Posted on 03/02/2019 11:59:46 AM PST by ebb tide
Cardinal George Pell was exactly where he should have been Wednesday night in Melbourne: in jail.
Let Henry David Thoreau explain: “Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison” (Civil Disobedience).
Now that the peculiar “suppression order” in Australia has been lifted, we are free to state what has been evident for several years now. The prosecution of Cardinal Pell has been a monstrous miscarriage of justice, a religious persecution carried out by prosecutorial means.
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
Ping
The anti-Christian sentiment on Australian media is palpable.
Very sad if Pell was a victim of sloppy Australian law enforcement. It would certainly seem his “trial” more closely resembled a “kangaroo court”. Sad for Pell and sad for decent Catholics who want the Church rid of predatory homosexual criminals masquerading as priests. The Church itself has not purged these criminals but instead has protected and even promoted them. Civil prosecutions and imprisonments are necessary.
Of course the NCR is going to say this. It’s taken decades for the chickens to come home to roost and roost they shall. When the first pedophile priest was protected rather than turned over to the police this end was inevitable. The prosecutions are only starting.
Note that not only were there no witnesses and no evidence, there was in fact no alleged crime, no accusation or allegation, no victim, and no accuser at the time the police started their "get Pell" project.
The police were literally advertising for anyone who knew or thought they knew, anyways, at any time, anything they could charge Pell with; and despite every kind of incentive (including suborning perjury from known criminals) they didn't get a nibble for the first couple years of dragnet-type, we'll-take-anything fishing expeditions.
Then they held a "closed" trial in which the credibility of the accuser --- reportedly a man with a criminal record ---was forbidden to be addressed or discussed!
For an act which it would not be physically possible for Pell (or anyone else) to have done.
BTW Pell, 77, just had knee replacement surgery and is now, because of Admin Seg, unable even to see a physical therapist. In a way I must say that being in Min Security might have been worse: by now, if he'd been in "population," I suppose he'd be dead.
This whole thing is a 'crowd free kick'
The innocent are being persecuted while the guilty walk free.
Prosecutions, where there is evidence are not the issue. Persecution without any evidence is the problem. Please don't be so cheerful about the innocent being jailed, you could be next.
This is the "good" NCR, the National Catholic Register. They have been on the side of the trth-tellers throughout all this mess. They are an indispensible part of the independent (meaning not USCCB-controlled) Catholic media, owned by EWTN.
EWTN carries "The World Over" with Raymond Arroyo and other members of the "Papal Posse' who have been calling out the Peronist Pope for his clerical malpractice: Francis and his whole circle of corner-cutters and cover-uppers. Their reporters and writers like Edward Conden and Edward Pentin have been among the first to give favorable coverage to the courageous whistle-blower Vigano.
I think most Freeper-type Catholics would see the "good" NCR as a credible news sources. They are not part of the Borg.
The choristers were in full view of the entire cathedral during the recession, so was the Cardinal. The choristers had a special rehearsal immediately after Mass. The choir master said they were there as were all of the other singers.
This was alleged to have happened right after Mass in the sacristy with no witnesses. Sacristies are very busy after Mass, the missal and the missal stand are brought back there from the altar as are the cruets and perhaps the candles and chalice. Other priests would be in there removing and hanging up their chasubles. Regular folk who wanted to speak to any of them are free to come in. The door to the hallway was open. This is normal in any church, I have seen it many times.
It was the Cardinal's habit to hang out in front and visit with people as they leave, again, this is normal behavior, it happens everywhere every Sunday.
They had to have used the OJ jury to get a 'conviction'.
Oops. My mistake.
It’s a pretty crazy thing that someone can be convicted on the testimony of a single individual with zero corroboration. And on the other side, there have been dozens of people who were in and around the cathedral sacristy during the relevant period who say it simply couldn’t have happened the way the alleged victim claims. Some have also pointed out the absurdity of the alleged victim’s claim that Pell whipped out his penis while wearing full, elaborate mass vestments during the supposed attack (the vestments have no opening). Even people who don’t like Pell or the Catholic Church have said this thing stinks to high heaven. The first jury voted 10-2 to acquit. Somehow, though, on retrial the prosecution found a jury willing to hang the guy based on nothing but an apparently irrefutable presumption of guilt.
There has been considerable criticism of the verdict in this case, and if the facts are as they have now been reported by various Catholic news sources are accurate, one could understand why supporters of Cardinal Pell would be upset.
What puzzles me, however, is how such a verdict could ever be reached in this particular case. If this had been a court trial (non-jury), it would at least be understandable (unfortunately). No one would really be surprised if a judge (Australian or otherwise) might be a participant in some nefarious plan to convict an innocent man––possibly as part of some religious prosecution effort.
But this was a jury trial––and it was a unanimous verdict! Is the suggestion that the entire jury was in on this plan? I’m aware of the fact that there were two previous trials in which he was not convicted, but that doesn’t answer the basic question: why would any sensible and responsible jury convict someone on the evidence that the NCR laid out? Are these actually the facts? The trial was secret, as I understand it, so how did NCR get those facts? Has anyone read and reported on the actual transcript of the trial?
Incompetency of counsel is always a possibility, but I doubt seriously that Cardinal Pell was represented by Australia’s version of the Public Defender. He likely had the choice of very able counsel who, must likely, represented him in the two earlier trials.
Cardinal Pell certainly has his loyal supporters from around the world; just as there are many anti-Catholics who would suspect that all Catholic clerics are guilty of homosexual abuse without having heard the first fact. But if reasonable men and women step back and consider what is being reported as an accurate version of the evidence presented, I do not understand at all why a fair jury convict him on these facts.
Right there with you. Something is off here.
Right there with you. Something is off here.
I tend to think the best and soundest part of any system of governance is the Jury Trial. Because normally, normal people act normal.
So this blows my mind as well. Mysterium Iniquitatis. The fickle crowd: We Want Barabbas! As for Jesus? Are you kidding? Crucify Him!
But the truth will come out in the end, whether here or hereafter.
Reportedly Pell is serene. He’s calling his his 23 hours a day of silence and solitude in Super Max “my Lenten retreat.”
We need to pray for him.
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.