Bye Bye to George Pell

 
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Mate, Frank Brenan doesn't have to be there, the fact of the matter is, that he would know about what goes on in the inner sanctum, and what garments the priests would wear during the service, he was just spelling it out in the paper, as is his right to do so.
"lsrailfan"
Brennan is entitled to comment upon customary practice which is what he did, and nobody has said he shouldn't.
But, I say again, he wasn't there, so he doesn't know what happened that day. His comment is not evidence of fact. Was Pell wearing all of his regalia? We don't know. Had Pell begun to remove his robes? We don't know.
We don't know, Brennan doesn't know, and you don't know.
You are welcome to surmise all you like, but trials deal in evidence of what people saw and heard.

I just happen to have a different view on his guilt, that's all.
Well, religion is based upon legend, faith and hope, so I guess you're just demonstrating that. You didn't hear any of the court proceedings, so your conclusion is not evidence-based.
And; before you question me, I have maintained all along that I could not state a verdict because I wasn't in court. Therefore, I rely upon the justice system because there is no alternative at this point.

Sponsored advertisement

  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
100% correct Valvegear, we have to respect the court's and their processes

Kind Regards
  Groundrelay Chief Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
100% correct Valvegear, we have to respect the court's and their processes

Kind Regards
lsrailfan
He has been convicted, it's no longer an allegation.

He is guilty unless an appeal reverses the conviction.

P.S. Interesting the people giving Pell the full benefit of the doubt. Now if he was of another race or religion where would they stand.
  wobert Chief Commissioner

Location: Half way between Propodolla and Kinimakatka
And Pell didn't give any benefit  of the doubt to any of the victims, so stuff him and the horse he rode in on.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
I'm still fascinated by one detail ( which I have mentioned earlier).
Why would Australia's most senior and well known cleric decline to swear on the Bible to tell the truth etc.?
Sure, the refusal doesn't prove anything, but wouldn't it carry more weight with a jury if he had done it?
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
His legal counsel would not put him on the stand.   Pell wanted to give evidence but Ritcher opposed it.
  Big J Deputy Commissioner

Location: In Paradise
His legal counsel would not put him on the stand.   Pell wanted to give evidence but Ritcher opposed it.
Donald
In the end that is a choice for Pell. His legal counsel can only advise not compel.

However it is perfectly normal for the defendant not to go on the witness stand.

My view is that Pell has been found guilty and has been convicted of a crime. He is entitled to a legal appeal and we will see if that changes that. However for the moment he has been convicted of an offence.

If we are to trust our judicial system, like we do normally, he has been found guilty of a heinous crime.

If he is successful with his appeal he will be vindicated. Let the process work.

For the time being he has been found to be scum of the earth.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
I know what Donald and Big J have said -  Richter was against it, as he usually is. He likes to do all the talking.
I still wonder why Richter didn't see that this was a case quite out of the ordinary. It was no run of the mill criminal, and my opinion is that Richter blew an opportunity for Pell to make a good impression.
  mikesyd Chief Commissioner

Location: Lurking
I know what Donald and Big J have said -  Richter was against it, as he usually is. He likes to do all the talking.
I still wonder why Richter didn't see that this was a case quite out of the ordinary. It was no run of the mill criminal, and my opinion is that Richter blew an opportunity for Pell to make a good impression.
Valvegear
If Pell went into the witness box he would then be open to Cross Examination by the Prosecution - Richter probably didn't want him answering any unrehearsed questions.
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
No question about that, Pell as it stands is a paedophile! make no doubts about it, now there will be more than likely an appeal, so we have to wait for the outcome

Kind Regards
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

I know what Donald and Big J have said -  Richter was against it, as he usually is. He likes to do all the talking.
I still wonder why Richter didn't see that this was a case quite out of the ordinary. It was no run of the mill criminal, and my opinion is that Richter blew an opportunity for Pell to make a good impression.
Valvegear
Well advised by council. Submit prepared statement as was done and say nothing. Or plead guilty.
Some comments provided to RC, my opinion is he's incapable of making a good impression. And would have been easily triped up under cross examination.

Perhaps Pell will speak at the appeal? Unsure of that procedure.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
The innocent (and by that I do not mean those acquitted) are generally well served by testifying, the guilty generally not.

Pell was well advised to not testify at the hearing, guilty people seldom look good or do well under cross examination. Any faults in his memory (and I guarantee he would have several) would have been pounced on by the prosecution.

He won’t speak at his appeal, he effectively cannot, if he tenders no evidence at trial he cannot suddenly submit his own evidence or recollections at appeal - at least without most certainly raising the ire of the court.

An appeal for him could be really dicey, what if the appeal is heard and dismissed, or worse, granted and he is found guilty again at retrial? He will be the first Catholic of rank to have been tried and convicted twice of pedophilia.

The Catholic Church needs to have a pretty hard look at itself, it maybe doesn’t encourage kiddie fiddling, but it hardly takes every step to prevent it, and in many ways, actively enables it. Israilfan’s comments about a person of Pell’s standing not ‘risking’ such actions is the perfect proof.

Why would a person granted a position of great power by the church risk that? Precisely because the rank and file like Israilfan (not to mention the likes of Brennan) will never believe that it could happen...
  DJPeters Deputy Commissioner

That is something no criminal thinks about when appealing a case it could still go against you or worse you get a longer sentence out of it. But all they see is an easy way to worm out of being sent to jail, and they forget or do not want to know that it could go against them again.  Not everyone that appeals is successful in getting the charge dropped though. I hope he is again found guilty to tell the truth just so it makes a point of saying it does not matter who you are or what religion etc, but if you do the crime then you do the time. He should be given a bar of soap as he leaves the court though, with a rider that says "Do not drop this soap in the showers".
  574M White Guru

Location: Shepparton
The whole idea of George Pell keeping silence is out of step with his character and I imagine Richer QC must have leaned on him very heavily to keep silent.

In 2017, Pell, while still in Rome, held a Press Conference where he was adamant he was going to "have his day in court", and have his say.

My hunch is he will speak at appeal.


Source: https://zenit.org/articles/pope-grants-leave-to-cardinal-pell-so-he-can-defend-himself/

Pope Grants Leave to Cardinal Pell So He Can Defend Himself



Cardinal Says: ‘I Am Innocent, Charges Are False, Whole Idea of Sexual Abuse Is Abhorrent to Me’
June 29, 2017 17:50 Anita Bourdin Pope and Holy See


Australian Cardinal George Pell, having been sent back before a court of his country, has been granted leave by the Holy See "so that he can defend himself," states a press release of the Holy See Press Office, published on Thursday, June 29, 2017, in Italian, English and Spanish, and read by the Director of the Press Office, Greg Burke. Cardinal Pell claimed his innocence before the press during a meeting at the Vatican.

"I'm looking forward to finally having my day in court. I am innocent of these charges. They are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me," Cardinal Pell said.

Observers in Rome believe that this leave manifests that respect for the presumption of innocence is not in contradiction with the "zero" tolerance discipline initiated by Pope Benedict XVI and followed by Pope Francis.

Now that Cardinal Pell, 76, must answer accusations of abuse on minors, the Vatican recalls that as Bishop he himself took measures for the protection of minors.

"The Holy See learned with regret the news of the indictment in Australia of Cardinal George Pell, for accusations going back to events that occurred decades ago," says the Holy See.

In fact, the Prefect of the Vatican's Secretariat for the Economy is called to appear before the court of Melbourne this coming July 18, to answer accusations going back to the time he was priest at Ballarat (1976-1980), then Archbishop of Melbourne (1996-2001). Last October, the Australian police questioned him in Rome on the alleged events.

"The police of Victoria have accused George Pell of former crimes of sexual aggressions," said to the press Assistant Commissioner Shane Patton this June 29.

A press release of the diocese of Melbourne points out that, "although it is still the early hours of the morning at Rome, Cardinal George Pell was informed of the decision and the measure of the police of Victoria" and that "he again vigorously denied the allegations."

Cardinal Pell attributed the accusations to a campaign of defamation. He had to face for a first time accusations of which the Court of Sydney exonerated him in 2002. He defended himself before the press at the Vatican, affirming that these accusations have been the object " of investigation for two years" and that there had been "leaks in the media": "an unremitting defamation," he said.

However, he renounces in advance his immunity; he does not shirk the management of important affairs of the reform, and is in a hurry to "defend himself before the court": "I am innocent, the accusations are false and I consider the very idea of sexual abuse a horrible crime. I informed the Holy Father regularly during these long months and on numerous occasions, and we talked about the possibility that I take a period of leave to defend myself. So I am grateful to the Holy Father for granting me this leave to return to Australia. I have spoken with my lawyers so that they understand the delays in my return and I have consulted my doctors to see what is the best way to do so. I have always been consistent and clear in totally rejecting the accusations. The news of these accusations reinforces my determination, and the court procedures now offer me the possibility to defend my name and to return to my work at Rome."

The Holy See press release pays tribute to the "honesty" of the Cardinal and to his "energetic" work in favor of the economic and administrative reforms desired by the Pope. A member of the C9, Cardinal Pell is a kingpin of the reform of the management of the Curia.

The Cardinal, 76, will return, the same source confirms, after having consulted his doctors, "to rehabilitate his name": He said he is in a hurry to go before the court where he will vigorously reject the accusations," stresses the Holy See.

Moreover, the note recalls that "Cardinal Pell has, for decades, openly and repeatedly condemned abuses committed on minors as immoral and intolerable acts," and that he "collaborated in the past with the Australian authorities - for example, by his depositions at the Royal Commission," his support for "the creation of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors" and, finally, for introducing, "as diocesan Bishop in Australia, systems and procedures for the protection of minors, and assistance to victims of abuse."

The note also points out that the decision to return to Australia comes from Cardinal Pell: "Made aware of the measure, Cardinal Pell, in full respect of the civil laws, and recognizing the importance of his participation, so that the trial can unfold in a just manner and thus foster the search for the truth, has decided to return to his country to address the accusations brought against him."

The Pope was informed, continues the note, and he has granted Cardinal Pell "a period of leave so that he can defend himself." And the note affirms the Holy See's "respect" vis-a-vis Australian justice, "which must decide on the questions raised."

The Secretariat for the Economy, so important in Pope Francis' reform will, nevertheless, continue its functions, specifies Greg Burke. "The secretaries will remain in charge of the management of the current affairs" until the Pope decides "otherwise."

The Holy See renders warm homage to the Australian Cardinal, stressing that "the Pope has been able to appreciate Cardinal Pell's honesty during these three years of work at the Curia and he is grateful to him for his collaboration and, in particular, for his energetic engagement in favor of reforms in the economic ad administrative sector and his active participation in the Council of Cardinals (C9)."

Observers in Rome noted that Pope Francis could have put the Cardinal in retirement - he has exceeded the canonical age of 75 years - or asked him for his resignation, and that he did not do so, while he implements the "zero tolerance" policy": he has just reduced an Italian priest to the lay state. But is it not first of all respect for the presumption of innocence and of the time of the work of justice? In France, justice has just decided to take no further action in a case that caused the resignation of a Bishop.

--------------------------------------------------------
No, I do not collect photos of George Pell.
I cite the photo as it is part of the Vatican Press Release.
I cite the Press Release as it illustrates that he wanted his day in court.
That is all.
  theanimal Chief Commissioner

  theanimal Chief Commissioner

Strange how the man of god chose not to swear on his bible and give evidence.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Strange how the man of god chose not to swear on his bible and give evidence.
"theanimal"
- as various people have mentioned earlier.
Richter QC, as 574M said, must have leant very heavily on Pell to convince him to keep quiet.

"The innocent (and by that I do not mean those acquitted) are generally well served by testifying, the guilty generally not.
Pell was well advised to not testify at the hearing, guilty people seldom look good or do well under cross examination. Any faults in his memory (and I guarantee he would have several) would have been pounced on by the prosecution.
"Aaron"
I think that sums it up extremely well.
  wobert Chief Commissioner

Location: Half way between Propodolla and Kinimakatka
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-04/george-pell-abuse-victims-family-police-speak-to-4-corners/10856998


Can't even begin to imagine what it must like for the parents involved
  Hafenbahn Locomotive Fireman

Agreed, a nightmare for the victims and their families.
I wonder how well Pell is sleeping now.
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

Agreed, a nightmare for the victims and their families.
I wonder how well Pell is sleeping now.
Hafenbahn
With one eye open.....
  theanimal Chief Commissioner

Agreed, a nightmare for the victims and their families.
I wonder how well Pell is sleeping now.
Hafenbahn
I reckon  he is that unsympathetic, he is probably sleeping as well as his God did during the holocaust
  theanimal Chief Commissioner

I pinched this of Facebook, it pretty much says it all to me.

...where there is darkness and the gnashing of teeth
My late mother went through the pain of childbirth seven times and as devout Catholics both my parents thanked God for granting them the ability to conform to the Scriptures by fulfilling their marriage.
All us seven siblings were baptised, confirmed and when it was the time we were each confirmed and went to holy communion.
As we grew up we were educated in Catholic institutions.
Our parents were proud and also enjoyed great peace of mind knowing that all of their children were appropriately equipped for life.
I refer to the devastating development of the incidences of paedophilia which has been permitted to infect the Catholic Church unimpeded, a picture reminiscent of hordes of white ants attacking a building.
Instead of using remedies available to them did they attack these pests with enthusiasm? No! They did cover it all in a veil of secrecy presumably to protect the good name of the church?
It is sad for me to have to say that I am glad that my parents did not survive to be now alive to witness, as much as can be witnessed, of the depth to which our great church has been allowed to sink.
We listen, see and read the utterings emanating from the currently summoned Bishops' Synod which is clearly reminiscent of its predecessor, the Synod of Bishops III Extraordinary General Assembly, held in October 2014 on the family.
There was an extraordinary level of printed material circulated highlighting all sorts of areas where the church was presumably seeking guidance from the laity through its Synod of Bishops on a high number of issues which were considered to be problem areas. At the time of preparing a commentary on that particular assembly, I noted with considerable disgust that not one mention or admission of the existence of paedophilia appeared anywhere. Notwithstanding the fact that incidences of those atrocities were talked about and growing as far as the church hierarchy in Rome was concerned the problem did not exist.
If those in control of an organisation are aware of the existence of a crime within their number which could develop into a very serious threat, by failing to control the problem they are as guilty as are the perpetrators of the crime.
Instead of recognising and acting against the incidences of paedophilia within the ranks of the church we found the Synod looking at areas like the problems experienced in the Sacrament of Marriage, the confessional, education the reduction in the number of priests and other religious and a myriad of other problem areas. All of these occurred under their stewardship and to now to attempt to address these without even recognising the problem of paedophilia in the ranks of the church speaks volumes of where the blame has to be pointing.
The veil of secrecy which became patently obvious in the Synod just ended created to protect the name of the church will instead be likely to cause the church untold grief. It was under its control where we saw the number of stray lambs alarmingly growing and the number of good shepherds diminishing.
Recently we saw one of America's cardinals defrocked and now Cardinal George Pell of our own country has been found guilty on three different counts of paedophilia and subject to the outcome of his appeal against his conviction he could well be the second Cardinal within a short space of time to be defrocked as well as serving up to 10 years in jail.
Are we hoping that these two are now the end of the matter but I don't believe too many of us would be that optimistic? Indeed I would not be surprised if we are only scratching the surface!
When handing out the vine at the Last Supper our Lord specified that the shedding of his blood will be for “you and for all”. Who can claim the right to have changed that wording to “for you and for many” and who will attempt to claim the right to decide precisely who qualifies for God's grace from among the “many” ?
It would not be so bad if every other organisation in our world was living by Christian principles even if not Catholics, but even that hope appears to be veining as we look around and find ourselves encircled by Royal Commissions each of whom presented depressing findings which indicates that many of the people we respected and trusted are rotten to the core and live purely to take advantage of each other rather than be dedicated to the common good.
Taking all this to account would we be shocked and surprised if God suddenly decides that his beloved creation has rendered itself beyond redemption, that people in all walks of life are in danger of being subject to the evil doings of what we need to regard as an over active minority.
Would it not be ironic if God decided to bring this world to an end after all it seems that one of the principal contributors to the world's problems are the people in control of God's own church?
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
In breaking news, I understand that Robert Ritcher QC has quit the Cardinal's legal team, ahead of his sentence and appeal, this must be a big blow surely for Pell
  mikesyd Chief Commissioner

Location: Lurking
In breaking news, I understand that Robert Ritcher QC has quit the Cardinal's legal team, ahead of his sentence and appeal, this must be a big blow surely for Pell
lsrailfan
Richter is angry and emotional that Pell was convicted. Probably feels that he cant control what he says in court, not surprising after his 'vanilla sex' gaffe.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-05/robert-richter-quits-george-pells-legal-team/10873112
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Extraordinary from such an experienced high profile barrister like Richter. I cannot understand how he could become so upset about a guilty verdict. Is he letting Pell down, or is there more to it?

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.