Cardinal Pell
Cardinal Pell
Cardinal Pell has been freed on his second attempt to have his conviction overturned. I'm anxiously waiting to hear an update from The Reckoning podcast by Guardian Australia on his case.
it's okay to say "I don't know"
Re: Cardinal Pell
I do not like thee
card'nal Fell
The reason why - I cannot tell
But this I know and know full well
I do not like you card'nal Fell
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7163
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Cardinal Pell
The judgement can be found here: http://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/showCase/2020/HCA/12
Re: Cardinal Pell
Ah, the rich person's legal ratchet. Spend enough money on enough lawyers and enough appeals, and eventually, through the Crazification Factor and the laws of probability, you'll find someone who will side with you. Remember, you only have to win once, your victims have to win every time.
Re: Cardinal Pell
That's an excellent - if highly depressing - way of putting it.Sciolus wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 6:57 pmAh, the rich person's legal ratchet. Spend enough money on enough lawyers and enough appeals, and eventually, through the Crazification Factor and the laws of probability, you'll find someone who will side with you. Remember, you only have to win once, your victims have to win every time.
it's okay to say "I don't know"
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7163
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Cardinal Pell
Having looked at the verdict I think there is something different, though also depressing going on.
It’s a unanimous verdict by seven judges. They found that there is reasonable doubt rather than that Pell is innocent.
As far as I can tell, they point to other witnesses who stated that the alleged sexual assault couldn’t have happened because Pell wasn’t alone with the accuser. However, those witnesses testified about what happened in general 24 years ago, not on the specific day that the assault is claimed to have happened. I wouldn’t attach so much importance to them as I’d assume that a victim of sexual assault would be much more likely to remember exactly what happened whereas if Pell’s routine were slightly different that day it would probably be forgotten over the past 24 years.
The outcome of the verdict will be that it will be far harder in Australia to get a prosecution for historic sexual crimes (unless there is evidence other than the testimony of the accuser). Given the unanimous decision I suspect this is the judges’ intended outcome.
It’s a unanimous verdict by seven judges. They found that there is reasonable doubt rather than that Pell is innocent.
As far as I can tell, they point to other witnesses who stated that the alleged sexual assault couldn’t have happened because Pell wasn’t alone with the accuser. However, those witnesses testified about what happened in general 24 years ago, not on the specific day that the assault is claimed to have happened. I wouldn’t attach so much importance to them as I’d assume that a victim of sexual assault would be much more likely to remember exactly what happened whereas if Pell’s routine were slightly different that day it would probably be forgotten over the past 24 years.
The outcome of the verdict will be that it will be far harder in Australia to get a prosecution for historic sexual crimes (unless there is evidence other than the testimony of the accuser). Given the unanimous decision I suspect this is the judges’ intended outcome.
Re: Cardinal Pell
There were similar accusations against him as well from earlier.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:59 pmHaving looked at the verdict I think there is something different, though also depressing going on.
It’s a unanimous verdict by seven judges. They found that there is reasonable doubt rather than that Pell is innocent.
As far as I can tell, they point to other witnesses who stated that the alleged sexual assault couldn’t have happened because Pell wasn’t alone with the accuser. However, those witnesses testified about what happened in general 24 years ago, not on the specific day that the assault is claimed to have happened. I wouldn’t attach so much importance to them as I’d assume that a victim of sexual assault would be much more likely to remember exactly what happened whereas if Pell’s routine were slightly different that day it would probably be forgotten over the past 24 years.
The outcome of the verdict will be that it will be far harder in Australia to get a prosecution for historic sexual crimes (unless there is evidence other than the testimony of the accuser). Given the unanimous decision I suspect this is the judges’ intended outcome.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
Re: Cardinal Pell
This case is only about Pell as a sexual predator on two (I think) victims. There were other victims who did not want to be part of this case (or any case) because they knew the way sexual abuse victims are treated in the courts. At least one of these victims has said he may come forward, so Pell may have to go through this again, although how he can get a jury of 12 who haven't formed an opinion of him, I don't know.jimbob wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 8:14 pmThere were similar accusations against him as well from earlier.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:59 pmHaving looked at the verdict I think there is something different, though also depressing going on.
It’s a unanimous verdict by seven judges. They found that there is reasonable doubt rather than that Pell is innocent.
As far as I can tell, they point to other witnesses who stated that the alleged sexual assault couldn’t have happened because Pell wasn’t alone with the accuser. However, those witnesses testified about what happened in general 24 years ago, not on the specific day that the assault is claimed to have happened. I wouldn’t attach so much importance to them as I’d assume that a victim of sexual assault would be much more likely to remember exactly what happened whereas if Pell’s routine were slightly different that day it would probably be forgotten over the past 24 years.
The outcome of the verdict will be that it will be far harder in Australia to get a prosecution for historic sexual crimes (unless there is evidence other than the testimony of the accuser). Given the unanimous decision I suspect this is the judges’ intended outcome.
There is also the potential for Pell to be brought up on charges that as Archbishop of both Melbourne and Sydney he was involved with moving priests around to cover up sexual assaults; he set up what was known as the 'Melbourne Response', which became the Australian church's official policy, in which victims were encouraged to come forward (to the church) and they would receive a payment of up to $50,000 (effectively as hush money) but no significant counselling, while the priests responsible were moved on and their crimes not reported to the authorities. There were at least 340 cases of this, since the scheme was set up in the late 1990s.
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"
-
- Snowbonk
- Posts: 534
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 8:05 am
Re: Cardinal Pell
That is what Pell inflicted on the young children who were abused by Gerald Risdale and dozens of other paedophile priests. He has consistently lied about what he knew and how bad child abuse was within the Catholic Church and used his position within the church to protect paedophiles within the church. Whether he was a paedophile, I am unsure, but he did as much damage as any of the paedophiles did.
Here grows much rhubarb.
Re: Cardinal Pell
340 is the number from the Catholic Church's own overseer of the compensation scheme. I've no idea if there are any cases of abuse which didn't get notified to the church (you'd think there probably would be a few), so God knows what the actual figure is. (Due to Catholic teachings, she's probably the only one who does!)Chris Preston wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:10 amThat is what Pell inflicted on the young children who were abused by Gerald Risdale and dozens of other paedophile priests. He has consistently lied about what he knew and how bad child abuse was within the Catholic Church and used his position within the church to protect paedophiles within the church. Whether he was a paedophile, I am unsure, but he did as much damage as any of the paedophiles did.
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"
Re: Cardinal Pell
George Pell died yesterday. I wonder what that means for the civil case against him that was still running.
Jaap's Page: https://www.jaapsch.net/
Re: Cardinal Pell
May he rot in hell if there is one. I know someone whose life was severely f.cked because of Pell's actions.
Re: Cardinal Pell
How does he have an estate? Or is the vow of poverty optional?
it's okay to say "I don't know"
Re: Cardinal Pell
The case continues with the Australian Catholic Church as the defendant (I believe)
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"
Re: Cardinal Pell
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7163
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Cardinal Pell
Yes, this states that:
Shine Lawyers chief legal officer Lisa Flynn said in a statement on Wednesday the claim would continue against the church and whatever estate Cardinal Pell had left behind.