(Cardinal) George Pell could overturn conviction, legal experts tip

Herald Sun ^ | 12th March 2020 | Shannon Deery

[naturalman1975]

George Pell looks set to successfully overturn his convictions for child sexual abuse, legal experts have tipped.

The High Court of Australia on Thursday reserved its decision following the second and final day of the former Vatican treasurer’s ­appeal, during which prosecutors were ­accused of changing their case on the run.

Lawyers in attendance later agreed the appeal, against a majority decision in the Victorian Court of Appeal which upheld his convictions, was likely to succeed.

University of Melbourne law professor Jeremy Gans, who was in Canberra for the hearing, said yesterday was a “very good day for Pell”.

“There’s clearly a chance of an acquittal arising out of this appeal,” Prof Gans said. “However, even if Pell succeeds, it may not mean the end of his legal saga that has now included a committal, two trials and two appeals.”

It was a torrid day for Victorian Director of Public Prosecutions, Kerri Judd QC.

She ­argued that if the court found an error in the Court of ­Appeal’s judgment upholding the convictions for sex ­assaults on two choirboys, it should revisit all the evidence itself or send the matter back to the Court of Appeal.

Bret Walker SC, for Pell, said either option would be an injustice because of delay. Yesterday he urged the court to finalise the matter.

In a stunning attack, Mr Walker ­accused the DPP of “prosecutorial improvisation” and ­argued she was changing the parameters of the case on the run. That included changing the prosecution’s stance on key evidence.

[naturalman1975]

I am not a lawyer - I did study some law at university, but nowhere near a full law degree - but this does seem extraordinary to me. All through this trial process, the prosecution has taken the position that the alleged main incident of abuse must have occurred in a five- or six- minute period immediately after a High Mass at the Cathedral, and has generally conceded that if this time frame did not hold up, the Cardinal could not be guilty. Now on the second and last day of Cardinal Pell’s final chance at appeal, the Director of Public Prosecution - in American terms, I think this is similar to a District Attorney - has argued that maybe that time frame could have been longer, so demonstrating that Cardinal Pell was likely elsewhere at the time (on the Cathedral steps talking to people who had attended the Mass) wouldn’t actually show he was not guilty - this seems an extraordinary step so late in proceedings.

I have said from the start - as have many others - that the timeline and suggestion that Cardinal Pell could have sexually molested two boys in the open Sacristy of the Cathedral immediately after Mass seemed ludicrous - anybody who has knowledge of such a Mass and a place would understand that room would have been full of Altar Servers, co-celebrants, going in and out at that time - added to that that the length of the procession from the Altar to the Sacristy would have taken at a minimum most of that time, even if the Cardinal (then the brand new Archbishop of Melbourne, celebrating his first or second High Mass at the Cathedral - these are the only possible dates things could have happened according to the Prosecution) hadn’t stopped to talk to parishoners on the steps as was normal practice.

My biggest concern right now is that the High Court has become increasingly activist in recent years and seems to make more and more decisions from a political perspective than ever before.

But from what I have been reading, they do seem to have given Cardinal Pell's case a fair hearing - which I do not believe was possible at his trial - given the horrendous prejudice against him in the community after decades of vilification by the left wing press, and a trial that was held in secret.

[Incorrigible]

Such a miscarriage of justice from the start. Terrible that Cardinal Pell had to endure this ordeal.