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.