Posted on 12/12/2018 9:04:07 AM PST by Red Badger
Full Title:
The incredible national news story that we CAN'T report: A very high-profile figure has been convicted of a serious crime - here's why you're not allowed to read about it
================================================================
A suppression order protected the conviction of a high-profile figure this week
The person was convicted on Tuesday and will be remanded in February
Victorian County Court has ordered a gag on the person's identity and charges
The state accounts for more than half of suppression orders doled out in country
===================================================================
A very high-profile figure has been convicted of a serious crime this week, but suppression orders have prevented Australian media outlets including Daily Mail Australia from reporting on it.
The well-known person has attracted significant media attention throughout their trial, and was only convicted on Tuesday.
The conviction came on the second attempt, after a jury could not decide a verdict during an earlier trial.
The Victorian County Court first brought in the suppression order after the first trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Where else would it be a criminal offense for his boomerang to not come back?
Several, in fact. From my Ozstraylion cutie, I learned the Oz term *Technicolour Yawn* and I've used it ever since.
AKA *A slab of blue tinnies.*
Be nice. It’s a small world, after all.
Howzit, China!
Cardinal George Pell.
The child molester will now go to prison! Sweet!!!
He changed to some other denomination?.............
I do not believe he is guilty. This article gives some insight into the accusations.
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2017/07/the-case-against-cardinal-pell
Forgot about Jacko, he was awesome!
From your article:
>>> Pell responded to the prosecutors’ questions with a frankness that bordered on heedlessness. He admitted that in 1974, when a boy spoke vaguely to him of the pedophilic behavior of a Fr. Dowlan of the Christian Brothers, Pell did not inquire further or intervene. Asked by the prosecutor to explain his inaction, Pell was blunt: The boy “wasn’t asking me to do anything about it.” <<<
Sorry, by his own words he was NOT innocent.
Inaction in the face of evil is complicity.
How do those words indicate guilt of molesting boys? It shows he handled a complaint poorly- this when “Pell was a junior priest with no authority in disciplinary matters, nor any formal charge to inquire into pedophilic infractions.”
You might try reading the whole article. Poor judgment and going by the laws of the time regarding reporting of allegations is not proof of guilt.
Twelve people heard the evidence that Pell was directly involved in child molestation at the cathedral in Melbourne and they were sufficiently convinced of his guilt that they found him guilty.
Next year in the spring he’ll be tried for the offences that are alleged to have taken place at a swimming pool in Ballarat. Maybe that jury may see things differently.
In any case he’s been found guilty and is now a convicted sex offender.
Oz term?
Huh.
We used that term in college.
In the United States.
In the early 1980s.
He plans to appeal. I find it doubtful that an impartial jury with no exposure to the accusations could be found. There was a great deal of publicity and guilt was assumed by the media from the git-go. An earlier trial on the same case resulted in a hung jury. You can be sure the prosecution jury shopped very carefully after that.
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.