The case of Cardinal George Pell

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pai_Nosso
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Patri said:
Should he be found innocent I wonder what you will post regarding that (after your careful analysis about his guilty verdict) . I have no idea what happened but I do know that sometimes innocent people are convicted (even executed) and on occasions, the guilty get away. Maybe not everything is as it seems…
Click to expand...
I just feel like adding to this thread about Cardinal Pell’s trial something that has crossed my mind. There are certain kind of crimes that require a build-up. One does not become a serial killer or pedophile overnight. Common sense makes me question why in all his career 2 people accuse him. Pedophiles acquire a taste for their sick tendencies, what prevented him before and what stopped him afterwards? I smell not only a rat but an army of rats here. Whatever happened, I pray the truth comes out.
 
Patri said:
Should he be found innocent I wonder what you will post regarding that
Click to expand...
He will not be ‘found innocent’. The best he can hope for is a finding that the jury could not have found him ‘guilty beyond a reasonable doubt’. This will mean he has been found ‘not guilty’ against that standard. This would not mean he would be ‘innocent’ against the civil standard of ‘balance of probabilities’ or the still lower standard employed by the Church of ‘credibly accused’, leading to apologies and ecclesiastical penalties. As I have said before, I simply do not know what if anything happened between Cardinal Pell and any of his accusers. Outside those involved, and without a change of account by the Cardinal, none of us ever will with absolute certainty. We will only be able to do so with the certainty afforded by a justice system in a democratic and free country.
 
Patri said:
Common sense makes me question why in all his career 2 people accuse him.
Click to expand...
Others made accusations that did not come to trial. In one case the prosecution was withdrawn because the court ruled that ‘propensity evidence’ that is, evidence claimed to show a tendency towards committing such crimes, was ruled inadmissible.
 
prayersoutherncross said:
It is not like that here in Australia. There is quite a list of criminal priests , religious and laity. One could say the swamp is being drained and cleaned up, to steal a famous American phrase
Click to expand...
I mean not a considerate percentage in comparison to priests not involved in such crimes.
 
FiveLinden said:
Others made accusations that did not come to trial. In one case the prosecution was withdrawn because the court ruled that ‘propensity evidence’ that is, evidence claimed to show a tendency towards committing such crimes, was ruled inadmissible.
Click to expand...
How many others?
 
if I may, two more points to add to you argument:

The police literally advertised for victims to come forward, before any accusations were made.

Even harder to imagine a pedophile committing his first crimes in such a public setting and at such a time as right after mass.
 
prayersoutherncross said:
Rau a rape / abuse victim is likely to remember down to minute and second. Surprising details are remembered. How could they not be?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. The matter I question was the defence mounted by Pell. Given he says he is innocent - what do you think he would remember about the specific day in question? Nothing. All he could say is what the usual pattern of the period just after mass would be.
 
Last edited:
prayersoutherncross said:
Pell would well remember that mass and in fact says he does.
Click to expand...
He would, or he does? Can you present evidence of this? Those attending at mass with him do not remember the specific day and gave evidence of the usual pattern.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Even harder to imagine a pedophile committing his first crimes in such a public setting and at such a time as right after mass.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is strange. Especially as people tend to want to talk to priests/bishops/cardinals after Mass.
 
prayersoutherncross said:
Have you any idea of the % or numbers in real time that some places here experienced?
Click to expand...
I am in no way saying any % in acceptable but I have known excellent priests in my life and I refuse to let the actions of some define them or a good part of the church.
 
Patri said:
He can be found innocent if the accuser is lying and confesses
Click to expand...
No, there is still the other dead former choirboy. And that is only in relation to this case. There are also other accusers whose cases have not been considered strong enough to bring to court. The chances of the one accuser who gave the evidence that so impressed the courts changing his story would seem to be nil. Not even Cardinal Pell’s lawyers accused him of lying. They suggested he was mistaken and or deluded or a fantasist.
 
tafan2 said:
Even harder to imagine a pedophile committing his first crimes in such a public setting and at such a time as right after mass.
Click to expand...
I agree that this seems unlikely, But the accuser was believed after giving evidence on oath, which Cardinal Pell chose not to do, and being cross-examined, which Cardinal Pell was not. Other charges against Cardinal Pell did not go ahead including one set where the prosecution withdrew them because the court would not allow ‘propensity evidence’.
 
Patri said:
I am in no way saying any % in acceptable but I have known excellent priests in my life and I refuse to let the actions of some define them or a good part of the church.
Click to expand...
You should look at the comprehensive and detailed and fair (the Church said so) Royal Commission on Institutional Abuse in Australia. The percentage of members of religious orders ‘credibly accused’ went from 0% to 45%. Yes, 45%. They were religious brothers, not priests, but it was a large order. And a great many priests were found to be guilty. A great many others were guilty organising or cooperating in hiding the offences, allowing more to be committed. Not only Catholics were involved. Many other organisations did likewise. Yu are right it does not define the Church. But it helps make clear the sort of organisation it is. The Royal Commission specifically criticised ‘clericalism’ which it saw as undue respect and subservience to clergy. You might find that part thought-provoking and leading to a better understanding of the type of support that helps good priests. Here is a link to the part of the report dealing with religious institutions.

https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/religious-institutions
 
Last edited:
FiveLinden said:
Church. But it helps make clear the sort of organisation it is.
Click to expand...
I do not agree with this. Whatever kind of organizational you have lumped the church into. I am part of the church as millions of devout Catholics.
 
Patri said:
40.png
LilyM:
Well, for starters, why accuse the victim of something as heinous as a fabricating the story? Surely it is better to say “the victim is mistaken, what he said happened did not happen and could not have happened, for xyz reasons”. It could be a case of honest but mistaken belief, after all.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand how one can be mistaken in making such a serious accusation. Except that person has problems distinguishing between what is real and what isn’t. I pray that if this is an unjust sentence then truth should surface. I agree that things should not be swept under the rug, but not in a general witch hunt. There are way more priests that are working really hard in the vineyard of the Lord, sad that everything is reduced to the criminal acts of a few (but, that is how it has always been).
Click to expand...
Memory is a strange thing. My own mother remembers perfectly well the dates of birth of four of her five children, but for.the first ten years or so of the life of the fifth was adamantly wrong about the birth date, even when corrected by my father who knew the correct date. We had to dig the birth certificate out and show it to her to convince her.

As I said, this was her own biological child who she gave birt to just like her others, raised and loved just like the others.

Otherwise she has.no memory issues that anyone is aware of. Just some peculiar glitch with that particular event.

There is much research about faulty memory on the part of eyewitnesses to crimes. A lot of the same factors - crimes happening quickly and unexpectedly, the mind blurring traumatic memories and so on - may well apply to victims. More research probably clearly needs to be done in this field.
 
Last edited:
Patri said:
hatever kind of organizational you have lumped the church into. I am part of the church as millions of devout Catholics.
Click to expand...
I meant only that it is an organisation with an incidence of child abuse t least as great as that found in similar organisations and with a history of failure to manage the problem in the best possible way. From all I have seen, the Church agrees with this assessment. I suggest you read the relevant parts of the Royal Commission report, if you have not.
 
Last edited:
FiveLinden said:
But the accuser was believed after giving evidence on oath, which Cardinal Pell chose not to do, and being cross-examined, which Cardinal Pell was not.
Click to expand...
I cannot see any significance in Pell not testifying (other than that that fact may improperly influence the jury) because he would have no useful evidence to give that could not equally or more effectively be provided by others. As I mentioned, he does not present well. People tend not to warm to him. Abuse survivors who know him regard him poorly. His denials would count for little. He was found guilty because the accuser was judged believable and there was no definitive / objective evidence to say Pell did not do it.
 
Last edited:
Patri said:
40.png
FiveLinden:
He will not be ‘found innocent’. The best he can hope for is a finding that the jury could not have found him ‘guilty beyond a
Click to expand...
He can be found innocent if the accuser is lying and confesses.
Click to expand...
And there is the added history of corruption and anti Catholic freemasonry that has plagued Victoria Police for so long.


Current Commissioner Graham Ashton instigated the ‘get Pell’ task force Operation Tethering before a single accusation was ever made.


Ashton has been recently embroiled in the unethical use of a lawyer informant that threatens to destroy serious gangland convictions. He has demonstrated a complete lack of integrity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top