PopeWatch: Cardinal Pell

Share on facebook
Facebook 0
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn 0
Share on reddit
Reddit 0
Share on delicious
Delicious
Share on digg
Digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon 0
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

Excerpts from the police interview of Cardinal Pell.  It astonishes me that charges were brought, that a Judge allowed this to go to trial and that a Jury convicted.  One of the accusers recanted before his death.  The idea that an Archbishop is molesting choir boys in a sacristy after Mass could only be believed by people who have never been in a sacristy after Mass, which is usually a whirlwind of activity with people constantly coming and going, especially parents of altar servers and choir boys picking them up.

Phil Lawler at Catholic Culture notes how weak the case against Pell was:

 

  • He claimed that he and the other alleged victims, who were choirboys, slipped away from the choir. But nobody noticed that they were missing, and other choir members find it unlikely that they could have stolen away unnoticed.
  • He claimed that they were in the sacristy drinking wine. He said it was red wine. But the only altar wine in use was white.
  • He claimed that the cardinal came into the sacristy alone and caught them. But the cardinal was invariably outside the cathedral after ceremonies, greeting the congregation. When he did return to the sacristy, he was always—always—accompanied by other priests.
  • He claimed that the cardinal parted his vestments and molested them. But the vestments that the cardinal wore did not allow for the movement the alleged victim described.

How did an Australian court reach a conviction, without any evidence, on the basis of such shaky testimony? It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that “the fix was in”—that this was the genteel Australian equivalent of the “show trials” that resulted in convictions for other prelates who were unpopular with Communist regimes in the 1950s.

Go here to read the rest.

 

This is a verdict that rests solely on anti-Catholic bigotry and mass hysteria.  The people of Australia should be ashamed of this farcial miscarriage of justice.  The Vatican, and all Catholics, need to rally to the support of this wrongly convicted man.

More to explorer

Because, Tolerance

The Tolerance Taliban have been active:   At least a dozen Confederate statues have been defaced around the South so far in

Saint of the Day Quote: Blessed John Fenwick

I Suppose you expect I should say something, as to the Crimes I am condemn∣ed for, and either acknowledge my Guilt, or

PopeWatch: Amazon Catholic Church

Julia Meloni at One Peter 5 takes a look at an all too possible future:   It’s 2029, and, by necessity, you’re

11 Comments

  1. It is worth adding that the first jury found cardinal Pell GUILTY (10-2) … but THE SECOND JURY WERE UNAMINOUS.

    Multiple child abuse cases against George Pell.

  2. I would like to know what evidence exists because regardless of guilt how can you possibly convict a person of a crime based on the evidence of one person’s testimony?

  3. Additionally the accuser claimed he “parted” the vestments. They are of the pull over type. The Master of Ceremonies swore under oath he was with Pell the entire time after mass, this was disregarded. One cannot imagine a judicial panel upholding this but as you stated, how on earth did it even got to trial?

  4. One cannot imagine a judicial panel upholding this but as you stated, how on earth did it even got to trial?

    Well, you might review the utterances of Rod Dreher and Leon Podles over the years. One fancies he’s a reporter and the other was an FBI agent for about 20 years. Neither one gave any hint of how a disinterested observer was supposed to parse accusations against clergymen lodged 15 years after the fact, but both could be very vehemently opinionated on specific cases. Dreher bought into some of the shadiest accusations you could imagine (Elizabeth McKenna in Sault Ste. Marie, Aretakis / Zalay in Albany).

  5. The people of Australia who are Catholic bigots are delighted by the outcome. This includes the entire MSM. This is not some new development. There has been a relentless attack on the Church and on Pell for over a decade in Australia. Cardinal Pell was last accused a few years back of assaulting a boy in a pool a decades ago and that was quickly thrown out of court. But, the people who despise the Church have made it their mission to bring our good Cardinal down. Being the Finance director of the Vatican and cleaning out that filth, the instigator of Catholic educator reform in Catholic schools over he past 20 years, the person who established the Melbourne response which compensated sexual abuse victims and acknowledged the hurt suffered by those victims and a constant faithful servant of God- It was a perfect storm. Pell VOLUNTARILY chose to stand down from his important position at the Vatican, VOLUNTARILY chose to come back you Australia to clear his name. But the witch hunt was relentless. A campaign which ended with a trial by a prejudice jury for a high profile case along with a flaky anonymous testimony from the “victim”, and second hand testimony from the parents of the other now deceased “victim” (who denied when asked by his mother before he died if he was ever touched)- both men remain anonymous. Maybe these men were abused. Only God knows. But it wasn’t Pell, judging by their testimony of the events which occurred and how and when they occurred. Basically if after the appeal, Cardinal Pell is convicted, then ANYONE at any time hence forward can end up with the same fate. Nobody is safe in our dissappointing legal system. And it’s sad to imagine that it is only going to get harder for our children to practice their Faith in the future.

  6. Archbishop Philip Wilson was convicted in May 2018 by an Australian jury for not reporting an abuse case from 1973. An appellate court in December 2018 overturned the verdict and stated that there was simply no evidence that he had done the crime. Three weeks later the prosecutors said they would not appeal because they could not prevail.

    That tells you all you need to know about modern Australian justice as applied to Church leaders.

Comments are closed.