Incredibly the conviction of Cardinal Pell has been affirmed on appeal by a 2-1 vote. The dissent of Justice Mark Weinberg, a former prosecutor, says it all about this farce:
One of the three Court of Appeal judges who heard George Pell’s appeal believes there is a “significant possibility” the cardinal did not commit the child sex crimes he’s in jail for and would have acquitted him.
Justice Mark Weinberg said he was not convinced by the victim’s evidence and could not exclude the possibility that some parts of the former choirboy’s testimony were “concocted”.
“From … the complainant’s evidence, it can be seen that there was ample material upon which his account could be legitimately subject to criticism. There were inconsistencies, and discrepancies, and a number of his answers simply made no sense,” Justice Weinberg wrote in his judgment released on Wednesday.
“An unusual feature of this case was that it depended entirely upon the complainant being accepted, beyond reasonable doubt, as a credible and reliable witness. Yet the jury were invited to accept his evidence without there being any independent support for it.”