Cardinal George Pell, The Catholic Church and Child Sex Abuse

[Ian4]

Look, it's entirely plausible that Pell is a pedo or at least has pedo tendencies. But much less plausible that it happened like this. I'll refrain from further comment until more information is available.

irrespective of whether he is guilty or not, he is clearly guilty of harbouring them to protect the church. Risden was moved from diocese to diocese under his watch. and this is coming from a man who publically stated that abortion is worse than paedophilia.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

irrespective of whether he is guilty or not, he is clearly guilty of harbouring them to protect the church.

Well let him be charged over that, then.

 

[MD Jazz]

imagine the repercushions had this happened.

A soft landing I'd suppose

 

[lukeanddad]

irrespective of whether he is guilty or not, he is clearly guilty of harbouring them to protect the church. Risden was moved from diocese to diocese under his watch. and this is coming from a man who publically stated that abortion is worse than paedophilia.

Well said. He’s either a criminal- or he has protected criminals. Or both, of course.

Reprehensible on either count.

 

[IanG]

Red wine/white wine, "What are you doing in here?" OR "You're in trouble" etc, and that was just the first time around when a hung jury was 10-2 in favour of acquittal. The complainant did not give evidence at the second trial.

Look, it's entirely plausible that Pell is a pedo or at least has pedo tendencies. But much less plausible that it happened like this. I'll refrain from further comment until more information is available.

So you have no idea and are making assumptions.

 

[MD Jazz]

The question the conservatives are mostly asking in private is

Should a poor vulnerable mans recollections be able to destroy a rich powerful man?

Its so vexatious to the flag bearers Howard and Bolt , so abhorent to them that one of their kind was unable to forcefully put his *smile* in a boys mouth with impunity,

Not all conservatives are the same.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/nsw-liberal-vice-president-lashes-craig-kellys-support-of-george-pell/ar-BBUb1pN?ocid=spartanntp

I can't stand the religious right but your post is way off IMO although consistent with your narrative of rich man = evil right wing exploiter of the poor, poor man = decent, honest hard worker.

I'll agree that I hope Pell suffers interminably in jail, and the church is further exposed for the fraudulent organisation it is and made to pay.

 

[Baloo]

I've avoided these numerous Pell threads because it's sickening what he's been found guilty of. But curiosity got the better of me as I couldn't think of who could be arguing for the defense. Silly of me really. It's the Bolt disciple of course.

 

[spook]

"I put it to you, Mr So-Called Victim, that you can't remember what colour the wine was while your trusted, revered authority figure was raping you decades ago, because he wasn't even raping you at all! Isn't that the truth, Mr So-Called!? Surely such a significant and traumatic event must be so seared into your memory that you would recall every peripheral detail with forensic accuracy, because that is how memory works."

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

"I put it to you, Mr So-Called Victim, that you can't remember what colour the wine was while your trusted, revered authority figure was raping you decades ago, because he wasn't even raping you at all! Isn't that the truth, Mr So-Called!? Surely such a significant and traumatic event must be so seared into your memory that you would recall every peripheral detail with forensic accuracy, because that is how memory works."

Which is exactly the trouble with memory, isn't it?

You don't seem to have any qualms about accepting the story of this person (identity unknown) as gospel in the absence of any corroborating evidence, least of all from the other alleged victim who has conveniently died, and who denied any abuse took place. Try putting your prejudice aside and looking at the allegations in isolation.

 

[year of the tiger]

Which is exactly the trouble with memory, isn't it?

You don't seem to have any qualms about accepting the story of this person (identity unknown) as gospel in the absence of any corroborating evidence, least of all from the other alleged victim who has conveniently died, and who denied any abuse took place. Try putting your prejudice aside and looking at the allegations in isolation.

Come on LTRTR

Your use of the word “conveniently” there is a tad offensive imo.

We are not all privy to all the evidence so our arguments are a little bit blind.

 

[RoarEmotion]

You want the stories of victims of the Catholic paedo ring, start here:

http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/62

I was an altar boy with this prick in charge. I was one of the lucky ones though.

Being a relatively quiet atheist I’ve never really taken the time to read in depth about this although I’ve watched some documentaries and read a bit about some of what happened in the US and Ireland. Thanks for sharing the link - The length and extent of the deception and multi generational damage to society is just horrific as others have commented. As a single child I feel pretty lucky looking back and thank ‘god’ the school RE teacher, cub leader, scout leader, cricket coach etc weren’t part of this boys club.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

I've avoided these numerous Pell threads because it's sickening what he's been found guilty of. But curiosity got the better of me as I couldn't think of who could be arguing for the defense. Silly of me really. It's the Bolt disciple of course.

I recall you helping me out on this site while I was persona non grata, Baloo. I'd like to think it was because you're capable of forming an objective opinion. And my opinion here is, hang on a second. It has nothing to do with Bolt's or Abbott's or Howard's opinion.

Come on LTRTR

Your use of the word “conveniently” there is a tad offensive imo.

We are not all privy to all the evidence so our arguments are a little bit blind.

Yeah, I take that descriptor back. It implies that the story is fabricated. And yeah, we're all a bit in the dark since the trial was conducted in secret. I'm not arguing for Pell necessarily, but what's been revealed sets a low standard of proof for a process we're all governed by.

 

[Tigers of Old]

You want the stories of victims of the Catholic paedo ring, start here:

http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/62

I was an altar boy with this prick in charge. I was one of the lucky ones though.

So sad. I could barely read it. I did notice the photo though. How creepy is that?

 

[year of the tiger]

Yeah, I take that descriptor back. It implies that the story is fabricated. And yeah, we're all a bit in the dark since the trial was conducted in secret. I'm not arguing for Pell necessarily, but what's been revealed sets a low standard of proof for a process we're all governed by.

No probs

 

[IanG]

but what's been revealed sets a low standard of proof for a process we're all governed by.

How can you possibly know that unless you were there? The judge was there to ensure that legalities were followed, if the prosecution did not present sufficient proof I would expect the judge to take action on that. However I guess we won't find out for sure until the appeal. IMO you are trivialising the enormous courage the victim had to display to not only appear on the stand but clearly not buckle under what must have been fierce cross examination.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

How can you possibly know that unless you were there? The judge was there to ensure that legalities were followed, if the prosecution did not present sufficient proof I would expect the judge to take action on that. However I guess we won't find out for sure until the appeal. IMO you are trivialising the enormous courage the victim had to display to not only appear on the stand but clearly not buckle under what must have been fierce cross examination.

It's not personal, I don't know anything about the victim. The jury obviously believed every word uttered by the witness and nothing of Pell's denials. I would like to know more about the jury's rationale before this can sit easily.

 

[Panthera Tigris]

So sad. I could barely read it. I did notice the photo though. How creepy is that?

Bloody hell Ballarat seemed to be a dumping ground for known paedo priests from all over Australia to continue their depraved habbits. Have read numerous cases of infamous kiddy fiddling priests from Tasmania, the Newcastle-Hunter region, Toowoomba QLD all being redeployed to Ballarat.

Or rather than a 'dumping ground' was it paedophile ring kind of wink, wink, nudge nudge - Ballarat offers very fruitful pickings......

 

[DavidSSS]

Which is exactly the trouble with memory, isn't it?

You don't seem to have any qualms about accepting the story of this person (identity unknown) as gospel in the absence of any corroborating evidence, least of all from the other alleged victim who has conveniently died, and who denied any abuse took place. Try putting your prejudice aside and looking at the allegations in isolation.

What utter crap. We are not accepting the story of one person from 30 years ago, because we, like you, did not hear the evidence.

What we are accepting is that 12 people who did hear the evidence came to a unanimous verdict beyond reasonable doubt that the case against Pell was proven.

Your biased rantings about this are embarrassing. You don't seem to have any qualms about trashing the verdict of the jury who actually heard the evidence (unlike you and the rest of us). Try putting your prejudice aside and look at the facts about how hard it is to get a conviction in a case such as this, how Pell had the best legal team money can buy, how Pell clearly has friends in high places and that the case was still found to be proven.

DS

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

What utter crap. We are not accepting the story of one person from 30 years ago, because we, like you, did not hear the evidence.

What we are accepting is that 12 people who did hear the evidence came to a unanimous verdict beyond reasonable doubt that the case against Pell was proven.

Your biased rantings about this are embarrassing. You don't seem to have any qualms about trashing the verdict of the jury who actually heard the evidence (unlike you and the rest of us). Try putting your prejudice aside and look at the facts about how hard it is to get a conviction in a case such as this, how Pell had the best legal team money can buy, how Pell clearly has friends in high places and that the case was still found to be proven.

DS

Call me crazy but I like my crimes to have witnesses or proof other than the account of the person claiming to be a victim. Big claims demand strong evidence. The plaintiff’s evidence erred on a number of details, yet the jury chose not to believe Pell. Why?

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

how Pell had the best legal team money can buy, how Pell clearly has friends in high places

Like I said, put aside your prejudice and consider the allegations in isolation. One man’s word against another’s. You’d better put on a good show for the jury or you’re going down.