Cardinal Pell

[cods]

He was charged, convicted, sentenced, appealed...appeal thrown out...
Game set and match....next please.....

so was Lindy Chamberlain from memory..

[cods]

Personally, I don't agree with this decision but a High Court appeal is on the table and I hope they go that route. Probably won't though.

I see Pell being used as a scapegoat for the Church and even though he may have been guilty of cover ups I don't believe he was guilty of what he was charged with. Nor do I believe the evidence was anything but weak, sketchy and dodgy.

I wonder what the legal costs are?
I guess over$1 million?

thats just the tip I would say.....his supporters are paying for him....

our system is broke .. that trial reminded me of OJs trial...

no matter what is claimed I cannot for the life of me see what Mr A claims happening.....

[Black Orchid]

Weinberg 'quite unconvinced' by victim's evidence
A jury found Pell guilty of five offences including sexual penetration of a child, based on the testimony of one of the former choirboys, who is known only as Witness J.

To overturn the convictions, the judges needed to be convinced the jury ought to have experienced a reasonable doubt as to Pell's guilt.

During the appeal, Pell's lawyer Bret Walker SC argued there were 13 "obstacles" that made the offending "impossible". Chief Justice Ferguson said she and Justice Maxwell rejected all 13.

The prosecution argued the victim was a "witness of truth", which both Chief Justice Ferguson and Justice Maxwell affirmed in their decision.

But Justice Weinberg said he was "quite unconvinced" by the argument the victim's evidence was so compelling he and the jury should have put aside all other factors suggesting his account was unreliable.

Justice Weinberg's remarks took up more than half of the court's 325-page decision.

He said the complainant "seemed almost to 'clutch at straws'" when he was questioned to minimise inconsistencies in the evidence.

"Having had regard to the whole of the evidence led at trial, and having deliberated long and hard over this matter, I find myself in the position of having a genuine doubt as to [Pell's] guilt," he wrote.

"My doubt is a doubt which the jury ought also to have had," he said.

President of the Law Institute of Victoria, Stuart Webb, said it was unusual for the bench to disagree in such a case.

"It's a fascinating decision that eminent minds can disagree on what is reasonable for a jury to determine," he said.

"That two very senior judges have decided that the jury was correct … and one judge can decide no, that's not what he believes and there was grounds for reasonable doubt."

Justice Weinberg said he was "troubled" to find himself disagreeing with his colleagues, whose opinions he respected.

"That has caused me to reflect even more carefully upon the proper outcome of this application. Having done so, however, I cannot, in good conscience, do other than to maintain my dissent."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-22/ ... l/11437306

[Neferti]

Some idiot MSM are mentioning the Pope getting involved and stripping Pell of whatever.

Apart from the reputation, won't Pell still get into Heaven when he dies? I thought that getting into Heaven was decided by earthlings for those who BELIEVED.

I have no intention of going there, the place is full of all sorts of creeps who suddenly got religious in Gaol.

[Bobby]

Personally, I don't agree with this decision but a High Court appeal is on the table and I hope they go that route. Probably won't though.

I see Pell being used as a scapegoat for the Church and even though he may have been guilty of cover ups I don't believe he was guilty of what he was charged with. Nor do I believe the evidence was anything but weak, sketchy and dodgy.

I wonder what the legal costs are?
I guess over$1 million?

thats just the tip I would say.....his supporters are paying for him....

our system is broke .. that trial reminded me of OJs trial...

no matter what is claimed I cannot for the life of me see what Mr A claims happening.....

When I find out I'll post the figure.

[cods]

I would imagine Mr A isnt expected to pay anything...but his legals will be expecting to be paid.

its a huge mess I am thinking...we have people cheering outside the court rooms

that was sad as far as I am concerned he wasnt on trial for molesting them....

I think it looks very much like a witch hunt and we should hang our heads in shame...

we rolled our eyes at the OJ debacle..and here we are with our very own eye rolling saga that is also going worldwide..

why dont we just burn him at the stake..think of the money saved.!

[Black Orchid]

Looks like Pell is taking it to the High Court. Good move imo.

[Bobby]

Looks like Pell is taking it to the High Court. Good move imo.

The High Court may refuse to hear the case.

[Black Orchid]

Lawyers for disgraced Australian Cardinal George Pell have lodged an appeal with the High Court over his conviction of historical child sex offences.

Pell was found guilty last year of abusing two choir boys at St Patrick's Cathedral in 1996 shortly after he had become Melbourne's Catholic Archbishop.

The high court confirmed today it had received the application through its Melbourne registry, with Pell's lawyers filing on the 11th hour.

Tomorrow was the cut-off date.

The matter will be considered by a panel and either dismissed or the parties will be called to a brief hearing for further consideration.

If the high court chooses to hear the appeal it will be listed in Canberra before five (or possibly seven) justices.
This marks Pell's last appellate avenue following his failed Court of Appeal bid, when the bench last month upheld the jury's guilty verdict by a 2-1 majority.

Any verdict from the high court will be final and not subject to appeal.
If an appeal is accepted by the high court, the court may quash the decision of the Court of Appeal, or uphold it, or uphold only parts of it.

This is it for Pell.
https://www.9news.com.au/national/georg ... d9443c7a3c

[Black Orchid]

A decision on whether disgraced cardinal George Pell can appeal his child sexual abuse conviction in the High Court will be made this week.

The court will announce its decision at 9.30am on Wednesday in Canberra.

Pell, 78, was found guilty by a jury of the rape of a 13-year-old choirboy and sexual assault of another at St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne in 1996 but Australia's most senior Catholic has always denied any wrongdoing.

If the leave is granted, the jailed cardinal's lawyers will need to lodge a formal appeal.

More at ... https://www.9news.com.au/national/georg ... bc0182be29