Jump to content

Cardinal Pell


Recommended Posts

The project just spoke to an ex priest/ex judge and he couldn't fathom why he didn't take the stand!  Maybe some exceptionally poor advice from his lawyers.  They also asked him about his faith after all this, and he said it's fine.  He believes in Jesus and the gospels.  But he has no time or belief in the Pope or Pell.

Remembering the previous trial ended in a hung jury, so some were convinced.  Unless people did just want to punish someone?  In a way I hope that's not the case, but if anyone had to pay he's a worthy choice.  What he must have known and covered up over the years is unfathomable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 783
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

All I can say is that I am glad that Tim has done what he has....to bring it to the forefront and have people realize a little more of what may have been done, all I can do is wait my turn to give evi

I probably have a bit of a unique insight into this. I was at the school when the attacks happened: in year 11 to be exact. I knew/know many exCcathedral College choir kids. I attended the masses and

To be fair, Pell was a senior cleric in parishes all over the state/country that have had thousands of cases of proven child sexual abuse. In all these cases, it has since emerged that there were alwa

Posted Images

Quote

What I don't understand, and I mean this sincerely is how on earth two 13 year old boys didn't fight back or tell anyone? I understand maybe back in the 50ies when they would have feared no one believing them etc but this case was back in 1996 when this type of stuff was public knowledge?? Also they were 13 year olds, not little boys. Most 13 year olds boys I know would have no problem smashing you in the face if you tried something like that. 

I dunno, maybe these types of sickos only prey on the weak that they know wont fight back or say anything :( 

Bloody hell you may want to do a bit of reading before posting this.  Maybe a bit less victim blaming!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, symo said:

Bloody hell you may want to do a bit of reading before posting this.  Maybe a bit less victim blaming!!

Victim blaming...Yeah righto whatever...

Save your outrage for Facebook. I never blamed anyone, what I did was pose an honest question. Remembering back to when I was a 13 year old I just couldn't imagine anyone getting away with that with me or any of my mates.

But as I then followed up with I then realised there are probably kids that would be scared to fight back or tell anyone hence me realising these scum must pick their targets carefully.. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bolt does not respect the law. On the bright side, assuming he goes to jail on Wednesday, maybe justice will be delivered. Why are the media so worried about this predator and his rights when people get sent down for this all the time.

Oh he's one of their elite mates

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, more said:

Victim blaming...Yeah righto whatever...

Save your outrage for Facebook. I never blamed anyone, what I did was pose an honest question. Remembering back to when I was a 13 year old I just couldn't imagine anyone getting away with that with me or any of my mates.

But as I then followed up with I then realised there are probably kids that would be scared to fight back or tell anyone hence me realising these scum must pick their targets carefully.. 

 

Having worked on the civil action against Ridsdale and the Catholic Church in Ballarat back in the early-mid 90s, they know their targets. They look for weaker or vulnerable victims who they think will not stand up to questioning of authority. That is the common MO of the abuser - shift the blame to the victim ("How could I??? Why would I??? I am a man of the cloth .... blah, blah, blah") and ensure that their reputation is their protector. 

Pell was widely known in the town as being a nonce, as was Ridsdale and there were also rumours flying about with Mulkearns. Pell was also widely known as a bully and manipulator - I have no doubt in the conviction. I know victims who have had their lives destroyed by the Catholic Church and have spent time with these people who have endured decades of guilt and misery at the hands of these a-holes. They deserve peace and not to have people like Andrew Bolt and others question their suffering and integrity. 

I hope he has a long, painful time in prison and endures a hell we cannot imagine. Disgusting human being.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, more said:

What I don't understand, and I mean this sincerely is how on earth two 13 year old boys didn't fight back or tell anyone? I understand maybe back in the 50ies when they would have feared no one believing them etc but this case was back in 1996 when this type of stuff was public knowledge?? Also they were 13 year olds, not little boys. Most 13 year olds boys I know would have no problem smashing you in the face if you tried something like that. 

I dunno, maybe these types of sickos only prey on the weak that they know wont fight back or say anything :( 

I wish you wouldn’t call these kids weak? 

Perhaps it was because they were just caught by the new archbishop in a section of the cathedral they weren’t permitted to be in, and drinking wine. Also they were both from poor families but attending a private catholic school on scholarships which required them to act as alter boys.

The creeps who do things like this prey on the vulnerable, not the weak.

Edited by Mike Del
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeeze, when you write it like that Mike it almost sounds like two kids who were handpicked from a sad situation and placed to be targeted on purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

I wish you wouldn’t call these kids weak? 

Perhaps it was because they were just caught by the new archbishop in a section of the cathedral they weren’t permitted to be in, and drinking wine. Also they were both from poor families but attending a private catholic school on scholarships which required them to act as alter boys.

The creeps who do things like this prey on the vulnerable, not the weak.

Yeah fair point.

I'm really hope these types of scumbags do have faith so that they fear the afterlife until their last breath as they will  surely have no doubt that they have a one way ticket to hell.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So if my wife making me watch too many cop shows has thought me anything, isn’t it true that you can’t sppeal the evidence but the process. 

In which case even if he is found not guilty it will be on a technicality but he will not be innocent. In fact the fact that he has been found guilty once should be enough for the Vatican to drop him like a hot potato. 

However I fear they will see not guilty (if it happens) as innocent and move along with nothing to see here. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, more said:

 

I'm really hope these types of scumbags do have faith so that they fear the afterlife until their last breath as they will  surely have no doubt that they have a one way ticket to hell.

I was actually talking with my wife about his possible level of faith.  He is high up.  He quite possibly has complete and utter faith, and I wonder if his decision to not take the stand was because he knew he could not swear on a bible.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, roxii said:

However I fear they will see not guilty (if it happens) as innocent and move along with nothing to see here. 

I suspect not - Pell is strongly disliked by the Vatican old-guard because they were being investigated by him for their financial excesses, so would definitely take the opportunity to push for getting rid of him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, XCOM.! said:

Much and all as I despise the church and all it stands for, I struggle to understand how he was found guilty based on the 'evidence' disclosed so far. Essentially one person making a claim that Pell denies but that the jury believed, because of details kept secret?

the victim was obviously very believable, and it would never even have gone to trial if there wasn't a good case. As for not taking the stand, there is no way Pells lawyers would have even considered him to take the stand. we saw what he was like when he was on the stand at the royal commission.  

I also say well done jury for having balls. I also hope the judge at sentencing has the same kahoonas.  I hope there will be more going to jail eventually. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, more said:

Remembering back to when I was a 13 year old I just couldn't imagine anyone getting away with that with me or any of my mates.

 

 

My own experience was to find out a few years after leaving boarding school, one of the house masters was doing pretty similar to members of the U13 rugby team he coached.  The part that shocked me was guys from my own year level in the seniors (ie 17 year olds) had an idea and thought it was all a big joke.  Not one that was so big though that they didn't use it as leverage of the rock spider to store their alcohol in his private fridge. 

I was in a different boarding house and naive to the whole situation, however it appears some others from age 12 right through to 17 knew and none of them ever said anything other than joke comments amongst themselves.  This was 1992 when I was a senior, heard about it in 94/95 when the house master was told to leave.  Same era as Pell and similar ages.  It happens

The part that shitted me was the school (or the church that backed it) did nothing when the allegations came out, the perv was told to move on and last I heard was a coach of a junior weight lifting team in regional Qld - not the type of activity someone with a history on their record would be doing

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cottoneyes said:

The part that shitted me was the school (or the church that backed it) did nothing when the allegations came out, the perv was told to move on and last I heard was a coach of a junior weight lifting team in regional Qld - not the type of activity someone with a history on their record would be doing

My own school in Ballarat (not St Pat's where Pell went) was the same. The school knew of impropriety and got rid of the people responsible (a priest, a PE teacher who was having a relationship with a student and a boarding house master who was allegedly stealing from the school) ... and no-one batted an eyelid! 

Protect the institution first, rather than treat the cause!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roxii said:

So if my wife making me watch too many cop shows has thought me anything, isn’t it true that you can’t sppeal the evidence but the process.

So, I consulted my learned colleague Mr. Google SERP, and he indicates that you can appeal a conviction if you can show your trial was seriously unfair or that the outcome a miscarriage of justice. I would think this has a ways to run yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, XCOM.! said:

So, I consulted my learned colleague Mr. Google SERP, and he indicates that you can appeal a conviction if you can show your trial was seriously unfair or that the outcome a miscarriage of justice. I would think this has a ways to run yet.

Assuming that when he is behind bars pending the appeal that someone doesn't get to him first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The media are making it as if having an appeal is almost suggesting he is not guilty. These are the same people who call standard people who get convicted on these charges grubs and who need to rot and be killed in jail.

Leads to the question do they have something to hide

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cottoneyes said:

 Apparently Pell did not speak in his defence though which would have swayed most people to assume guilt.

He had already given an interview denying the allegations which was played.  Fairly common in that situation not to give evidence in court due to things that can unintentionally wrong.

And no doubt his defence would have pointed that out to the jury and reminded them it is his right not to give evidence and they can’t assume guilt by doing so, blah blah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, XCOM.! said:

So, I consulted my learned colleague Mr. Google SERP, and he indicates that you can appeal a conviction if you can show your trial was seriously unfair or that the outcome a miscarriage of justice. I would think this has a ways to run yet.

Yeah but that still doesn't change the evidence and the fact that it was obviously strong enough to get a conviction.  That should be enough for the church to admit that even if he gets not guilty on a technicality he still did it and should be dumped. 

 

Christina Kennealy, one of the few staunch catholics whose opinion I respect is very scathing of the church today. Good on her for standing up and not just toeing the "company" line.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, XCOM.! said:

Much and all as I despise the church and all it stands for, I struggle to understand how he was found guilty based on the 'evidence' disclosed so far. Essentially one person making a claim that Pell denies but that the jury believed, because of details kept secret?

We weren’t in the court hearing everything.  So none of us know exactly what was put forward.  And if you believe the press, you are delusional.  The press gets info wrong all the time.  

Only those in the courts each day and jury room really know.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Poll. 

Id like to place a bet he gets 10 years house arrest and will never see the inside of a jail cell. 

The liberal party and powers that be will be doing everything they can to ensure he is never locked up. 

The shock jocks will absolutely slam any judge that makes the decision to either luck him up or deny bail. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly what's playing out in Australia now and over recent years hasn't even begun in many other countries. Watch how over the next decade or more we see victims come forward in Britain,  Europe, North America and South America.

Not to mention other religions. What's the likelihood senior religious figures in other religions have been perpetrators as well? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, roxii said:

Yeah but that still doesn't change the evidence and the fact that it was obviously strong enough to get a conviction.  

In the first trial no agreement could be made, the second got a conviction. The problem with these cases is it is only one person's word against another, and most of the effort is put into whether it could have happened as described by the victim.

See https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theage.com.au/national/victoria/the-case-for-and-against-what-the-jury-was-told-in-george-pell-s-trial-20190226-p510f6.html

I'd hate to be on a jury for a case like this. 

The whole child molestation issue in the Catholic church is a travesty and a shocking crime for an institution that is supposed to represent people of faith. Unfortunately the Catholic church made some bad decisions very early on in its history and this and other events have led to many travesties across its long history, in which it has often operated as a political and commercial tool in direct opposition to the very beliefs it was built on.

Society has a right to be very angry. As a person who has a faith I find it reprehensible and a disgrace. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dazaau said:

Society has a right to be very angry. As a person who has a faith I find it reprehensible and a disgrace. 

Absolutely, I moved away from the church a as soon as I could, but feel for my Dad who is a staunch catholic and hate what this does for his faith. 

If you get a chance try and listen to Christina Kennealy's interview on ABC radio Sydney this morning. She is angry but eloquent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter said:

We weren’t in the court hearing everything.  So none of us know exactly what was put forward.  And if you believe the press, you are delusional.  The press gets info wrong all the time.  

Only those in the courts each day and jury room really know.  

Well exactly... that's what I wrote - " I struggle to understand how he was found guilty based on the 'evidence' disclosed so far".

I have no sympathy for Pell or the church, but so far, all we've been told is that it was one person's word vs. another's, and the jury found one more believable than the other... with no details as to why that's the case this time vs. last time. I can only assume that details are being withheld because an appeal is anticipated, because I would hope our legal system and jury process is a bit more robust than that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, A2K said:

Not to mention other religions. What's the likelihood senior religious figures in other religions have been perpetrators as well? 

I have no doubt the same has happened at other churches, scouts, guides etc...

However he was the guy doing the cover ups.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, XCOM.! said:

Well exactly... that's what I wrote - " I struggle to understand how he was found guilty based on the 'evidence' disclosed so far".

I have no sympathy for Pell or the church, but so far, all we've been told is that it was one person's word vs. another's, and the jury found one more believable than the other... with no details as to why that's the case this time vs. last time. I can only assume that details are being withheld because an appeal is anticipated, because I would hope our legal system and jury process is a bit more robust than that. 

He would have come across as a pompous arsehole during the case.

Did you listen to the transcript of him being interviewed by the police that flew to Rome to interview him?  His reactions and comments were of someone that believed they were untouchable.

He could have just answered all along, "That's not true" rather than the way he did.

Between you and me I'm surprised he was found guilty. He was 100% guilty of covering it up for other priests.  But from what I've read, I agree with you, it's his word against the other 2's. 

 

Edited by Peter
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, roxii said:

Wasn't there another person involved in one of the incidents (since deceased). Maybe there was some corroboration from the other victim on record.  2 v's 1 would certainly change things

Possibly, but as currently presented, this appears dangerously close to hearsay evidence - I hope there is something more to it than a sworn statement and the possibility of it being true. I'd hate  to be found guilty of something on that basis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Cottoneyes said:

My own experience was to find out a few years after leaving boarding school, one of the house masters was doing pretty similar to members of the U13 rugby team he coached.  The part that shocked me was guys from my own year level in the seniors (ie 17 year olds) had an idea and thought it was all a big joke.  Not one that was so big though that they didn't use it as leverage of the rock spider to store their alcohol in his private fridge. 

I was in a different boarding house and naive to the whole situation, however it appears some others from age 12 right through to 17 knew and none of them ever said anything other than joke comments amongst themselves.  This was 1992 when I was a senior, heard about it in 94/95 when the house master was told to leave.  Same era as Pell and similar ages.  It happens

The part that shitted me was the school (or the church that backed it) did nothing when the allegations came out, the perv was told to move on and last I heard was a coach of a junior weight lifting team in regional Qld - not the type of activity someone with a history on their record would be doing

Yeah, similar story at my Boarding School with two of the senior tutors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, XCOM.! said:

Possibly, but as currently presented, this appears dangerously close to hearsay evidence - I hope there is something more to it than a sworn statement and the possibility of it being true. I'd hate  to be found guilty of something on that basis.

I thought exactly the same.  Would love to have been a fly on the wall in the courtroom to hear the full story.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roxii said:

Wasn't there another person involved in one of the incidents (since deceased). Maybe there was some corroboration from the other victim on record.  2 v's 1 would certainly change things

From what little I understand the deceased person denied it happened years ago before they died. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen as for some it is very hard to confirm such things, but I don't think they had any helpful testimony for the prosecution that I'm aware of from my casual reading of media reports.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roxii said:

Wasn't there another person involved in one of the incidents (since deceased). Maybe there was some corroboration from the other victim on record.  2 v's 1 would certainly change things

Yes, one of the two passed away.

Apparently the jury was reminded time and time again by the judge that they must base their deliberations on the evidence presented against Pell, and that this case is not about the church, it's guilt, and funding him guilty as a scapegoat for the church.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ComfortablyNumb said:

I thought exactly the same.  Would love to have been a fly on the wall in the courtroom to hear the full story.

I'm sure Ch7 will have a recreation coming out soon.

41 minutes ago, roxii said:

You would also wonder how hard it would be to find a jury for this sort of trial. 

Wouldn't be too many people that could walk in there without some preconceptions, either way. 

Guessing thats why they can challenge and pick who they want from either side.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, roxii said:

WOW, withdrawn the bail application. Thats a strange move.

Hope enjoys Bubba tucking him in tonight! 

Regardless of what he did we are civilised and moved from punishing the body a long time ago. 

Please don’t wish harm on another human flawed as he is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, roxii said:

WOW, withdrawn the bail application. Thats a strange move.

Hope enjoys Bubba tucking him in tonight! 

I wonder if they already know he will get home detention. That would be a great outcome for him and his team.

7-10 years at home.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

Not hard to see which side of the fence that journalist sits.

As with my jury comment, I doubt that there will be anyone from any walk of life that doesn't have some level of preconceived opinion on this case that clouds their view. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like his lawyer has admitted his guilt, asking for consideration that the offenses only lasted for a few minutes and there was no ejaculation.

"“It lasted less than six minutes,” he said about the rape of one choirboy and molestation of another in Melbourne’s St Patrick’s Cathedral in 1996. “There are no physical injuries. There is no ejaculation."

What an absolute scumbag for even suggesting that makes any difference. 

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

it irks me that some people,  even on here, were surprised he was found guilty????     rapists get convicted based on the victims testimonies regularly. They have nothing to gain by sharing their stories and any descent human being, jury or not, see their testimonies as painful and truthful.  little evidence is ever available for these kinds of acts. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, more said:

Sounds like his lawyer has admitted his guilt, asking for consideration that the offenses only lasted for a few minutes and there was no ejaculation.

I think that was all prefaced by "although the cardinal maintains he is innocent" and the rest of it relates to dealing with what he's been convicted of.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, more said:

Sounds like his lawyer has admitted his guilt, asking for consideration that the offenses only lasted for a few minutes and there was no ejaculation.

"“It lasted less than six minutes,” he said about the rape of one choirboy and molestation of another in Melbourne’s St Patrick’s Cathedral in 1996. “There are no physical injuries. There is no ejaculation."

What an absolute scumbag for even suggesting that makes any difference. 

WTAF!!!!

So now he wants the court to take it easy on him. 

I assume Mr Pell swore on a bible to tell the truth too!    Shows how much respect he has for his own god and religion.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just cannot believe how many years or decades this has put the church back. Yes, I was raised as a catholic. My family on my mother's side is quite religious (my 87 YO aunty is a nun). All the hard and great work she has done over the past 70 years just gets destroyed by this. Shattered lives.............

FM

 

Edited by Flanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...