Archive for the 'Cardinal George Pell' Category

Pell verdict – manifestly unsafe.

Decades ago a dingo as they can and do, killed a baby.  Yet that didn’t stop any madness and let the parents grieve, it only started the next level of madness!   It did so mostly because two church cranks were involved that people didn’t like the look of!  Nothing made sense in that crazy case and I think we have a similar situation underway with high flying Cardinal Pell.

No one – that counted – believed the mother and the father.  Pure madness broke out and infected all levels of the police and judicial system with the mass media driving the hysteria.  Lindy and Pastor Michael were convicted and thus began a merry-go-round of shame for the Australian justice system. Many ordinary Australians came to believe that the baby’s name, Azaria, meant sacrifice in the desert…

Cardinal Pell has also been convicted of what amounts to a highly improbable, even totally insane attack – almost in public view, in 1996. The story is bizarre and highly unbelievable. In fact, as politically incorrect as this may be, I call bullshit!

That same form of sacrifice in the desert hysteria from all those years ago has driven the Pell case and hyperdrive hysteria is what we are seeing as the conviction became public. Pell could not get a fair trial and the Victorian police appear to have been caught up in some kind of vendetta – actually advertising for complaints.

For all manner of reasons I think Pell is a sick creep, BUT  the evidence to convict on the 5 charges just doesn’t add up to beyond a reasonable doubt as I think Frank Brennan and George Weigel demonstrate.  And here is a partial timeline from a US report.

This case of two children being vilely molested was never tried when there was another person alive to swear that such an event happened.  ‘April 8, 2014: One of the molested choirboys dies of a heroin overdose without alleging the crime and having told his mother he had not been abused.’   That is convienient for our one actual complainant and I would bet that our complainant knew he was dead.  After all they were teen friends that had sleepovers (yet apparently never again talked about one of them being orally raped out of the blue in front of the other).  Gimme a break.  The Australian culture in 1996 was well aware about this type of molestation stuff.  Neither came forward when they could have relied on the other to bring this child rapist to book.  Only much later and after one has no role can he be brought along as another ‘witness’.  But the inclusion now only harms the credibility of the complaint because yet another adult male let a child rapist get away with it for years rather than get backed up and deal with the monster!  By the time they were 23 the rapist had been free for 10 years and perhaps raping children after every mass.  Neither man thought they had any duty to protect other choir boys and to get this scoundrel put away.  The pair carried on with life after the witnessed rape and did nothing at all about it till 8 years later and the only other witness dies.

I suspect, as a result of watching a bloke on a current affairs program….

Probably this  ‘July 27, 2016: Pell issues a statement denying sexual abuse allegations made on an Australian Broadcasting Corp. current affairs program.’

…who told of an incident at a pool in Ballarat in 1970s in a very convincing manner.  That Pell has been up to no good way back then.  But clearly nothing that could convict has been found and put before a court over this.  The prosecution kept that case going and only now after it has helped do damage have they dropped it.  This is a typical stunt.  Those now dropped charges for that – or some similar incident created a background of suspicion and no doubt hatred for some.

Pell was thereafter up against it until his defence team finally dropped the ball in the second trial.

‘June 18, 2015: The surviving choirboy gives his first statement to Sano detectives outlining criminal allegations against Pell.’

This date has to be checked because it was in…

‘Dec. 23, 2015: Sano makes a public appeal for information relating to allegations of sexual offences in Melbourne while Pell was archbishop from 1996 until 2001.’

Weigel I think, says he came forward from that advert?  Either way it’s only actually one person who gave evidence.

This single ex Choir boy’s evidence was never brought up till at least 19 years after the ‘events’.   Two men had grown into middle age without a thought of protecting any other 13 year old choir boys!!

This complaint arose in the publicity for the police general inquiry ‘Sano’ or was advertised for.  No other stuff against him has stood up fit for trial.  All the Sano work was done in the context of an hysterical public mood against Pell and the entire Catholic Church.  The stuff that was brought to the magistrates was almost totally thrown out but not this junk.  And just this that apparently even the magistrate admitted she could not convict with resulted in this conviction.

Frankly ‘we were just swilling the wine when he came along and stuck his hard one in my mouth and so we went back to choir practice and never spoke of it again’  has to be doubted.  I am not surprised that the complainant has now disappeared and wants to be left alone.  I’m not surprised that the first jury went 10-2 FOR an acquittal.

I am surprised by the unanimous second jury!  But court decisions tend to go all over the place in my experience.  The turn around is not astounding if people recall the great film ’12 angry men’.  A leader in a jury can and will often lead the rest.  But the evidence does not hold holy water.

The assertions are so improbable that Pell was entitled to scoff at them in his police interview.  The evidence was not treated with any scepticism by the police and procecutors but for a functioning jury evidence must be beyond a reasonable doubt and Pell is supposed to be the beneficiary of any doubt.  Proof beyond a reasonable doubt?  No.

The vile pseudoleft, red necks, greenie types and open rightists could not however care less about guilt or inocence.  The frenzy at the time of his trial is like what came down on poor old Lindy C all over again.  They are all now howling like the pack of dingoes they are.

In this case Pell is also a dingo but not all dingoes got to eat the baby!  This conviction had to have been appealed.

To protect the likes of Lindy and the rest of us, any unsafe verdict must not stand despite any gut wish to cheer on a conviction for Pell!  His apeal ought to be upheld and this Dingo ought to be set free to scurry off back to Rome.