateful that Viv agreed to help me and to do so for free. She has liaised with the media on my behalf. She has allowed the storms of public opinion to buffet her so that my young family could find safe harbour.

My journey has not been an easy one. It has been all the more stressful because it involved a high profile figure. I thank the media for respecting my privacy and for continuing to protect my identity. I need to be able to define myself away from all of this.

Recently, I have started a new chapter in my life as a father. The experiences I have been through have helped me understand what is truly important.

I am grateful for a legal system that everyone can believe in, where everybody is equal before the law and no one is above the law.


Then there's you sitting in your little cubby-hole having not been privy to any of the first hand evidence saying 'nah'. And when your side of the discussion gets a hiding you run to the executioner to bail you out.

I dare say that if Pell is granted the right to appeal to the High Court and fails again you'll still waffle on about the system with all those checks and balances being wrong.-
 
AM
I dare say that if Pell is granted the right to appeal to the High Court and fails again you'll still waffle on about the system with all those checks and balances being wrong.-
Click to expand...
the fact Richter convinced Pell innocent man, and the bar surprised at the verdict should be enough to have any sentient person concerned. I have no love for the Catholic Church or that particular individual, but the individual is inconsequential in this principal.

*two fallacies here- deference to authority, plus I think I have heavy case of confirmation bias, in this case dis-confirmation bias. Jurors as individuals may have been neutralised perfectly of any zeitgeist culture influence and achieved peerless rigour. Pretty decent chance that a figbooty member who has wade into this thread is 2degreesofseperation from a juror of this trial.

#fredschepisi
 
AM said:
That's not even remotely near my point. Nor have I hurled abuse a Bruce - as I've already pointed out. But, hey, let's just keep repeating the same lies.

I should know by now that discussion with you is a fruitless exercise as is illustrated not only by this piece of absurdity but your incapacity to address the issues relating to Pell as put in my earlier post.

As for the refuge of the desperate - the Chamberlain case - no one has put the system is perfect. The term 'beyond reasonable doubt' would demonstrate that to someone with the most base common sense. And to attempt to undermine a system which has stood the test of time by getting the overwhelming matters right and do it in that manner, only someone like you would attempt.

Pell was unanimously tried and convicted in a case where the jury heard all the evidence. 12 people. Pell having allegedly spent around $10m employing the best legal brains to defend him. An appellate court then sifted through the evidence forensically and the 2 most senior judges from the court confirmed the judgement.

To quote the statement of Witness 'J' taken from The Tablet following the appellate court decision. Someone who has been pilloried mercilessly for being in it for money:

Full statement from Cardinal Pell’s victim, known as Witness J, released 21 August 2019


I am relieved by the decision of the court of appeal. It is four years since I reported to the police. The criminal process has been stressful. The journey has taken me to places that in my darkest moments I feared I would not return from.

The justice machine rolls on with all of its processes and punditry, almost forgetting about the people at the heart of the matter.

Despite this, I appreciate that the criminal process afforded Pell every opportunity to challenge the charges and to be heard. I am glad he had the best legal representation money can buy. There are a lot of checks and balances in the criminal justice system and the appeal process is one of them.

I just hope that it is all over now.

Some commentators have suggested that I reported to the police somehow for my own personal gain. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have risked my privacy, my health, my wellbeing and my family. I have not instructed any solicitor in relation to a claim for compensation.

This is not about money and it never has been.

Some commentators have suggested that I am somehow out to cause damage to the Catholic church. I am not on a mission to do anybody any harm. Although my faith has taken a battering, it is still part of my life and part of the lives of my loved ones.

I am not an advocate. You wouldn’t know my name. I am not a champion for the cause of sexual abuse survivors, although I am glad that those advocates are out there. But that is not my path.

After attending the funeral of my childhood friend, the other choir boy, I felt a responsibility to come forward. I knew that he had been in a dark place, I have been in a dark place. I gave a statement to the police because I was thinking of him and his family.

I felt I should say what I saw and what had happened to me. I had experienced something terrible as a child and I wanted some good to come of it. I would like to acknowledge my friend who passed away, the other choir boy.

I would like to acknowledge the courage of those people who reported to the police. For one reason or another, those matters did not proceed. My heart goes out to you.

I would like to acknowledge the Victoria Police and the Office of Public Prosecutions. I am grateful for the steady hand of His Honour Chief Judge Kidd in guiding the trial and his compassionate, balanced and fair sentencing.

In February, due to other cases not going ahead, I ended up in the spotlight alone. The suppression order was to be lifted and I suddenly found myself in the centre of world wide media interest. I asked Viv Waller to help me manage the considerable media interest in the case.

I could not afford legal representation but that did not matter to her. I will be forever grateful that Viv agreed to help me and to do so for free. She has liaised with the media on my behalf. She has allowed the storms of public opinion to buffet her so that my young family could find safe harbour.

My journey has not been an easy one. It has been all the more stressful because it involved a high profile figure. I thank the media for respecting my privacy and for continuing to protect my identity. I need to be able to define myself away from all of this.

Recently, I have started a new chapter in my life as a father. The experiences I have been through have helped me understand what is truly important.

I am grateful for a legal system that everyone can believe in, where everybody is equal before the law and no one is above the law.


Then there's you sitting in your little cubby-hole having not been privy to any of the first hand evidence saying 'nah'. And when your side of the discussion gets a hiding you run to the executioner to bail you out.

I dare say that if Pell is granted the right to appeal to the High Court and fails again you'll still waffle on about the system with all those checks and balances being wrong.-
Click to expand...
I’ll accept the High Courts decision in this matter if Pell is granted leave to appeal.
The fact that Justice Weinberg believed that Pell did not commit the child sex crimes and should have been freed has cast significant doubt over the decision of the Court of Appeal to uphold the County Courts guilty verdict.
www.google.com.au

Why the dissenting judge believed George Pell should walk free

One of the three Court of Appeal judges who heard George Pell's appeal believes there is a "significant possibility" the cardinal did not commit the child sex crimes he's in jail for and would have acquitted him.
www.google.com.au www.google.com.au
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top