Page 15 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141516171819 LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 364

Thread: Vic police have the green light to charge george pell with sexual abuse

  1. #281
    Premium Member
    ol' boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    16,710
    Thanks
    7,622
    Thanked 9,349 Times in 4,750 Posts
    Rep Power
    3941
    Reputation
    162052

    Default

    Well, lets not forget the crowd of previously abused victims that attended court yesterday
    May have been abused by other members of the Church, but they didn't turn up because they had nothing better to do.
    They were there for a genuine and personal reason.
    And on the "Turn up and be counted" basis, there was probably 9 times that amount that didn't attend.

    He has one last chance now... the High Court
    "High Court could decide whether to accept the case by the end of this year, possibly hearing it by the middle of next year." * The Australian

    Obviously the Pell defence will lodge this with the High Court
    And given the 200 pages from Justice Weinberg, gives them good grounds the appeal should go ahead.

    If not, just 3 short years and he'll be out on bail.


    First thing i thought watching yesterdays appeal, was i wonder if all those Judges were also lovers of the Catholic faith and/or George Pell ?
    As it seems the people in these very high places come from a stern religious school up bringing, which is also continued in the right private schools and universities.
    Of course, they are meant to be more professional than that... But...
    Last edited by ol' boy; 23-08-19 at 07:17 AM.
    If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!



  • #282
    Premium Member
    Mr 672A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The only Country in the English speaking World where you cannot sue your Solicitor or Barrister.
    Posts
    3,427
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 907 Times in 533 Posts
    Rep Power
    515
    Reputation
    15645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ol' boy View Post


    .... Acknowledgment and Support for what has happened to them.
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ fixes every thing, take away the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ and you might get the truth. Now What happens is PELL is saying the truth. for me His only Crime he did was hiding the real filth and moving them around for easy picking with new meat.
    Not responsible for any post written after the 28/10/2014. My pet hate, Corrupt Politicians, Corrupt Legal System + a legal system Australia wide that does not allow you to sue a Solicitor or Barrister for Professional Negligence (as Stated by the Law Society and prominent Lawyers) and Corrupt Cops. Not necessarily in this order. Please Note Lawyers are PROTECTED SPECIES IN THIS COUNTRY, PROTECTED FROM THEIR F..K UPS

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Mr 672A For This Useful Post:

    irritant (22-08-19)

  • #283
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,121
    Thanks
    1,615
    Thanked 1,702 Times in 838 Posts
    Rep Power
    733
    Reputation
    24428

    Default

    mR672A, you are forgetting the people who witnessed the self destruction and eventual death of the second offended victim and whose testimony and collaboration they gave the court, there were a few of them that endorsed the reason for the deterioration of the dead witness and the reason he self destructed. Then there was witness one, evidently he was unwavering in his evidence that could not be faulted
    If I am correct George did not enter the witness box, the only reason i can tell is he did not want to be subjected to cross examination, wonder why?
    Guilty as hell and hope he rots there
    There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Madness"

  • The Following User Says Thank You to allover For This Useful Post:

    ol' boy (22-08-19)

  • #284
    Premium Member
    ol' boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    16,710
    Thanks
    7,622
    Thanked 9,349 Times in 4,750 Posts
    Rep Power
    3941
    Reputation
    162052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allover View Post
    If I am correct George did not enter the witness box, the only reason i can tell is he did not want to be subjected to cross examination, wonder why?
    Guilty as hell and hope he rots there
    Yep, as announced in the speech by the Judge yesterday.
    Pell did not have to defend himself.

    Like you allover, i agree, the more he opened his mouth, the worse he would have made it!
    If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!

  • #285
    Handle With Care
    irritant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Cape Town, S. Afr.
    Posts
    1,684
    Thanks
    5,049
    Thanked 3,662 Times in 831 Posts
    Rep Power
    1580
    Reputation
    73230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr 672A View Post
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ fixes every thing, take away the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ and you might get the truth. Now What happens is PELL is saying the truth. for me His only Crime he did was hiding the real filth and moving them around for easy picking with new meat.
    Was watching the news yesterday and the first word coming out of their mouths is compensation. Strange, I didn't know money is all it takes to fix mental scars. Who knew?
    True freedom is the greatest gift a man can possess, yet is the one thing most easily and innocently given away, to crafty curses and binds cleverly disguised as blessings and gifts, in the pursuit of supposed achievement, status and power.

  • #286
    Grumpy Old Fart
    Al Bundy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tazzie
    Posts
    3,297
    Thanks
    1,428
    Thanked 3,393 Times in 1,309 Posts
    Rep Power
    1389
    Reputation
    56850

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr 672A View Post
    ....Now What happens is PELL is saying the truth.
    If he was telling the truth then I see no reason for him not to take the witness stand, but he didn't....


    Quote Originally Posted by Mr 672A View Post
    ....for me His only Crime he did was hiding the real filth and moving them around for easy picking with new meat.
    Which to me is as bad as if he committed the crimes himself, to say he only did that is like saying that Osama bin Laden only supplied Al quieda with money.
    Cheers
    Ted (Al)

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Al Bundy For This Useful Post:

    ol' boy (22-08-19)

  • #287
    Premium Member
    ol' boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    16,710
    Thanks
    7,622
    Thanked 9,349 Times in 4,750 Posts
    Rep Power
    3941
    Reputation
    162052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DB44 View Post
    The lack of even a shred of corroboration here is very troubling to me.
    Child sexual abuse typically is inflicted in secret, without other evidence. I'm not sure where a victim is meant to find such corroboration???
    Thankfully the Law understands this and there is no legal requirement to have any. It is the Law.

    Last edited by ol' boy; 23-08-19 at 03:59 AM.
    If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!

  • #288
    Premium Member
    Mr 672A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The only Country in the English speaking World where you cannot sue your Solicitor or Barrister.
    Posts
    3,427
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 907 Times in 533 Posts
    Rep Power
    515
    Reputation
    15645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al Bundy View Post
    If he was telling the truth then I see no reason for him not to take the witness stand, but he didn't....

    All Barristers advise you not to sit in that Electric chair, this is for all type of cases not just Child sex cases only and one of the many reason for child sex cases is most of the defendant are old and they have been a few case where the defendant fell ill with stress or sufferer a heart attack. You must remeber that PELL was DRILLED in the Royal commission and he had not issue with this but a trial is different.
    Not responsible for any post written after the 28/10/2014. My pet hate, Corrupt Politicians, Corrupt Legal System + a legal system Australia wide that does not allow you to sue a Solicitor or Barrister for Professional Negligence (as Stated by the Law Society and prominent Lawyers) and Corrupt Cops. Not necessarily in this order. Please Note Lawyers are PROTECTED SPECIES IN THIS COUNTRY, PROTECTED FROM THEIR F..K UPS

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Mr 672A For This Useful Post:

    irritant (24-08-19)

  • #289
    Premium Member
    Mr 672A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The only Country in the English speaking World where you cannot sue your Solicitor or Barrister.
    Posts
    3,427
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 907 Times in 533 Posts
    Rep Power
    515
    Reputation
    15645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al Bundy View Post
    If he was telling the truth then I see no reason for him not to take the witness stand, but he didn't....

    Mainly Involve Legal Aid but also in Hi Profile cases

    Being involved with a few Lawyers doing there dirty work for over 5 years you get to know the dirty tricks. Now try this!
    1/ Go to a supreme Courts on Monday and look at the Law List on the wall and find any case that is defended by Legal Aid, (Do your homework first to find the case is Legal Aid).
    2/ As the 12 jurors are impaneled go in the court as a public visitor so you sit out the Back or the top.
    3/ Find the Barrister
    4/ Find the Court Room Wall Clock
    5/ During the Case (mainly after 2 or 3 days of a 4 to 5 day trial) you will see the Barrister CONTINUALLY LOOK AT THE CLOCK I mean continually look at the wall clock all because he wants the case to finished and the last thing the barrister wants the defendant to go on the stand and stretch the case out because the barrister might go over the time limit that can effect the NEW Another High Profile case that starts on each or Monday, Fortnight, or even Tuesday. Yes by have a defended giving evidence this can put a case that is destined to be a 4 to 5 day case Max to be a 10 day or more days and trust me barristers don't like this.
    Even on High Profile cases like PELL's barristers dont want the case to go over the time limit which the Prosecutor is happy to do because barristers have many cases to do.
    When it comes to Legal Aid the Barristers controls the case and because Legal Aid pays SH.it they shorten the case as much as possible (Remember a New case starts on Monday or Tuesday that pays plenty of $$$$) and the last thing a barrister want is a defendant goes on the stand and drag the case on. "Barrister have a right to do this and control the case in any way they want"
    As to be expected most dont understand the Politic in a Court room
    Not responsible for any post written after the 28/10/2014. My pet hate, Corrupt Politicians, Corrupt Legal System + a legal system Australia wide that does not allow you to sue a Solicitor or Barrister for Professional Negligence (as Stated by the Law Society and prominent Lawyers) and Corrupt Cops. Not necessarily in this order. Please Note Lawyers are PROTECTED SPECIES IN THIS COUNTRY, PROTECTED FROM THEIR F..K UPS

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Mr 672A For This Useful Post:

    irritant (24-08-19)

  • #290
    Grumpy Old Fart
    Al Bundy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tazzie
    Posts
    3,297
    Thanks
    1,428
    Thanked 3,393 Times in 1,309 Posts
    Rep Power
    1389
    Reputation
    56850

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr 672A View Post
    All Barristers advise you not to sit in that Electric chair, this is for all type of cases not just Child sex cases only and one of the many reason for child sex cases is most of the defendant are old and they have been a few case where the defendant fell ill with stress or sufferer a heart attack. You must remeber that PELL was DRILLED in the Royal commission and he had not issue with this but a trial is different.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr 672A View Post
    Mainly Involve Legal Aid but also in Hi Profile cases

    Being involved with a few Lawyers doing there dirty work for over 5 years you get to know the dirty tricks. Now try this!
    1/ Go to a supreme Courts on Monday and look at the Law List on the wall and find any case that is defended by Legal Aid, (Do your homework first to find the case is Legal Aid).
    2/ As the 12 jurors are impaneled go in the court as a public visitor so you sit out the Back or the top.
    3/ Find the Barrister
    4/ Find the Court Room Wall Clock
    5/ During the Case (mainly after 2 or 3 days of a 4 to 5 day trial) you will see the Barrister CONTINUALLY LOOK AT THE CLOCK I mean continually look at the wall clock all because he wants the case to finished and the last thing the barrister wants the defendant to go on the stand and stretch the case out because the barrister might go over the time limit that can effect the NEW Another High Profile case that starts on each or Monday, Fortnight, or even Tuesday. Yes by have a defended giving evidence this can put a case that is destined to be a 4 to 5 day case Max to be a 10 day or more days and trust me barristers don't like this.
    Even on High Profile cases like PELL's barristers dont want the case to go over the time limit which the Prosecutor is happy to do because barristers have many cases to do.
    When it comes to Legal Aid the Barristers controls the case and because Legal Aid pays SH.it they shorten the case as much as possible (Remember a New case starts on Monday or Tuesday that pays plenty of $$$$) and the last thing a barrister want is a defendant goes on the stand and drag the case on. "Barrister have a right to do this and control the case in any way they want"
    As to be expected most dont understand the Politic in a Court room
    So, are we playing True or False here, or are you having a bob each way just to hedge your bets?
    Cheers
    Ted (Al)

  • #291
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    52
    Posts
    30,771
    Thanks
    2,156
    Thanked 13,205 Times in 5,628 Posts
    Rep Power
    4273
    Reputation
    155285

    Default

    Well, at least there was one actual judge there who looked at facts.

    We really have gone down the gurgler when it comes to legal justice. Based on the evidence, if this case heard in any other country the case would be thrown out for lack of evidence. And lets face it, there isnt any evidence at all. It just comes down to one persons word against an others.

    Its hard to believe that Pell, on the busiest day of the year for St Patricks cathedral, managed to molest not one, but two alter boys in a 10 minute period with a church full of people in a room with the door open. And that's while wearing ceremonial robes that cover him from neck to ankle and are so heavy it takes 2 people to dress him. And one of those alter boys saying he was not molested. And the single accuser claiming they were molested when Pell caught them drinking the church's red wine....which they didnt have, they had white.

    While I have sympathy for anyone who has genuinely been sexually assaulted by anyone to do with the any church, simply choosing to punish someone simply because they are a figurehead of the church is not acceptable and never will be. The 2 judges who agreed with the accuser said they did so because "he seemed a credible witness". What ????? So that's all required for a prosecution these days ? No need for evidence, just seem credible. Ironically Pell had witnesses that said they were with him all day, seemingly they must be liars because they are from the church ?

    I would hope true legal justice is done at the next appeal. Otherwise we might as well just set up Salem Witch trials in the future run by the church hating left.

    * Disclaimer. I am an atheist and have never been christened.

  • The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to admin For This Useful Post:

    alpha0ne (24-08-19),DB44 (24-08-19),enf (23-08-19),george65 (23-08-19),irritant (24-08-19),Jma (23-08-19),OSIRUS (23-08-19)

  • #292
    Administrator
    admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Victoria
    Age
    52
    Posts
    30,771
    Thanks
    2,156
    Thanked 13,205 Times in 5,628 Posts
    Rep Power
    4273
    Reputation
    155285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr 672A View Post
    All Barristers advise you not to sit in that Electric chair
    That is generally correct, yes.

  • The Following User Says Thank You to admin For This Useful Post:

    OSIRUS (23-08-19)

  • #293
    LSemmens
    lsemmens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Rural South OZ
    Posts
    8,201
    Thanks
    7,502
    Thanked 4,792 Times in 2,362 Posts
    Rep Power
    2110
    Reputation
    87100

    Default

    Just a quickie, Admin, are you sure that the wine that day was white? It goes against all tradition where communion wine is traditionally red to symbolize the Blood of Jesus.
    I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...

  • #294
    Premium Member
    Mr 672A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The only Country in the English speaking World where you cannot sue your Solicitor or Barrister.
    Posts
    3,427
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 907 Times in 533 Posts
    Rep Power
    515
    Reputation
    15645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by admin View Post
    Well, at least there was one actual judge there who looked at facts.

    We really have gone down the gurgler when it comes to legal justice. Based on the evidence, if this case heard in any other country the case would be thrown out for lack of evidence. And lets face it, there isnt any evidence at all. It just comes down to one persons word against an others.

    Its hard to believe that Pell, on the busiest day of the year for St Patricks cathedral, managed to molest not one, but two alter boys in a 10 minute period with a church full of people in a room with the door open. And that's while wearing ceremonial robes that cover him from neck to ankle and are so heavy it takes 2 people to dress him. And one of those alter boys saying he was not molested. And the single accuser claiming they were molested when Pell caught them drinking the church's red wine....which they didnt have, they had white.

    While I have sympathy for anyone who has genuinely been sexually assaulted by anyone to do with the any church, simply choosing to punish someone simply because they are a figurehead of the church is not acceptable and never will be. The 2 judges who agreed with the accuser said they did so because "he seemed a credible witness". What ????? So that's all required for a prosecution these days ? No need for evidence, just seem credible. Ironically Pell had witnesses that said they were with him all day, seemingly they must be liars because they are from the church ?

    I would hope true legal justice is done at the next appeal. Otherwise we might as well just set up Salem Witch trials in the future run by the church hating left.

    * Disclaimer. I am an atheist and have never been christened.
    Your spot on Admin. Wont be long before all Priest suspected of child sex will be burnt at the stake.
    Not responsible for any post written after the 28/10/2014. My pet hate, Corrupt Politicians, Corrupt Legal System + a legal system Australia wide that does not allow you to sue a Solicitor or Barrister for Professional Negligence (as Stated by the Law Society and prominent Lawyers) and Corrupt Cops. Not necessarily in this order. Please Note Lawyers are PROTECTED SPECIES IN THIS COUNTRY, PROTECTED FROM THEIR F..K UPS

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Mr 672A For This Useful Post:

    irritant (24-08-19)

  • #295
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    1,427
    Thanks
    1,617
    Thanked 1,429 Times in 668 Posts
    Rep Power
    645
    Reputation
    24768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ol' boy View Post
    Child sexual abuse typically is inflicted in secret, without other evidence. I'm not sure where a victim is meant to find such corroboration???
    Thankfully the Law understands this and there is no legal requirement to have any. It is the Law.

    Which means that if any child was to accuse you of abusing them 20 years ago or more, without any evidence but the word of the now adult child, you better hope that they are not a good actor. Since some of these children may over the passing years have come to genuinely believe that you did in fact abuse them, which of course you did not, even acting skills may not be required. Sadly this does mean that many guilty accused will go free simply because there is no corroboration available. It is the better of 2 bad choices, but blindly believing a victim without corroboration beyond a reasonable doubt is a travesty.

    It is hardly surprising that the Peoples Republic of Victoria leads the nation in turning its courts into modern day star chambers.
    Last edited by DB44; 24-08-19 at 01:06 AM.

  • The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DB44 For This Useful Post:

    alpha0ne (24-08-19),irritant (24-08-19),lsemmens (24-08-19)

  • #296
    Premium Member
    ol' boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    16,710
    Thanks
    7,622
    Thanked 9,349 Times in 4,750 Posts
    Rep Power
    3941
    Reputation
    162052

    Default

    Im sure it is not as simple as you portray
    If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!

  • #297
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    1,427
    Thanks
    1,617
    Thanked 1,429 Times in 668 Posts
    Rep Power
    645
    Reputation
    24768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ol' boy View Post
    Im sure it is not as simple as you portray
    It certainly seems to have been in Pell's case. I appreciate your position. It is not an easy area, and there is much injustice, mostly on the side of the guilty going free. But adopting the me too type approach that the accuser must be believed is not the answer.

  • The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DB44 For This Useful Post:

    alpha0ne (24-08-19),george65 (24-08-19),irritant (24-08-19),OSIRUS (24-08-19)

  • #298
    Premium Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,121
    Thanks
    1,615
    Thanked 1,702 Times in 838 Posts
    Rep Power
    733
    Reputation
    24428

    Default

    We really have gone down the gurgler when it comes to legal justice. Based on the evidence, if this case heard in any other country the case would be thrown out for lack of evidence. And lets face it, there isnt any evidence at all. It just comes down to one persons word against an others.



    People keep saying it was one persons word against another
    This is simply not true and inaccurate
    There were two people telling the same story about the incident, but one had trouble making it to court
    The fact the second witness had related what occurred to him that day to a number of witnesses many times prior to his death, verified what was said by witness number one
    There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Madness"

  • #299
    Premium Member
    Mr 672A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The only Country in the English speaking World where you cannot sue your Solicitor or Barrister.
    Posts
    3,427
    Thanks
    911
    Thanked 907 Times in 533 Posts
    Rep Power
    515
    Reputation
    15645

    Default

    Here in QLD no corroboration is needed to send the defendant to jail, actually in some cases its the opposite way around as you can have a Child (not Adult complain 30 years later) a child giving evidence via a recording and yet you have 2 or more children giving evidence that contradict the complainant child yet the defendant is found guilty, WHY? Difference today we have a FEAR FACTOR here in QLD because of all the Daniel Morcombe stuff going up here.
    Once Again I will say for the untine time KEEP AWAY FROM ANYONE UNDER 18 YEARS OLD because its like a car crash everyone else dies on the road crash but not you the same goes for being accursed to be a sex offender but if someone does this to you you will be stuffed.
    Actually (spoke about this before) One day I would like to see someone set up the complete system to prove the system has major flaws in it to a point that this other person Defiantly a well trained man, a Man that will be convicted and sent to jail then others involved with this man release the Video and other evidence to prove it was nothing but a set up to set up a defunk system.
    Back to the Tv now.
    Last edited by Mr 672A; 24-08-19 at 11:05 AM.
    Not responsible for any post written after the 28/10/2014. My pet hate, Corrupt Politicians, Corrupt Legal System + a legal system Australia wide that does not allow you to sue a Solicitor or Barrister for Professional Negligence (as Stated by the Law Society and prominent Lawyers) and Corrupt Cops. Not necessarily in this order. Please Note Lawyers are PROTECTED SPECIES IN THIS COUNTRY, PROTECTED FROM THEIR F..K UPS

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Mr 672A For This Useful Post:

    irritant (24-08-19)

  • #300
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    725
    Thanks
    179
    Thanked 757 Times in 348 Posts
    Rep Power
    335
    Reputation
    14714

    Default

    Again, comes back to the fact he abused all these Kids but they can only find one/ two to come forward and testify?

    That's BS right there.
    When my friend was involved with the case where he was abused there was plenty of people who came forward. They all by then had jobs and families and an otherwise normal life as well and there were more willing to testify than what the cops needed.

    Just seems unreal that they go after such a High profile person like pell and put all their eggs in the one basket with a single witness. I don't think anyone would say the guy is innocent directly or indirectly turning a blind eye to it but you have to do these things properly.

    Seems to me they let go all sorts of other crims on the flimsiest of errors or technicalities but they are wanting to lock pell up with no where near the evidence they would require for some other POS.
    Surely this case shouldn't be that hard to find a load of evidence for that would put his conviction beyond everyone's reasonable doubt.

  • Page 15 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141516171819 LastLast

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •