Posted on 08/24/2019 8:49:34 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
By 2-to-1 vote, an Australian appellate court this week dismissed George Cardinal Pell’s appeal of his conviction on five counts of “historic” child sexual abuse. For Pell’s supporters, the decision can hardly be surprising. Given the way things had gone, a just outcome would have come as a shock.
Prosecutors accused Pell of surprising two choirboys who were guzzling communion wine in the sacristy of the Melbourne cathedral immediately after Mass one Sunday in 1996. The cardinal was charged with forcing the boys to fellate him while he was still vested in archbishop’s robes.
The allegations were utterly implausible — for several reasons well-established by the defense at trial.
The cathedral’s communion wine was kept locked in a safe, for starters, and Pell couldn’t have left the post-Mass proceedings without his absence being noticed; witnesses attested this never happened. Likewise, the choirboys couldn’t have left the post-Mass proceedings without their absence being noticed; witnesses attested this never happened, either.
Plus, the sacristy would have been bustling with activity. As witnesses testified, Pell was never alone in the cathedral while vested for Mass but always accompanied by at least one assistant. The security arrangements and layout of the cathedral, and the respective locations of the cardinal and the choir, would have made it impossible for the abuse to occur as alleged. Nor is it physically possible to expose one’s genitals while vested in an archbishop’s robes.
Before he died in 2014, one of the two boys denied that he had “ever been interfered with or touched up” — by anyone. All this led 10 out of 12 jurors at Pell’s first trial to vote to acquit. Yet at the retrial, the jurors ignored the enormous weight of exculpatory evidence and voted in December to convict him amid a climate of media-driven
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
The New York Post is not the Times. And what if Pell really is innocent?
What’s that saying about lying down with dogs ...?
“Rather than howls of outrage from members of the Catholic Church, this should elicit a pause of reflection as to how it came to pass that the organization has so little credibility...”
Yes. Should be cause for some serious and deep soul searching.
Oh please. Grow up. Find some guts.
First Bishop Wilson. Then Cardinal Pell. Set up by the unjust Australian justice system in Stalinist show trails complete with secret witnesses, frenzied media campaigns and secret police frame ups.
The only crimes Wilson and Pell committed is that they refused to bow down and offer a pinch of incense to Caesar by supporting the State religion of abortion, sodomy and climate change.
The day Pell was convicted some 500,000 Australian perverts turned out to celebrate gay pride in Sydney. No coincidence.
Now the fail and elderly Pell rots in solitary confinement in a max security prison. What is he going to do? Overpower and strangle his guards? Scale the wall. and sprint off into the night?
This is anti-Catholic persecution pure and simple.
The visual images resulting from your post is nauseating. The sickness such people have.
This Catholic may have been innocent, I am not aware of actual facts, so I do not know. What I do know is the Catholic faith has brought this on themselves by harboring fags and child molesters. In essence, since they have been a protected class, this is all done in the name of God and the Catholic Church. With this in mind, the Catholic Church is evil as Satan is within and protected.
I’m logging in to clear something up about Pell.
He was pot into the Vatican Bank by Pope Benedict XVI to work on cleaning it up. Francis ousted him from that. He’s knows too much. That’s why Pell. He needed to be silenced.
Yes. Should be cause for some serious and deep soul searching.
Read the facts of the case. A conservative Cardinal has been railroaded because he does not love dead babies, sodomy and all other sins as the liberals would have him.
Since this does not seem to bother you, I ask, who will be there to defend you when you are falsely accused? You can laugh and point all you want but the time may come when the vicious mob arrives for you.
Your blow-off attitude is precisely why the association between the Catholic Church and pederasty has stuck like napalm.
You don’t get the level of outrage a normal person should have over it - at all.
The jurors probably figured that if Pell didn’t do this particular crime, there’s no way he could have held that position as long as he did and not at the very minimum aided and abetted a whole lot of other such crimes.
Because the Catholic Church is run and operated by a global homo-pederasty ring. That is a reality that has nothing to do with anyone you may point the finger at in your clueless, blind self-righteousness.
Thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned reply.
I’m a Catholic and I’d say the Church is circling the bowl. A lot of what I hear from the alter is woke bullshit. add that to the cover up of pervert activity.
Except there were no jurors involved in this case level; it was 3 judges, 2 of whom ruled against the cardinal, one who said the evidence didn’t support the conviction and ruled for the cardinal. So who were the two judges who ruled against the cardinal and what are their backgrounds? I suspect pre-bias on their part.
It's a long story, but think of Cardinal Pell as the Donald Trump of Australia. You know how the Democrats are always trying to find something on him to impeach him with? That's how Australians have always acted toward Cardinal Pell because he's uncompromising when it comes to the Catholic faith (e.g., repeatedly refusing Communion to gay activists). He's been accused of this before, but always managed to flat-out prove he didn't do it (like for example, being out of the country for an entire year surrounding the supposed molestation and being able to prove that with his passport and credit card statements).
There's a ton more directly related to the trial, but I'll leave it at that. Even his enemies in the press who had been dogging him for years wrote editorials in the major papers lamenting that there was no way he could get a fair trial in Australia.
Your deep anti-Catholic bigotry prevents you from even reading the article. Pity, but not unusual.
The Aussie media and academe wanted him guilty long before the trial. Like the rest of Leftism in Western Civilization, they must remove, by any means, those who don’t worship government.
We are not making assumptions, we are basing our opinion on evidence and experience much as the well-reasoned opinion written by Justice Weinberg. If your would like to read about it -
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/pell-loses-appeal.4916229/page-325?post_id=40137172
I agree, Pell is innocent. I’ll go further, he was framed.
Yes, presuming someone is innocent is such a crazy idea. People are being judged by the media, courts and anti Catholic bigots based on identity. OJ Simpson: innocent. Because Black Victimhood. Pell: guilty. White male conservative Catholic. Kavanaugh: guilty. Catholic and White, conservative. Clinton: innocent. Prochoice Dumbocrap. Smollett: innocent. Black Victimhood privilege. Clarence Thomas: conservative Black, guilty of breathing air and betraying victims all over Earth. Cosby: guilty. Black conservative. Nicholas Sandmann: guilty. White Catholic. No smiling.
Go to a different parish and it is spelled 'altar'.
st joseph’s pomona CA cuirca 1960 three altar boys kicked off the team for drinking altar wine after mass.
I can think of various ways altar boys can get into the wine. The most obvious there is still some out on a table after servicer waiting for a priest to lock it up. People get carless over time till the SHTF.
Did the boys play gobble the rocket, i don’t know.
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.