Posted on 06/29/2017 6:34:53 PM PDT by ebb tide
Could this have anything to do with Vatican financial reform?
Let’s get the “full disclosure” out of the way up front: Cardinal George Pell and I have been friends for 50 years, and collaborators in different projects for 25.
The Victoria police in his native Australia have now announced that they are filing “multiple charges in respect to historic sexual offenses” against Pell. This has come as no surprise to those familiar with the fantastic campaign of false allegations of sexual abuse that has been conducted against the cardinal: allegations of which he has been consistently exonerated. But despite that fact — or perhaps because of it — the campaign has recently intensified Down Under, creating a thoroughly poisonous public climate exacerbated by poorly sourced but widely disseminated allegations, no respect for elementary fairness, and a curious relationship between elements of the Australian media and the Victoria police during the two years the investigation leading to the current changes has been underway. So it may be worthwhile, before offering a few of my own thoughts on another angle in this tawdry business, to note several recent comments from Australians who have not been caught up in an atmosphere of hysteria and persecution that inevitably invites comparison to Salem, Mass., in the 17th century.
Two weeks before, in the same newspaper, an op-ed columnist, Angela Shanahan, had some sharp words for the public atmosphere that has gripped Australia like a bad fever: “Conspiracy and rumour reign, logic and fact have gone out the window in the case of Pell. . . . In all this sound and fury, the cardinal has acted impeccably. He has said nothing except to state his innocence. He waits, prays, and gets on with the job. Pity more people didn’t do the same.”
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
On June 9, in the Sydney Morning Herald, columnist Peter Craven reviewed a new book about Pell, Louise Milligan’s Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell — a hatchet job riddled with inaccuracies and replete with unfounded allegations. The review concluded on this somber note: “One can only hope to God that in the present climate people will be capable of realizing this is a case being mounted for a witch trial.”
And in mid May, Andrew Halphen, co-chairman of the criminal-law section of the Law Institute of Victoria, described the inappropriate leaking of information about the investigation against Pell in the Sydney Morning Herald as exhibiting a “lack of regard” for the cardinal’s rights and a “startling affront” to the legal system. Halphen also expressed “grave concerns” about whether Pell could receive a “fair trial” if charges were brought, and noted that he could not think of any “other matter in recent memory where a DPP’s [director of public prosecution’s] advice to the police in respect of whether or not to charge a person finds its way to the front page of a major news publication before a person is actually charged.”
Thus it was little wonder that, on the morning of June 29, Cardinal Pell said that he was “looking forward to having my day in court,” in a brief statement from the Vatican press office. As to the charges themselves, the cardinal could not have been blunter, or clearer:
These matters have been under investigation now for nearly two years. There have been leaks to the media, relentless character assassination, and for more than a month claims that a decision on laying charges is “imminent.” . . .
I repeat that I am innocent of these charges. They are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me.
I have kept Pope Francis regularly informed throughout this lengthy process, and have spoken to him in recent days about the need to take leave to clear my name. I am grateful for his support in granting me this leave to return to Australia. I have spoken to my lawyers about when I need to return home and to my doctors about how best to do this
I have been consistent and clear in my total rejection of these allegations. News of these charges strengthens my resolve, and court proceedings now offer me an opportunity to clear my name and then return to my work in Rome.
George Pell has many enemies in Australia, political and ecclesiastical. They and their allies in the Aussie electronic and print media have indulged in a campaign of vilification against him for decades, charging him with everything from vanity to bullying. It’s all rubbish. But in the past few years, as the longstanding anti-Pell campaign has gone into overdrive with allegations of sexual abuse, there has been another dimension to this drama that should be flagged.
Cardinal Pell has been relentless, straightforward, and bold in his pursuit of Vatican financial reform, which Pope Francis brought him from Sydney to Rome to design, implement, and oversee.
Cardinal Pell has been relentless and, in an Italian context, shockingly straightforward and bold in his pursuit of Vatican financial reform, which Pope Francis brought him from Sydney to Rome to design, implement, and oversee. That reform has had its ups and downs. But Pell has had his share of successes, and despite the sometimes fierce bureaucratic resistance he’s encountered as he’s dealt with ingrained patterns of corruption, malfeasance, cupidity, and stupidity, he’s forged ahead.
It is not unreasonable to imagine — indeed, it’s more than likely — that as his reforms began to threaten serious financial (and perhaps legal) consequences for the miscreants, those determined to maintain the status quo from which they had richly benefited took care to try to derail Cardinal Pell by fostering more false allegations in Australia, where, as I’ve just noted, poisoned ground for the reception of such calumnies had been well prepared.
However that plays out — and investigative reporters looking for a really good story should be digging into the possibility of an Italian–Australian connection or connections in this affair — George Pell will have his day in court. He will not be the only one on trial as he faces his accusers in a court of law, however. The reputation for fairness and probity of the Australian police and judicial systems will be on trial with him, as will the Australian media and those in Australian politics who have directly or indirectly encouraged — or at the very least failed to stand up against — the relentless and brutal attack that has been underway against one of Australia’s most accomplished sons for years.
Cardinal Pell’s friends, among whom I am honored to be numbered, must hope that the persecution fever gripping Australia breaks; that the cardinal receives a fair trial; and that our belief in his innocence will be vindicated by a jury that takes the rules of evidence — meaning the lack thereof — more seriously than those who have been baying for George Pell’s blood.
It is also not unreasonable to imagine, in fact, to conclude, that he, like so many other priests, is and/or was a very sick pedophile.
I know of another good priest who, *because* he spoke out against corruption, including homosexuality, was targeted by vicious 50 year old gay activists, who loudly alleged to the press that the priest had "inappropriately touched" them when they were eight or nine. No witnesses, no physical evidence, no priors, absolutely unprovable --- but this is a charge which is also impossible to defend against. Just the accusation, even if false, is horribly defiling in itself. It can destroy an innocent man for a lifetime.
A charge was not brought without some evidence. Before we all try to jump to conclusions, for or against, let’s let this play out and see all the evidence, for and against.
It is statistically unreasonable to believe he is either a pedophile or sexual abuser. We are talking less than 4%, and that is generous.
Perhaps one should look at the rash of female school teacher pedophiles, bringing this level of venom to those offenders found guilty.
Presumption of innocence -— especially for this kind of charge, 40 years later. There’s a good reason for Statutes of Limitations, not least of which is the unreliability of accusers’ memories over the decades.
Look up “confabulation” -— happens all the time.
And that’s something that happens naturally, or at least blamelessly. It doesn’t even address deliberate, politically-motivated defamation.
By all means, let’s be attentive to the evidence. Pell says he is eager for his day in court.
An underage neighbor could make up a story about you, and if it sounded plausible the police would probably come and take you away. You might be tried in court and be lucky if you escaped jail.
This happened to someone in a community I once lived in. The accuser finally admitted to making up the story. The accused in the process lost his job, his family, and his home because of the false accusation. No real evidence just an accusation.
Pedophiles flock to jobs where they, as non-parental adults, have authority over children; teachers, priests, ministers, rabbis, camp counselors, juvenile justice counselors, school custodians, etc.
We make a mistake, and are unfair to both the Cardinal and his accusers, if we try to jump to conclusions, either way, before ALL the facts are known.
Totally true, look at the false pedophilia mania of a few decades ago. But, we all make a mistake in making any assumptions until ALL the facts are out in this (and any) case.
I’m not pre-judging, rather, refuting an erroneous statement.
No evidence has been presented.
Sorry, but the logic does not work. Less than 4% are abusers, true, but there are abusers.
Less than .00001% are serial killers, but there are serial killers.
The fact that the percentage is small does not decrease the possibility of an act.
He may be an abuser, and he may not be. Let’s all wait for the facts before trying to judge case either way.
Interesting things; facts.....
Not correct. The evidence has not been made public, but on 29 June 2017, Pell was charged with multiple historical sexual assault offenses.and was summonsed to appear at Melbourne Magistrates Court on 18 July 2017
Australian police have not released a detailed list of charges against Pell and didn’t disclose any information about alleged victims, in accordance with Australian law for a case at this point, saying only that there were multiple charges and “multiple complainants.”
Let’s all wait until the facts are in, shall we?
Yeah, right.
“Historical” facts that have only just come to light.
Oh, please. You’re too late.
Don’t fill up the thread now, finger wagging at us with your high minded standards. Not after that knee jerk prejudicial and accusatory opening statement of yours, bare naked of a shred of evidence or fair mindedness.
Sure it does. The less homos, the less possibilities.
Sheesh.
The logic most certainly works. You said it “wasn’t unreasonable” to believe the Cardinal is an abuser.
On the contrary, it is unreasonable. There is a 90+% chance he didn’t do anything. To say he did, without evidence, is unreasonable.
The #15 comment was for strac6.
I have no explanation how you got it and he did not. I am on a cell pho keyboard— as close as I can come for explaining an accidental post that missed its deserving destination.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.