Blog powered by Typepad

« A 'warmish' welcome back to the 'newish' Labour party | Main | Starting a war is so easy but finishing it is rather more tricky »

Tuesday, 07 April 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

With all the charges floating around about priests, some of them had to be false. Glad to see an innocent man exonerated. I want my Church to be able to continue to lead us, and that means defending priests when innocent as well as protecting the parishes from them when guilty. It's in the latter thing that the bishops have failed.

A discussion of America's priests and their problems is here.

I know less about Australia's problems or politics than you do, so the link above may have nothing to do with them.

The arguments will go on forever. Pell is an arrogant man and not in the least humble but I am not CONVINCED of his guilt in this instance.

I obviously have no skin in the game [sorry. old Jewish joke] but living in Oz and particularly Melbourne it has been impossible to avoid the protracted saga of the trial of Cardinal Pell and so rather than try futilely to avoid it I decided to do an objective analysis of the case presented against him.

To say that our State police failed in their basic duty to present a fair and unbiased brief against the Cardinal would be the understatement of the decade.

Our State Court of Appeal upheld a conviction after a second trial [2 to 1] with the dissenting Justice doing a forensic demolition of the Crown case against Pell. The other two opinions defy logic.

This demolition has now been endorsed by the highest court in Oz - the High Court of Australia - in a 7-0 judgement.

Whatever one may think of the Catholic Church in general or Cardinal Pell in particular on the weight of material available he was not and could not be guilty of what was alleged against him.

Institutional child abuse can never be excused but the conviction and jailing of an innocent man for the sins of an organization cannot, in a civilized society, ever be tolerated.

AussieD, Andra, either of you perhaps ever heard of 'our' McMartin Preschool Abuse Trials? (I'm *pretty sure pre-school in the instance meaning children of working parents which children were beyond infancy yet too young to've lost their absolute faith in their "close-elders.")

"They're putting on witnesses who they know are lying. They concealed exonerating evidence. Don't we have enough criminal conduct by the prosecutors to put them behind bars?"

"It doesn't work that way," the lawyer laughed. "The law is just for the little people. When we break the rules we go to jail. When they break the rules they go to lunch...."

"But what about the law?" the woman gasped. "What about the Constitution?"

"I'm afraid that's just one of those nice, comforting fantasies like the tooth fairy. There are two classes of people. Those who hold power and those who do not. And in any dispute the guys who hold power will decide which way it's going to go....I hope you understand that this is not about child abuse, just as McCarthyism was not about Communists."

--- Eberle, Paul and Shirley. The Abuse of Innocence: The McMartin Preschool Trial ( 1993) (reporting a discussion between a friend of the Buckeys and a defense lawyer)"

I of course 'having no skin in Australia's game' a'tall and in any case just wonder if perhaps what's divided y'all has come before here.

The Catholic Church will always claim there is institutional bias against them to ward off investigation however the film Spotlight showed the worldwide abuse that has probably been going on for centuries. The pervert priests will lie low for a while until complacency sets in again.

There is a very good 2part series on Australia's ABC Iview called Revelation which tells us a whole lot about the catholic church and the cover-up.

The comments to this entry are closed.