Also one thing I saw Bolt had claimed about why Pell couldn’t have done it was that he hadn’t a record of proven convictions like most pedos did. I guess Bolt must assume they were born with those records. No pedo ever had a proven conviction before their first one, I’d be pretty sure!
Why was he convicted of the crime of raping two children? The answer to that question lies in the question itself. Don’t create straw man arguments, @tom.
If Pell had been questioned in the witness box about a protection racket, I imagine there would have been an immediate objection and the judge would have instructed the jury to disregard the question on grounds of irrelevancy to the charge.
You’re right. It’s so obviously not a permissible question that the prosecutor wouldn’t even attempt to ask it.
I don’t know why Pell didn’t give evidence. On the face of it, it was an error of judgment.
nope. That’s the complete opposite of what I’m saying.
The Catholic Church and its followers will be expecting to get a Catholic Judge, if the appeal is successful.
The jury system is designed to have a group of people from different backgrounds, to counter the biases… that being one judge making a decision.
The Catholic Church has their fingers controlling the Government, controlling the mainstream media… and who’s to say if they have influence within the legal system.
Catholics are furious that they weren’t able to influence the Jury on the Pell Case. Which is why they are trying so hard to tarnish the Jury system.
News for you- it was a difficult trial and the RCC did the cops no favours and two boys were raped, which makes it a real crime.
The Victorian prosecutors should be applauded for conducting an exemplary prosecution, and hand the blueprint over to all of the other State DPP’s so that more like Pell end up in the pen.
Most guilty persons avoid the stand, Shelton.
Whether you think he did it or not, the defence must have thought his response to cross examination would not look good.
As I understand it, three judges will decide on the leave to appeal. I have enough faith in judges that they would would recuse themselves if their religious views /view of any kind of a religious denomination might be in conflict. The charges would probably be sins in any mainstream religion.
. It is just as ridiculous to claim that Pell might not get a fair hearing because the judges aren’t Catholic.
Why should Pell be accorded a different status than any other person accused of a crime.?
Maybe in spite of all his grievous sins, Pell may have told the truth under oath. Prosecutors would have been very eager to question him on the stand, and I am not so sure that questions about the RCC role in handling child abuse cases would have been stopped. Now I know that Australian Law is very different to that of the USA, but in similar cases in Boston, these questions were asked, as it was seen that the “protection” afforded RCC Clergy was a motivation to cause harm.
The press isn’t going to wait to release all the dirt on this scum bucket.
Why wouldn’t they be waiting or trying to get a sympathetic Catholic Judge to hear Pell’s appeal.
Prisoners and others facing court do it all the time. Keep adjourning the case for as long as it can legally be done until they get a friendly ear. Favours for favours - the boys club has far reaching tentacles. I’m expecting “the try on” but I hope it doesn’t happen.
Let’s see if the “stick” is on.
The date for leave of appeal hearing is reportedly set at 3 June , after which- if granted- the appeal would immediately follow
Sentencing date is 13 March. Any chance of a non custodial sentence?
Not sure if you got the context right with that bit; Pell’s status now is no longer an accused person.
He’s a criminal.
Surely you jest
That’s really only effective in a magistrates court. Get in front of a real judge and who it is doesn’t really matter.
I am not making definitive judgements,and I am not saying he isnt guilty, the point is witch hunts
are never good and essendon supporters should know that. The church is happy to keep it to a few bad
eggs and leave those who intimdated victims and protected paedophiles out of the spotlight.
The point being made is the whole institution needs to be examined as does non secular education
and they dont want to do that, so the institution that is wrotten to the core remains intact. The past
needs to be addressed but the future of children is just as important
Being found guilty in a court of law is the complete opposite of a witch hunt.
…whilst being protected by literally the richest and most powerful non-govt body in the world, with numerous politicians sticking up for you, and various commentators on radio, TV and in all the papers all decrying the investigation and proclaiming your innocence.
“Witch hunt”? ■■■■ off