Jump to content

Cardinal Pell


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, roxii said:

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.  

I think that Richter is trying to run the 'deal with the law and the charges, not the morals or the individual' argument, which is perhaps running the risk of pissing off the judge, as they are presumed not to be influenced by public sentiment - although that might be one reason why they backed off on the bail application.

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

11 minutes ago, Flanman said:

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

 

This is the problem with all religions-at their core they have a very good message of love and care and a lot of very very good people who devote themselves to helping others. But human nature being what it is there are also very very  bad people who use and abuse their power for personal gain. Same with charities etc....there are just bad people out there....

A brief look at the history of all religion will show many people using it as an excuse for power an control. Its such a shame...

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

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.  

As the great Kerry Packer once said after his heart attack and being dead for several minutes. 

"The good news is there is no devil. The bad news is there is no heaven. There is nothing."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't take the stand, so maybe he never had to put his hand on "the good book"....

With regards to his defence saying the time period of the crimes was short etc etc, apparently the judges two word response was "So what?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

All these people defending him etc, John Howard, Bolt etc etc.  Regardless of his guilty verdict, there will be people who firmly believe he couldn't have done this, didn't have the time to etc etc.  Forget about anything he himself may have done to anyone over the years!

How they can excuse what happened in Ballarat, how he moved undisputed molesting priests around, hid their crimes, etc etc.  That is as bad as anything he's ever personally done to anyone!  He knew it was happening, he protected priests and he threw to the wolves the very people he should have been standing up for!  If there is a god the questions he will have to answer when he reaches the gates will go much much further than about the two poor 13 year old boys.  Retribution will one day reign down on him and he will have no where to hide!

Unless, of course, you don't believe in that codswallap?

No amount of good can undo the damage he has done over the years, and those that want to defend him now should hang their heads in shame.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours 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.  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. 

 

.  

But there wasn't any evidence, it was the victim's account of the events against Pell's .

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

But there wasn't any evidence, it was the victim's account of the events against Pell's .

Well he was found guilty by his peers.  

its how our legal system works. 

Edited by Peter
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

But there wasn't any evidence, it was the victim's account of the events against Pell's .

 

Unless you were in court for it all that's one hell of an assumption to make.  Seems strange that it would take so long to hear the arguments "he did it" and the rebuttal "no he didn't."

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

Well he was found guilty by his peers.  

its how our legal system works. 

I suspect Lindy Chamberlain could tell you how well that works. 

Not that I think he shouldn't already have done time for the various cover-ups and perverting the course of justice etc, but this case may have a ways to run yet. The conviction of the offence on the now deceased person, who denied it happened, never made a complaint, and was not interviewed by police, seems a bit strange without anything to explain it.

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

I suspect Lindy Chamberlain could tell you how well that works. 

Not that I think he shouldn't already have done time for the various cover-ups and perverting the course of justice etc, but this case may have a ways to run yet. The conviction of the offence on the now deceased person, who denied it happened, never made a complaint, and was not interviewed by police, seems a bit strange without anything to explain it.

Out of interest are you or have you been a catholic? Or parents?

for the record my father was a uniting church minister.  

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

Out of interest are you or have you been a catholic? Or parents?

for the record my father was a uniting church minister.  

I'm a Catholic...and I don't really feel like 'this bloke is on my and team so I should defend him'. He is just a scumbag who has been caught. At the end of the day the sooner this dark stain is dealt with the better.

Religion can be a very good thing and provides a great benefit to many people. I'm not sure I believe in God and all that, and often feel like it can be a matter of 'my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend' causing religious conflict.

But for most people in most religions it teaches people to treat others as you would want to be treated, and provides a sense of hope I guess for those in times where they most need it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Peter said:

Out of interest are you or have you been a catholic? Or parents?

Atheist - with non-religious parents.

I despise the church and all organised religion. I'm generally ambivalent regarding people 'of faith' so long as they keep it to themselves, but make an exception for hypocritical politicians.

However, I'm not sure that's got anything to do with me questioning the basis and process of the decision.

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

 I'm generally ambivalent regarding people 'of faith' so long as they keep it to themselves.

I hope you don't apply that "keep it to yourself" standard to triathletes, you'd have no tri friends! 😉 I'm sure these people of faith were trying to be helpful if they know you well and bring religion up, unlike triathletes 😉 

But yes, I agree, not really relevant to the legal points you are making. It would seem surprising if 12 people all agreed on the guilty verdict if all the info they had we have seen, so there might be more? Having said that group think and the power of the herd is real so while it seems unlikely it's not impossible I suppose. 

Oh, and totally with you on the hypocritical politicians. Gee we have had some shockers lately. 😡

 

Edited by dazaau
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, monkie said:

Isn't that just being a decent human? 

 

You would think so wouldn't you...I dunno, do people need to be taught these things or is it inherent? A bit of both maybe, but yeah religion is a relic of the past. 

As for the bible or any religious book its something that has been written by man and changed by man over thousands of years. Like the whole rubbish of how gays etc are apparently a bad thing whereas Jesus taught to love everyone, and I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem with gays-heck 'God' made them that way. And that's the problem-if there was really a dude called Jesus he didn't write the bible, some other guys did. Then you have other guys changing it and interpreting it to suit their agenda. The whole thing is pretty crazy...

I still cant believe how Jews or Muslims for example wont eat pork-I'm sure if there was a God he wouldn't give two craps about you eating a piece of bacon.

 

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

I still cant believe how Jews or Muslims for example wont eat pork-I'm sure if there was a God he wouldn't give two craps about you eating a piece of bacon.

I agree with everything you've said except for this bit, this is about culture not religion in most cases. Lots of people do lots of  things (Westerners won't eat dogs but in some cultures they do, Hindus won't eat cows, many people don't eat meat at all) for all sorts of reasons which have probable equal validity.

The rest of it we're totally on the same page.

And yes you do need to be taught to treat others well but you don't need religion to do that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, monkie said:

I agree with everything you've said except for this bit, this is about culture not religion in most cases. Lots of people do lots of  things (Westerners won't eat dogs but in some cultures they do, Hindus won't eat cows, many people don't eat meat at all) for all sorts of reasons which have probable equal validity.

The rest of it we're totally on the same page.

And yes you do need to be taught to treat others well but you don't need religion to do that.

I thought the whole pork thing was religious? So can jews  and Muslims eat pork depending on where they are from?

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

I thought the whole pork thing was religious? So can jews  and Muslims eat pork depending on where they are from?

It's religious in the same way that issues like Northern Ireland are "religious". In that they started that way but now they're not really about that.

E2A: Or the fact that we have Sunday as a day of rest!

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

I suspect Lindy Chamberlain could tell you how well that works. 

Not that I think he shouldn't already have done time for the various cover-ups and perverting the course of justice etc, but this case may have a ways to run yet. The conviction of the offence on the now deceased person, who denied it happened, never made a complaint, and was not interviewed by police, seems a bit strange without anything to explain it.

it wouldn't have even got to court if there wasn't a case against him. Rolf Harris, Bill Cosby  and jimmy Saville were all based on on victim testimonies and were all found guilty. 

 

they dropped other cases against him. just be happy there is justice. 

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

How awesome are Devine and bolt

As I said early, even if you want to ignore this case, he has still done horrible things by helping hide abuse, at the very least.  Apparently John Howard character reference for him has be printed.

I grew up Catholic, attended Catholic schools my whole life, got the strap and cane from brothers and sisters.  My grandmother attended church every day, sometimes more than once.  Up until her death she still prayed that my wife would convert.  I don't consider myself a Catholic, an atheist, or whatever these days.  I'm just me who doesn't know what he believes.  I have relatives, and good friends; incredibly intelligent people that believe in evolution and equality and always supported the LGBTIQ community (some doing so in their professional life as psychologists and counselors); and when at church and it's time to sing are standing there with their hands up in the air and their eyes closed!

As to whether my wife would convert?  She has a Twitter account called Pink Heretic....... Also designed some book covers for a guy in the US who wrote some atheist books.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, more said:

I thought the whole pork thing was religious? So can jews  and Muslims eat pork depending on where they are from?

Since you asked... No they can't!

It also does not equate to fish at Easter or lean meats on Fridays for Catholics, as there is nothing in the Bible to support these traditions, they are just traditions (indeed there is a great deal of Catholic practices and teachings that are not necessarily contained in the Bible, but I digress) 

On the other hand Jews and Muslims are prohibited from eating pork (and a great deal of seafood and other things) because their religion specifically forbids it in their sacred texts. Infact the reason they both abstain from pork is because Muhammad was heavily influenced by Jews and some forms of Christianity. (Islam came about with Mohammad in around 600AD). So much so that Muslims view the Jewish text (Old testament of the Christian Bible)  as a sacred but not well preserved text (they also believe Jesus was a prophet from God, but no more than that and didn't actually die on a cross) - however they claim the Jews and Christians messed with these texts so they cannot be relied upon in their current form.  The Quran however can apparently be relied on.

But no orthodox Jew or Muslim would eat pork, although I'm sure many more liberal Jews and Muslims find a way of explaining why they think they can. Plenty of people do avoid it because they identify with Jews as a race, so do it to identify with the ancestors, but that's an entirely different motivation. Similar for those from a Muslim background that don't practice.

I feel like we have stayed far from the topic so feel free to split it out someone.

Edited by dazaau
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm startling to come to the conclusion that regardless of whether this particular case is shaky or not, I feel Pell being found guilty and getting a sentence is the scales of justice coming into balance. 

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

That one has been quoted before. As experienced as he may be, his wording in some situations makes it obvious he is a Pell supporter though.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Craig Kelly on the Project right now defending Pell.  He's saying that on the evidence he's seen it's a miscarriage of justice, and when queried admitted he hasn't seen the actual evidence of this case.  Said that at the last trial a significant number of jurors were not convinced, then admitted he didn't know how many actually were not convinced.  But said when he's found guilty he will come back on and condemn him!!!

Also said that he is not defending a convicted paedophile......... (They also pointed out that two former PM's are also defending a convicted paedophile), but he still claimed he is not defending a convicted paedophile.......... cause an appeal is happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/02/2019 at 7:48 AM, goughy said:

The evidence still looks shaky to me from that article.

I'd be surprised if he did not cover up/turn a blind eye to abuse by other priests, but the whole circumstance of abusing these two kids looks highly risky.  Still, I haven't heard all the evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been revealed this morning that the 100+ students that have received compensation from Brisbane Grammar School for abuse by their former counselor Kevin Lynch have had to sign NDA's. Surely forcing you to sign an NDA changes it from compensation, to hush money.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ComfortablyNumb said:

The evidence still looks shaky to me from that article.

I'd be surprised if he did not cover up/turn a blind eye to abuse by other priests, but the whole circumstance of abusing these two kids looks highly risky.  Still, I haven't heard all the evidence.

That's the thing.  Basically no one has heard the actual evidence.  Will it be overturned on appeal, maybe.  Will their be another trial, maybe.  I guess this case in some way is similar to say a rape case where the only question is whether consent was given.

But quite simply only a handful of people know the evidence of this case, and it may stay that way for ever.  Who do I believe; not Pell, that's for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

It's been revealed this morning that the 100+ students that have received compensation from Brisbane Grammar School for abuse by their former counselor Kevin Lynch have had to sign NDA's. Surely forcing you to sign an NDA changes it from compensation, to hush money.

Do you think the school pay anything at all if it didn't allow them to keep the incidents under wrap?

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...