What the 'Pell' is going on 'down under there'?

Sorry for the heavy-handed humour in my title but the Pell case in Australia is somewhat ominous - particularly if you are Australian!  For those unaware of the details, it concerns Cardinal Pell, an exceedingly high-ranked Australian Catholic priest who has been charged and found guilty of sexually assaulting two young boys in the sacristy of  St. Paul's cathedral in Melbourne in the 1990s.  Neither of the boys made any complaint at the time and in fact one of them died later from a drug overdose.  It was then, or shortly after, that the remaining boy, now an adult, made a complaint to the police.

Somewhat disturbing is the fact that:

In March 2013, more than a year before any complaints were filed [My emphases] against Pell, Victoria police began their “Operation Tethering,” soliciting any “information” regarding inappropriate contact with minors at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Melbourne. No crime had been reported. Requests for information were advertised in the local press.

In early 2017, the police told Pell that there were, as yet, no allegations. A few months later, they alerted him to forthcoming charges. Of his own volition, Pell travelled from the Vatican back to Australia to defend his innocence.

A trial took place in 2018 and on a majority verdict of 10-2, the Cardinal was found 'Not Guilty'.  Technically, that constituted a 'hung jury' and so the prosecution insisted on a second trial in which on that occasion he was found guilty.  Pell appealed against the result but the three appeal judges confirmed his guilt on a 2-1 basis.  The odd man/judge out, Justice Mark Weinberg, wrote this:

[From] the complainant’s evidence, it can be seen that there was ample material upon which his account could be legitimately subject to criticism. There were inconsistencies, and discrepancies, and a number of his answers simply made no sense. . . .

An unusual feature of this case was that it depended entirely upon the complainant being accepted, beyond reasonable doubt, as a credible and reliable witness. Yet the jury were invited to accept his evidence without there being any independent support for it.

In other words, it was one man's totally unsupported accusation against another.  To paraphrase 'old Bill': Something is rotten in the state of Australia!

 

 

 

Comments

[JK]

Maybe David "more than a year before any complaints were filed" it came out that this guy Alexander Downer who was known to be a Clinton associate ...

Background:

https://www.lifezette.com/2018/01/aussie-complaints-to-be-filed-with-fbi-on-clinton-foundations-dealing-down-under/

Had been found to be on the flight manifests along with Bill, of the Lolita Express (owned by Jeffery Epstein) and it went from there?

[Whitewall]

One vote condemned him and evidence was suspect? I know the priesthood was nearly doomed from the beginning by predator priests, but this 'trial' may be another route to doom. Justice or 'social justice'?

[Glesga]

Whitewall, guilt by association is a problem however the Catholic Church has done everything it could to cover up its indescretions and failed. What the Catholic Church has in its favour is history because people and the next generation forget until the next round of abuse raises its head. During the late fifties lots of child bones were exhumed in a local cemetery in a Convent near to my home. The story died very quickly. Such is the eternal spin from the RC Church.

[Michael F Adams]

Predatory priests? They were homosexual priests. Until a half-century ago, homosexuals were generally excluded from the priesthood, for reasons that seemed obvious then, the same reasons that I am not a leader of Girl Scouts/Girl Guides. No, I would not be diddling little girls, but you can't know that, so, we are just left out of those positions. The other problem was that the RC bishops had access to much more money which was paid out to hush up potential scandals. In the USA, the Anglican bishops have a fund, limited to about fifty K. They don't have to account for that money, so they can give anonymous aid to people in need, but they don't have the power that comes with larger sums of money.

The paederastic priests were transferred to other posts, and sent for counseling/psychotherapy, as was recommended at the time, the 1950's and sixties. It was all so humane, don't you know, so kind.

I have met several Continental Europeans whose families were former Catholics, until a man in the family was sexually abused by the priests. The Devil used his wiles to destroy the church from within. He still has devotees who advocate for ordaining homosexual men, for reasons of charity and broad mindedness, of course.

The vulnerability of men to these temptations, heterosexual and homosexual, is one argument that I find convincing for the ordination of women to the priesthood. Yes, women get into some pretty kinky stuff, but predation is less common among women than among men.

The First Things piece and its comments made a pretty good case that Cardinal Pell was framed, by anti-Catholic journalists and some very unsavory characters within the Vatican bureaucracy. The Victoria Police actually advertised for accusers, many of whom came forward and were rejected as not credible. So, yes, sometimes priests take advantage of their position, as do teachers and uncles, and do generational harm to individuals and families. What I can't let go is the fact that the organizational/institutional safeguards have been attacked, by the very same people who now raise a hue and cry when the inevitable happens, or can even be alleged. Our own Vice President has been reviled in some media quarters for following the simple rules of safety.

I am compelled to believe that the attacks on the safeguards and the accusations come from the same quarters, from people who otherwise make no secret of their desire to destroy churches, Boy Scouts, and even families.

[AussieD]

As a Jew I have no sectarian interest in whether the Catholic
Church does or does not harbour paedophile priests. What I do have is a suspicion that Cardinal Pell has been made the scapegoat for the sins, real or imagined, of others and that his trial was not far short of a Kangaroo Court.

I followed the matter closely and on what was published of the evidence given caused me great doubt as to whether the allegation made against the Cardinal was feasible. There has been much written on it down here.

He appealed his conviction and the Court of Appeal found 2 to 1 that the conviction was sound. What was revealing was the 215 page analysis of the evidence by Justice Weinberg, an experienced jurist in the criminal sphere, who found that the evidence given did not reasonably support the conviction. Indeed the opinions of the other two judges seemed to be that they just accepted the evidence of the "victim" as being credible despite the mountain of contradictory material.

For a reasonable analysis, and their are many of them, see

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/08/the-pell-outrage-vibe-trumps-veracity/

The next step is for the Cardinal's team to make leave to appeal to the High Court.

For the sake of justice in this country I hope the High Court sees fit to hear the matter.

[Whitewall]

AussieD,
that was a thorough write up. The motives of the two judges sound suspect to me and they knew their opinion would meet a "backstop" one way or the other with the higher court. Meantime, Cardinal Pell lingers in Purgatory, I believe would be a proper Catholic phrase.