So do they release the evidence that the jury heard after the appeal?
I don’t think so, No.
The victim is entitled to complete anonymity if they wish it.
How many people believed Jackson was not a pedo ? How did he get away with it in his lifetime ?
His own sister outed him in 1993. How many people believed her ? Not many, it would seem.
Its just as well Pell lived long enough for his victims to get to an age where they felt strong enough to out him.
If Jackson had lived to 60, as he would be now, surely in the current climate he would finally be exposed and convicted.
From what I can tell it’s mostly only the people that benefit from him being a mega star. I reckon his old man had a significant impact on him, a negative impact.
According to a 28 February article in Quadrant by James Franklin, the main evidence is in Milligan’s book. How does he know that if he has not had access to the transcripts?
You are assuming good faith on his part. That is a mistake.
It’s a matter of record that Milligan interviewed the main witness and that the conversations she had with him ended up contributing to her book. I’m sure Franklin knows that too.
But Milligan AFAIK wrote and published the book BEFORE the victim was subject to 12 hours (or whatever) or cross-examination by Richter. And Milligan wasn’t allowed into that cross-examination any more than anyone else was.
Franklin is trying to make the false logical connection that Milligan interviewed the victim and published the results, plus the court interviewed the victim and the jury heard the results, therefore one can read Milligan’s book and understand what the jury heard. It’s bad logic and a thoroughly bad-faith argument. Not every question asked by Richter and the prosecutor of the victim would have also been asked by Milligan, and not all the details that the victim gave Milligan would have ended up in the book.
I’m a little disappointed in the Catholic church on this one - the Jesuits in particular are renowned for their reasoning and debating skills, but a child could see through the obfuscating crap they’re spouting at the moment.
What makes you think that I made the assumption that you have attributed to me?
That definitely happened. I remember getting ■■■■■■ off about it at the time.
Does it even matter who is insisted on expanding the scope of the royal commission? It’s hardly some line in the sand moment that changed the public and political discourse.
“I reckon we should expand this thing beyond the catholic church” “Yeah good idea”.
It seems like an irrelevant detail to get stuck on at this point in time
There’s a film that covers this whole spectrum at the current French Film Festival. Called By the Grace of God.
At one point, in court, the bishop, or church spokesman, says “by the grace of God, the statute of limitations has passed and this can go no further”.
The prosecutor says “I hope you realise that that phrase means ‘fortunately’”.
Hmmm…yes…or in this case, oui.
Sentencing scheduled for 10 a.m.
News cameras allowed in court to film the handing down of Judge Kidd’s sentence.
No bail application listed (as yet) for the period post-sentencing & when the appeal is heard in June.
As earlier stated, I reckon 3-4 years will be given (but hope it is longer than that). Fck you, Pell.
Thought I heard max 10 yrs each offence, guilty on several. You’d hope longer than 3-4, but you’re probably right.
This is a good summary as to why some people simply cannot bring themsleves to believe something they don’t want to accept could be true.
Had to have a sardonic laugh at the Brooklyn Diocese ‘demanding’ an apology from SNL for comparing R Kelly fans to Catholics.
Called Catholics “victimised.”
Justice Kidd giving some context for the sentence. Noting Pell is being sentenced for the crimes he has been convicted of not more broadly for the shortcomings of the Church.
Now talking about the facts - on the account of victim J who gave evidence.
Not for me to second guess the verdict - i am, by law, required to act upon the account of victim J’s account.
Listening to the facts.
Farking poor kids.
Judge Kidd: “The term of imprisonment I am about to impose carries a distinct possibility you may not live to be released from prison.”
“Facing prison at your age in your circumstances must be an awful state of affairs for you.”
Imagine living your whole life facing an “awful state of affairs” daily because of the abuse somebody chose to inflict on you.
Rot in jail.
Wish he would hurry up and get to the sentence.
Judge Kidd: “die in a gutter, ■■■■”