Cardinal Pell exonerated on Appeal!

[EMNofSeattle]

This case was a total disgrace, the allegations against Pell were highly questionable and there was obviously sufficient reasonable doubt to acquit him.

Fortunately the Australian High Court reviewed the case and overturned his conviction.

Cardinal Pell welcomes court'''s dismissal of abuse conviction | Fox News

The trial court and jury ought to be ashamed of themselves. Their subjective perception of the Catholic Church’s response to allegations in the past should not have been a factor in this specific trial. The claims against Pell were not even physically possible.

Anyway, some good news amidst all the bad.

 

[roughdraft274]

This case was a total disgrace, the allegations against Pell were highly questionable and there was obviously sufficient reasonable doubt to acquit him.

Fortunately the Australian High Court reviewed the case and overturned his conviction.

Cardinal Pell welcomes court'''s dismissal of abuse conviction | Fox News

The trial court and jury ought to be ashamed of themselves. Their subjective perception of the Catholic Church’s response to allegations in the past should not have been a factor in this specific trial. The claims against Pell were not even physically possible.

Anyway, some good news amidst all the bad.

He has a long list of allegations as well as a history of covering for other child rapists in the church. I wish there was a hell for him to burn in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[EMNofSeattle]

He has a long list of allegations as well as a history of covering for other child rapists in the church. I wish there was a hell for him to burn in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Long list of baseless allegations. The prosecution clearly picked what they thought were their strongest ones and they stunk.

Why don’t you provide examples of these alleged “cover ups”

 

[RabidAlpaca]

EMN is the guy who says there have been no substantial number of child molestation cases in the catholic church. He lies because he's a catholic with a vested interest in protecting the church, which is also why so many priests have lied and protected their fellow priests who molested kids.

It's an objective fact that the catholic church has a systemic, horrible child abuse problem and that they actively and intentionally cover it up using church funds.

 

[Hawkeye10]

EMN is the guy who says there have been no substantial number of child molestation cases in the catholic church. He lies because he's a catholic with a vested interest in protecting the church, which is also why so many priests have lied and protected their fellow priests who molested kids.

It's an objective fact that the catholic church has a systemic, horrible child abuse problem and that they actively and intentionally cover it up using church funds.

You dont have any credibility as a witness with me, I would need to hear that from him.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

You dont have any credibility as a witness with me, I would need to hear that from him.

Ok, let's hear it from him:

There are virtually no Child molestations in the Catholic Church.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

EMN is the guy who says there have been no substantial number of child molestation cases in the catholic church. He lies because he's a catholic with a vested interest in protecting the church, which is also why so many priests have lied and protected their fellow priests who molested kids.

It's an objective fact that the catholic church has a systemic, horrible child abuse problem and that they actively and intentionally cover it up using church funds.

You have made no objective arguments.

You simply do not like the church.

I do not remember a single time you’ve called to end teachers unions because Teachers abuse children at a rate 100 times higher then clergy and unions absolutely protect them. There’s even a term amongst school administrators called “passing the trash” where they have to let teachers go apply at different schools and can’t tell the next school because of union agreements.

So unionized school teachers in fact have a large scale systemic system of child abuse and refuse to allow making firing their members easier. So if you compare the Catholic Church to other human institutions the church is remarkably clean. So you add either making this claim because of politics or ignorance and you are not making your argument in the proper context

 

[roughdraft274]

Long list of baseless allegations.

That's why he ran and hid in the vatican?

This man at the very least protected child rapists. He very likely raped children.

It seems your in denial regarding the entire affair in Australia. Do you deny that the church protected child rapists and moved them around to let them rape other children?

 

[phattonez]

He has a long list of allegations as well as a history of covering for other child rapists in the church. I wish there was a hell for him to burn in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

A long list of allegations proves guilt? Just get out.

 

[phattonez]

EMN is the guy who says there have been no substantial number of child molestation cases in the catholic church. He lies because he's a catholic with a vested interest in protecting the church, which is also why so many priests have lied and protected their fellow priests who molested kids.

It's an objective fact that the catholic church has a systemic, horrible child abuse problem and that they actively and intentionally cover it up using church funds.

Let's talk about orthodox Judaism, shall we?

 

[phattonez]

That's why he ran and hid in the vatican?

This man at the very least protected child rapists. He very likely raped children.

It seems your in denial regarding the entire affair in Australia. Do you deny that the church protected child rapists and moved them around to let them rape other children?

The dude was just in prison for 400+ days because he was convicted on baseless allegations. Why the hell do you think he would run?

 

[roughdraft274]

A long list of allegations proves guilt? Just get out.

I never said that.

"a history of covering for other child rapists in the church."

If you don't think covering for child rapists is a bad thing then that's your problem.

 

[roughdraft274]

The dude was just in prison for 400+ days because he was convicted on baseless allegations. Why the hell do you think he would run?

Guilt.

Even if he didn't rape those boys (and honestly there's about a 99% chance he did) he still protected other child rapists. That's a bad thing in my book. Go read your bible and try to find a verse about child rape so that you can understand that it's wrong and get back to me.

 

[phattonez]

Guilt.

Even if he didn't rape those boys (and honestly there's about a 99% chance he did) he still protected other child rapists. That's a bad thing in my book. Go read your bible and try to find a verse about child rape so that you can understand that it's wrong and get back to me.

You're going to stay in a place where you'll be convicted and sent to prison for 400 days for a crime you didn't commit? Just get out.

 

[roughdraft274]

You're going to stay in a place where you'll be convicted and sent to prison for 400 days for a crime you didn't commit? Just get out.

Well, I wouldn't have raped little boys in the first place, nor would I have protected disgusting old men that raped little boys either. So I wouldn't be put in jail for 400 days.

He pulled an OJ and found a way to get off. But it doesn't mean he's innocent. He's very likely done evil things or protected those that have done evil things. The only reason you are protecting him is because he's part of the church. It's disgusting.

 

[phattonez]

Well, I wouldn't have raped little boys in the first place, nor would I have protected disgusting old men that raped little boys either. So I wouldn't be put in jail for 400 days.

He pulled an OJ and found a way to get off. But it doesn't mean he's innocent. He's very likely done evil things or protected those that have done evil things. The only reason you are protecting him is because he's part of the church. It's disgusting.

He didn't rape any one either, so I guess we're just stuck with your blind hatred of the faith.

 

[roughdraft274]

He didn't rape any one either, so I guess we're just stuck with your blind hatred of the faith.

Catholic Church Child Abuse: How Cardinal George Pell Was Protected - Rolling Stone

The horrifying details of St. Alipius reemerged during Australia’s Royal Commission Into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, where Pell was called in for questioning. As they spell out in their 2017 report, the abuse at St. Alipius was so “blatantly obvious” that “every boy in the class knew his turn would come.” The royal commission wanted to know: why didn’t Pell do anything to stop it?

He did nothing, Pell claimed, because he was unaware that any abuse was happening at all. He made this claim even though he was Episcopal Vicar for Education of the Ballarat diocese and gave mass at St. Alipius several times a week. Moreover, he lived in the clergy house with Australia’s worst pedophile priest, Gerald Ridsdale, who raped victims in that presbytery.

Years later, multiple victims testified that Pell knew about the abuse, both at St. Alipius and other parishes. He even sat on a committee that facilitated Ridsdale’s moving from parish to parish, allowing the priest to abuse countless more children while keeping the scandal under wraps. Years later, when Ridsdale pleaded guilty to 27 counts of child abuse, Pell walked him to his day in court — an image that many Australians have never forgotten. “I didn’t know whether [Ridsdale abusing children] was common knowledge or whether it wasn’t,” Pell told the royal commission. “It’s a sad story and it wasn’t of much interest to me.

That's your hero. Congrats.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I never said that.

"a history of covering for other child rapists in the church."

If you don't think covering for child rapists is a bad thing then that's your problem.

Define “covering for other child rapists” and explain what Pell did that fits this definition.

 

[roughdraft274]

Define “covering for other child rapists” and explain what Pell did that fits this definition.

Refer to post 17.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Catholic Church Child Abuse: How Cardinal George Pell Was Protected - Rolling Stone



That's your hero. Congrats.

So what you have is allegations where people are presuming different things combined with moving a priest to different parishes after allegations that could never have been proven were made. This was how virtually all institutions dealt with this issue. In fact it’s how teachers unions and school administrators deal with it to this day.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Refer to post 17.

You are quoting one time piece of a larger source that doesn’t prove Pell abused anyone and makes claims like “everyone knew abuse was happening” without proving such. At the worst you’ve proven bad administration. Not that Pell was a rapist or believed that the accused priests were rapists and moved them to cover it up versus believing the claims were not accurate and moving people in order to maintain community peace.

 

[phattonez]

Catholic Church Child Abuse: How Cardinal George Pell Was Protected - Rolling Stone



That's your hero. Congrats.

If it were so obvious then why wasn't he convicted of it? Why this other fraudulent case?

 

[Robertinfremont]

This case was a total disgrace, the allegations against Pell were highly questionable and there was obviously sufficient reasonable doubt to acquit him.

Fortunately the Australian High Court reviewed the case and overturned his conviction.

Cardinal Pell welcomes court'''s dismissal of abuse conviction | Fox News

The trial court and jury ought to be ashamed of themselves. Their subjective perception of the Catholic Church’s response to allegations in the past should not have been a factor in this specific trial. The claims against Pell were not even physically possible.

Anyway, some good news amidst all the bad.

I am no Catholic and want justice for all. I knew nothing of this. Anyway, he is free. As to him committing a lot of sex crimes, that is what the court had to prove and failed to prove.

 

[Robertinfremont]

You are quoting one time piece of a larger source that doesn’t prove Pell abused anyone and makes claims like “everyone knew abuse was happening” without proving such. At the worst you’ve proven bad administration. Not that Pell was a rapist or believed that the accused priests were rapists and moved them to cover it up versus believing the claims were not accurate and moving people in order to maintain community peace.

This reminds me of the time when I was perhaps 17 and sitting in the barber chair of the man who had up to this point cut my hair. I have no clue why he pulled this stunt but he grasped my genitals through my pants and was playing. I stopped him and it cost him a customer. But proving it took place? There were no witnesses. I forgot all about it till reading this claim against the Cardinal.

 

[phattonez]

This reminds me of the time when I was perhaps 17 and sitting in the barber chair of the man who had up to this point cut my hair. I have no clue why he pulled this stunt but he grasped my genitals through my pants and was playing. I stopped him and it cost him a customer. But proving it took place? There were no witnesses. I forgot all about it till reading this claim against the Cardinal.

What's the point of telling this story? Implying that Pell was found innocent because it couldn't be proved but that he probably did it? It's a good thing that's not how the justice system works. Pell was obviously innocent. The act would have been visible by bystanders, and one of the original accusers recanted on his death bed. He was convicted purely out of anti catholic animus.