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

[irritant]

I will admit I know too little about anything like this to judge.

But, what I've never been able to understand is...why? Why do these things happen?

We obviously don't know yet about George Pell specifically of course, but we do know it definitely did occur before as we learned from the cases of other bishops, cardinals, fathers, etc.

And, that's my question...why do it? Maybe I'm just stupid and sorely lacking in knowledge, but I don't understand the appeal (if any) of a child.

I wish one of these individuals would just step up and tell the truth for once so that we could get the facts, instead of having to listen to the endless theories by psychologists and other who's who of studies of the human psyche.

I mean this is clearly something that seems more pronounced in a Catholic church setting - and my question is - why?

[Mr 672A]

Cardinal George Pell has been committed to stand trial on multiple historical sexual offences but the most serious of the charges have been struck out.

I told you all this will happen!
Whilst I was eating last night the Phone allegedly rang and the DPP allegedly was on the phone and the DPP said to me:

DPP: Hey MR 672A stop giving our secrets out? If you persist I will have to manufacture a charge just for you just to shut you up.

Mr 672A: You're up to this shit again. Why do you continually do this?

DPP: Why? We want to win and we will win so the complainants get their compensation claim and we will keep the conviction rate at 99.8%.

Mr 672A: I see that you have dropped the serious charges

DPP: Yes you know we have dropped the serious charges as to what happened in Canada that case as you know the Complainant Girl said she was RAPED by that 38 your old man RAPED by Sexual Intercourse, you know that in out in out thing that thing yet it was proved in court that the man lost his penis in a bike accident whilst he was 13 and after this the case that sent shock wave throughout the DPP in the World so since then we have allegedly encouraged all complainants not to say he or she was Raped because the good Defense Barrister will pick this to peices. I say a good barrister allegedly not the ones used by Legal Aid they work for us and they don't give a shit about the defendant as legal aid pays pittence. Yes we allegedly tell them to say little so the Barrister cant pick the complainant to peices.

MR 672A: That not fair that you do this. Are you going to bleed Pell dry with money.

DPP: You are on the ball again. We will have a standard amount of last minute cancellation of Mention and pre trial hearings so when Pell with his team are in court for nothing this alone will bleeds PELL dry, as you know Pell will still need to pay for the super expensive Barrister + the solicitors + the other that hang off them, Yes they will have to be paid including the parking fees for all their cars as the Barrister wont drive from his chamber to the Court with the others. Each Failed Mention that we allegedly do could cost Pell $30, to $40,000 and pre trial that we cann after the last minute. We have about allegedly 6 of them for a normal child sex case we will do more for Pell as we don't know who is funding him.

MR 672A: That disgusting that you do this to remove his Barrister off him by bleeding him dry.

DPP: You are on the ball again! Yes this is our master plan as when Pell runs out of money the Barrister will take off and Pell will have to use a Legal Aid Barrister and since Legal Aid Barrister are easy to beat we will have Pell by his Balls.

Mr 672A: Talk about Balls. Since the Serious charges were dropped what are you going to use to get Pell?

DPP: Yes serious charges dropped but we will use Exposure as he dropped his shorts and show the kids allegedly his penis and his pecker was starting to get angry. Yeah that will get him. The best cases were from the defendant allegedly doing nothing. Look at the Michael Jackson Case, Look at Rolph Harris, look at that swim coach in Sydney, all were convicted for doing nothing , all that was needed was He TOUCH ME! and that it!!. That all you need. this is not a Murder case Or other case were you need REAL Evidence. This is a Child sex case and you done need any evidence, Hear say will do, as long as all the complainants allegedly say the same stuff.

MR 672A: But the defense Barrister might ask the Complainants to describe his Penis?

DPP: That been taken care of as we allegedly told the Complainants to say, at a Party last Night with wine celebration Pell being sent to trial, yes all complainants said they will say that he allegedly saw his penis in one second but did not look at it for longer as to see that was it circumcised or not circumcised. That alone lost us some cases. You must remember we have a terrific police Force that mostly leads the complainants to say what they want

MR: 672A: But surely you know that being a Cardinal he must be a Catholic and since he is Catholic and born a long time ago he should have his pecker cut?

DPP: Anyhow will have to get off as we allegedly need to find out where Pell is getting his money from as if he has a endless pit of money and we continually stall the case to bleed him dry this could back fire on us. Do you know where Pell gets his money from?

MR 672A: NO

DPP: All we need is to find him guilty on "A" charge and this is $$$$$$$$$$$$ for the Complainants and another win for the DPP as we don't want the Prosecutor to lose as he might be demoted to do petty crimes and that means he will receive less money in his/her pay packet, Do you know that all the Well known cases around the world they the DPP won the cases without penetration of anything, none what so ever. Keep it simple so the Defence barrister has nothing to go on

DPP: Bye, the allegedly phone hangs up

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....

On the serious side of thing not the cut and paste I found this and added Pell's name he has no hope of winning. Even God won't help him from getting jail, Because of his age, because of his status he will get 6 months to 2 years and all will be needed for the complainants to get compensation. Even if he gets a suspended sentence the Complainants will get $.

Final note. If you take away Money you possible will get some of the truth.

[allover]

Not looking good for George

[Mr 672A]

Not looking good for George

Funny thing is the DPP rang me up last week and they to me not to tell anyone because the DPP are going to release sensitive information just before the the Pre Trial hearing but they said mainly they will leak part of the evidence just before the trial to corrupt the prospective jurors but at the same time to make it legal they said they will tell that fool with the wig to tell the jury "quote" "NOT TO LISTEN ON WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD ON THE MEDIA ABOUT THIS CASE"

[enf]

Not looking good for George

Whats that got to do with Pell?

I don't care mind you, just can't see the connection other than they are both in the service of a church.

[allover]

[QUOTE=enf;781770]Whats that got to do with Pell?

Just like Geo, he was moving pedo priests on to new parishes when he was aware of their offending
In Geo case, it has already been established by witnesses at the Royal Commission, (admin may have been unaware when he started this thread), that Geo when in Ballarat, was transferring at least one priest to another parish to avoid controversy fully knowing that "he has been playing with little boys again",
As i see it that is some one is knowingly abetting criminal acts, and that is how the criminal system saw the case in SA

[Mr 672A]

The Police/DPP always manufacture a NEW law just to suit the occasion. there good at it.

[ol' boy]

And he is cooked!

[lsemmens]

It would be interesting to see report of this from the more mainstream sources. Sites, such as "catholicnewsagency" are often set up by someone with an axe to grind. I know nothing of this site, and it may well be legit, but the only references to this guilty verdict seem to be on such "small" sites. If he were found guilty, you'd think that this would be headline news and the announcement of an appeal. I'd suggest that the appeal process would actually overturn such conviction only because of the publicity leading up to the gag order and the lack of unbiased jurors. Regardless of your religion, or not, there would be few people who haven't already formed an opinion based on the media frenzy anyway.

[ol' boy]

It would be interesting to see report of this from the more mainstream sources..

You can Google it, but AU Media has been Gagged and Ass Raped
So you'll have to look elsewhere

Maybe this is more to your liking:

Or read the Herald Sun front page report on it



The perks you get when you and your judge mates are all believers

[admin]

I think they might have it in for him just a bit.

Original jury.....10-2 in Pell's favor.

Solution ? Get a jury that sees things unconditionally the way of the prosecution.

[admin]

Just like Geo, he was moving pedo priests on to new parishes when he was aware of their offending
In Geo case, it has already been established by witnesses at the Royal Commission, (admin may have been unaware when he started this thread), that Geo when in Ballarat, was transferring at least one priest to another parish to avoid controversy fully knowing that "he has been playing with little boys again",

As you or may not have seen me mention in the past, if we want to convict on that basis, by all means bring it on and apply it proportionally to all involved. Or dont apply it at all.

In the 50's, 60's, and 70's, Victoria Police ignored every complaint that was made in regards to child molestation matters regarding the church. As did almost everyone else. Any child that came up with it likely got a good belting from their parents and were made to apologise.

Thats how it was back then...even when I was a kid, if you or your mates threw a rock and broke someones window, they would catch you and give you a good belting before dragging you to your front door (usually by the ear) banging on it and telling your old man what you had done and that they had given you a belting for it. Your old man would then apologise for your behaviour, drag you inside then you would get another belting. Then you would have to apologise to the person the next day. It didnt actually matter that you didnt throw the rock and it was actually one of your mates.

So realistically, there wasn't much point complaining. But some did, only to be dismissed by police. So who do we want to blame there ? The Sgt in charge ? The Snr Sgt in charge of the station ? The district inspector ? Or the constable who wouldnt listen ? Or based on what we have here, all of them ?

This trial is the usual leftist crap looking to destroy the church in this country. They have no problems with Mosques, but look out if you are a Christian. I dont believe Pell molested anyone, but yes, possibly moved priests if there was rumours of inappropriate behaviour. Basically thats how things were handled back then. How long are we going to keep up this historical charges crap ? Actor John Jarrat has been charged with rape from a party he went to in 1976 !

I have 4 ancestors who were brought here in chains as convicts. Should I sue Aboriginal Australia for lack of duty of care ? Breach of OH & S ? Based on the how we charge for historical crime, I should have no problem with winning that one.


For the record, I am an atheist. But I don't support selective historic witch hunts. The first trial would have been 10-2 in Pells favor because a lot of the evidence was simply ridiculous.

[admin]

From earlier in the thread about who do you charge.

[lsemmens]

You can Google it, but AU Media has been Gagged and Ass Raped
So you'll have to look elsewhere

Maybe this is more to your liking:

Or read the Herald Sun front page report on it



The perks you get when you and your judge mates are all believers

I did do a search before I posted, strangely enough, the only two I found, then, were the aforementioned link, and one from a similar site that said much the same as the other one.

[Reschs]

An appeal will be lodged and the selection process for the Jury will be a key issue.
Is he guilty of moving suspect Priests ? Probably yes.
Was he an offender himself ? Unlikely.
Only time will tell.

[Tiny]

The Catholic News link that Oceanboy posted has gone/censored?
This may replace it, not sure as I didn't get to read the other one. >>

[DB44]

The Washington Post reports that many US, UK and International outlets respected the Courts ruling out of fear of contempt, including Reuters and the New York Times. Apparently these outlets have some presence in Australia. Whether for a good reason or not these gag orders just don't work in this internet and social media age. Some journalists must be pretty nervous, as the judge reportedly said they face “the prospect of imprisonment and indeed substantial imprisonment” for breaching his gag order. I doubt any Washington Post executives will be visiting us any time soon.

[george65]

Australian Judge has no Jurisdiction over foreign media and what is published OS.

I do find it... " Unusual" that this judge has rattled the sabre so hard on this case when it seems pretty much every other case/ story of significance is all over the headlines and clearly has massive potential to influence any Jury member not living under a rock.

[peteramjet]

Australian Judge has no Jurisdiction over foreign media and what is published OS.

If a foreign media outlet publishes information that is available online in any Australian state/territory, then they are covered by the suppression order. Taking action against an individual who is offshore is more difficult, however orders can be made to have the offending sites geoblocked to Australians.

Look at Michael Smith News - despite his site being hosted offshore and Smith being overseas when he published info on the court outcome, he has removed his post under threat of court action.

[alpha0ne]

I still do not understand the reason for the gag order, if anything it is more harmful IMHO than letting the press have the usual feeding frenzy