# Royal Commission into Institutional  Responses to Child Sex Abuse



## Tisme (1 March 2016)

I've been watching Pell on the ABC giving his two bobs worth and not withstanding the objectives of the commission, I can't help but wonder who is paying for all the suits who seem to be just there? I assume, given the line of questioning about accountability, many of commission are doing it gratis .... in the interests of the child of course.


So the lead female bulldog is making it clear that she believes it is the top echelon of the Church who are guilty, so I therefore assume the Pope is the one to blame. However as a secular society I'm wondering if the Queen should be hauled before the cameras to explain her lack of action when it was "common knowledge" in the communities that their local priests were doing evil things ...... the coppers would have known. 

Pell is a scalp they are after, but me thinks he's a teflon man .......

Of course Andrew Bolt and News Corp will blame the Labor Party


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I've been watching Pell on the ABC giving his two bobs worth and not withstanding the objectives of the commission, I can't help but wonder who is paying for all the suits who seem to be just there? I assume, given the line of questioning about accountability, many of commission are doing it gratis .... in the interests of the child of course.
> 
> 
> So the lead female bulldog is making it clear that she believes it is the top echelon of the Church who are guilty, so I therefore assume the Pope is the one to blame. However as a secular society I'm wondering if the Queen should be hauled before the cameras to explain her lack of action when it was "common knowledge" in the communities that their local priests were doing evil things ...... the coppers would have known.
> ...




Given that he's been given witness protection, Pell is laughing basically. The question is what is the church going to do from now on about these peddies infesting their organisation.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2016)

I think you are (way) off the track there Tisme.

The Royal Commission is publicly funded. It arose from the  discovery of widespread child abuse in the Catholic Church.  The terms of reference were extended to all religions and  other institutions to ensure that it wasn't seen as just Catholic Church bashing and that other crimes could be brought to light.

In the past few years the Commission has exposed almost every religious, State and community organisation  with records of child sexual abuse.

Cardinal Pell is in the spotlight because he has been a key senior  religious figure in Victoria for the past 35 years.  It appears as if, despite his central position in the Church, he has never heard of any concrete issues of child sex abuse.  The Commission is testing his version of events to see if it is plausible that such a senior person could conceivably have "known nothing" about these widespread practices.

There was a background story on Cardinal Pell and where he was placed in Victoria over the years which highlights the areas the commission is questioning.


> *
> The cardinal and the royal commission: the questions George Pell must answer*
> 
> Australia’s most senior Catholic faces the royal commission into child sex abuse once more, and it’s a last chance to make sense of the conflicting accounts of his handling of years of abuse by paedophiles in his church. By David Marr
> ...




http://www.theguardian.com/australi...mission-the-questions-george-pell-must-answer


----------



## Value Collector (1 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> However as a secular society I'm wondering if the Queen should be hauled before the cameras to explain her lack of action when it was "common knowledge" in the communities that their local priests were doing evil things




Why not, if it can be shown that she was covering up things, the fact that the pope is the pope should not give him any protection, other wise no cult leader could ever be tried for anything.

I know to some the pope etc are on the same level as the queen, but really to the rest of us he is a leader of an immoral cult, and should be questioned with a no holds barred approach the same as you or I would be if we were accused of similar crimes.

----------------------------------

Everyone has probably heard this by now, but its a catchy little tune, lol






And there is this earlier song about the pope,


----------



## Knobby22 (1 March 2016)

Cardinal Pel inherited a mess in 1996 caused by Archbishop Frank Little who completely failed the Catholic community. Archbishop Hart stated that Little "had covered up paedophile priests and moved them to other parishes where they would abuse again It is rumoured the Pope made him retire.

Pel was the first to set up compensation schemes in Australia and got rid of priests but I am sure in hindsight he wished he had gone harder as still wanted to protect the Church. When he was a new young priest in Ballarat he would not of been told of all the goings on and probably didn't believe the rumours initially in any case. He received a rude awakening.

Pell comes out of it better than many including the presently dying ex Bishop of Ballarat who completely failed in his duty, however he is human and made mistakes.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2016)

While we are talking about child sexual abuse, why isn't the Commission looking into child marriages and female genital mutilation in the Islamic church ?


----------



## Value Collector (1 March 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> however he is human and made mistakes.




As are all the people in prison, I can't see the fact that you happen to be a human should mean you should have to front up and face the music for your actions (or inactions).

If it can be shown that these men put children at risk to save the reputation of the church or certain priests, and this caused children to be hurt, then they need to face the music, some time in prison will serve both a good punishment and a good deterrent.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 March 2016)

Value Collector said:


> As are all the people in prison, I can't see the fact that you happen to be a human should mean you should have to front up and face the music for your actions (or inactions).
> 
> If it can be shown that these men put children at risk to save the reputation of the church or certain priests, and this caused children to be hurt, then they need to face the music, some time in prison will serve both a good punishment and a good deterrent.




Well yes, but Pell tried and generally succeeded in stopping it. He made mistakes as it took him a while to succeed. Priests have gone to jail but its all too late.

Believe me, I am disgusted with it all and Pell has to front up but he tried and deserves some respect for that.. which he got and that is why he is a Cardinal.


----------



## Value Collector (1 March 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Well yes, but Pell tried and generally succeeded in stopping it. He made mistakes as it took him a while to succeed. Priests have gone to jail but its all too late.
> 
> Believe me, I am disgusted with it all and Pell has to front up but he tried and deserves some respect for that.. which he got and that is why he is a Cardinal.




And I am sure that if that is true that's what the royal commission will find out, the truth will set you free as they say, why is he so scared to answer some questions?


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2016)

From what I'm seeing of the RC and Pell's answers he's as evasive as a snake, blaming others and denying all knowledge of the reality of what his subordinates were doing.

Unfortunately I don't think he will ever come back here and face the real music, which is accessory after the fact to a crime or crimes.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2016)

I think you are being exceptionally generous to Cardinal Pell Knobby. The history of child sex abuse by the clergy around the Ballarat region in the time George Pell was a senior administrator is almost an open book. It will be exceptionally hard for Cardinal Pell to plead ignorance of so many red flags. I don't think the commission has even reached the point of calling up the victims who attempted to directly tell Cardinal Pell of abuse and were just dismissed.

Let's see how it unrolls.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2016)

Another concern I have about Cardinal Pell was his management of the Melbourne response to child abuse  from 1996.

The short story was Archbishop Pell as he then was created a system intended to discourage abuse victims from taking any action,  offered minimal compensation (Max $50,000)  and then demanded confidentiality and no further actions by victims.

This has already been noted by the Royal Commission.  The url I have posted gives the Royal Commission findings on the response of the various organisations investigated in 2013-14

George Pell has proven to be a very sharp operator. You don't want to be on the other side of an argument.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ised-by-royal-commission-20150914-gjm1l2.html

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/public-hearings/findings


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2016)

Some of these priests are lucky that they avoided a violent response from the parents of the victims.

A lot of people would just go and give the bast**d a good hiding.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Some of these priests are lucky that they avoided a violent response from the parents of the victims.
> 
> A lot of people would just go and give the bast**d a good hiding.




Very lucky indeed...

Unfortunately in many cases the kids coped the hiding from their parents for* daring *to talk about Father  "X" like that.

Horrible but true.

If you can bear it check out some of the stories of  the abuse on Broken Rites. Will also give you an insight into the concern many people have about Cardinal Pells role in the situation.  Makes you weep.

http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/


----------



## Value Collector (1 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Some of these priests are lucky that they avoided a violent response from the parents of the victims.
> 
> A lot of people would just go and give the bast**d a good hiding.




Yes, they are lucky it's the RC that's asking the questions, I would think a lot of dads and uncles would be a lot less forgiving, I think if someone touched my nieces or nephews they would be in for a world of hurt.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2016)

Todays questioning of Cardinal Pell has been expertly dissected by David Marr in The Guardian.

Short story in Marr's view is very simple. Fr Pell came to Ballarat as a young priest with big ambitions. He discovered he was in very messy situation  with superiors incapable or unwilling to take serious action against paedophiles.

In David's view Father Pell decided to look the other way because challenging the Church hierarchy would destry his career prospects.



> * George Pell wasn't much interested in stories of abuse by priests. Which was lucky for his career*
> David Marr
> 
> Had Pell made a big fuss about the abuse going on all around him as a young priest, he would not be at the Vatican. But as he told the royal commission, he stayed clear of such ‘sad stories’
> ...




http://www.theguardian.com/australi...use-by-priests-which-was-lucky-for-his-career


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2016)

Just three words "wasn't much interested" are enough to sum up this Pell person.

Completely contemptible.


----------



## Tisme (2 March 2016)

I am starting to resent the counsel who does all the talking.


----------



## basilio (2 March 2016)

"Look away, Shut up, Don't ask Questions."

These are the messages that encapsulated Cardinal Pells testimony to the Royal Commission. 

I can understand his position. In fact most people would have first hand experience of being in a workplace/organisation where bad things happen and employees and management are expected to ignore or overlook the actions. 

Police brutality, political shenanigans, Corporations that deceive and destroy their customers  (Think financial services industry)

The  examples demonstrated in the Catholic Church take this behaviour to an extreme level. Mind you the Royal Commission found similar activities across a score of other institutions. And it seems as if almost all of them tried to hide or ignore the crimes.

I wonder where we go to from here ? With the Church and beyond.

_______________________________________________________________________________

For what it's worth

Not every Catholic clergy accepted abusive priests. Turns out Mother Mary McKillop who founded the Josephite teaching order in Victoria  jacked up when she found a local priest was abusing her students. The consequences were predictable. This was a time when obedience to the Bishop was *absolutely *demanded and as for the role of women  ......




> *
> MacKillop banished after uncovering sex abuse*
> 
> Updated 7 Oct 2010, 2:23pm
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-09-25/mackillop-banished-after-uncovering-sex-abuse/2273940

*



			Church sex-abuse victims see Mary MacKillop as their patron saint
		
Click to expand...


*
http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/178


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2016)

Yes a lot of organisations have skeletons in the cupboard and people are expected to tow the party line for the good of the "brotherhood", sisterhood or whatever.

Abuse within the  Defence forces are another example of collusive behaviour. I remember the "bastardisation" scandals from way back as well as the recent sexual abuse cases.

It's a bit different where children are involved though. Zero tolerance should have been the reaction of the church, not a lot of blind eyes.


----------



## basilio (2 March 2016)

I think people are not aware of the wide range of sexual behaviours in the clergy.  Obviously the focus on the Royal Commission has been child sexual abuse. But in the broader picture Bishops and fellow priests would recognise the following behaviours amongst their flock

1) Gay relationships sometimes between clergy sometimes with outsiders

2) Heterosexual Relationships between priests and many different women. They could be completely outside the church, housekeepers, casual relationships, sometimes prostitutes.  This became even stickier if the other party was a parishioner.  It became particularly dangerous when priests comforted recently deceased widows...

What was the church supposed to do with these situations ? Should they be  expelled ? Sanctioned ? When ? Who by ? What would the effect be on the community if they heard about such behaviours ?

And finally *How many religious people would be left if such sanctions were enforced ?*

I raise this point because it does affect how the Church generally glossed over or ignored almost anything it could in this arena.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2016)

basilio said:


> I think people are not aware of the wide range of sexual behaviours in the clergy.  Obviously the focus on the Royal Commission has been child sexual abuse. But in the broader picture Bishops and fellow priests would recognise the following behaviours amongst their flock
> 
> 1) Gay relationships sometimes between clergy sometimes with outsiders
> 
> ...





When you say "The Church" I presume you are referring to Catholics mainly ?

The problems occur because their priests are unable to marry. Looking at Protestant churches, the problems are far less, although they probably have some discrepancies.

As to the action the Church should have taken with pedophiles, they should have supported the victims not the perps.

Did the church finance legal counsel for the defendants ? YES

Did they finance legal counsel for the victims ? NO.

That action has probably done more damage to the church than throwing the perps out would have done.


----------



## Value Collector (2 March 2016)

basilio said:


> I think people are not aware of the wide range of sexual behaviours in the clergy.  Obviously the focus on the Royal Commission has been child sexual abuse. But in the broader picture Bishops and fellow priests would recognise the following behaviours amongst their flock
> 
> 1) Gay relationships sometimes between clergy sometimes with outsiders
> 
> ...




Those things aren't illegal or immoral, I couldn't careless if a priest broke a church rule and ate meat on Good friday, what I care about is the crimes, especially where innocent children were the victims.

If Pell was just covering up broken church rules eg a priest rooting a hooker, no one outside the church would give a crap, and there wouldn't be an rc, but he most likely helped cover up priests rooting little boys and girls, for this he should go to prison if found guilty.


----------



## noco (2 March 2016)

Whist I am not a Catholic, far from it, the emphasis on this child sex is mainly about Catholic Priests...

No mention in the Royal Commission about child abuse in the Aboriginal Communities and the Muslim community where girls of 10 and 11 years old are mutilated and often married off to older men falling pregnant at that very young age......

I would say that could possibly be more relevant with child abuse than the Catholic Church or is it a Marxist and Islamic plot to destroy the The Catholic religion and other minor religions as well?


----------



## Tink (3 March 2016)

I have already given my view on the shambles in Victoria.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=28209&page=6&p=898964&viewfull=1#post898964

What I hadn't said was that it also came from Brendan O'Neill - Royal Commissions
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4273039.htm

I have also given my views on Christianity, our foundations, and the shaping of Western Civilization.
The Christian Worldview.
Life and Liberty
The Law etc.

The West as we know it, would not exist.

That is my view.

_Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical_
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27938&page=70


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

Tink said:


> The West as we know it, would not exist.




Not withstanding the big role catholicism played in its early days Tink, without the Anglican British Empire and its rule of law, the "west" would not exist. I suppose we could point to a Catholic nutter in George III allowing the British Colony in North America the opportunity to break away and rewrite human rights into law. which countries like Oz adopted in various ways.


----------



## McLovin (3 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Just three words "wasn't much interested" are enough to sum up this Pell person.
> 
> Completely contemptible.




It sums up the Catholic Church. Even Pell's favourite fanboy Bolt has turned on him.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> No mention in the Royal Commission about child abuse in the Aboriginal Communities and the Muslim community where girls of 10 and 11 years old are mutilated and often married off to older men falling pregnant at that very young age......
> 
> I would say that could possibly be more relevant with child abuse than the Catholic Church or is it a Marxist and Islamic plot to destroy the The Catholic religion and other minor religions as well?




Shame you have to bookend your comments with the communistic bogies all the time, but insofar as the seriousness of Islamic mutilations and pubescent marriages I agree that the full weight of civilised law should be loaded on the barbarians so they are forced to play catchup with the evolution of the species.


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Shame you have to bookend your comments with the communistic bogies all the time, but insofar as the seriousness of Islamic mutilations and pubescent marriages I agree that the full weight of civilised law should be loaded on the barbarians so they are forced to play catchup with the evolution of the species.





It is a shame you don't educate your self into the Communistic intentions to destroy democracy in the Western World including their method of breaking down the morals of children and young teenagers with pornographic material and absurd sex education in schools.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> It is a shame you don't educate your self into the Communistic intentions to destroy democracy in the Western World including their method of breaking down the morals of children and young teenagers with pornographic material and absurd sex education in schools.




Enough of the blather Noco. The labels are so 1950s scare mongering. 

Let's look at the communist countries:

no sanctioned trade unions
no state sanctioned homosexual marriages
no tolerance of kiddie fiddlers
no tolerance of islamists
no andrew bolts
enormous capitalism and investment
full employment
rising standard of living.

Let's look at Oz under a Liberal Govt:

Private investment gone negative
Public expenditure increasing at a greater rate
Cross party support for homosexual marriages
Legalised pot in places
Tolerance of Islamic voodoo 
Andrew Bolt
Did I say relatively zip private investment
Real unemployment 9.2%
Falling standard of living

. 
When Australians start talking about moving to NZ, there's a problem Houston


----------



## Value Collector (3 March 2016)

Tink said:


> I have also given my views on Christianity, our foundations, and the shaping of Western Civilization.
> The Christian Worldview.




Yes yes Tink, we all know you long for a past era of good Christian values, where nothing was wrong, and all was rosie. the church was good, marriages were happy and teenage pregnancy didn't exist.

The reality is all wasn't rosie, your church leaders were screwing little boys and girls and covering it up, they were pressuring women to stay in bad marriages, refusing to teach kids about contraception and instead forcing girls out of town to give birth and then stealing their babies or making them marry etc.

Your Pleasantville view of our past is nothing but a faÃ§ade that's falling down as we speak.


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Enough of the blather Noco. The labels are so 1950s scare mongering.
> 
> Let's look at the communist countries:
> 
> ...




Well, if all those items sound like goodies to you, why don't you move to a Communist Country?

You don't seem to be happy living in Australia...You are always so critical about our living standards here....

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you originally leave a communist country?......If you did why did you leave?...Maybe you should go back from where you came.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

When I was a kid way back in the dark ages, my mother made sure none of us were allowed alone with any adult, especially a solitary male. 

I'm wondering how any mothers/carers could leave their own kids with a priest that belongs to a religion that has a long historical word of mouth reputation for homosexual pedophilia and leaving a staff at the door of someone else's wife. Sure it was said in a joking choir/alter boy narrative, but we all knew there was substance behind it.

Even books like Sex, Priests and Secret Codes  points to it being a 2000 year tradition in the Catholic Church.

Taking young men into a priesthood and denying them the exposure to normalised maturation is just asking for abhorent behaviours as they seek out sexual satisfaction and gratification that have been denied them via normal, as God intended,  hetrosexual coupling. 

Where was the state in all this and why did they allow Canon Law to dilute their responsibility? This is the same kind of nonsense we are in fear of with the Muslims and their push for Sharia Law within our codes. Where was the state when these young men were forced to endure deprivation in favour of religion in a secular society?


----------



## basilio (3 March 2016)

First Dog on the Moon has skewered and  slow roasted Cardinal Pell through his own lips.


> * George Pell: They didn't tell me because they were worried I might ask difficult questions
> *
> While the rape and torture of hundreds of children swirled around him, a monstrous wailing storm of blood and terror and unimaginable sin ... Pell heard nothing




http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-were-worried-i-might-ask-difficult-questions

______________________________________________________________________

I made a broader observation in an earlier post on the range of other sexual activities of priests. It is a significant issue because at any one time The Archbishop is dealing with a number of incidents involving priests, parishoners, non parishioners and  sometimes relationships between clergy.

My understanding was that little of this was documented or if it was, it was carefully screened. Certainly under Archbishop Frank Little the main edict was Don't tell, Don't ask.

This created a strained and hypocritical  faÃ§ade to Church dealings with almost all internal moral questions.  The denials and cover ups of child sex abuse were just an extension of this behaviour.



> Roman Catholic clerical culture favors doctrinal rigidity, conformity, obedience, submission and psychosexual immaturity, mistaken for innocence, in its candidates. These are the personality elements that lead to advancement and power in the clerical system. Single men are more easily controlled if their sexuality is secret. Double lives on all levels of clerical life are tolerated if they do not cause scandal or raise legal problems. Sexual activity between bishops and priests and adult partners is well known within clerical circles. The secret system forms a comfortable refuge for unresolved gay conflicts. There is a new emerging awareness of the systemic nature of sexual/celibate behavior within the Roman Catholic ministry that is increasingly destabilizing to the church.
> 
> Dire consequences will follow the exposure of this sexual system embedded in a secret celibate culture. Authorities who are or have been sexually active, although not with minors, are hard put to publicly correct clerics who are abusing minors. The need for secrecy, the cover-up, extends beyond defending criminal activity of a sex abuser. The power and control that holds the Roman Catholic church together depends on preservation of the celibate myth. The Vatican and Pope John Paul II declared its inviolability.




http://ncronline.org/blogs/examining-crisis/secret-sex-celibate-system


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> Well, if all those items sound like goodies to you, why don't you move to a Communist Country?
> 
> You don't seem to be happy living in Australia...You are always so critical about our living standards here....
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you originally leave a communist country?......If you did why did you leave?...Maybe you should go back from where you came.




I can't imagine the hate that has filled your core Noco ... it so patently affects your comprehension of the world and people around you.

You know well and truely that I am descendent of first settlers because i has posted same and as much as you try to avoid eye contact you do read my posts, thus the rage inside you when I poke you. 

Let's try this on with your same argument: if you don't like what someone with early settler pedigree, thus more ownership than you, then you should rack off to where you came from, which I assume is England given your penchant for superior opinions over dinky di Aussies. 

You may not be familiar with us old Australian Families motto espoused so eloquently by Mary Gilmore:


"I am he

Who paved the way,

That you might walk

At your ease today;

I split the rock;

I felled the tree,

The nation was””

Because of me!

"


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I can't imagine the hate that has filled your core Noco ... it so patently affects your comprehension of the world and people around you.
> 
> You know well and truely that I am descendent of first settlers because i has posted same and as much as you try to avoid eye contact you do read my posts, thus the rage inside you when I poke you.
> 
> ...




Careful, there may be Greens in them thar hills.


----------



## luutzu (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I can't imagine the hate that has filled your core Noco ... it so patently affects your comprehension of the world and people around you.
> 
> You know well and truely that I am descendent of first settlers because i has posted same and as much as you try to avoid eye contact you do read my posts, thus the rage inside you when I poke you.
> 
> ...




Ya commies! Noco might be right you Red Irish - First Fleet or otherwise.

Fell trees and pave roads for the public to use; build nations and... "dislocate" the natives. Only a part of that was Capitalism (imperialism?)


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

luutzu said:


> Ya commies! Noco might be right you Red Irish - First Fleet or otherwise.
> 
> Fell trees and pave roads for the public to use; build nations and... "dislocate" the natives. Only a part of that was Capitalism (imperialism?)




Don't you start!!


----------



## basilio (3 March 2016)

To go back to the Topic at hand.

There is an exceptionally well written website which explores sexual behaviour in the Catholic Church.  The auther was a Benedictine monk for 18 years so he has an insiders understanding of the situation. He is also a psychologist which brings another perspective to the issue.

Well worth a read.

http://www.awrsipe.com/Click_and_Learn/REVISION of CODE WORDS TO HIDE SEX ABUSE 1.pdf

"Code words to hide sex abuse"


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2016)

basilio said:


> To go back to the Topic at hand.
> 
> There is an exceptionally well written website which explores sexual behaviour in the Catholic Church.  The auther was a Benedictine monk for 18 years so he has an insiders understanding of the situation. He is also a psychologist which brings another perspective to the issue.
> 
> ...




The question is why are there so many pedohiles in the C.C. ?

The cloistered atmosphere, access to children and air of authority provided to priests provides fertile ground for peddos to indulge their fantasies and get paid for it as well.

I don't see anything to suggest that the RCC has put in any processes to weed these people out. Until they do I don't know why decent people associate with them.


----------



## basilio (3 March 2016)

I agree with you Sir Rumpole on asking how the Catholic Church should be ensuring it doesn't have abusers in the system.  Interestingly enough the reference I gave goes into great detail on how the secretive, obedience focused systems of the CC helped create unhealthy environments.

With regard to current activities by senior Church officials to stop immoral behaviour by priests check out this story


> * SEXUAL PREDATOR PRIESTS*
> 
> 
> There are a small number of Catholic priests in Irish Dioceses and Religious Orders who are sexual predators of vulnerable women!
> ...




http://wisecatholic.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/sexual-predator-priests.html

The author of the bog is Bishop Pat Buckley.


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I can't imagine the hate that has filled your core Noco ... it so patently affects your comprehension of the world and people around you.
> 
> You know well and truely that I am descendent of first settlers because i has posted same and as much as you try to avoid eye contact you do read my posts, thus the rage inside you when I poke you.
> 
> ...




Sport, I was born in Brisbane, my father was born in Brisbane and my mother was born in Port Douglas....You don't say where you were born.

I just don't understand why you are holier than thou to sprout your like for the the communist way of living over our democratic way of living in Australia.

I am also asking the question as to why this Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse is limited to the Catholic Church and their pedophile priests...Why aren't the rogues in the Islamic Movement and the Aboriginal Communities included......Yes, we all know why, when you look into who set up this commission  and the terms of reference.


----------



## basilio (3 March 2016)

> With regard to current activities by senior Church officials to stop immoral behaviour by priests check out this story
> 
> 
> http://wisecatholic.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/sexual-predator-priests.html
> ...




Point of clarification here..

I was pretty amazed as I read Bishop Pat Buckleys blog that he managed to survive in the catholic Church.

Fact of the matter is that he *was* a Catholic priest but has been excommunicated for a long time. 

He still calls himself a Bishop but it's strictly in his own sphere. Very colourful character and I think his insights into the Catholic Church still stand.


----------



## basilio (3 March 2016)

> I am also asking the question as to why this Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse is limited to the Catholic Church and their pedophile priests...Why aren't the rogues in the Islamic Movement and the Aboriginal Communities included......Yes, we all know why, when you look into who set up this commission and the terms of reference.




You don't have much more than a passing wave to reality do you Noco ?

Did you get any hint from the title of the Royal Commission as to it's remit ?  ie 
*
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse*

The Commission covered scores of institutions Noco.  You can check out their report here.

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission...rings/findings

The current questioning of Cardinal Pell was to get to the bottom of the huge intersecting web of child sex abuse that surrounds Cardinal Pell career in Ballarat and Melb.

By the way you will almost certainly examples of aboriginal sexual abuse in the documentation of various orphanages, State Institutions, welfare groups.


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

basilio said:


> You don't have much more than a passing wave to reality do you Noco ?
> 
> Did you get any hint from the title of the Royal Commission as to it's remit ?  ie
> *
> ...




Yes you are right in the fact that there were a score or more, 29 to be exact, institutions mentioned from what I checked on google but not one mention of Muslim or Aboriginal child abuse.

BTW, your URL could not be opened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_into_Institutional_Responses_to_Child_Sexual_Abuse


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> Yes you are right in the fact that there were a score or more, 29 to be exact, institutions mentioned from what I checked on google but not one mention of Muslim or Aboriginal child abuse.
> 
> BTW, your URL could not be opened.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_into_Institutional_Responses_to_Child_Sexual_Abuse




And what about sub cults like Scientology, Hillsong, Exclusive Bretheren etc. There are loonies all around the place that hide some dark secrets.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> I just don't understand why you are holier than thou to sprout your like for the the communist way of living over our democratic way of living in Australia.
> 
> .




You're right Noco ... you just don't understand 

How do you go through life without any funny bone? I don't think I have ever contested with anyone with such tunnel vision.....it's amazing 

Please do yourself a favour and look back on my recent involving you posts and try to find out where I say I like communism..... then take a pic of your embarrassment and post it on instagram.


----------



## basilio (3 March 2016)

> Yes you are right in the fact that there were a score or more, 29 to be exact, institutions mentioned from what I checked on google but not one mention of Muslim or Aboriginal child abuse.
> 
> BTW, your URL could not be opened.  Noco




The terms of reference of the Commission were quite broad to allow it cover a wide range of organisations which may have had instances of child sexual abuse which had been covered up. As you noted in the end 29 organisations found themselves trying to explain why children had been abused in their care and why little if anything had been done. 

There were a number of cases of aboriginal sexual abuse covered in the examples of welfare homes and orphanages.

If institutions run by Muslims or Aboriginals had situations of child abuse it was totally open for victims to come forward to the Commission and make a case.  That doesn't seem to have happened does it or more likely these examples have been a part of the overall cases made against institutions.

The URl for the Commissions findings is

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/public-hearings/findings

________________________________________________

If you check out the website for the Royal Commission you can find where they specifically invited Aboriginal people and people from Non-english speaking backgrounds to come forward if they had been abused and tell their story. 

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/resource-centre/other-languages
http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/resource-centre/indigenous-people


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Enough of the blather Noco. The labels are so 1950s scare mongering.
> 
> Let's look at the communist countries:
> 
> ...




Where you have compared communism to  OZ under a Liberal government, what other conclusion would you expect anyone to come to.....You indicated favorable thoughts on Communism and criticized OZ under  liberal government and that is why I say if you favor communism over Liberalism, then why do you continue to live here in OZ?.......Simple question my learned friend.

You still seem reluctant to state where you were born.


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

basilio said:


> The terms of reference of the Commission were quite broad to allow it cover a wide range of organisations which may have had instances of child sexual abuse which had been covered up. As you noted in the end 29 organisations found themselves trying to explain why children had been abused in their care and why little if anything had been done.
> 
> There were a number of cases of aboriginal sexual abuse covered in the examples of welfare homes and orphanages.
> 
> ...




I am sure everybody knows there are dozens of cases of sexual abuse in the Islamic world and Aboriginal communities and it does make me wonder why no one has come forward.....It would not surprise me that as this Royal Commission was set up by a Labor Government in January 13 2013, these cases may well have been suppressed. ....The personnel on the Royal Commission would have been hand picked by Labor and knowing Labor's history they would stop at nothing with their main at destroying the Catholic Church in order to persuade people to convert to socialism...... The snide way the Labor Party operate under the Fabian Flag is well known as stated in an article posted by "Restore Australia"....The Fabians are a wolf in sheep's clothing.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> I am sure everybody knows there are dozens of cases of sexual abuse in the Islamic world and Aboriginal communities and it does make me wonder why no one has come forward.....It would not surprise me that as this Royal Commission was set up by a Labor Government in January 13 2013, these cases may well have been suppressed. ....The personnel on the Royal Commission would have been hand picked by Labor and knowing Labor's history they would stop at nothing with their main at destroying the Catholic Church in order to persuade people to convert to socialism...... The snide way the Labor Party operate under the Fabian Flag is well known as stated in an article posted by "Restore Australia"....The Fabians are a wolf in sheep's clothing.




You really are  just taking the pi$$ aren't you old chap ?


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You really are  just taking the pi$$ aren't you old chap ?


----------



## noco (4 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You really are  just taking the pi$$ aren't you old chap ?




Rumpy I am a realist and no matter how you and your lefties try to ridicule or discredit me, you are wasting your time.....I am ever suspicious of the  Fabians, Communists, Labor, Social Democrats or what ever you like to call them and  the propaganda and the the hidden agenda they continue to come up with....I have followed it for so long now and nothing has change my opinion of their Modus Operandi.

I am too old in the tooth for you or any of your lefties to take the pi$$ out of me.


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> And what about sub cults like Scientology, Hillsong, Exclusive Bretheren etc. There are loonies all around the place that hide some dark secrets.




Isn't Scientology a hangout for closet homosexuals and surrogacy?


I agree, the state should go hard on all the superstitious organisations for any breach of the law. The state has a mandate from Jesus afterall:

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's".


----------



## SirRumpole (4 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's".




There may be a demarcation dispute about which is which.


----------



## Knobby22 (8 March 2016)

Now the trial is over some realistic comments from the literary critic of the Age who, like me, was disgusted with the media witch hunt.
Please rise above it and read the following or better yet read the whole article (link below).


Last week we saw Cardinal George Pell cross-examined for  about 20 hours at the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse,  with the 74-year-old prelate speaking via video link from Rome. Afterwards there was a meeting with victims who were pleased to hear he would try to set up a centre for survivors of abuse.

In an hour-long interview on Sky with Andrew Bolt, Pell said he wasn't so stiff on the inside and, at one point, he appeared to weep. Yet none of this cut the mustard: from much of the response to Pell's testimony, both during and after it, you would imagine he is personally responsible for the sins of the Church.

Why? Because we were witnessing a show trial. A week before the hearing began, the Herald Sun published a leak from Victoria Police that investigations were under way into possible crimes of the cardinal. No new lines of inquiry were offered, no reliable source was indicated and the one specific matter referred to allegations which had been laid to rest in 2002 when they were examined by Justice Southwell.

Still, the day after Pell made his notorious slip about not being "interested" in the sexual abuse, the front page of the Herald Sun said "Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Stop No Evil".

It's nonsense. When Pell initiated the Melbourne Response in 1996 he went further than any bishop had gone to fixing the problem. Yet a lot of people want to blame him  for the horrors that were perpetrated for no better reason than they see his formidable, take-no-prisoners manner as the embodiment of the attitude of an arrogant and heartless church.

So, when he says that as a young priest in Ballarat he heard of a brother not only using excessive discipline but behaving dodgily with boys and he spoke with the chaplain who said the Christian Brothers were attending to the problem, this is met with derision.

When he says that Sir Frank Little, then Archbishop of Melbourne, and the Catholic Education Office left him in the dark about accusations against clergy he is told by the head of the Royal Commission and the Assisting Counsel that this is "implausible".

A lot of people seem to want Pell to bear personal responsibility for the sins of the Church, sins against the innocent which have ruined lives, for no better reason than that they don't like him.

It's ironic but it's precisely because Pell was a tough customer that he was liable to be left in the dark. As he indicated to Bolt (never mind that you hate Bolt too), a lot of people in the Church couldn't stand him, both before and after his appointment as Archbishop of Melbourne.

I can remember the disdain of the liberal-minded Jesuits. Pell was theologically conservative and tough-minded in his expression of it. He refused communion to rainbow-sashed gay activists. He took legal action to stop an artwork from being exhibited. There was a whistle of awe when he walked into a press conference and said, "I'm here to object to 'Piss Christ'."

He was the opposite of a conciliatory, namby-pamby ecclesiastic. He was a muscular, confrontational sort of Christian. He came close to playing top-level Australian Rules Football as a ruckman for Richmond and it amused friends and foes alike that an old injury made it next to impossible for this man of God to kneel.

And, yes, he was politically conservative – close to Tony Abbott, a climate change sceptic and an admirer of B.A. Santamaria. He did not get on with the mild-mannered Frank Little and he said in the Royal Commission of Bishop Ronald Mulkearns of Ballarat, "his repeated refusal to act is, I think, extraordinary." Of Little he spoke of an "extraordinary world, a world of crimes and cover-ups and people [who] did not want the status quo to be disturbed." 

Should we be surprised that these "merciful" bishops might have wanted to keep Big George, the bull in the china shop, out of the picture? And yet how much the dogs of outrage want to bay at the man who took steps to stop the abuse six years before the events in Boston highlighted in the film Spotlight.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/bl...show-trial-20160306-gnbz0e.html#ixzz42FqrG3ED 
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

Pell said that no one told him because he might do something about it, but when someone did tell him he did nothing about it.

A man with feet of sand pretending he's a rock.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Now the trial is over some realistic comments from the literary critic of the Age who, like me, was disgusted with the media witch hunt.





More a media feeding frenzy I think. The media is not the paragon of virtue they would have us believe:- they are merely gossipers, talking heads and wordsmiths IMO. 

I don't trust anyone who uses a never been seen being as an excuse to get inside people's heads, but as has been seen by the farce commission, getting inside a church organisation is pretty difficult and if Pell is a good man then he can do better within rather than knocking on the door demanding an audience.

I suspect there has been a lot of lawyers who have made a lot of money from the taxpayer purse and the few who have made a name for themselves in the inner sanctums of the legal brotherhood.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> More a media feeding frenzy I think. The media is not the paragon of virtue they would have us believe:- they are merely gossipers, talking heads and wordsmiths IMO.
> 
> I don't trust anyone who uses a never been seen being as an excuse to get inside people's heads, but as has been seen by the farce commission, getting inside a church organisation is pretty difficult and if Pell is a good man then he can do better within rather than knocking on the door demanding an audience.
> 
> I suspect there has been a lot of lawyers who have made a lot of money from the taxpayer purse and the few who have made a name for themselves in the inner sanctums of the legal brotherhood.




I don't think the Commission is a complete farce. Better these things see the light of day rather than fester in the background. 

The sad thing is that there is more child abuse going on in families that never see the light of day because people don't want to break up a relationship or fear that they will be blamed themselves. 

The Church is the tip of the iceberg on child abuse, and societal abuse is something that will never be investigated.


----------



## McLovin (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think the Commission is a complete farce. Better these things see the light of day rather than fester in the background.




I don't think it's a farce at all. Pell's Melbourne Response was riddled with conflicts of interest, and was about risk mitigation for the Church. The needs of the victims were a very distant second. In reality millions of children around the world have suffered because of this grubby organisation that still believes itself above the law. Imagine the Catholic Church wasn't a Christian religious organisation, I doubt the Pell Cheer Squad would be as forgiving.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think the Commission is a complete farce. Better these things see the light of day rather than fester in the background.
> 
> The sad thing is that there is more child abuse going on in families that never see the light of day because people don't want to break up a relationship or fear that they will be blamed themselves.
> 
> The Church is the tip of the iceberg on child abuse, and societal abuse is something that will never be investigated.




I say farce because it didn't amount to a "hill of beans" except as you say bring to light the players ... as knobby22's post indicates it has probably had zip effect on the true believers and the non believers.

It seems to me that Royal Commissions are merely a vehicle to slur and play word games, worst still as seen with the Union commission, political witchhunts.

If there has been criminal behaviour the monies should be poured into police investigations and convictions IMO.


----------



## noco (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think the Commission is a complete farce. Better these things see the light of day rather than fester in the background.
> 
> The sad thing is that there is more child abuse going on in families that never see the light of day because people don't want to break up a relationship or fear that they will be blamed themselves.
> 
> The Church is the tip of the iceberg on child abuse, and societal abuse is something that will never be investigated.




It is a complete and utter farce......It is all about the Fabian indoctrinated LUG party out to kill the Catholic Church.

Still no  mention of child abuse in the Islamic world and Aboriginal communities....I bet there is far more abuse going on in these institutions than in the Catholic Church.

Can you tell me why Rumpy or are you and your lefty mates turning a blind eye to it for fear of repercussions in those communities?


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

noco said:


> It is a complete and utter farce......It is all about the Fabian indoctrinated LUG party out to kill the Catholic Church.
> 
> Still no  mention of child abuse in the Islamic world and Aboriginal communities....I bet there is far more abuse going on in these institutions than in the Catholic Church.
> 
> Can you tell me why Rumpy or are you and your lefty mates turning a blind eye to it for fear of repercussions in those communities?




I've said several times here that things like forced child marriages and genital mutilation in other religions should be investigated.

And you want the Catholic church to be a protected species ?


----------



## Knobby22 (8 March 2016)

The Catholic Church obviously deserves to be in trouble,  but this witch hunt attacking the one guy who was doing something about it and saying he is lying is just wrong. He was just out of Uni, a wet behind the ears priest and he was fighting Archbishop Frank Little almost from the beginning.  

There is more in the full article (worth a read) but the salient point I will requote is:

Should we be surprised that these "merciful" bishops might have wanted to keep Big George, the bull in the china shop, out of the picture? And yet how much the dogs of outrage want to bay at the man who took steps to stop the abuse six years before the events in Boston highlighted in the film Spotlight.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> The Catholic Church obviously deserves to be in trouble,  but this witch hunt attacking the one guy who was doing something about it and saying he is lying is just wrong. He was just out of Uni, a wet behind the ears priest and he was fighting Archbishop Frank Little almost from the beginning.
> 
> There is more in the full article (worth a read) but the salient point I will requote is:
> 
> Should we be surprised that these "merciful" bishops might have wanted to keep Big George, the bull in the china shop, out of the picture? And yet how much the dogs of outrage want to bay at the man who took steps to stop the abuse six years before the events in Boston highlighted in the film Spotlight.




Knobby, the thing is that anyone with an ounce of compassion towards children would, even if he heard only rumours, try to do something about it.

His own words "wasn't much interested" condemns him as much as any of the victims evidence.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Knobby, the thing is that anyone with an ounce of compassion towards children would, even if he heard only rumours, try to do something about it.
> 
> His own words "wasn't much interested" condemns him as much as any of the victims evidence.




I can only keep reminding everyone that it was common knowledge that Catholic Priests were suspects way before any of us were born. And any parent, brother, sister, family friend etc who turned a blind eye to an incident instead of going straight to the police showed a total lack of care and were complicit in the ongoing abuse through the centuries and decades.

I think the "It’s a sad story and it wasn’t of much interest to me,” comment was a mangled response that the press were most happy to parade. I must admit it flumoxed me when I watched it live, but there was no way Pell was going to skewer himself so I put it down to fluster.


----------



## McLovin (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Knobby, the thing is that anyone with an ounce of compassion towards children would, even if he heard only rumours, try to do something about it.
> 
> His own words "wasn't much interested" condemns him as much as any of the victims evidence.




This was the most telling quote and, imo, sums up the entire Catholic Church.



> Cardinal Pell also said the instinct was to protect the church in response to allegations.
> 
> "At that stage, the instinct was more to protect the institution, the community of the church, from shame," he said.




So by his own admission in the first instance the faÃ§ade of the Church was to be maintained. Bringing to justice those who had committed those awful crimes against children was secondary.


----------



## noco (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I've said several times here that things like forced child marriages and genital mutilation in other religions should be investigated.
> 
> And you want the Catholic church to be a protected species ?




Excuse me !!!!!!...where did I ever say I want the Catholic Church to be a protected species?......I am not a Catholic and I really don't care about them.......I will say it again, this  Royal Commission is all about destroying the Catholic Church in favor of prompting followers to leave and follow Socialism which is atheism.
Stop making up stories to protect the modus operandi of your beloved Labor Party..

So I ask you again, why hasn't this hand picked Labor Royal Commission started investigating  the Islamic movement and the Aboriginal Communities?

I am sure you know why......It is so pointed.


----------



## Value Collector (8 March 2016)

noco said:


> I will say it again, this  Royal Commission is all about destroying the Catholic Church in favor of prompting followers to leave and follow Socialism which is atheism.




:iamwithst

"socialism is atheism" what are talking about, you sound like a conspiracy nutter.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

noco said:


> Excuse me !!!!!!...where did I ever say I want the Catholic Church to be a protected species?......I am not a Catholic and I really don't care about them.......I will say it again, this  Royal Commission is all about destroying the Catholic Church in favor of prompting followers to leave and follow Socialism which is atheism.
> Stop making up stories to protect the modus operandi of your beloved Labor Party..
> 
> So I ask you again, why hasn't this hand picked Labor Royal Commission started investigating  the Islamic movement and the Aboriginal Communities?
> ...





The TRUC was designed to turn people off joining a union and make them more vulnerable to the whims of the employers. That's blatantly political.

As for the CARC , there are a lot of Catholics in the Labor Party too. Your Fabian conspiracy theories are getting worn around the edges.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

Value Collector said:


> :iamwithst
> 
> "socialism is atheism" what are talking about, you sound like a conspiracy nutter.




You only just realised that ?


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

Bill Shorten, Barnaby Joyce, Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey & Christopher Pyne, they are not only Catholic boys, but   Jesuit-educated too.

Remember history lessons and the unofficial Catholic- ALP coalition before the DLP dumped on its masters? Joseph Lyons was Catholic too.

It's all a Labor plot to wipe out the Catholics, and if Menzies had his way they (Catholics) would never have been allowed to get their hands on his Liberal Party, either.


----------



## basilio (8 March 2016)

I am amazed at how many different versions of reality people are proposing with regard to Cardinal Pells evidence and the role of the Royal Commission into Institutional Response to Child Sex abuse. 

It reminds of the Japanese movie "Rashamon" (which was later remade in the US as "The Outrage" ) All the participants attempting to create the best look for themselves with what actually happened being totally at odds with any story.

__________________________________________________________________________

_And by the way Noco .  No matter how many times you repeat your garbage the Royal Commission had no remit to "investigate" the sexual abuse topics you have such a prurient interest in._. 

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-rashomon-1950
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Outrage_(1964_film)


----------



## basilio (8 March 2016)

Has anyone else on this forum read the Commission findings into the "Melbourne Response" ? It details some of the worst cases of abuse committed on children and the response of Archbishop Pell to the parents. The case of Emma and Katie Foster starts on page 19 of the report.  Have a read and a think. This is the independent observers view.

https://www.childabuseroyalcommissi...-a392-5d8bc7d3e77c/Report-of-Case-Study-No-16


----------



## noco (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The TRUC was designed to turn people off joining a union and make them more vulnerable to the whims of the employers. That's blatantly political.
> 
> As for the CARC , there are a lot of Catholics in the Labor Party too. Your Fabian conspiracy theories are getting worn around the edges.




I was reprimanded by the ASF moderators and the lefties for accusing Islam regarding infiltration into the Western World 5 or 6 years ago but it has been proven how right my predictions were and I will prove how right I am about the influence the Fabian Society has on the Greens and the Labor Party.

I am still waiting for you to tell me when this Labor stacked RC into institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse will look into Islam and Aboriginals......Are you trying to tell me the RC has not received any Muslim or Aboriginal submissions or complaints?.......Or just maybe they have and are suppressing them for very good reasons only known to themselves.


----------



## basilio (8 March 2016)

> I am still waiting for you to tell me when this Labor stacked RC into institutional Responses to Child Sex Abuse will look into Islam and Aboriginals......Are you trying to tell me the RC has not received any Muslim or Aboriginal submissions or complaints?.......Or just maybe they have and are suppressing them for very good reasons only known to themselves.




Or maybe you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and simply create conspiracy theories out of thin air to defend your hatred of Islam and Aboriginals ? 

You have been told numerous times what the remit  of the Commission is. You just aren't interested in any reality except your own fantasies.
____________________________________________________________________________

I can see a place for a conversation about sexual practices in various communities. This thread and the discussion around the Royal Commission is not it.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I say farce because it didn't amount to a "hill of beans" except as you say bring to light the players ... as knobby22's post indicates it has probably had zip effect on the true believers and the non believers.
> 
> It seems to me that Royal Commissions are merely a vehicle to slur and play word games, worst still as seen with the Union commission, political witchhunts.
> 
> If there has been criminal behaviour the monies should be poured into police investigations and convictions IMO.




The "hill of beans" may be the findings of the Commission.

If they recommend charges against people who haven't currently been charged then that's a result.


----------



## noco (8 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Or maybe you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and simply create conspiracy theories out of thin air to defend your hatred of Islam and Aboriginals ?
> 
> You have been told numerous times what the remit  of the Commission is. You just aren't interested in any reality except your own fantasies.
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ...




Firstly, where have I expressed my hatred for Islam and Aboriginals?....I think you are getting carried away with your fantasies and have become obsessed with your own righteousness....You appear to be the judge and jury...I know exactly what I am talking about and perhaps more than you do....I have certainly lived longer than you and have and have observed this practice over many years.

Secondly, you appear to be full of exaggeration about me being told numerous times about the terms of reference to this RC......I have read the terms of reference and I have noted submissions have been received from  29 organizations including sporting and religious groups......According to the loaded left wing hand picked members of the commissions, there have been no such submissions made by any Muslims of female mutilation, underage marriage of young girls who are not even in their teens or sexual abuse by Aboriginals.......There has been  numerous reports in this area so where are they?.....One can only presume those submissions are being suppressed and I will continue to believe that is the case until I see some evidence otherwise.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

noco said:


> One can only presume those submissions are being suppressed and I will continue to believe that is the case until I see some evidence otherwise.




You have to prove there have been submissions first.

But I think that if there have not been any it could well be due to victim's fear of retribution by the "clan".

So there may well be an issue but it's off the beam to say that it's being ignored by the Commission without any evidence of submissions received.


----------



## noco (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You have to prove there have been submissions first.
> 
> But I think that if there have not been any it could well be due to victim's fear of retribution by the "clan".
> 
> So there may well be an issue but it's off the beam to say that it's being ignored by the Commission without any evidence of submissions received.




That is a very convenient answer but the suspicions remain of malpractice by the Labor Party when it comes to such hearings....It is like letting the fox look after the chickens.......The Fabian motto......"A WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING".


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

noco said:


> That is a very convenient answer but the suspicions remain of malpractice by the Labor Party when it comes to such hearings....It is like letting the fox look after the chickens.......The Fabian motto......"A WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING".




No, YOUR suspicions remain, and always will because you are a class warrior, first, last and always.


----------



## noco (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No, YOUR suspicions remain, and always will because you are a class warrior, first, last and always.




Thanks Rumpy....I am pleased you have a high opinion of me....I like the way you think of your old mate.

Freedom of speech...ain't it great?


----------



## basilio (9 March 2016)

Another Grand Jury report in the US outlining the abuse of children by priests.

Same story different place.  Widespread abuse. Priests shuffled around. No one believed the kids. Action was delayed and delayed and delayed  - mostly to get past Statute of Limitations and allowing people to die off.


> *He was a monster': how priest child abuse tore apart Pennsylvania towns*
> 
> A grand jury report issued last week details abuse by dozens of Catholic leaders in the small communities of Altoona-Johnstown from the 1950s to the 1990s
> s
> ...




http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...priest-child-sex-abuse-ebensburg-pennsylvania

More details in the following article


> * Catholic bishops covered up 'hundreds' of sexual abuses in Pennsylvania*
> 
> New grand jury investigation of central Pennsylvania diocese says bishops protected over 50 priests who sexually abused hundreds of children




http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ops-cover-up-priest-sexual-abuses-of-children


----------



## noco (9 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Another Grand Jury report in the US outlining the abuse of children by priests.
> 
> Same story different place.  Widespread abuse. Priests shuffled around. No one believed the kids. Action was delayed and delayed and delayed  - mostly to get past Statute of Limitations and allowing people to die off.
> 
> ...




Ah yes...the good old commo paper the Guardian...What else would you expect from them?

http://www.islam-watch.org/MuminSalih/child-abuse-islam.htm


----------



## SirRumpole (9 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Another Grand Jury report in the US outlining the abuse of children by priests.
> 
> Same story different place.  Widespread abuse. Priests shuffled around. No one believed the kids. Action was delayed and delayed and delayed  - mostly to get past Statute of Limitations and allowing people to die off.
> 
> ...




There are too many cases of child abuse in the Catholic church worldwide to believe that it was unknown to the hierarchy (those who were not involved themselves).

To me it points to an organised ring of pedophiles who saw the church and the cover it provided as a way to spend their lives indulging their fantasies and being paid for it as well.

I say again that there does not appear to be any concerted action on behalf of the church to weed these people out before they become priests and are given access to children. 

Are churches exempt from legislation and checks that other "working with children" employees have to go through ?

I wonder if the Commission has addressed that issue.


----------



## noco (9 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There are too many cases of child abuse in the Catholic church worldwide to believe that it was unknown to the hierarchy (those who were not involved themselves).
> 
> To me it points to an organised ring of pedophiles who saw the church and the cover it provided as a way to spend their lives indulging their fantasies and being paid for it as well.
> 
> ...




When will the RC address child sex abuse in Aboriginal Communities?.......This problem is far greater than what is happening in the Roman Catholic Church by far....Have a read of the statistics.


http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2013/05/aboriginal-child-abuse-the-royal-commission-cannot-avoid/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-25/sex-abuse-reports-rise-among-indigenous-children/4843600


----------



## SirRumpole (9 March 2016)

noco said:


> When will the RC address child sex abuse in Aboriginal Communities?.......This problem is far greater than what is happening in the Roman Catholic Church by far....Have a read of the statistics.
> 
> 
> http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2013/05/aboriginal-child-abuse-the-royal-commission-cannot-avoid/
> ...




The fact is that after the Stolen Generation, criticising Aboriginal child rearing is taboo. No government would do it, not Liberal or Labor. They are both gutless in that respect.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 March 2016)

Catholic Church establishes new body to handle abuse complaints in Canberra, Goulburn

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...s-new-body-to-handle-abuse-complaints/7234494


----------



## basilio (12 March 2016)

Awful stuff happening to Aborigines in Queensland 



> * Child sexual abuse and prostitution in formerly secret government report*
> 
> A report delivered to the Newman government detailing sexual abuse and prostitution of Indigenous children in far north Queensland is now public




http://www.theguardian.com/australi...titution-revealed-in-secret-government-report

Can't give it  any credance of course because it was published  "in that load of commo rubbish" The Guardian.


----------



## noco (13 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Awful stuff happening to Aborigines in Queensland
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The report published by the "RED RAG" Guardian was compiled by Professor Stephan Smallbone of Griffith University.......The Guardian could hardly  distort the facts like they normally do......In this incident they were only the messenger in which case your argument has been blown out of the water as The Guardian having been some Messiah in bringing out the facts.


http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ut-of-the-shadows-report-20160312-gnhedt.html


----------



## basilio (13 March 2016)

noco said:


> The report published by the "RED RAG" Guardian was compiled by Professor Stephan Smallbone of Griffith University.......The Guardian could hardly  distort the facts like they normally do......In this incident they were only the messenger in which case your argument has been blown out of the water as The Guardian having been some Messiah in bringing out the facts.
> 
> 
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ut-of-the-shadows-report-20160312-gnhedt.html




Ah Noco,s version of reality. When he likes the news story The Guardian is running they are just the messenger.  When he doesn't like the news story they are running they are a "commo rag."

Ever considered the possibility that The Guardian in many, many cases is just running the story and being the messenger?  That in fact you could find almost exactly the same story in a score of other media outlets ? For example the  case of the Grand Jury report on the abuse of children by Catholic priests was big news everywhere. 

Same story different messengers.  Wake up mate.  Most of the time you are just dreaming.

Punch this heading into Google and see how many other medias reported the story

"Grand jury report on Catholic sex abuse"

Grand jury report reveals decades of clergy sex abuse in ...
ncronline.org/.../grand-jury-report-reveals-decades-clergy-sex-abuse-alto...
Mar 2, 2016 - The 147-page grand jury report chronicles a history of abuse in the ... issue of clergy sexual abuse in Pennsylvania, following grand jury reports in ... 58 active priests under age 75 and a Catholic population of roughly 94,000.
Reports of Attorneys General, Grand Juries, Individuals ...

www.bishop-accountability.org/AtAGlance/reports.htm
7) Philadelphia PA - Grand Jury Report, September 15, 2005 ... Karen Terry et al., The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the ...
Read the grand jury report on sexual abuse of children by ...

www.pennlive.com/politics/index.../grand_jury_accuses_priests_in.html
Mar 1, 2016 - The report from the statewide grand jury released on Tuesday accuses priests in Altoona-Johnstown Catholic Diocese of sexually abusing ...
In the news
147-Page Grand Jury Report on Pennsylvania Diocese Reveals Decades of Sexual Abuse and Cover-up

The Nonprofit Quarterly‎ - 2 days ago
The Grand Jury found, as was the case in most sexual assault reports ... other investigative reports of child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, ...
Catholic church's secret archives key to exposing sex abuse scandal

Allentown Morning Call‎ - 26 mins ago
Lawmaker: Investigate every Catholic diocese in Pa.
York Daily Record/Sunday News‎ - 3 days ago
More news for Grand jury report on Catholic sex abuse
Grand jury: Altoona diocese concealed sex abuse of hundreds

www.post-gazette.com/news/...abuse...grand-jury.../201603010091
Mar 1, 2016 - The report says priests molested children, bishops covered it up and ... Grand jury: Altoona diocese concealed sex abuse of hundreds of children by priests ... 50 priests in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown.
Report: Priests abused hundreds of kids in Altoona ...

*www.catholicnews.com/.../report-priests-abused-hundreds-of-kids-in-alto...
Mar 2, 2016 - A grand jury report released March 1 by Pennsylvania Attorney General ... up clerical sexual abuse in the Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown to ... Amy B. Hill, spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference, said in an ...
Grand jury: 2 bishops hid sex abuse of hundreds of children
*

bigstory.ap.org/.../grand-jury-2-bishops-hid-sex-abuse-hundreds-childre...
Mar 1, 2016 - (AP) ”” Two Catholic bishops who led a small Pennsylvania diocese helped cover up ... The 147-page report issued Tuesday on sexual abuse in the ... Saylor told the grand jury that the mayors of Altoona and Johnstown even ...
Sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Sexual_abuse_scandal_in_the_Roman_Cathol...
Jump to grand jury - The 2011 grand jury report said that as many as 37 priests were credibly accused of sexual abuse or inappropriate behavior toward ...
Pennsylvania Diocese Leaders Knew of Sex Abuse for ...

www.nytimes.com/.../pennsylvania-diocese-leaders-knew-of-sex-abuse-for-...
Mar 1, 2016 - Clergy Accused of Abuse in Pennsylvania ... discussed a grand jury report that said two Catholic bishops at the Altoona-Johnstown Diocese hid ...
Grand Jury Report: 2 Bishops Hid Sex Abuse Of Hundreds ...

philadelphia.cbslocal.com/.../grand-jury-2-bishops-hid-sex-abuse-of-hun...
Mar 1, 2016 - ALTOONA, Pa. (AP) ”” Two Roman Catholic bishops who led a central Pennsylvania diocese helped cover up the sexual abuse of hundreds of ...


----------



## noco (13 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Ah Noco,s version of reality. When he likes the news story The Guardian is running they are just the messenger.  When he doesn't like the news story they are running they are a "commo rag."
> 
> Ever considered the possibility that The Guardian in many, many cases is just running the story and being the messenger?  That in fact you could find almost exactly the same story in a score of other media outlets ? For example the  case of the Grand Jury report on the abuse of children by Catholic priests was big news everywhere.
> 
> ...




It is always very obvious to me when I hit a raw nerve in one of you lefties you have no alternative but to to resort to the old Fabian tactic of discredit and ridicule.....If comments like "DREAMING AND WAKE UP MATE" is the best you can do to win an argument then I must feel sorry for you.


----------



## basilio (13 March 2016)

noco said:


> It is always very obvious to me when I hit a raw nerve in one of you lefties you have no alternative but to to resort to the old Fabian tactic of discredit and ridicule.....If comments like "DREAMING AND WAKE UP MATE" is the best you can do to win an argument then I must feel sorry for you.




Actually Noco my argument was simply presenting the squillion other news organisations that presented the same story  as The Guardian on the sex abuse of children by the Catholic Church to discredit your rejection of the story on the first occasion.

Back to the land of nod Noco.


----------



## noco (13 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Actually Noco my argument was simply presenting the squillion other news organisations that presented the same story  as The Guardian on the sex abuse of children by the Catholic Church to discredit your rejection of the story on the first occasion.
> 
> Back to the land of nod Noco.




Once again you have reverted to the Fabian way of character assassination...Is that the best you can really do?

The Fabians, Socialism, Communism what ever term you like to use are all "WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING" and that is their own motto and the Guardian News Paper is their propaganda machine as is the ABC.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2016)

I wonder why people like this have not come to the notice of the Child Abuse Royal Commission.

Malka Leifer: Australian principal accused of 74 child sex charges walks free in Israel



> The former principal of an ultra-Orthodox girls school in Melbourne has been ruled mentally unfit to face extradition and had her home detention lifted in a move that has shocked and deeply concerned Australian officials.
> Key points:
> 
> Judge rules Malka Leifer unfit to face extradition
> ...


----------



## SmokeyGhost (3 June 2016)

Because, in my view, they are gutless and more concerned with reputation and "niceties" of law than the victims of such abhorrent behaviour.  The community which allegedly assisted this person to leave this country should hang their heads in shame.  They have offended their faith and humanity.  Just my opinion of course.


----------



## pixel (3 June 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I wonder why people like this have not come to the notice of the Child Abuse Royal Commission.
> 
> Malka Leifer: Australian principal accused of 74 child sex charges walks free in Israel




So, this sadistic rapist has panic attacks when she thinks about facing court.
What would her victims experience when thinking back at the events? Orgasms??

Shudder the thought how an Israeli judge would've ruled if the rapist had been Australian, maybe even of German extraction.

This sordid episode highlights what is wrong with Western Jurisprudence: *We're soft on criminals and ignore the plight of their victims.* It's always "someone else's fault" that "made them do it", and the victims get a patronising pat on the back, plus - if they're lucky - a sum of cash, forcibly collected from either the taxpayer or by way of higher insurance premiums from everyone who holds a policy.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2016)

pixel said:


> So, this sadistic rapist has panic attacks when she thinks about facing court.
> What would her victims experience when thinking back at the events? Orgasms??
> 
> Shudder the thought how an Israeli judge would've ruled if the rapist had been Australian, maybe even of German extraction.
> ...




I think it may go a bit deeper than that.

The Jewish community in Australia is very powerful. So is the Catholic church but it has been gradually losing power and influence. They all try and cover up their blunders. 

That the Jewish community or parts thereof aided this person to escape Australia must be rigorously investigated by the police. I wonder why they and the Commission have been so quiet about it.


----------



## basilio (27 July 2016)

Cardinal Pell is back in the soup again.  The 7.30 report has broke open a series of allegations the police have been examining  for a year now. Very unsavoury. 

Interesting question will be if it triggers other accusations.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-27/george-pell-the-surf-club-allegation/7664690
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-...ing-george-pell-over-abuse-complaints/7664674


----------



## basilio (28 July 2016)

The range and scope of the allegations made against Cardinal Pell suggest he is in a heap of trouble.  If anyone else had such a range of complainants against them one would think they would certainly be charged  and have to face a court.

I suppose the fact that the complaints have decided to make their voices public highlights their concern this could be buried again. 

Next question will be how Pope  Francis responds.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 July 2016)

It's a complete beat up.
The police have already looked at it. 
If he wasn't in the Church the ABC would have writs already. These complainents have an agenda.


----------



## basilio (28 July 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> It's a complete beat up.
> The police have already looked at it.
> If he wasn't in the Church the ABC would have writs already. These complainents have an agenda.




Not true Knobby.  It is still well and truly being investigated by the police and has been sent to the Office of Public Prosecutions. If there is an agenda by the complainants it's to make sure this isn't quietly binned.

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/graham-a...-george-pell-about-leaks-20160728-gqfgt1.html
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...nvestigation-into-police-over-sex-abuse-smear


----------



## SirRumpole (28 July 2016)

It's a bit of a worry that these guys have waited untill now to come forward.

It all may be true, but can they prove it ?

I don't think much will come out of it as it seems to be their words against Pell's.


----------



## basilio (28 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It's a bit of a worry that these guys have waited untill now to come forward.
> 
> It all may be true, but can they prove it ?
> 
> I don't think much will come out of it as it seems to be their words against Pell's.




They havn't just come out with this. The investigation has been been running for at least a year.  In  February this year the Herald Sun ran an expose of the allegations. The 7.30 report was, in a sense, the result of the complainants wanting to keep the issue in the public eye.

Regarding proof ?  There are three separate sets of allegations at different times with different people. They were multiple actions over a period of time. It wasn't a simple one off behaviour.

 I suppose the job of the Office of Prosecutor is to examine the evidence offered and judge if it is strong enough to warrant a prosecution. There are also many people who were witness to the some of the events and it's possible the publicity will jog the memory of others who were also on location.


----------



## qldfrog (28 July 2016)

I do not like these inquesst after 20y, it is impossible to really know the truth, the French legal system has the concept of prescription, after a certain time: 10y or 20y I do not remember the details: depends on type of crime, the claims are discarded;
How do you want someone innocent to prove that in the night of 5th of july 1998 or whatever , he did not raped that boy in that place.most witnesses are dead, victims can be confused with dates/face/people especially if children at the time;how can a jury decide that there is no doubt..
This is not justice but witchhunt in my opinion; justice would be better served by ensuring today's crimes are solved.
Note that I am not a friend of the church here but that is too easy to accuse , especially if you take into account the potential monetary gains.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 July 2016)

basilio said:


> They havn't just come out with this. The investigation has been been running for at least a year.  In  February this year the Herald Sun ran an expose of the allegations. The 7.30 report was, in a sense, the result of the complainants wanting to keep the issue in the public eye.
> 
> Regarding proof ?  There are three separate sets of allegations at different times with different people. They were multiple actions over a period of time. It wasn't a simple one off behaviour.
> 
> I suppose the job of the Office of Prosecutor is to examine the evidence offered and judge if it is strong enough to warrant a prosecution. There are also many people who were witness to the some of the events and it's possible the publicity will jog the memory of others who were also on location.




You have to consider the possibility of witness collusion. The two men now making the allegations went to the same school. The wife of the man who ran the pool at the times said she never saw anything inappropriate.

Well , let them try if they have the evidence. Rolf Harris got convicted on similar evidence. It seems the Statute of Limitations doesn't apply in this case.


----------



## basilio (28 July 2016)

The question of priests abusing children was practically unthinkable 20-30 years ago. The response to children or anyone who tried to accuse priests of such actions was disbelief and generally a refusal to even consider the possibility of such activity.

The statement  and circumstances of the person who ticked off George Pell for exposing himself to children in the Torquay Surf Club is quite compelling.  And he did tell other people at the time.


> *
> George Pell exposed himself to young boys at surf club, says Victorian man*
> 
> Les Tyack, who reported to police the alleged 1980s incident involving the cardinal, has gone public in the hope it will support child sex abuse survivors
> ...




https://www.theguardian.com/austral...to-young-boys-at-surf-club-says-victorian-man


----------



## basilio (29 July 2016)

One of the critical issues with Cardinal Pell is that lived with Gerald Risdale for a long term in Ballarat. Gerald was one of the worst sec abuse offenders  amongst the Catholic clergy.  The Royal Commission found it very hard to understand how Cardinal Pell was unable to what was happening right in front of him.

*What was happening Ballarat ?*



> *The girls, the paedophile and Cardinal Pell*
> Words: Debi Marshall
> Pictures: Paul Harris and Thom Rigney
> 
> ...



http://www.sbs.com.au/news/feature/girls-paedophile-and-cardinal-pell


----------



## basilio (29 July 2016)

*40 ex-students  from St Alipius  suicided .  Why ? *

This was published before the Royal Commission. The writer is the lawyer representing the male victims of the priests and brothers who abused them



> *In the Name of the Father*
> 
> 12 / 07 / 2012
> 
> ...




http://sheilas.org.au/2012/07/in-the-name-of-the-father/


----------



## basilio (3 August 2016)

*What was Father Gerald Risdales sexual history as a priest ?*

Gerald Risdale is in Pentridge for a minimum of 24 years over sex assaults on at least 54 children. How did this all happen ?

This Broken Rites research outlines Geralds history and the role of the Catholic Church in protecting him and the Church over a 30 years period.

It is a long read..



> *
> Catholic clergy (including George Pell) looked the other way while Father Ridsdale continued committing more crimes against more children in more parishes*
> 
> Background article by a Broken Rites researcher
> ...




http://brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/55


----------



## Tisme (26 October 2016)

Pell is back on the radar with the coppers over new sexual abuses allegations


----------



## Tisme (25 February 2017)

I can't understand why these disgusting acts were ever allowed to happen, especially as we were all made beware of never being alone with men, we all knew of the stories of Catholic Priests and little boys, our own gut instincts tell us it's not normal for men and women to vow not to have sexual urges and encounters. We all knew about youth and scout camps and dirty old men running them.

Yet like crowd hysteria, parents en masse sent their kids off to kiddy fiddlers and perverts hiding in plain sight. They still do!!

We mostly all recoil at the those who show little regard for children and treat them harshly for being so, but watching the coverage of the Royal Commission into Institutional Response to Child Abuses the other day and the casual way the clutch high ranking priests maintained confession ranked ahead of reporting confessed child abuse to police, just astounds me. 

We berate the Muslims for trying it on having their own cancerous law within our own, but no one seems to cane this perverted mob for following their own cannon law invention. Of course the moral dilemma for both side of parliament is the fact most of them are Catholics themselves and doing anything punitive is akin to lopping off their own hands IMO.


watching 92 yearold Eileen the other day on the ABC morning news was spellbinding for me.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-23/eileen-piper-seeks-apology-for-her-daughter/8296642


----------



## SirRumpole (25 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> We berate the Muslims for trying it on having their own cancerous law within our own, but no one seems to cane this perverted mob for following their own cannon law invention.




Well, we are having a Royal Commission into the Catholic Church and it looks like a verbal caning if nothing else.

Will people be charged ? Let's hope so.


----------



## noco (25 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, we are having a Royal Commission into the Catholic Church and it looks like a verbal caning if nothing else.
> 
> Will people be charged ? Let's hope so.




I hope the RC is extended into the Muslim community to check if any young Muslims girls have received any genital mutilation......The RC seems to be concentrating on the Catholic church.


----------



## Tisme (26 February 2017)

noco said:


> I hope the RC is extended into the Muslim community to check if any young Muslims girls have received any genital mutilation......*The RC seems to be concentrating on the Catholic church.*




and Anglican. 

There was a fella on the ABC extending the definition to "white, anglo saxon, males" which means the Europeans and coloureds have been let off the hook...perhaps roman catholicism is not agreeable with English bloodlines?


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2017)

Jehova's Witnessnes "scripturally unable" to believe child abuse victims unless there are two witnesses.

Another crank cult that covers up and protects itself not children.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-10/uniting-church-in-australia-apologises-to-victims/8344496


----------



## basilio (3 April 2017)

I don't think we should take the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse for granted. It's been going on for years and somehow we have been inculcated to expect/accept that all the churches, orphanages, State run children institutions, Scouts, youth clubs hid child abusers and did little/nothing to bring them to account.

If we think for more than a few seconds of the effect this abuse had on children we would be horrified. Those you have had direct or indirect experience understand the situation in a way the rest of us cannot.

Do we want to ignore or gloss over these realities?  I already see the institutions trying to calm people down even before the final findings are released.  Lets see some justice before we put these situations out of the headlines.

* Law firms swamped by historical child sexual abuse cases due to royal commisison *







*Rachel Browne*
Australian legal firms are experiencing unprecedented demand from people who have suffered alleged child sexual abuse in institutions such as churches, schools and youth groups.

The demand has been spurred on by revelations from the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse and legal reforms which allow survivors to make a claim for damages regardless of when the abuse allegedly occurred.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nsw...-due-to-royal-commisison-20170331-gvarge.html


----------



## basilio (3 April 2017)

There was one story from the Commission that said much about the way the the Catholic Church handled the sex abuse of it's various religious orders. Well worth a read. It is horrific.

*Child sex abuse royal commission: The night a group of Catholic schoolboys confronted evil*
*Analysis*
By political editor Chris Uhlmann
Updated 7 Feb 2017, 12:09pm

*Related Story:* Worst Catholic groups for child sex abuse claims in Australia revealed
*Related Story:* Nearly 2,000 Catholic Church figures implicated in child sex abuse report
 *Map: * Canberra 2600
About 20 boys crammed into the small hotel room in Wellington and the mood was sombre.

Marist College Canberra's First XV had gathered to hold court. The 1978 rugby tour of New Zealand was going well, but they weren't there to talk about football.

The night before an incident had profoundly shaken the group.

One of the players had been called to a Marist brother's room on the pretence of treating an injury from that day's game.

The coach tried to sexually assault the boy. He fled, told his closest friend, and word had spread quickly through the touring party.

The boys, aged between 16 and 18, called a meeting. At its end they passed a resolution: the coach was to be banned from the change room, when the team returned to Canberra, the brother was to leave the school and the Marists were called on to guarantee that he would never teach again.

The shocking incident caused one 17-year-old to question a commitment. At school's end he had resolved to leave for Sydney, to train as a priest.

So he sought the counsel of another brother travelling with the group, a popular man who ran a movie club at the school.

When the boy confided his fears about the act of a man who professed to be a model of faith he got an unexpected response.

The brother's face darkened with fury: why would your vocation be affected by the actions of one man? The boy felt ashamed of his doubts.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-07/sex-abuse-royal-commission-schoolboys-confronted-evil/8247130


----------



## noco (11 April 2017)

Rumpy you asked the question reference your post #6 dated March 1 2016.

Since then nobody has shown any interest in extending the RC into the Islamic World....Not on this forum or the RC......

There is as much if not more child abuse carried out by Muslims....Genital mutilation.....9 year old child brides forced to marry much older men and it is a known fact it is going on in Australia under the Islamic Sharia law.

Is the terms of reference confined to the Catholic church or all religions?

I would also like some answers.

I just did some quick check and find the terms of reference could most definely apply to Islam as it states all religions.

So why hasn't the RC taken up the taken into account child sex abuse in the Islamic World here in Australia?

http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/about-us/terms-of-
AND public and private institutions, including child-care, cultural, educational, *religious*, sporting and other institutions, provide important services and support for children and their families that are beneficial to children’s development.
reference


----------



## Tisme (12 April 2017)

noco said:


> Is the terms of reference confined to the Catholic church or all religions?





I'm surprised Bill Shorten hasn't been hauled before the commission to explain his role in supporting catholics.


----------



## noco (12 April 2017)

What purpose does female genital of young girls serve.....Why do they do i?


----------



## Junior (14 April 2017)

noco said:


> Rumpy you asked the question reference your post #6 dated March 1 2016.
> 
> Since then nobody has shown any interest in extending the RC into the Islamic World....Not on this forum or the RC......
> 
> ...




Because genital mutilation is not widespread or tolerated in Australia.  The vast majority of women in Australia who have suffered from this disgusting practice, had the procedure overseas before migrating here.

Abuse by catholic priests has been found to be widespread and ongoing over 60 years, with many many victims and people affected.

If there is child sex abuse in the Islamic community here in Australia then of course it should be taken into account.


----------



## noco (14 April 2017)

Junior said:


> Because genital mutilation is not widespread or tolerated in Australia.  The vast majority of women in Australia who have suffered from this disgusting practice, had the procedure overseas before migrating here.
> 
> Abuse by catholic priests has been found to be widespread and ongoing over 60 years, with many many victims and people affected.
> 
> If there is child sex abuse in the Islamic community here in Australia then of course it should be taken into account.



What proof do you have that genital does not occur in Australia?


----------



## noco (15 April 2017)

Here is proof, FGM does occur in Australia......Even a known case where a Muslim man was sentenced.

There is also an 1800 hot line for girls to use.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-22/ferrari-fgm-in-australia/6794278


----------



## SirRumpole (15 April 2017)

Interesting that we make a fuss about FGM and not about circumcision.

They are the same thing really.


----------



## macca (15 April 2017)

As I understand it, not really the same.

For a male, only the foreskin is removed which still allows normal sex to take place whereas the purpose of the female procedure is to remove the "parts" that could give physical pleasure or arousal.

Quite different and all to do with the patriarchal society attitude of ownership of females


----------



## bellenuit (15 April 2017)

You can bet it is still happening here too.
*
FGM charge for Detroit doctor Jumana Nagarwala in US first

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39597062

Charity warns of FGM 'parties' taking place in England

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-38290888*


----------



## luutzu (15 April 2017)

macca said:


> As I understand it, not really the same.
> 
> For a male, only the foreskin is removed which still allows normal sex to take place whereas the purpose of the female procedure is to remove the "parts" that could give physical pleasure or arousal.
> 
> Quite different and all to do with the patriarchal society attitude of ownership of females




Strange God to be asking for foreskins to be removed. 

Did He made a mistake when he created Adam?

What's with these Abrahamic religions and out/lawing people's sexual habits and genitalia?


----------



## macca (15 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> Strange God to be asking for foreskins to be removed.
> 
> Did He made a mistake when he created Adam?
> 
> What's with these Abrahamic religions and out/lawing people's sexual habits and genitalia?




I have no idea why it is done but a side benefit is that a man who has been circumsized is far less likely to contract aids from having sex with a female, this also applies to most STD apparently.

I have also read that circumsized males do not suffer as much from premature ejaculation, the theory is that over time underwear tends to desensitise the "end bit"


----------



## SirRumpole (15 April 2017)

macca said:


> I have no idea why it is done but a side benefit is that a man who has been circumsized is far less likely to contract aids from having sex with a female, this also applies to most STD apparently.
> 
> I have also read that circumsized males do not suffer as much from premature ejaculation, the theory is that over time underwear tends to desensitise the "end bit"




Whatever the reason it's mutilation without consent. No one, not even parents owns an individual's body.

If a person wants to be circumsized they can make that decision for themselves when they reach an appropriate age.


----------



## PeterJ (15 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> hatever the reason it's mutilation without consent. No one, not even parents owns an individual's body.
> 
> If a person wants to be circumsized they can make that decision for themselves when they reach an appropriate age.




Absolutely correct !
Terrible and disgusting traditions


----------



## luutzu (15 April 2017)

macca said:


> I have no idea why it is done but a side benefit is that a man who has been circumsized is far less likely to contract aids from having sex with a female, this also applies to most STD apparently.
> 
> I have also read that circumsized males do not suffer as much from premature ejaculation, the theory is that over time underwear tends to desensitise the "end bit"




I'm no doctor but I'm pretty sure if a guy has sex with an AIDS infected woman, circumcision or not... I mean, the foreskin isn't the only bits in contact. Circumcision is not a protective device. Just say No would be more effective here.

As to female genital mutilation... I haven't looked it up to know what it is. There are things I don't want to see. But assuming the worst. Anyway, religion and people should really stay away from children, their genital... just stay away from kids altogether if you ask me. 

I heard a while back that Jewish circumcision have its origin in the Bible where King David either ordered, or God ordered him, to slay the enemies and bring back their foreskin. So as to be with God, or as proof? Whatever happen to a head, wait, wrong wording... an ear or a heart as evidence? Seems a bit unmanly to ask your soldiers to do that. But then God did asked for it so I guess you can't say no.

Man, that better be some racist joke someone pulled.


----------



## Junior (16 April 2017)

Well, to your question about why it is not a part of the Royal Commission.  I guess the question is whether or not FGM is considered child sex abuse or not, and whether or not investigating it as a part of this commission will halt the practice or not.


----------



## noco (16 April 2017)

Junior said:


> Well, to your question about why it is not a part of the Royal Commission.  I guess the question is whether or not FGM is considered child sex abuse or not, and whether or not investigating it as a part of this commission will halt the practice or not.




Of course it is child abuse.......It is not practiced on a new born Muslim girls but on young girls from the age of 6 or 7 to 14 years old.......No sedatives.....No anaesthetics and  is normally carried out by some male barbaric Muslim with a razor blade...The girls are held down and leg roped.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 April 2017)

noco said:


> Of course it is child abuse.......It is not practiced on a new born Muslim girls but on young girls from the age of 6 or 7 to 14 years old.......No sedatives.....No anaesthetics and  is normally carried out by some male barbaric Muslim with a razor blade...The girls are held down and leg roped.




Source for that ? Have you seen it happen personally ?


----------



## noco (16 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Source for that ? Have you seen it happen personally ?




On videos yes.....I am sure I posted a link illustrating the procedure.........I may have been deleted because it may have been too explicit or may be on another thread.

Yes I did post it on my thread #2271 Islam : Is it inherently evil....Unfortunately the video was deleted.


----------



## Tisme (17 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Interesting that we make a fuss about FGM and not about circumcision.
> 
> They are the same thing really.





It's not the same. One is predicated on infections and cancer the other is disgraceful display of male domination using superstition as the vehicle. See also infibulation


----------



## SirRumpole (17 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> It's not the same. One is predicated on infections and cancer the other is disgraceful display of male domination using superstition as the vehicle. See also infibulation




They are the same to the extent as I have said is that both are mutilation without consent.

Circimcission can be done at any age, so the individual should be allowed to make their own decisions.


----------



## Junior (17 April 2017)

noco said:


> Of course it is child abuse.......It is not practiced on a new born Muslim girls but on young girls from the age of 6 or 7 to 14 years old.......No sedatives.....No anaesthetics and  is normally carried out by some male barbaric Muslim with a razor blade...The girls are held down and leg roped.




Is FGM considered to be Child Sexual Abuse?


----------



## noco (17 April 2017)

Junior said:


> Is FGM considered to be Child Sexual Abuse?




How naive you are. .....If a pedophile fingers a young girl's clitoris, isn't that regarded as child sex abuse? 
You come across as though you condone FGM.
I believe there is nothing in the Koran referring to FGM.


----------



## Junior (17 April 2017)

I'm not even going to bite there noco, that is an extremely offensive accusation.

I was merely asking whether FGM fits into the term of reference of this particular royal commission.  They can't investigate issues outside of their scope, that isn't how it works.


----------



## noco (17 April 2017)

Junior said:


> I'm not even going to bite there noco, that is an extremely offensive accusation.
> 
> I was merely asking whether FGM fits into the term of reference of this particular royal commission.  They can't investigate issues outside of their scope, that isn't how it works.




As far as I am concerned it is very clear and the RC has included FGM  under child sex abuse.

But you do your own research...Just go to go to google and you will have plenty to read about.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 April 2017)

I find it strange that FGM (which is supposed to make sex less enjoyable) is allegedly popular in the Muslim community as I believed that it was their desire to breed as much as possible and eventually take over the world by pressure of population.

These two things seem contradictory.


----------



## bellenuit (17 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I find it strange that FGM (which is supposed to make sex less enjoyable) is allegedly popular in the Muslim community as I believed that it was their desire to breed as much as possible and eventually take over the world by pressure of population.
> 
> These two things seem contradictory.




I don't get your logic. A Muslim woman has no choice when it comes to intercourse. The fact that she (post FGM) might find it repugnant because she can no longer enjoy the sexual pleasure that goes along with the intercourse act is irrelevant. She must do it according to Islamic law. This is one of the many reasons that religion is repugnant. But there will always be apologists for it as we know from one of the regular contributors on this thread.


----------



## luutzu (18 April 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I don't get your logic. A Muslim woman has no choice when it comes to intercourse. The fact that she (post FGM) might find it repugnant because she can no longer enjoy the sexual pleasure that goes along with the intercourse act is irrelevant. She must do it according to Islamic law. This is one of the many reasons that religion is repugnant. But there will always be apologists for it as we know from one of the regular contributors on this thread.




I would never take SirR to be apologising for that kind of stuff. Shame SirR, shame!


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> I would never take SirR to be apologising for that kind of stuff. Shame SirR, shame!




Below the belt old chap. I said that both fgm and circumcision are repugnant.


----------



## luutzu (18 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Below the belt old chap. I said that both fgm and circumcision are repugnant.




Yea I know, was playing.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> Yea I know, was playing.




Me too.


----------



## Tisme (18 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Me too.





He didn't even know he had been biatch slapped  well done


----------



## Tisme (18 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Below the belt old chap. I said that both fgm and circumcision are repugnant.



*



Question: "What does the Bible say about circumcision? What is the Christian view of circumcision?"

Answer: Circumcision is the surgical removal of the prepuce, or foreskin, of a male. The word circumcise literally means “to cut around.” As a religious rite, circumcision was required of all of Abraham’s descendants as a sign of the covenant God made with him (Genesis 17:9–14; Acts 7:8). The Mosaic Law repeated the requirement (Leviticus 12:2–3), and Jews throughout the centuries have continued to practice circumcision (Joshua 5:2–3; Luke 1:59; Acts 16:3; Philippians 3:5). There are different issues involved in the question of whether or not males today should be circumcised. One issue is that of religious teaching: what does the Bible, God’s Word, say? Another issue is, as a matter of health, should males be circumcised? The Christian view of circumcision is probably best described as a combination of the two.

Concerning the first issue, New Testament Christians are no longer under the Old Testament Law, and circumcision is no longer required. This is brought out in a number of New Testament passages, among which are Acts 15; Galatians 2:1–3; 5:1–11; 6:11–16; 1 Corinthians 7:17–20; Colossians 2:8–12; and Philippians 3:1–3. As these passages proclaim, being delivered from our sins is the result of faith in Christ; it is Christ’s finished work on the cross that saves, not the observance of an external rite. Even the Law acknowledged that circumcision alone was insufficient to please God, who specified the need to “circumcise your hearts” (Deuteronomy 10:16; cf. Romans 2:29). In salvation, the works of the flesh accomplish nothing (see Galatians 2:16).

In Acts 16:3, Paul had a missionary helper, Timothy, circumcised. Timothy was half-Jewish, and Paul circumcised him so that he would not be a hindrance as they sought to reach out to unsaved Jews. Although the Bible did not require Timothy to be circumcised, it was something he did willing for the sake of reaching the Jews. However, as Paul states unequivocally in Galatians, circumcision does not aid either salvation or sanctification in Christ. Of course, the incident with Timothy does not directly apply today because Christians need not be circumcised in order to reach unbelievers, whether Jews or Gentiles. Once again, the principle of the circumcision of the heart is at the heart of the matter.

There are practical issues involved with circumcision as well. Some parents have their sons circumcised so that they will look like all the other males in their culture. Some parents are concerned that their son would someday be in a locker room and find himself different from everyone else. In some cultures, though, males are not commonly circumcised. There is also the issue of health. Doctors debate back and forth in regard to whether there are any health benefits to circumcision. Any parents with such concerns should definitely speak with a doctor in regards to this issue.
		
Click to expand...


*
Kind of a Big-Endians and Little-Endians argument. It really isn't a big deal for a baby boy if you witness it.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Kind of a Big-Endians and Little-Endians argument. It really isn't a big deal for a baby boy if you witness it.




We will just have to disagree here.

I suppose  people could get infections or cancers in their little fingers, so should we cut those off as well ?

And I guess the religious argument can be easily dismissed. If God didn't want men to have foreskins, they wouldn't have them. QED.


----------



## Tisme (18 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> We will just have to disagree here.
> 
> I suppose  people could get infections or cancers in their little fingers, so should we cut those off as well ?
> 
> And I guess the religious argument can be easily dismissed. If God didn't want men to have foreskins, they wouldn't have them. QED.





I thought we were just going to disagree!

If GOd didn't want men to have circumcision he'd have made them girls.


----------



## noco (20 April 2017)

It will be interesting to read the response from the RC.

http://kelsolawyers.com/au/news-item/muslim-child-abuse-australia/


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> It will be interesting to read the response from the RC.
> 
> http://kelsolawyers.com/au/news-item/muslim-child-abuse-australia/





Perhaps you could petition your mates Malcolm and Tony to stop wasting money on sham Royal Commissions into Bill Shorten and focus on the real disgrace of appeasement to Rome, Mecca and Westminster. First in the docks should be the commissioners themselves.


----------



## Tink (21 April 2017)

Interesting reading his own story -

http://kelsolawyers.com/au/peter-kelso/


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Perhaps you could petition your mates Malcolm and Tony to stop wasting money on sham Royal Commissions into Bill Shorten and focus on the real disgrace of appeasement to Rome, Mecca and Westminster. First in the docks should be the commissioners themselves.



Tisme firstly, Turnbull is no mate of mine for as far as I am concerned the sooner he resigns or gets kicked out the better.
Secondly, although there has been one conviction of FGM, the problem is none of the recent FGM procedures have been reported by the girls for fear of repercussion from their families and the Muslim communities...There is an 1800 HOT LINE for any of those girls to report such an incident......This is where the difference comes in comparison to other religions where the victims of child abuse have come forward even 20 and 30 years later.
The RC into union corruption has proved it does exist in a big way resulting in 100 convictions and over 1000 offenses....It also brought out the $40,000 Shorten received and did not declare it until  8 years later when he was caught out.
Tisme , don't start this facetious rhetoric of yours again....I have enjoyed the break from that now for some weeks....Just keep it clean without the insinuations please.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> Tisme firstly, Turnbull is no mate of mine for as far as I am concerned the sooner he resigns or gets kicked out the better.
> Secondly, although there has been one conviction of FGM, the problem is none of the recent FGM procedures have been reported by the girls for fear of repercussion from their families and the Muslim communities...There is an 1800 HOT LINE for any of those girls to report such an incident......This is where the difference comes in comparison to other religions where the victims of child abuse have come forward even 20 and 30 years later.
> The RC into union corruption has proved it does exist in a big way resulting in 100 convictions and over 1000 offenses....It also brought out the $40,000 Shorten received and did not declare it until  8 years later when he was caught out.
> Tisme , don't start this facetious rhetoric of yours again....I have enjoyed the break from that now for some weeks....Just keep it clean without the insinuations please.





Everyone knows it was a political witch hunt. The same spite drove Campbell Newman out of Govt in QLD and the same will happen to the LNP Federally. The people elected the govt to govern, not turn into a Spanish Inquisition with organised labour and the dirty working class constantly in the cross hairs.

And whats wrong with being facetious? Most of the great orator people in history have that talent.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Everyone knows it was a political witch hunt. The same spite drove Campbell Newman out of Govt in QLD and the same will happen to the LNP Federally. The people elected the govt to govern, not turn into a Spanish Inquisition with organised labour and the dirty working class constantly in the cross hairs.
> 
> And whats wrong with being facetious? Most of the great orator people in history have that talent.



And what was the spite you refer to that drove Campbell Newman out of office?...Newman tried to get rid of Labor's debt of $80 billion by selling/leasing Queensland assets to break Labor's deadlock on infrastructure.......Labor and the CMFEU poured millions into the election campaign to stop something that Beattie had repeatedly  done while in office...Beattie sold off $18 billion in assets during the good mining days and was still able to leave a debt of $80 billion....What hypocrites......But it was enough to persuade the naive.......Then Palaczcuk, chased the car like a dog and when she caught up with it she did not know what do to do with it and has just bumbled along since moving from one disaster to the next....She pretends to agree with the Adami coal mines but gives the Greens $600,000 to fight against it.

Clive Palmer did not help Newman's cause either.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> The people elected the govt to govern, not turn into a Spanish Inquisition with organised labour and the dirty working class constantly in the cross hairs.




Well said.


----------



## Junior (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> Just keep it clean without the insinuations please.




Noco, you insinuated that I condone FGM, one page earlier in this thread.  A disgusting accusation.  Take your own advice before offering it to others, please.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Junior said:


> Noco, you insinuated that I condone FGM, one page earlier in this thread.  A disgusting accusation.  Take your own advice before offering it to others, please.




Well perhaps you should express yourself a little better and then it won't get you into trouble.


----------



## basilio (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> Well perhaps you should express yourself a little better and then it won't get you into trouble.




Alternatively Noco you could stop being a right  royal xxxxole and accusing people of things that just arn't true and that no other sensible person would acknowledge.
I  too was disgusted with your swipe at Junior.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2017)

basilio said:


> Alternatively Noco you could stop being a right  royal xxxxole and accusing people of things that just arn't true and that no other sensible person would acknowledge.
> I  too was disgusted with your swipe at Junior.




Well, maybe we should pity the ill informed.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

basilio said:


> Alternatively Noco you could stop being a right  royal xxxxole and accusing people of things that just arn't true and that no other sensible person would acknowledge.
> I  too was disgusted with your swipe at Junior.




Of course you would come to the defense of Junior  because you are from the same mold as Junior.

You see this is what Junior quoted.
*Well, to your question about why it is not a part of the Royal Commission. I guess the question is whether or not FGM is considered child sex abuse or not, and whether or not investigating it as a part of this commission will halt the practice or not.
*
Note : FGM is part of the RC terms of reference.

If Junior had done his home work he could have gained a lot more information instead of embarrassing himself.......But I had to do it for him. 

For Junior to not have considered FGM was not sexual abuse is the reason I believed he was condoning FGM on young girls to protect the Muslim brotherhood...What else would any sensible person  think?

Once again you are at it again with your character assassination in am attempt to ridicule my analysis.

You just can't help yourself because you don't anything different.


----------



## basilio (21 April 2017)

Tink said:


> Interesting reading his own story -
> 
> http://kelsolawyers.com/au/peter-kelso/




I found the whole website and the summaries of what had happened in the various institutions tragic. Clearly Kelso is looking to encourage abuse victims to use his services to sue the relevant organisations. I can understand from his perspective the anger he feels about the situation have endured it himself and recognised how difficult it was to get justice. 

With regard to abuse in Muslim institutions. It is relatively black and white to investigate instants of child sexual or physical abuse and any resultant cover ups by institutions.  The issue of forced child marriages is probably harder to quantify.  I believe there would need to be specific complaints brought before the Commission to kick off a specific inquiry. Perhaps this is happening? 

Looking at the breadth and depth of the incidents around the country one can't fault the Commissions efforts to investigate and expose what has happened in churches, schools, institutions, and other facilities. Just hope there is justice at the end of it.


----------



## Tink (22 April 2017)

I am all for justice, basilio, our laws are based on our Christian values, which does not include 'children being sexual beings'.
http://www.mamamia.com.au/the-coupl...for-the-sole-purpose-of-sexually-abusing-him/

Not marrying under the age of 18.
Not blood related.
One man, one woman.

All these that were set up by our Christian values, and laws.
--------------

My post was to the fact on how much he missed his biological family, and did all in his power to find them.

The constant demonisation of men/boys is not good for our society either, which he has pretty much said in his article.

This is my view.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2017)

Tink said:


> The constant demonisation of men/boys is not good for our society either, which he has pretty much said in his article.
> 
> This is my view.




Off topic but I think the incessant ridicule, demonisation, mocking, feminisation and lampooning of males is making them gradually withdraw from expressing the resulting discomfort, but we all know what happens when men generationally reach their limit of patience and we are seeing the awakening of that anger in people like Trump ...


----------



## Junior (22 April 2017)

I questioned whether the practice is considered to be sexual abuse or physical abuse.  How you could construe that as condoning it is beyond me.


noco said:


> Of course you would come to the defense of Junior  because you are from the same mold as Junior.
> 
> You see this is what Junior quoted.
> *Well, to your question about why it is not a part of the Royal Commission. I guess the question is whether or not FGM is considered child sex abuse or not, and whether or not investigating it as a part of this commission will halt the practice or not.
> ...




I was questioning if FGM was part of the terms of reference of this RC.  My point was, is it considered to be physical abuse or sexual abuse?

Why did I ask this?  It was in response to YOU Noco, repeatedly asking why has the RC not looked into FGM.  I was addressing your question.  Is it part of the terms of reference or not?  A valid question to pose.  If you are telling me that, yes, FGM is considered to be under the umbrella of child sex abuse.  Well, good, I hope it is investigated further under the royal commission.

How you could construe this as me condoning it, and 'protecting the muslim brotherhood' is beyond me.  I have no affiliation with any religion whatsoever.  I was born and raised in Melbourne, as were my parents, grandparents & great grandparents.  My background beyond that is British.  No muslim affiliation or interest in the muslim religion.

I find many aspects of the muslim religion to be completely archaic, as I do with most major religions.  I follow my own values, I believe in science, not in an imaginary man in the sky.  If others choose religion, that's fine by me.  I can understand and accept that.

What I don't accept, is pinning the actions of a minority of extremists, onto the 1 billion people on this planet who follow the muslim faith.  That is unfair on the vast majority who are peaceful and law-abiding, and it will lead to epic division and war which is not in anyone's best interests.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2017)

Junior said:


> How you could construe this as me condoning it, and 'protecting the muslim brotherhood' is beyond me. * I have no affiliation with any religion whatsoever*.  *I was born and raised in Melbourne*, as were my parents, grandparents & great grandparents.  My background beyond that is British.  No muslim affiliation or interest in the muslim religion.
> 
> .





You do see the fallacy of that dichotomy I presume: you can't be a Melbournian and not have a religious bent for an AFL team. Denial is futile


----------



## SirRumpole (22 April 2017)

Junior said:


> What I don't accept, is pinning the actions of a minority of extremists, onto the 1 billion people on this planet who follow the muslim faith. That is unfair on the vast majority who are peaceful and law-abiding, and it will lead to epic division and war which is not in anyone's best interests.




We have just seen how 'peaceful' Islam operates in Indonesia. Christian governor doing a good job, threats and violence from the Muslims and trumped up ridiculous blasphemy charges and now he's out.

That's how they operate, they are a criminal gang masquerading as a religion.


----------



## Junior (22 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> You do see the fallacy of that dichotomy I presume: you can't be a Melbournian and not have a religious bent for an AFL team. Denial is futile




You are correct there.  A solid 33 year affiliation with MFC.

Go Demons!!


----------



## noco (22 April 2017)

Junior said:


> I questioned whether the practice is considered to be sexual abuse or physical abuse.  How you could construe that as condoning it is beyond me.
> 
> 
> I was questioning if FGM was part of the terms of reference of this RC.  My point was, is it considered to be physical abuse or sexual abuse?
> ...




This time I will let you off the hook but next time make sure you use the right words to express yourself otherwise confusion will set in again....End of story for me.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> We have just seen how 'peaceful' Islam operates in Indonesia. Christian governor doing a good job, threats and violence from the Muslims and trumped up ridiculous blasphemy charges and now he's out.
> 
> That's how they operate, they are a criminal gang masquerading as a religion.




It does seem their idea of peaceful is different to the version we have been taught. As soon as the dicke@ds are labelled as extremists it legitimises their actions and numbs the population's response.


----------



## noco (28 April 2017)

Jones is right.......Someone needs to take on this RC over the ill treatment go young Muslim girls.

http://kelsolawyers.com/au/news-item/one-rule-for-muslims-another-for-rest/


----------



## noco (1 May 2017)

Where is the RC in all this?......Where is Gillian Triggs from the HRC?

They seem to be turning a blind eye to it all even though they know what is going on.


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...y/news-story/e2d80d12cff553f17fc490279ac3d62d

*Melbourne man to be first person convicted of forced child marriage under federal law*
Shannon Deery, Herald Sun
April 30, 2017 9:30pm
Subscriber only
VICTORIAN schoolgirls are being forced into marriage in record numbers as a Melbourne man is set to be the first person convicted under federal forced-marriage laws.

Authorities are investigating dozens of child-bride and forced-marriage claims, with new figures revealing Victorian cases make up almost one-third of probes launched.

*‘AT RISK’ GIRLS FALLING THROUGH CRACKS*

Now the _Herald Sun _can reveal Melbourne man Majed Mamosi is likely to become the first person to be convicted under federal forced-marriage laws since the practice was criminalised in 2013.

The laws can be extremely difficult to prosecute because they rely on victims testifying.






Child bride laws can be difficult to prosecute.
But Mamosi, from Epping, pleaded guilty to a forced-marriage charge last month, meaning his victim was not required to give evidence.

He remains on bail pending his case appearing at the County Court later this year.

Mamosi admitted arranging a forced marriage in the Greenvale area in 2015.

Mamosi’s was one of dozens of Victorian cases to be referred to federal police with figures show a doubling in the number of cases the national agency is investigating.

Reports have been made about young girls being sent overseas to marry, while others are being married in illegal religious ceremonies.

Federal police investigated 69 incidents of forced or underage marriage in the 2015-16 financial year, with 19 investigations launched in Victoria.

The national figure was up from 33 the previous year. In the 2013-14 financial year, just 11 cases were investigated.





Australian child brides laws are not retrospective. Picture: Paula Bronstein/Getty Images
New South Wales reported the highest number of investigations, with 36. Agencies consider the figure of 69 potential recent cases the tip of the iceberg with many girls too fearful to contact police.

Reports are most commonly made by worried school principals, teachers and counsellors.

An AFP spokeswoman said because legislation was not retrospective, police were unable to investigate matters where a marriage or arrangement occurred prior to March 2013.

Last year, a 14-year-old Melbourne girl was forced to marry a man more than double her age in a ceremony at a Noble Park mosque.

*HORROR CHILD BRIDE SLAVE TRADE MUST STOP*

Her “husband” last month pleaded guilty to marrying the girl only after prosecutors dropped a sexual abuse charge.

It had been alleged the man had raped the girl in the days after the wedding ceremony.

The wedding was allegedly performed by prominent Melbourne imam Ibrahim Omerdic, who has been charged and will face court next month.

Both the Victorian Board of Imams and the Islamic Council of Victoria have publicly condemned the illegal marriages.

shannon.deery@news.com.au


----------



## Tisme (17 May 2017)

The imminent laying of charges on Pell will be a victory for people everywhere who care for welfare of children.

Subjecting a child to any degree of lascivious activities and images is an appalling dereliction of adult duty and decency.

Even more appalling are those adults who pervert the boundaries by tritely dismissing the gravity of their ambivalence to the damage being done to the innocence of youth.


----------



## basilio (17 May 2017)

It will be interesting to see if charges are actually laid against Cardinal Pell. It is not a done deal.
On the larger scale the head of the Commission has put out an update on the scale and scope of teh abuse. Catholic religious communities had the most complaints.
Justice McClellan offered his observations on why religious  institutions were so prominent in the allegations of child abuse.

T_he majority of the allegations received to date have emerged from faith-based institutions. “This inevitably raises the question ‘why’,” McClellan will tell the conference of ecclesiastical dignitaries and theological experts from around the country.

“Why is it that in institutions which proclaim faith in God and embrace the highest ethical and moral principles so many children are abused? Why do some people who proclaim their faith and have accepted a life of religious endeavour breach their obligations to children? 

“Is there something in either the structure, culture, or personal qualities of members of the churches and other religious bodies, whether lay or ordained, that gives them such a prominent place amongst offenders?_
*
He will answer those questions by saying that while children would always be vulnerable to abusing adults, they were extra vulnerable when the adult was perceived by the child to be a manifestation of spiritual good or chosen by God.

Children were told that if they tell anyone about the abuse they will be punished by God.*

Justice Peter McClellan
_ 
“The commissioners have heard many times from survivors who as children were told that if they tell anyone about the abuse they will be punished by God and may go to hell,” McClellan said. 

 “The calculated exploitation of a child’s innocence is difficult to comprehend. The power afforded to the adult by the institution is corrupted and used to abuse the child"_
What was the response of of Jesus Christ to child abuse ?

“But if anyone is the downfall of one of these little kids who believes in me, it were better for him that he drowned in the deep of the sea with a great millstone tied round his neck.” (Matt 18:6)
_
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...e-than-100-child-abuse-prosecutions-says-head

_


----------



## basilio (29 June 2017)

Latest news.  Cardinal Pell has been formally charged with multiple sexual assault offences.

No point talking about the ins and outs of any alleged crimes but this trial will (obviously..) have a profound impact on ... everything. Lay in the chippies..
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/cardinal-george-pell-charged-sexual-assault-offences/8547668


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 June 2017)

I should point out that many of these allegations and crimes against Pell are historical. 

I won't see it myself, but I can imagine in 10-30 years many cases of young Muslim boys and girls having being now sexually assaulted in Asrams and prayer groups and young Jewish boys and girls too. 

There is now an alleged female paedophile in Israel protected by their judicial system from extradition to Australia who allegedly committed disgraceful sick acts against Melbourne girls under her care.

gg


----------



## orr (29 June 2017)

I


Garpal Gumnut said:


> I should point out that many of these allegations and crimes against Pell are historical.
> 
> I won't see it myself, but I can imagine in 10-30 years many cases of young Muslim boys and girls having being now sexually assaulted in Asrams and prayer groups and young Jewish boys and girls too.
> 
> ...



I have to say something here;
I offer absolutely no defence for those you mention. And shine upon them every aspect of inquiry and due response.
*In regard Pell*; Accusations of offences by him directly on others,  is now before the court.
The much bigger tradgity is that the institution of the Catholic church has protected 'Historically' deeds by offenders under their control so heinous and protracted and then facilitated the further ghastly and evil perversions to be perpetrated by those in their employ; *And then persecuted to the grave *individuals damaged by the arrogant high handed and dismissive attitude of an institution that assumed itself to be above the law; The injured souls in their hundreds and thousands.
Pell embodies the ethos of this god awful institution, irregardless of the outcome of the ruling that awaits of the above mention accusations.

The pithy blatherings of some in the News Corp press  that attempt to argue this as a distraction to Victoria's presumed current crime trouble, seem completly unable to quantify the magnitude this multi generation national disaster perpetrated against the most vulnerable.

By the last census results Jews and Muslims make up about a combined %4 percent of the Australian population. Catholics make up over a quarter ... Just hold that as a metric. And the damage is done.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 June 2017)

orr said:


> I
> 
> I have to say something here;
> I offer absolutely no defence for those you mention. And shine upon them every aspect of inquiry and due response.
> ...




Thanks mate, 

Totally agree.

Abuse is abuse.

gg


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

Pell sounded pretty perky at his press conference.

Either:

1. he's bluffing.
2. he's really innocent and thinks he can prove it.
3. he has a lot of confidence in his lawyers paid for no doubt by the bottomless Vatican pit.
4. he thinks he can drag it out indefinitely untill the prosecution gives up.
5. he know's it's a matter of his word against someone else and no one can prove anything either way.
6. he will suddenly get 'very ill' and claim persecution of an old sick man.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Pell sounded pretty perky at his press conference.
> 
> Either:
> 
> ...




Mate,

You have no idea about how the Vatican works.

It's a state, like the USA or Australia.

Plus he has the presumption of innocence as an a Australian.

He has agreed to come back to face the allegations.

If so, due process will be followed. 

Uninformed comment is prejudicial to a fair trial.

gg


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mate,
> 
> You have no idea about how the Vatican works.
> 
> ...




Please note my point 2. It could well be that he is actually innocent and is the victim of a beat up. We shall see.

And what does the status of the Vatican have to do with it ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Please note my point 2. It could well be that he is actually innocent and is the victim of a beat up. We shall see.
> 
> And what does the status of the Vatican have to do with it ?




Thanks Rumpole,

The status of the Vatican has little to do with it.

gg


----------



## basilio (29 June 2017)

The trial and processing of Cardinal George Pell  is going to be the Trial of the Century. So the following questions come to mind as  far as the process goes.
1) *How will a jury be chosen *? How can one find  either an inpartial juror or one that has not seen/heard of the Royal Commission into institutional child abuse ? AND if by some miracle there is a person who isn't even aware of the commission  would lawyers be properly concerned about such lack of knowledge ? How will questions of religious affiliation be addressed. After all the defence only has to find one person to say no and stick to the decision to ensure a Not Guilty result. And on this point who is going to accept being on such a jury with all the pressure this will entail ? From my limited experience  people who end up on juries  are not the sharpest pencils in the box. Why ? Because lawyers attempt to get rid of the more intelligent people in the jury pool and the more intelligent people try to get out sticky cases..

2) *How will a judge be appointed ?*  This is such an important case the choice will be agonised over. What should be the religious background of the Judge ?  How much weight will be put on the judges history ? Will they be a "conservative" judge "or a "liberal" one? What will that mean anyway ? Will judges have a choice in taking on the case with all the attendant publicity ?

3) *How do we deal with public and political comment ?* Traditionally the procedure before a trial is a voluntary black out of any public discussion to enable a fair trial. But at this stage we already have politicians like Tony Abbott declaring what a fine man George Pell is. Andrew Bolt likewise is calling this a witch hunt . Miranada Devine is also questioning the charging of George Pell. Will the judicial system attempt to stop such public utterances and threaten them with contempt of court charges ?  How will the judges/judicial system respond to these attempts to "pervert the course of justice" ?

4)* How will the Catholic community/heirarchy respond  ?*  Will it be accepted that there is now a  trial  to properly investigate well founded charges or.... what ?

5) *What will be the fate of the complainants *? Cardinal Pell has, to date, protested his complete and total innocence of all charges. No grey. No if's ,buts. From that premise it seems as if the main defence will be total denial and by definition presenting a case that each complainant is a liar.

6) *Going back to the Catholic community . What will be the thoughts of remaining senior religious leaders.*  Do they really want the trial to go ahead ? What will be the impact on the Church's  credibility if Cardinal Pells credibility is picked apart piece by piece ? Who has a say in deciding how far Cardinal Pell will be defended ? What legal steps will be taken to present a case for the defence that essentially has to destroy each and every complainant ? How ugly would it look to mount such a defence get a Not Guility  and then be faced with the damage they have done.

7)  Let's say the trial happens and for all sorts of reasons a jury cannot find beyond reasonable doubt and acquits George Pell. A week later the complainants  lodge a civil suit alleging personal damages. In a civil court cases,  I understand, are decided on "balance of probabilities" rather the much stricter "beyond reasonable doubt." How would this turn out?

8) How will the court process cope with countless online discussions, blogs, internet click bait. Should these be suspended/banned until the trial is over to try and keep some semblance of a fair trial ? How would that work ? Would such a process be accepted as part of allowing a fair trial to take place ?

My guess is that George Pell and any legal counsel is well aware of these issues and  are acting accordingly. In that sense the complete and total denial or any culpability is part of a process to make this trial one of the most difficult ever mounted.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...l/news-story/8f5c5487292a06ecdace84a3a275c896


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

basilio said:


> My guess is that George Pell and any legal counsel is well aware of these issues and are acting accordingly. In that sense the complete and total denial or any culpability is part of a process to make this trial one of the most difficult ever mounted.




Maybe there should be an all Muslim judge and jury ?


----------



## basilio (29 June 2017)

As I was noting..
 

*News Corp's Miranda Devine says police are 'hunting Catholics' after George Pell charges *
Columnist launches attack on Victorian police chief as force insists investigation of cardinal followed usual procedure for allegations of historical sex offences




The News Corp columnist Miranda Devine says the media is pre-judging Cardinal George Pell and he will not be able to get a fair trial.

  

*Shares*
1,388

Amanda Meade

Thursday 29 June 2017 14.18 AEST   Last modified on Thursday 29 June 2017 14.56 AEST

The News Corp columnist Miranda Devine has defended George Pell on Twitter, saying his charges have been drummed up by Victoria police as a distraction from a supposed crime epidemic in that state.

After Pell was charged on Thursday morning, Devine said on Twitter that the media was pre-judging Pell and said he could not possibly get a fair trial.

“Victoria police chief Graham Ashton desperate for a distraction from the crime epidemic he’s incapable of stopping #HuntingCatholics,” Devine said.

“How would you like to be labelled a pedophile,” she asked. “Pell is supposed to be charged with exactly what I don’t know.

“But a fair trial can’t be now. Let due process prevail not Christian hate. I don’t defend churches’ shameful history of child sexual abuse. I am objecting to the feral prejudging of Cardinal Pell.

“Cardinal Pell is not charged with what you say but congratulations on the smear which ensures no fair trial.”

The Daily Telegraph columnist is a practising Catholic and has characterised the investigation of Pell as a witch-hunt of Catholics in particular and Christians in general and has used the hashtag #HuntingCatholics.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...e-hunting-catholics-after-george-pell-charges


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

basilio said:


> “But a fair trial can’t be now. Let due process prevail not Christian hate




Due process but not now ?

How do people like this become journalists ?


----------



## basilio (29 June 2017)

George Pell 
* The charges against Cardinal George Pell – explainer *
Pell, who rose up the ranks of the Catholic church to manage the Vatican’s finances, has been charged with historical sexual assault offences in Australia

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...harges-against-cardinal-george-pell-explainer

Good clear explanation of what has happened to date.


----------



## McLovin (30 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Due process but not now ?
> 
> How do people like this become journalists ?




Her father got her her job. In her ****-eyed view of the world, "due process" is this...



> saying his charges have been drummed up by Victoria police as a distraction from a supposed crime epidemic in that state.
> 
> Devine said on Twitter that the media was pre-judging Pell and said he could not possibly get a fair trial.
> 
> ...




If you don't know, Miranda, maybe you should stfu until you do. That is, if you really do believe in due process rather than just trying to silence anyone whose opinion differs. Perhaps she should preface her opinion by declaring her Catholicism, I'm sure she'd expect the same transparency.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2017)

McLovin said:


> Perhaps she should preface her opinion by declaring her Catholicism, I'm sure she'd expect the same transparency.




Do you think she's doing her best to create an atmosphere where a fair trial is impossible ? ie deliberatlly trying to influence a potential jury in Pell's favour rather than just being incompetent ?

It would be interesting to know just how far she could go without being in contempt.


----------



## McLovin (30 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Do you think she's doing her best to create an atmosphere where a fair trial is impossible ? ie deliberatlly trying to influence a potential jury in Pell's favour rather than just being incompetent ?




I don't think she has the readership for that to be of concern. I haven't seen any reporting of Pell now, or when he appeared at the Royal Commission, that hasn't been fair and balanced. Courts in Australia very rarely postpone a trial because of media attention, and there have been far worse examples of media bias than poor ol' Pell has recieved. If worse came to worse they could just go for a judge only trial (not sure if Victoria has those).


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Do you think she's doing her best to create an atmosphere where a fair trial is impossible ? ie deliberatlly trying to influence a potential jury in Pell's favour rather than just being incompetent ?
> 
> It would be interesting to know just how far she could go without being in contempt.





Justice is blind to bias apparently....I think I just made a funny ...blind to bias hahaha.


----------



## basilio (30 June 2017)

This article by David Marr gives an insightful view into Cardinal Pells career and the skills and strengths that have taken him so far. Well worth a read in the context of the investigation into child sexual abuse.

* George Pell profile: the pope's Australian hardman faces the fight of his life *
*David Marr* on the long and often controversial career of a ‘bright kid’ who rose from rural Australia to the highest reaches of the Catholic church

*Shares*
433

David Marr

Thursday 29 June 2017 21.09 AEST   Last modified on Friday 30 June 2017 08.59 AEST

A bright kid from an Australian bush town, George Pell kept his nose clean as he rose through the ranks to become chief of the Vatican’s finances. Despite a notably hard heart he was always a valuable asset to the church as a fearless conservative ideologue and a fine administrator.

Young Pell was plucked from Australia to train in Rome and at Oxford for the big career that was always beckoning. He returned to serve briefly and unhappily in a remote parish on the Murray before being brought into the heart of the diocese of Ballarat which was a hell of child abuse.

Pell swears he saw little or nothing in those years.

Strange that the career of a man who would climb so far and so fast was marked early on by such a want of curiosity. He would explain to Australia’s royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse: “It was a sad story and of not much interest to me.”

He sat on a committee that transferred Father Gerard Ridsdale from parish to parish. The crimes of this vicious paedophile were notorious in Ballarat, known to the bishop and familiar to other members of the committee. But by his own account, Pell never asked why this priest was always on the move. 

Pell was a big man who awed the faithful and impressed politicians. Even in Ballarat he began to display an almost magical ability to extract money from governments. This was to stand him in excellent stead in his Australian career.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ustralian-hardman-faces-the-fight-of-his-life


----------



## basilio (30 June 2017)

Cardinal George Pell is indeed entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a properly constituted court of law. (God that all sounds so old fashioned in 2017 )

Indeed  amongst the strongest advocates for such a principled view are writers  in the News Ltd Press ( unless of course they are banging on that no fair trial will be possible because of the media witch hunt against Cardinal Pell.).

First Dog On the Moon has produced his own masterly reminder of just how principled News Ltd has been in its approach to other people in conflict situations. Enjoy it. As always *Priceless*.

 
*Cardinal Pell is entitled to the presumption of innocence. Unlike some people *




First Dog on the Moon
According to News Corp everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence unless they are not
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...e-presumption-of-innocence-unlike-some-people


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2017)

basilio said:


> Cardinal George Pell is indeed entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a properly constituted court of law. (God that all sounds so old fashioned in 2017 )
> 
> Indeed  amongst the strongest advocates for such a principled view are writers  in the News Ltd Press ( unless of course they are banging on that no fair trial will be possible because of the media witch hunt against Cardinal Pell.).
> 
> ...




Another witchhunt? :Bligh, Gillard, Rudd and Shorten must be sh!tting themselves, being the traditional targets they will eventually be blamed by the LNP.


----------



## Tink (1 July 2017)

Yes, we can see what Melbourne is like, McLovin.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/freedom-of-speech-and-protest.31657/page-6


----------



## McLovin (1 July 2017)

Tink said:


> Yes, we can see what Melbourne is like, McLovin.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/freedom-of-speech-and-protest.31657/page-6





You'll need to be a bit clearer about what you're talking about, Tink.


----------



## Tisme (1 July 2017)

http://www.organicandhealthy.org/2017/06/catholic-church-raping-children-is.html

*Deny, Minimise, Blame*



> *In a depraved and disturbing statement by the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, a high-ranking cleric from the Catholic Church, he claimed that pedophilia is granted by God for priests. The vile comment was made by Cardinal Timothy Dolan after being found to have transferred church finances into a trust to keep them from being sued for clergy child abuse. *
> 
> 
> The Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee kept $55 million dollars in church funds from lawsuits started by victims of priestly sexual abuse, and transferred the money to a separate trust to take care of the archdiocese's cemeteries and mausoleums, stated a letter by Timothy Dolan, the then-Archbishop of Milwaukee. When victims came forward to seek compensation in a bankruptcy proceeding, the archdiocese made claims that their ability to sexually molest children is a right of religious liberty and that no money should be compensated to victims of clergy child sex abuse.
> ...


----------



## Tink (1 July 2017)

You mentioned opinions, McLovin.

Is Margaret Court a Catholic?
I don't think so.


----------



## McLovin (1 July 2017)

Tink said:


> You mentioned opinions, McLovin.
> 
> Is Margaret Court a Catholic?
> I don't think so.




So what if she's not. She's a minister and very open about it, unlike Devine and her own religious beliefs. (And what does any of this have to do with Court and Melbourne??)

I'd expect a conservative Catholic like Devine to be as dogmatic as the best the Vatican has turned out. Thankfully, most practising Catholics long ago turned their backs on the Catholic hierarchy and concentrate on their own congregation. And with guys like Pell at the top of the tree, who can  blame them?


----------



## Tink (1 July 2017)

Off topic -

So every time Margaret Court walks out, her difference of opinion is attacked by the baying mob?

Miranda has said, innocence until proven guilty, unless you are a communist.

https://twitter.com/mirandadevine


----------



## McLovin (1 July 2017)

Tink said:


> Off topic -
> 
> So every time Margaret Court walks out, her difference of opinion is attacked by the baying mob?
> 
> ...




Margaret Court gave an opinion. It's either wrong or right depending on ones own opinion. George Pell turned a blind eye to the sexual abuse of children and is now accused of abuse himself. The difference between the two is so stark that it beggars belief anyone would draw parallels between them.

No one is denying Pell's right to the presumption of innocence. It's just a mischief contrived by Devine to get the Catholics riled up into thinking that they are all under attack, and evidently it's working.


----------



## Tink (2 July 2017)

Speech to the Christopher Dawson Centre for Cultural Studies, Hobart
– Gerard Henderson –

Monday 22 May 2017

*“The Media, the Royal Commission & Freedom of Religion”.*

http://www.dawsoncentre.org/who-we-are/


----------



## basilio (2 July 2017)

The charging of Cardinal Pell for historical sex offences is certainly the news of the day. However it seems that he is only one *of a minimum of 20* Catholic religious figures with current open court cases for child sexual abuse.
*Current Court Cases*
*By Broken Rites researchers*
Following are some examples of current court cases which Broken Rites is observing (this is not a complete list). This page has not yet been fully updated.

http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/236


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2017)

I would have given Pell some latitude had I not watched him debating on QANDA. After that I couldn't see through his deliberate befuddling, a man being disloyal to paragon truths IMO.

I still remind myself of how the alterboy jokes abounded as some kind of perverse humour and I still hear my mother telling me as an infant never to be alone with a man, especially a priest..... the silent generation who didn't prosecute when perhaps they should have, instead of turning a blind eye.


----------



## overhang (15 August 2017)

So the commission have released their recommendations


But the royal commission is recommending any exemption on the confessional is removed, meaning members of the clergy would break the law if they failed to report child abuse to the authorities.
changes to police responses, such as improvements to investigative interviewing techniques
measures to improve "courtroom experiences" for victims, such as by pre-recording evidence, including in cross-examinations
the removal of "good character" as a mitigating factor in sentencing "where that good character facilitated the offending"
requiring sentences to be set in line with current sentencing standards instead of those in place at the time of offending, subject to the maximum sentence that applied at the time of the offence
extending grooming offences to cover when an offender builds trust with a parent or carer to get access to a child
All up there were 85 recommendations.  

And we've already seen the Catholic church attempting to protect their outdated practices in the confession box instead of protecting children who their pedophile priests exploit.



> But the president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart, said protections for confession should be respected.
> "Confession in the Catholic Church is a spiritual encounter with God through the priest," Archbishop Hart said in a statement.  "It is a fundamental part of the freedom of religion, and it is recognised in the law of Australia and many other countries.  "It must remain so here in Australia.



The church is a disgrace


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2017)

overhang said:


> So the commission have released their recommendations
> 
> 
> But the royal commission is recommending any exemption on the confessional is removed, meaning members of the clergy would break the law if they failed to report child abuse to the authorities.
> ...





One of the commission's talking heads got the rounds of the table from Michael on the ABC this morning, Michael was not impressed at the idea of making priests answer to the law about confessions.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> One of the commission's talking heads got the rounds of the table from Michael on the ABC this morning, Michael was not impressed at the idea of making priests answer to the law about confessions.




The only thing that will do is make sure pedophiles don't go to confession.


----------



## basilio (15 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The only thing that will do is make sure pedophiles don't go to confession.




Not so true Rumpy...
One of the sick discoveries of the Royal Commission was that at least one priest confessed his behaviour in the confessional. By doing this he effectively sealed his confessor to silence which was his intention in the first place.
I suspect actions like that could be in the sights of the Commissioner.


----------



## overhang (15 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The only thing that will do is make sure pedophiles don't go to confession.



For a start it will prevent priests from being able to confess their crimes and atone them self without any criminal repercussions.  But also the commission found that children had confessed what had occurred to them in the confession box, but of course the priests never passed this information on to the authorities.  At least this way the priest that kept the crimes secret could be charged.   Priests probably won't confess their crimes if the law were passed but we have absolutely nothing to lose by passing this law.


----------



## dutchie (22 November 2017)

The Judiciary is an Institution.

Queensland magistrate jailed for child abuse

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/na...e-jailed-for-child-abuse-20171121-p4yx4y.html



'If you rape children you belong in prison': The paedophiles who weren't jailed despite being convicted of abusing young children - and the reasons they were let off the hook will astonish you

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-despite-abusing-children.html#ixzz4z8q6tMGG 

Hmm ...........


----------



## Tink (23 November 2017)

When are they going to deal with these public schools...

http://youreteachingourchildrenwhat.org/


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

Royal Commission findings out. Catholic Church in Melbourne copped a beating... (surprise, surprise, surprise...)

* Melbourne Catholic archdiocese's inaction had 'catastrophic' consequences *
Royal commission finds former archbishop Thomas Francis Little ‘dismissed or ignored’ allegations of child sexual abuse




The royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse says there was a ‘culture of secrecy’ within the Melbourne Catholic archdiocese. Photograph: Tracey Nearmy/AAP

*Shares*
14

Melissa Davey

 
@MelissaLDavey

Tuesday 5 December 2017 07.16 GMT   Last modified on Tuesday 5 December 2017 09.28 GMT

The failure of senior figures within the Catholic archdiocese of Melbourne, including the former archbishop Thomas Francis Little, to deal with serious allegations of child sexual abuse “demonstrates the catastrophic human consequences of inaction”, a report from the child sex abuse royal commission has found.

On Tuesday the commission released its findings from hearings held in Melbourne in 2015 and in Sydney last year about the response of Melbourne Catholic church authorities to allegations and complaints of child sexual abuse made against seven priests, and especially the abuse by Father Peter Searson.

Those hearings culminated in evidence from Cardinal George Pell, who gave evidence via video-link from the Vatican after his doctor declared him too unwell to fly to Australia to appear in person.

The commission’s report found that Little, who headed the archdiocese of Melbourne from 1974 to 1996, “dismissed or ignored serious allegations of child sexual abuse against a number of priests” and did not investigate or report them to police. The commission also found Little moved offending priests to other parishes where they continued to offend. Little died in 2008.

“We are satisfied that the evidence in the case study showed a prevailing culture of secrecy within the archdiocese, led by Archbishop Little, in relation to complaints,” the report found. “Complaints were dealt with in a way that sought to protect the archdiocese from scandal and liability and prioritised the interests of the church over those of the victims.”

*Searson’s abuse was particularly pervasive and included the rape of multiple children. In 1982 he brought a handgun to Our Lady of Carmel parish school in Sunbury, Victoria, and threatened children with it. He also tortured animals in front of children, the commission heard.

 “The case of Father Searson is remarkable in terms of the volume of complaints against him and the number of church personnel to whom they were made,” the report found. “This was not a story of serious but isolated allegations being reported only to the archbishop or vicar general. Rather, Father Searson enjoyed a level of infamy within the parish and ... within other parts of the archdiocese.”
*
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/dec/05/melbourne-catholic-*archdioceses-inaction-had-catastrophic-consequences*


----------



## basilio (5 December 2017)

More detail on the response of Archbishop Frank Little to compalints about Father Searson
commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse 
* Letters show Melbourne archbishop failed to act on allegations about priest *


Archbishop Frank Little wrote it was ‘difficult for every priest to fulfil the expectations of every parishioner’ in response to letters about Peter Searson




The commission heard that in the face of first-person accounts about children being traumatised by Searson, Little responded that there was no concrete evidence to compel him to act. Photograph: Royal Commission

*Shares*
18

Melissa Davey

 
@MelissaLDavey

Thursday 26 November 2015 03.52 GMT   Last modified on Wednesday 26 October 2016 23.57 BST

A number of extraordinary letters from then Melbourne archbishop Frank Little, in response to serious allegations about behaviour towards children by parish priest Peter Searson, have been revealed by the royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...hop-failed-to-act-on-allegations-about-priest

___________________________________________________________

*'No one listened' to hundreds of complaints about priest, says principal *
*‘*How do I look after 400-and-something kids when we’ve got this raving lunatic loose?,*’ *former headmaster says of ‘diabolical position’ he was in

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...eds-of-complaints-about-priest-says-principal


----------



## basilio (6 December 2017)

More findings from the Royal Commission.  Just horrific..

* Catholic bishop cared little for children and left them in danger, royal commission finds *
Ballarat’s Ronald Mulkearns knew or strongly suspected pedophile priest was sexually abusing children and did nothing, report says




The former bishop of Ballarat, Ronald Mulkearns, knew and did nothing about the sexual abuse of children in his diocese, the child sex abuse royal commission has found. Photograph: ABC

*Shares*
5

Melissa Davey

 
@MelissaLDavey

Wednesday 6 December 2017 01.35 GMT   Last modified on Wednesday 6 December 2017 02.00 GMT

Children were sexually abused over many decades by notorious pedophile priests within the diocese of Ballarat largely because the bishop at the time, Ronald Mulkearns, had little concern for children, deliberately left them in danger, and failed to investigate or report offenders to police.

This was a key finding from a report on Catholic church authorities in Ballarat published by the child sex abuse royal commission on Wednesday. The report is the result of public hearings held in three parts in 2015 and 2016 in Ballarat and Sydney.

The hearings examined the response of the congregation of Christian Brothers in the St Patrick’s province of Ballarat and the Catholic diocese of Ballarat to complaints and allegations of child sexual abuse by Christian brothers, clergy and other religious staff.

“There is no doubt from the many documents which are in evidence that, at various times, Bishop Mulkearns, the bishop of Ballarat, knew or strongly suspected that these priests had sexually abused children in the diocese,” the report said.

“His concern was overwhelmingly about protecting the reputation of the church and avoiding scandal. There was little evidence that he was concerned to protect children from these priests.”

Mulkearns died last year aged 85. He managed the diocese from 1971 and during a time when numerous notorious pedophiles, including Gerald Ridsdale, Robert Best and Edward Dowlan, were found to have been abusing children. Australia’s most notorious pedophile, Ridsdale, has been convicted of sexually abusing 65 children, although his victims are believed to run into the hundreds.

Most survivors who gave evidence about Ballarat said they were sexually abused by Ridsdale, and the commission found his conduct was the source of gossip among priests and in the community. Despite this, he held 16 appointments over 29 years as a priest. His appointments were typically short, and when allegations against him were made, he was often transferred to a new role or location.

Commissioners were satisfied that “by late 1975 Ridsdale had admitted to Bishop Mulkearns that he had offended against children and that Bishop Mulkearns knew that Ridsdale’s conduct was known to the police in Bendigo and it is likely he knew of the general talk in the community about Ridsdale”.






* Priest raped me nearly every Saturday for six months, victim tells hearing *
Read more
Despite being aware of allegations about Ridsdale, Mulkearns did nothing when a 14-year-old boy, Paul Levey, was sent to live with Ridsdale in the Mortlake presbytery in 1982 for more than six months. Levey gave evidence to the commission that he slept in Ridsdale’s bedroom and that he was sexually abused “all the time, just about every day”. 

“We are satisfied that, by about April 1982, Bishop Mulkearns knew that Mr Levey was living with Ridsdale in the presbytery at Mortlake,” the report said.

“He knew that the boy’s mother was concerned about the situation and sought his assistance, but he ignored her. By this time, Bishop Mulkearns knew of Ridsdale’s admission of offending against boys. It is inconceivable that it would not have occurred to him that Ridsdale should not have had a boy living with him and that the boy was, at least, at risk of sexual abuse by Ridsdale.

“Bishop Mulkearns’ response to Mr Levey living with Ridsdale in the Mortlake presbytery demonstrated a total absence of concern for the welfare of that boy. Bishop Mulkearns deliberately left Mr Levey in danger.”

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...nd-left-them-in-danger-royal-commission-finds


----------



## basilio (12 February 2018)

* Days of Fasting and Reparation *
*following the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse*
                                            Feb  14-17, 2018

Through these years, Australia's bishops and other Church leaders have often expressed their sorrow and have offered their apology for what has occurred in the past - the harm suffered by victims and survivors, the instances of cover-up, the failure to believe survivor's stories and to respond with compassion and justice, and the distress that many still experience. Our apologiies have at time seemed too little - not because they were insincere, but because trust has been broken.

We stand firm in our resolve to ensure that the abuse of children never happens again in the Catholic Church and to build new bonds of trust. With the Royal Commission concluded, our country and our Church enter into a new moment. We are calling upon the Catholic community in Australia to embrace this new moment by beginning the penitential season of Lent with four days of fasting and reparation. These are spiritual practices which express our desire for God's reconciling and healing grace.


_Statement to Catholic Church communities_


----------



## basilio (12 February 2018)

* With $30b in wealth, why is the Catholic Church struggling to pay for justice? *


*Ben Schneiders
Royce Millar*
*Chris Vedelago*
After a lifetime contributing to the Catholic Church, Neil Ormerod could give no more.

Following a Sunday mass in 2014, the Australian Catholic University theology professor told his parish priest he no longer trusted the church to use its resources in a way Jesus Christ would approve.



*Where does the Catholic Church get its money?*
What the Catholic Church is really worth.

The trigger for his rebellion was the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2014 - in particular, Cardinal George Pell’s testimony about the church’s brutal legal assault on John Ellis, a former altar boy abused by a priest in the 1970s.

When Ellis finally confronted the Sydney archdiocese in 2002, then led by Pell, it offered him $25,000 in compensation, which he rejected.

The church then dismissed Ellis’s proposal for a $100,000 settlement, instead spending $800,000 fighting him in court, successfully arguing it could not be sued because it did not exist as an entity.
*The church threatened to pursue Ellis for its legal costs.*

"That money was the accumulated wealth of generations of good faithful Catholics who gave with the best will in the world," says Ormerod. "It was used in an immoral attack on an abuse survivor and church member."

Ormerod’s faith in God remained strong, but his belief in the institutional church was severely shaken. The church leadership had forfeited its right to his support.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nat...gling-to-pay-for-justice-20180208-p4yzra.html


----------



## Tisme (12 February 2018)

Wonderful snippet on the ABC radio this morning 3hr30min mark:

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/brisbane/programs/breakfast/breakfast/9399012


----------



## basilio (31 May 2018)

Came across an amazing "comedy" story on Iview last night.
The abuse of children in foster care is another cancer in our community. This guy has the experience to make a thoughtful response.

*Corey White's Roadmap To Paradise*
Series 1 Ep 5 Foster Care
COMEDY
Corey White has experienced the absolute worst of the foster care system, an issue which he feels gets too little attention. He attempts to figure out how it got so staggeringly bad and offers a controversial solution.
https://iview.abc.net.au/programs/corey-whites-roadmap-to-paradise/IR1701V005S00

-----------------------------------------------------

On a similar theme a court case has just finished on the treatment of children under care in a child care hostel. 
*The horrors of the Warminda hostel and the children who were never heard. Until now*
By [URL='http://www.abc.net.au/news/joanna-menagh/4421090']Joanna Menagh and Briana Shepherd
Updated 16 minutes ago





* Photo:* Martin Cooper's victims were all wards of the state living at the hostel. (Supplied) 
*Related Story:* 'Hostel parent' intimidated, threatened, sexually abused children in state care
*Related Story:* Call for bail hostels to cut high WA prisoner remand rate
*Related Story:* WA police lay historic child sex charge
"You're not wanted. You're a welfare kid. No-one will believe you."

These were the words spoken to silence young children by "hostel parent" Martin Cooper, who was supposed to care for the boys and girls at Warminda hostel in East Victoria Park in inner Perth but instead subjected them to horrendous physical and sexual abuse.

Now 40 years on, those eight children — now adults aged in their 50s — have finally been believed.

Cooper is facing a lengthy jail term after being found guilty by a Perth jury of 30 sex crimes.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-31/warminda-hostel-abused-children-told-no-one-would-believe-them/9807480
[/URL]


----------



## basilio (22 October 2018)

Big day in parliament today with the National Child abuse apology. Seems to have been a very powerful event for the the politicans and the  people and families who had lived through the abuse and then the ongoing denials.

* The national child abuse apology shows that institutions can heal, as well as harm *
Julia Gillard was the victims’ champion while Scott Morrison articulated survivors’ betrayal and frustration
Katharine Murphy

The survivors who came to Canberra for the apology had been betrayed by institutions, yet they journeyed to the national parliament, an institution seemingly determined to drive the Australian people to despair, to seek a measure of healing.

With victims of institutional sexual abuse massing in their hundreds in Canberra on Monday – intent on taking possession of their house, its halls and its chambers, the pain etched on their faces and in their bodies – the Australian parliament did not have an option to fail.

The only option for the people’s representatives was to rise to the occasion, and deliver. So on Monday, politicians gathered with solemnity and purpose, turning their collective sights away from the B-grade intrigues of the palace, turning their eyes to the survivors who wept in the chambers, on the forecourt, in the corridors, to the people who bowed their heads to avoid meeting the eyes of others, or the terrible punishment of the prying cameras.

At 11am, the Australian parliament assembled and said sorry to the brave souls who had been betrayed by the men of God, by people in power, by people with a duty of care to protect the innocents.

It said sorry to the people who had every reason to break, but refused to be broken.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ws-that-institutions-can-heal-as-well-as-harm


----------



## basilio (22 October 2018)

A more detailed report on the apology itself

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...stralia-apologises-to-child-sex-abuse-victims

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...vivors-praise-commission-shaking-institutions


----------



## PZ99 (13 December 2018)

If this report is accurate I'd say a certain someone has played his last card-and-all 

https://www.americamagazine.org/fai...ancis-found-guilty-historical-sexual-offenses


----------



## basilio (13 December 2018)

I had heard about the suppression order of this court case and can understand why it was done.
This is serious xhit


----------



## SirRumpole (13 December 2018)

I didn't even know the case was underway. I thought it would be next year.


----------



## Joe Blow (13 December 2018)

I think it's advisable to tread very carefully here. There is a suppression order in place and although ASF is not traditional media, we are certainly part of the media landscape. So please, let's not have any names mentioned or discussion of the case to which the suppression order applies.

Thanks.


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 December 2018)

Joe Blow said:


> I think it's advisable to tread very carefully here. There is a suppression order in place



I note that you are generally opposed to censorship (as am I) but from a legal perspective I do wonder if it would be wise to edit or remove the post in this thread which does name an individual?

I'm thinking purely in terms of any potential legal consequences there, noting the suppression order, and please don't anyone interpret this comment as an attack on the person who posted the comment.

In principle I see the suppression order as a bit pointless, since the facts of the matter are easily available from overseas sources and reasonably widely known in Australia, but the law is the law and if it were up to me I'd just err on the side of caution.


----------



## PZ99 (14 December 2018)

I didn't know about the suppression order and I didn't entirely trust the article given it wasn't posted locally so I chose my words carefully but happy for the post to be removed. Is our server based in the US? If it is I'd be surprised if we violated any laws but that's the ref's call


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2018)

I heard the case mentioned briefly on the ABC yesterday.


----------



## Joe Blow (14 December 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> I note that you are generally opposed to censorship (as am I) but from a legal perspective I do wonder if it would be wise to edit or remove the post in this thread which does name an individual?




A wise suggestion Smurf. I have edited the post to remove the name just to be on the safe side.


----------



## orr (16 December 2018)

On occasion I take it on  faith and harken to the adage 'no news is good news'


----------



## Humid (18 January 2019)

https://thewest.com.au/news/court-j...oric-sex-abuse-of-teenage-girl-ng-b881074286z
Unbelievable


----------



## SirRumpole (18 January 2019)

Humid said:


> https://thewest.com.au/news/court-j...oric-sex-abuse-of-teenage-girl-ng-b881074286z
> Unbelievable




Should have been home detention at least.


----------



## basilio (16 February 2019)

Catholic Church opening up another ugly situation with sexual abuse of nuns by priests. 

*Catholic Church headed for another sex abuse scandal as #NunsToo speak up*
The Conversation
By Kathleen McPhillips

Posted about 3 hours ago




* Photo:* Pope Francis has finally, and for the first time, admitted the Church has a problem with priests sexually abusing nuns. (AP: Gregorio Borgia) 
*Related Story:* Priests held nuns in 'sexual slavery', Pope admits
*Related Story:* Pope Francis becomes first pontiff to visit Arabian Peninsula
*Related Story:* 'Something that worries me': Pope tells homosexuals to leave
All eyes will turn to Rome between February 21-24, when senior church clerics across the world meet to discuss how to handle the widening sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic Church.

Until recently, this has been focused on the abuse of children.

But now Pope Francis has admitted — for the first time — sexual abuse by priests against religious women exists and must be acknowledged.

And Catholic women are speaking out under the #NunsToo hashtag.

Twenty-five years ago, Irish nun Maura O'Donohue prepared an extensive report for the Vatican on the abuse of nuns internationally by priests.

Her report was based on information supplied by priests, doctors and others, and she had been assured records existed for several of the incidents. But the report was covered up.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02...or-another-sex-abuse-scandal-nunstoo/10817270


----------



## basilio (26 February 2019)

The big Reveal.
Cardinal Pell found guilty on 5 charges of child sex assault. (This was the case that was suppressed last December)
* Cardinal George Pell: Vatican treasurer found guilty of child sexual assault *
Third most senior Catholic in the world convicted on five charges by jury in Australian court case 
• Follow live updates on the reaction to Cardinal George Pell’s conviction
• Five times guilty: how Pell’s past caught up with him

Cardinal George Pell, once the third most powerful man in the Vatican and Australia’s most senior Catholic, has been found guilty of child sexual abuse after a trial in Melbourne.

A jury delivered the unanimous verdict on 11 December in Melbourne’s county court, but the result was subject to a suppression order and could not be reported until now.

A previous trial on the same five charges, which began in August, resulted in a hung jury, leading to a retrial.

Pell, who is on leave from his role in Rome as Vatican treasurer, was found guilty of sexually penetrating a child under the age of 16 as well as four charges of an indecent act with a child under the age of 16. The offences occurred in December 1996 and early 1997 at St Patrick’s Cathedral, months after Pell was inaugurated as archbishop of Melbourne.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...reasurer-found-guilty-of-child-sexual-assault


----------



## basilio (26 February 2019)

Further details of the December trial which found Cardinal Pell guilty of five sex offences against two choirboys.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...using-past-caught-up-with-him-in-courtroom-43


----------



## Zaxon (26 February 2019)

basilio said:


> Further details of the December trial which found Cardinal Pell guilty of five sex offences against two choirboys.




It's an interesting twist that churches who consider themselves bastians of goodness and virtue and far more moral than the "great unwashed", have a much higher rate of abusing children and female staff (nuns) than the rest of the population whom they normally like to judge.


----------



## basilio (26 February 2019)

Zaxon said:


> It's an interesting twist that churches who consider themselves bastians of goodness and virtue and far more moral than the "great unwashed", have a much higher rate of abusing children and female staff (nuns) than the rest of the population whom they normally like to judge.




Yeah that is very, very sad... In Cardinal Pells case it is even more heinous  given his responsibility as a key figure in the Catholic Church and his responsibility to obtain justice for the victims of religious abuse . Very much a case of the Fox in charge of the chook house.

_*"Melbourne Response"*

After being installed as Archbishop of Melbourne in August 1996, Pell announced the establishment of the "Melbourne Response" protocol in October of that year.[9][115]:29, 31 Victims were publicly encouraged to come forward. When Pell was appointed a Cardinal in 2003, the ABC noted that he had established Australia's first independent commissioner to handle sexual abuse complaints against clergy.[8] In 2017, it reported that the Melbourne Response was "widely criticised as being legalistic and offering inadequate support to victims".[13]_
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Pell


----------



## basilio (26 February 2019)

There is already a savage response from families destroyed by religious sexual abuse and then re destroyed by the response of Archbishop Pell to their suffering. 

*Chrissie Foster calls for George Pell's Melbourne Response to be 'torn down'*
Updated 32 minutes ago




* Photo:* Chrissie Foster attended several days of the trial and said the guilty verdict was "amazing". (ABC News: Gemma Hall) 
*Related Story:* Pell abused two choirboys. One of them didn't live to see justice
*Related Story:* What you need to know about George Pell's child abuse case
*Related Story:* In his own words: George Pell's victim responds to the cardinal's conviction
*Related Story:* 'Vile and disgusting': How George Pell reacted when police put abuse claims to him
*Related Story:* Cardinal's child abuse conviction creates 'unprecedented' crisis for Vatican
The mother of two girls abused by a Catholic priest says the conviction of George Pell on child sex abuse charges should lead to the tearing down of the controversial compensation scheme he set up for survivors of clerical sexual abuse.

*Key points:*

Pell is Australia's most senior Catholic cleric and has been convicted of child sex abuse
Chrissie Foster said the verdict helped her understand Pell's "angry" response to her family
She is calling for the Melbourne Response established by Pell to be dismantled

Pell was last year found guilty of sexually abusing two choirboys at St Patrick's Cathedral during his time as archbishop of Melbourne in December 1996, but the verdict had been suppressed until now.

Chrissie Foster's daughters Emma and Katie were raped by Melbourne priest Kevin O'Donnell while they were at primary school in the 1980s.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02...abuse-guilty-verdict-chrissie-foster/10845500


----------



## explod (26 February 2019)

*Colleen Hartland shared a post.*
5 hrs · 





Suzanne Marry Roberts
5 hrs
"Julia Gillard stared down Influential Lobbyists and Catholics from the church, including Tony Abbott to get the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse throug...

See More


71You and 70 others

8 Comments14 Shares
Love
Like
Love
Haha
Wow
Sad
Angry

Comment
Share
*Comments*
View 3 more comments




Zappy Russell THIS is what leadership looks like. Not banning guns. Or signing up to a phony war. Or guarding the finances. Or a million other minor details. It's taking on institutions that can get down and dirty when they are losing.
2
Like
Like
Love
Haha
Wow
Sad
Angry


 · Reply
 · 3h





Jillian Verhardt It wasn't until a person, in this case, PM Julia Gillard, to put Justice first and foremost. Since that time, the push-back, resistance and entitlement delivered by the now found immoral authority is the most telling. That just leaves all the other 'authorities' who looked away, who did not protect those harmed.
2
Like
Like
Love
Haha
Wow
Sad
Angry


 · Reply
 · 2h





Zappy Russell And what did Abbot call her, "barren" she respected the rights of children more than he ever did
5
Like
 · Reply
 · 2h
 · Edited





Tim Mentzing We should all be grateful that we were lucky enough to have this unmarried, childless, atheist, female prime minister. Without her religion institutions probably wouldn't have been made accountable for decades to come.


----------



## Logique (27 February 2019)

Predictably, Hinch is straight out of the blocks, even though the matter is still subject of an appeal.

Perhaps the the cardinal could move to Nauru and get two doctors to medivac him via skype, hey Derryn


----------



## basilio (27 February 2019)

Background to the two child  sex abuse trials held for Cardinal Pell. And why we never heard anything until now.

* Inside the Pell trial: we sat in court for months, forbidden from reporting a word *
 George Pell 

When the verdict came, the room was still. No one made a sound

• Up to 100 journalists accused of breaking suppression order may face jail
•Five times guilty: how Pell’s past caught up with him

Melissa Davey

 
 @MelissaLDavey 
Wed 27 Feb 2019 00.00 AEDT   Last modified on Wed 27 Feb 2019 09.05 AEDT


Shares
173




George Pell leaves court in Melbourne on Tuesday. ‘A suppression order meant that the thousands of words recorded by the media had to remain carefully protected.’ Photograph: David Crosling/AP
For nearly three months a small group of journalists watched as the most powerful Catholic official to be charged with child sexual abuse faced justice in a Melbourne courtroom.

Until now we have been unable to publish a word of what we heard and saw.

Cardinal George Pell, a confidant to the pope and the financial manager of the Vatican, had been on trial for child sexual abuse – not once, but twice.

But a suppression order meant that the thousands of words recorded by the media – including the Guardian – through first a mistrial and then a retrial had to remain carefully protected in notepads and on personal computers. Nothing could be published.

*The court had ruled that the interests of justice were paramount. Pell was due to face yet another trial involving more allegations – this time accused of molesting boys in a swimming pool. And, without a suppression order, news of the preceding trials would have received saturation coverage – potentially biasing a future jury.*

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...rt-for-months-forbidden-from-reporting-a-word


----------



## IFocus (27 February 2019)

I am sure the Murdoch press would give the same outraged support for an Indigenous man convicted of sex crimes against two young children as they are for Pell.............


----------



## SirRumpole (27 February 2019)

Zaxon said:


> It's an interesting twist that churches who consider themselves bastians of goodness and virtue and far more moral than the "great unwashed", have a much higher rate of abusing children and female staff (nuns) than the rest of the population whom they normally like to judge.




I don't know about that.

I think incidences of child abuse in the home is a hidden monster that is not able to rear it's head because families tend to stick together and protect themselves, the same as churches.

I doubt if the full extent of the problem will ever be known.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 February 2019)

He's waved his right to a Bail hearing apparently, off to the "Big House" this arvo.
His Lawyers have submitted 10 character references for the sentencing hearing.


----------



## Darc Knight (27 February 2019)

His QC has argued to the Judge for the sentencing that "this is just a standard sexual penetration case", and that "it's just a matter of Law, not morals".

Best of luck with that argument!


----------



## Zaxon (27 February 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I think incidences of child abuse in the home is a hidden monster that is not able to rear it's head because families tend to stick together and protect themselves, the same as churches.




Very much so.  But outside of family, if you look at any profession, so nurses, doctors, teachers, etc, the clergy is massively over represented in cases of abuse.  Hence the need for the royal commission in the first place.


----------



## Zaxon (27 February 2019)

George Pell, in particular, built his career on condemning other people.


----------



## moXJO (27 February 2019)

Back in the 80s I attended a Catholic school. My old man did some building work for them and I was passed through.
Fairly prestigious school in the area.

Anyway, first day for interview with the principal. I'm sitting in the waiting room listening to good old brother whipping the shite out of some lad. Who knew that he was getting his rocks off doing it.

Now the principal or Brother E as I'll call him, was well respected throughout the community. Had his own hour radio show,  was deeply entrenched with local media and community leaders. 

There was another priest there (priest c).
And also a kids refuge on school grounds that a friend of mine was staying at. We would always make jokes about him getting "rogered" by a priest. 

And then one night he is sitting on the lounge and priest c starts stroking his hair saying "You're such a pretty boy". He made for the exit, rang me and we laughed about it for an hour. My parents went and picked him up and he stayed with us over the next few years.

I  was a bit young to think anything of it at the time. But brother E and priest c were abusing kids in my year. In the end they abused a few kids and the story came out.

The media quickly turned and brother E shot himself on some outback qld road while priest c hid in the church. 
When my aunty was on her death bed. She asked for priest c to come for last rights (just as it all was going south). He gutlessly refused to come to save his own skin.

Fast forward 20 something years and I  was doing some work for a judge. He went to the same school and said "I don't believe all the rumors about what happened". I ran through what happened, the names of the kids that committed suicide, etc.

He was in shock. Looked like I redefined his world.
Nice guy as well, bit of a toff.

The 80s were full of that kind of thing. One of my heroes of labor lore was franca arena. She called out the pedos in Parliament in the 90s. A local catholic priest/boxing instructor  also called out the church protecting pedos.

Hell I even remember the local pedo who lived next to the primary school and had a whole wall covered in photos of little kids. 
Entertainment industry, Religious institutions, parliament, judicial system. All need a good look at.


----------



## Logique (27 February 2019)

I remember when there were altar boys. I was damn relieved I never got that gig.
I could tell you stories about the Christian Brothers too, as could most of us who went to CB schools.

So the first sympathy is with the victims, no question


----------



## Zaxon (27 February 2019)

moXJO said:


> I  was a bit young to think anything of it at the time. But brother E and priest c were abusing kids in my year. In the end they abused a few kids and the story came out. The media quickly turned and brother E shot himself on some outback qld road while priest c hid in the church.




Thanks for sharing your story.  This sort of thing has affected so many people.


----------



## moXJO (27 February 2019)

Zaxon said:


> Thanks for sharing your story.  This sort of thing has affected so many people.



It was bad where I  am. Every girl I knew in one street was assaulted by a pedo. My misses was at age 7 and that case wrapped up about 5 years back. Even the mayor was one. 

God... there were so many jokes about all  the pedos in town and no one was doing anything.


----------



## basilio (27 February 2019)

If you have the stomach for it the site Broken Rites details the sick, sad stories of abuse by Catholic religious. Moxjo might even see  Brother E or Priest C.
http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/

Cardinal Pell was sent down today. David Marr wrote a cutting analysis of how Robert Richter attempted to  mitigate the gravity of Cardinal Pells behaviour and just succeeded in digging him deeper into the pxx. A classic final paragraph.

*Take him away, please': George Pell hadn't dressed for prison, but that's where he went *
The only question on the agenda today was how long the man who once bestrode the Catholic world will be living behind bars

...We will see him again when the appeal begins, the grounds already being argued on the front pages of the papers. The lawyer Father Frank Bennan’s defence of the cardinal in the Australian is being distributed to parents with kids at Catholic schools. How might a fair jury be empaneled if these attacks on the victim, the jury and the court continue month after month.

By then Pell will be in one of the prisons where Victoria houses paedophiles. He will know so many of the faces, so many priests and brothers who have done what he continues to deny having done himself. What reunions there will be.

For the first time since they shared the St Alipius presbytery at Ballarat in the 1970s, George Pell will be back under the same roof as the worst of the worst. He and Gerald Ridsdale will have so much to catch up on.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ot-dressed-for-prison-but-thats-where-he-went


----------



## Darc Knight (28 February 2019)

Alan Joans well and truly on Cardinal Pell's side this morning.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Alan Joans well and truly on Cardinal Pell's side this morning.




I wonder if Pell would want Jones as a character witness ?

Pot and kettle ?


----------



## Logique (28 February 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Alan Joans well and truly on Cardinal Pell's side this morning.



Who is this Alan 'Joans' fellow?


----------



## Darc Knight (28 February 2019)

Logique said:


> Who is this Alan 'Joans' fellow?




*Alan Belford Joans* AO (born 13 April 1941, or possibly 1942 or 1943[1][2]) is an Australian radio broadcaster. He is a former coach of the Australia national rugby union team and rugby leaguecoach and administrator. He has worked as a school teacher, a speech writer in the office of the Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser, and in musical theatre. He has a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Queensland, and completed a one-year teaching diploma at Worcester College, Oxford. He has received civil and industry awards.
Joans hosts a popular Sydney breakfast radio program, on radio station 2GB. Joans advocates mainly conservative views, and the popularity of his radio program has made him a highly paid and influential media personality in Australia. Despite his success, he remains acontroversial figure.[3] His on-air conduct has received adverse findings from Australia's mediaregulators, and he has frequently been sued for defamation.

On 6 December 1988, Joans was arrested in an underground public toilet on Broadwick Street in the Soho area of London. He was taken to the Mayfair police station and charged with 'outraging public decency' and 'committing an indecent act'. 'Joans friends rushed to his support, and when the case was heard in the Marlborough StreetMagistrates' Court the next day The Crown withdrew the more serious charge, with Joans pleading not guilty to the lesser charge of committing an indecent act. The authorities ultimately did not present any evidence to support either charge, and the second charge was also later dropped, with Joans lawyerswinning ₤70 in costs. Joans read a prepared statement when he first appeared back on his radioshow on 16 January 1989, saying "I am and always was innocent of the charges levelled against me".[4][74] Joans has avoided talking about the incident ever since, although it is frequently raised by his opponents or those looking to highlight alleged hypocrisy in his comments.[10][25][75]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Jones_(radio_broadcaster)


----------



## basilio (28 February 2019)

A couple of years ago investigative journalist Louise Milligan wrote a book called "Cardinal: The rise and fall of George Pell".  It detailed many accusations about Cardinal Pells behaviour.
In particular she opened up the issue of the The Choir boys at St Patricks Cathedral
The book was immediately quashed and the Victorian police laid charges against Cardinal Pell.
The story of these young boys is now open for the public record. Check it out.

* The Kid and The Choirboy – the harrowing story of George Pell's victims *

In this extract from Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell, one boy’s family tell Louise Milligan the cataclysmic effect abuse had on him

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...y-the-harrowing-story-of-george-pells-victims


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2019)

basilio said:


> A couple of years ago investigative journalist Louise Milligan wrote a book called "Cardinal: The rise and fall of George Pell".  It detailed many accusations about Cardinal Pells behaviour.
> In particular she opened up the issue of the The Choir boys at St Patricks Cathedral
> The book was immediately quashed and the Victorian police laid charges against Cardinal Pell.
> The story of these young boys is now open for the public record. Check it out.
> ...




_*"I’m not at liberty to name the boys – complainants of sexual assault and their families have a legal right to anonymity and it has been requested here. I’ve called them The Kid and The Choirboy."
*_
Shouldn't that apply to the defendant as well, just in case the complaint is false or not proven ?


----------



## basilio (28 February 2019)

Broken Rites has been a key organisation is documenting the extent of child sex abuse in the catholic community. Excellent interview with one of the main  researchers of this organisation.
*The Goodlife: Justice for survivors of clerical sexual abuse*
Sunday, February 3, 2013  
by Noel Debien with Dr Bernard Barrett





Honorary Researcher with Broken Rites


*




	

		
			
		

		
	
Related Audio:*
Goodlife: Justice for survivors of clergy sexual abuse
Noel Debien with Dr Bernard Barrett from Broken Rites 

Download as MP3

In this year of the royal commission into sexual abuse, we're looking into some of the people who have pursued issues many people find distasteful- even not discussible.

In this episode, we speak with Dr Bernard Barrett, a person who has been dedicating his voluntary time to the investigation and exposure of clerical sexual abuse- many crimes which have been previously hidden for cultural and family reasons.

Bernard Barrett has spent much of his free time researching and following up on crimes of sexual abuse within the church. The group he works with is called Broken Rites; a group of volunteers who continue to report on the church and victims of sexual abuse.

It's a difficult job to do, but one which reveals the deeply personal nature of exposing clerical sexual abuse; why it helps people to recover and be well- and so to lead the Goodlife.
http://www.abc.net.au/sundaynights/stories/s3682632.htm


----------



## Darc Knight (28 February 2019)

A true story and Academy award winner


----------



## Zaxon (28 February 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> *Alan Belford Joans* AO (born 13 April 1941, or possibly 1942 or 1943
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Jones_(radio_broadcaster)




Did you really take a correctly spelt article and still misspell it?


----------



## Darc Knight (28 February 2019)

Zaxon said:


> View attachment 92600
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Humour is in the eye of the beholder I guess


----------



## Zaxon (28 February 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Humour is in the eye of the beholder I guess




I assumed that was the case. But I've seen some very dogmatic people on this forum who keep insisting black is really white regardless of the independent evidence.  So I was just checking


----------



## Zaxon (1 March 2019)

https://www.9news.com.au/2019/02/28/08/02/news-george-pell-john-howard-speaks-character-reference


----------



## Darc Knight (1 March 2019)

The case that Alan Joans was making yesterday was that the DPP don't normally run such a case off one witness. He (Joans) also claimed the other Boy had denied the incident before his death.


----------



## Tink (1 March 2019)

imv, the stalinists have hijacked Melbourne, and I have said that before.

Our state is being watched around the world.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> The case that Alan Joans was making yesterday was that the DPP don't normally run such a case off one witness. He (Joans) also claimed the other Boy had denied the incident before his death.




Check out the story of the The Kid and The Choirboy.  That would be the source of the claim that the other boy had denied the incident before his death. Then think about the context of that statement and it might make more sense.

I can understand the "concern" that there was only one (living) witness to the assault and that the DPP wouldn't normally proceed with such a case. I'm absolutely certain that Cardinal Pell and hundreds of other similar figures were equally confident that no one would believe a kid vs them in any setting.

Perhaps the biggest thing we have learnt in the course of the Commission, Previous publicity and current fallout is how evil these people have been. And in particular that defiant postures of innocence and truth are part of a facade that says  "If I keep denying it they can't make it stick".


----------



## basilio (1 March 2019)

Tink said:


> imv, the stalinists have hijacked Melbourne, and I have said that before.
> 
> Our state is being watched around the world.



Tink, you do say some  pretty strange things at times
... But this is getting into Gold Star territory.

By the way do you acknowledge that hundreds probably thousands of people, many in the Catholic Church sexually abused children in their care?


----------



## Tink (1 March 2019)

Was this Royal Commission about the Catholic Church, basilio?


----------



## Tink (1 March 2019)

And a few years ago we had this paedophile on TV...

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35587959


----------



## Logique (1 March 2019)

Is Cardinal Pell being tried as a proxy for the entire Catholic Church, or for his alleged individual participation?

Anyone taking the time to actually look at the publicly available evidence would see, the Cardinal has strong grounds for legal appeal.

I remember when the mob howled at Lindy Chamberlain. Who was innocent.


----------



## IFocus (1 March 2019)

Logique said:


> Is Cardinal Pell being tried as a proxy for the entire Catholic Church, or for his alleged individual participation?
> 
> Anyone taking the time to actually look at the publicly available evidence would see, the Cardinal has strong grounds for legal appeal.
> 
> I remember when the mob howled at Lindy Chamberlain. Who was innocent.




Didn't Lindy Chamberlain get done over by circumstantial and dodgy forensic evidence. 

Pell was convicted on the evidence of a victim who convinced a jury of his truth.

Note Pell had the best defence money could buy


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2019)

IFocus said:


> Didn't Lindy Chamberlain get done over by circumstantial and dodgy forensic evidence.
> 
> Pell was convicted on the evidence of a victim who convinced a jury of his truth.
> 
> Note Pell had the best defence money could buy




The defence was denied the opportunity to present some evidence. 

For the sake of fairness the defence should be given as much opportunity to present it's case as possible.

I understand this will be grounds for the appeal.


----------



## IFocus (1 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The defence was denied the opportunity to present some evidence.
> 
> For the sake of fairness the defence should be given as much opportunity to present it's case as possible.
> 
> I understand this will be grounds for the appeal.




Its often the case as I understand also often for evidence from the prosecution  to be denied as well.

There is a fair bit of emotion on both sides of this case Pell I think got a fair hearing I suspect if the conviction stands others will come forward with further allegations Pedos never just strike once.


----------



## Darc Knight (1 March 2019)

IFocus said:


> I suspect if the conviction stands others will come forward with further allegations Pedos never just strike once.




That's what I was wondering.


----------



## basilio (1 March 2019)

Tink said:


> Was this Royal Commission about the Catholic Church, basilio?



In point of fact it was initially proposed as an investigation into the Catholic Church's handling of child sex abuse.  This came out of a number of cases that were brought to the public's attention.
However the  Catholic Church (rightly) felt they were being unduly picked on and it was suggested that the Commission should have a broader remit - The Institutional  Response to Child Sex abuse.

That was quickly agreed and the Commission systematically looked at all institutions which was an excellent outcome.

In the final analysis it turned out that the Catholic Church in fact had the most number of complaints in terms of proportion of victims vs size of institution. Not a good first at all.
____________________________________
As far as Cardinal Pell's defense  ? On every indication his legal team used every possible angle to get a not guilty result. This was a Rolls Royce defense, not your garden variety representation   limited by  financial resources and any skill limitations. Jon Faine, lawayer and ABC presenter, had some words on this situation as well as the public response to the verdict.

So which Stalinists have hijacked Melbourne ??

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-26/jon-faine-on-pell-talkback-response/10850254


----------



## basilio (1 March 2019)

When you think about it for a millisecond the response of Cardinal Pells high profile supporters to his conviction  has been absolutely breath taking. 

*Since when has Australia supported a convicted pedophile ?*

Well it looks like we have turned that page - when it comes to defending a man of the conservative stature of Cardinal Pell.
Check out the argument.
 
 George Pell 
* The inconsistencies of George Pell's defenders just display their power *
 Richard Cooke https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rge-pells-defenders-just-displays-their-power


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2019)

basilio said:


> However the Catholic Church (rightly) felt they were being unduly picked on and it was suggested that the Commission should have a broader remit - The Institutional Response to Child Sex abuse.




How many Muslim institutions did they investigate ? 

Other Christian Cults ?

Scientology ?


----------



## basilio (1 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> How many Muslim institutions did they investigate ?
> 
> Other Christian Cults ?
> 
> Scientology ?




Check it out Rumpy.  All online. If *a complaint was made* it was checked. Everyone had an opportunity to be heard in public or private sessions.
https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/religious-institutions
https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/case-studies


----------



## Darc Knight (1 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> How many Muslim institutions did they investigate ?
> 
> ?




Makes you wonder, Muslims are very "closed Shop" aren't they? Would they dare pursue them - PC and all.


----------



## Darc Knight (1 March 2019)

Second thoughts, do Muslim "Priests" have to be celibate? That seems to be the problem with Catholics.


----------



## basilio (2 March 2019)

For  people who have questions about the conduct of the Cardinal Pell trial this story offers an excellent overview by a reporter who sat through the entire trial.
* Cardinal George Pell's conviction: the questions that remain *
George Pell’s trials on child sexual assault charges have received unprecedented public attention. Melissa Davey, one of the few reporters who sat through the entire process, answers some of the most common questions raised since his conviction 
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ge-pells-conviction-the-questions-that-remain


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

Another perspective on Cardinal Pell.
 
* My anger with George Pell has been replaced by immense sadness *
Christos Tsiolkas

I don’t see a monster. I see all the women and children and men and nuns and priests destroyed by shame, fear and lies

Sun 3 Mar 2019 07.19 AEDT   Last modified on Sun 3 Mar 2019 07.21 AEDT

    ‘I can’t help also wondering what it has meant for this man, once we strip him of the aura of his cardinalship and priestly authority, to have clearly led a life as a lie?’ Photograph: Reut




https://www.theguardian.com/austral...rge-pell-has-been-replaced-by-immense-sadness


----------



## Knobby22 (3 March 2019)

basilio said:


> Another perspective on Cardinal Pell.
> 
> * My anger with George Pell has been replaced by immense sadness *
> Christos Tsiolkas
> ...




What a croc. He is filled with anger.
One thing though he knows it looks like a fit up. 

What annoys me about the whole thing is that it is an obvious way to attack him and despite the obvious lies in most of the testimonies, no one got charged for perjury. 

One managed to get through despite the dead persons Mum saying she asked and was told that no incident occurred and the obvious strangeness of the incident which doesn't fit with paedofile methods or with reality within a cathedral.
 and they are already holding out their hands for money.


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> What a croc. He is filled with anger.
> One thing though he knows it looks like a fit up.
> 
> What annoys me about the whole thing is that it is an obvious way to attack him and despite the obvious lies in most of the testimonies, no one got charged for perjury.
> ...




Wow Knobby ! So you were part of the closed court that heard the complainants testimony over a number of days ?  Really ? And you believe that this million dollar defense counsel of Cardinal Pell was unable to nail all the obvious  lies in the various testimonies.  Big call.

As far as the obvious strangeness of the incident  which makes the crime impossible? Thirty years ago something like this would have been unthinkable. But then 10's then 100's of cases of child sexual abuse by religious came before the courts. And don't kid yourself. The capacity of these people to openly assault children in the presence of family was also unbelievable. After these experiences courts have realised what was unthinkable in fact happened time after time.

As far as the dead persons mothers comments.  Yes she did ask. Yes he did say "nothing happened" .
But the facts are that thousands of people who were  sexually abused denied it  while they were trying to cope with the trauma it provoked. There was an article on their situation which I posted.

Perhaps one could have it both ways.  If someone denies having been abused they are telling the truth. But if they say they have been abused it is a monstrous lie  and they are clearly lying. But we wouldn't accept that surely ?

By the way did you read my post 279 ?  In many ways it addresses your comments but I'll post some particular ones in full

_On top of this straw-clutching is a layer of active disinformation, lying and irrelevance. It is not true that priests rarely abuse their victims without grooming. It may be true that Pell is a “lively conversationalist” but he is not on trial for being a bad raconteur. As for the man of high office, the man that I knew, the man who is so privately charitable, the man who would never … These words already appear in tens of thousands of case files. How many more are needed?

Those files also find priests who raped children not just in the sacristy but at the altar. They molested children not only in public but in front of their own family members, sometimes in the same moving car. They raped them while wearing vestments, not only orally but anally as well. That same untieable cincture has been used to bind the hands of a 16-year-old boy, who was then raped so viciously he needed corrective surgery. Opportunistic priests have acted in windows of time not just after mass, but on school excursions in public toilets. They have snuck into a hospital to rape a seven-year-old girl. They have molested every daughter in a five-daughter family. 

So what about Pell’s case is implausible, or even unusual? For anyone willing to look, it is almost humdrum, once compared to the vast, prolific compendium of international crime his institution has compiled.

Unthinkable? What his defenders really mean is that they cannot bear thinking about it.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rge-pells-defenders-just-displays-their-power_


----------



## Darc Knight (3 March 2019)

Chill Bas. Christians by nature and ethos are generally very caring people. It's only the requirement for celibacy of Priests which entices those without enough restraint to commit these atrocities.


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

The appeal process .

*  How an appeal could uphold or overturn George Pell’s conviction *
https://theconversation.com/how-an-appeal-could-uphold-or-overturn-george-pells-conviction-112620


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

*Why the complainant in George Pell’s trial was so compelling*
Many people can’t believe Cardinal George Pell is guilty of child sex offences but it was this key piece of evidence that sealed his fate.
https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...g/news-story/c2737320de6619d82f101973eb02e96f

https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...t/news-story/72046e0048bfe34720011824f8e96125

https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...KiWB3NGT-HiBIGnkvgqq3dJ3Q1jb_KsBlHYfNBKMJyHuQ


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

Another slow motion horror story of children raped by sadistic priests.
But it gets worse when you recognise the efforts the  Catholic Church went to, to keep this quiet.
*Sexual abuse survivor sadistically raped by a priest as an altar boy fought for 15 years to get justice*
As an 11-year-old, Marco Fabbro was whipped and brutally raped by a sadistic Jesuit priest. It became a rapid downfall for the young boy.

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/r...e/news-story/baca519cd2896ae34c3c11150fcde848


----------



## Knobby22 (3 March 2019)

Great article in The Age/SMH by crime reporter John Sylvester pointing out the problems with the conviction.
On phone so haven't got link.


----------



## Darc Knight (3 March 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> Great article in The Age/SMH by crime reporter John Sylvester pointing out the problems with the conviction.
> On phone so haven't got link.




I got your back bro 

*Beyond reasonable doubt: Was Pell convicted without fear and favour?*

*https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/na...-without-fear-and-favour-20190227-p510j0.html*


----------



## Knobby22 (3 March 2019)

Thanks


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

We have an independent legal system which has been developed to provide every opportunity for a person to receive a fair trial. The system is  devised so that it is always on the prosecution to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. The defendant doesn't have to prove their innocence. They only have to create reasonable doubt in the minds of at least a couple of jury members.

We also have an appeals process which allows a convicted person the opportunity to ask another court to review their conviction if they believe there has been a failure in the court process. So far so good.

I can understand people being concerned that such a notable person as Cardinal Pell being found guilty of child sex abuse. So sure. Go for an appeal.

What I don't like is this clamor of  outrage that says Cardinal Pell can't be guilty, that it is all a mistake, that somehow "the courts are rigged"..

*For a second just turn the result over. Imagine Cardinal Pell was found Not Guilty.  What would/should the response be if people starting saying exactly the same thing in reverse ? 
*
On everything I have read to date the Judge conducted a very fair trial. He repeatedly told the jury they wern't trying Cardinal Pell for anything except the case at hand*. *He never gave any direction to the jury of his view, if any. *
*
The defense was truly the best that money could buy. They used every opportunity they could to create doubt in the minds of the jury. In the end the jury accepted the tested,  rigorously cross examined testimony of the accused*. Doesn't that count for something ?
*
Anyway lets see what an appeal brings. But using the power of the press and particular  conservative opinion to create pressure for another result seems so, so wrong.


----------



## Knobby22 (3 March 2019)

What did you think of the article Bas? 
The trouble in my view is that a jury can be tainted by bias. In the past it was the opposite way as we all know.

Also just because the Guardian doesn't support it doesn't make it right wing. Not everything is left right.

The accusor stands to make big money and let's just say he isn't a pillar of society.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2019)

basilio said:


> They used every opportunity they could to create doubt in the minds of the jury. In the end the jury accepted the tested, rigorously cross examined testimony of the accused*. *




I find it strange that the defendant did not actually appear at this trial. His testimony and the cross examination from a previous trial where there was a hung jury was used instead.

I wonder if the defence objected to this. It just seems a bit odd to me.


----------



## Darc Knight (3 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I find it strange that the defendant did not actually appear at this trial. His testimony and the cross examination from a previous trial where there was a hung jury was used instead.
> 
> I wonder if the defence objected to this. It just seems a bit odd to me.




From Knobby's article:

"Much has been made of the fact that Pell did not take the witness box to defend himself. His lawyer, Robert Richter, QC, who is about the best in the business, has only ever let two of his clients take the box. One was the colourful Mick Gatto, charged and acquitted of the murder of hitman Andrew ‘‘Benji’’ Veniamin. I asked Richter why he allowed Gatto to testify and he replied, ‘‘Because he insisted.’’ Wise move.

It should also be recorded that when he was interviewed by police, Pell answered all questions and didn’t choose to invoke his right to silence.

In all probability Richter thought the case was so weak and, as Pell can come over as cold and aloof, that his testimony could do more harm than good."


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> From Knobby's article:
> 
> "Much has been made of the fact that Pell did not take the witness box to defend himself. His lawyer, Robert Richter, QC, who is about the best in the business, has only ever let two of his clients take the box. One was the colourful Mick Gatto, charged and acquitted of the murder of hitman Andrew ‘‘Benji’’ Veniamin. I asked Richter why he allowed Gatto to testify and he replied, ‘‘Because he insisted.’’ Wise move.
> 
> ...




Sorry, I made a mistake there.

I should have said "complainant" not defendant.

The complainants testimony from a previous trial was used , he did not appear at this one.

"
The complainant did not appear in person at the trial but footage of his testimony and cross-examination from an earlier trial, which resulted in a hung jury, was shown instead."

https://www.news.com.au/national/vi...g/news-story/c2737320de6619d82f101973eb02e96f


----------



## basilio (3 March 2019)

Knobby22 said:


> What did you think of the article Bas?
> The trouble in my view is that a jury can be tainted by bias. In the past it was the opposite way as we all know.
> 
> Also just because the Guardian doesn't support it doesn't make it right wing. Not everything is left right.
> ...




Knobby the article was fairly restrained in my view. It made the points that historically sexual abuse cases are very hard to prove with only the uncorroborated testimony of the victim and no supporting forensic evidence. In fact this "reality" has been the cornerstone of historical unwillingness of police and prosecutors to press sexual assault charges.

So this was a pretty historic case. "The Cardinal" versus "The Kid".  I'm quite certain that then as well as now no one would have given The Kid a chance in hell of being believed. But in 2019  we have a new history of behaviours by clergy, people in power, famous stars and so on that has informed us of how the rich and powerful can get away with almost anything the care to do.

Knobby you suggest that somehow this complainant isn't that savory a character. And that he is after money.

I have not heard a whisper of money. All the observations to date have been that The Lad has in fact survived his ordeal quite well. He is not, it seems, the  traumatised person who has self medicated to disaster. If you have *evidence* of anything different send it to me. But even so lets leave this to the court processes rather decide without benefit of being in the trial itself what was impossible and so on. Clearly 12 people heard all the cross examined evidence and came to the  unanimous conclusion that The Kid was telling the truth.

*Of course the real problem is that if indeed The Kid is telling the truth The Cardinal is truly from hell. And that is a big call..*


----------



## explod (3 March 2019)

And fair enough Rumpy, the trauma on the victims is horrendous and finally building up the courage to come forward makes it totally unlikely that it was concocted.

Was interesting that Pell's defence had set up a video scenario of what took place and where in the hope to prove it was not possible to have taken place in the setting described by the victim/complainant.  I would contend and the authorities/court would be aware that the victim's only real memory (due to the horror) would be the event and not the precise spot within the building where it occurred.  

However the video in not being accepted as admissible is a prime part of the appeal application.


----------



## Tink (4 March 2019)

*One of the most sacred principles in our society; innocent until proven guilty*

That is how it should be, not the other way round.

Knobby, I was going to post that article as well.

@McLovin brought up a while back about 'judge only' trial.

Victoria does not have that though other states do.


----------



## basilio (4 March 2019)

I* never* take anything Andrew Bolt offers as factual without independent, verifiable evidence. So  I put his eloquent waxing about how he believes Cardinal Pell was wrongly convicted in the same bin as almost everything else he says.

In this case however it is far more serious because his column is attacking the courts, complainant and jury which spent considerable effort examining all the evidence as fairly as possible.

There is one person who can speak with more authority about sex abuse by priests than most. Check out her analysis of Andrew Bolts contribution to this discussion.

* Andrew Bolt, please stop implying that you know all the facts about George Pell *
Clare Linane, whose husband Peter Blenkiron is a survivor of clerical child abuse, writes in response to Andrew Bolt’s defence of George Pell

I am a Ballarat local who has been living with the aftermath of child sexual abuse for many years. My husband, Peter Blenkiron, is a survivor of clergy abuse at 11-years-old. You met him whilst in Rome three years ago.

I am compelled to write to you after you expressed your opinion that George Pell has been falsely convicted.  You are entitled to your opinion.

What concerns me, however, *is your statement that your opinion is based on “overwhelming evidence”*. *I believe this is misleading, irresponsible and ignorant. Your lack of genuine insight into the issue of sexual child abuse makes a mockery of survivors and all they have endured.*

The “overwhelming evidence” you mention includes some of the following points which I would like to respond to in an attempt to help educate you about this issue:

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...that-you-know-all-the-facts-about-george-pell


----------



## basilio (4 March 2019)

And Cardinal Peel hasn't escaped his other accusers ...

* George Pell to be sued over alleged 1970s sexual abuse in Ballarat *
Man was a complainant against disgraced cardinal in a second trial that was abandoned, and says ‘when I was told they had withdrawn the case I felt empty’

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...d-over-alleged-1970s-sexual-abuse-in-ballarat

__________________________

Meanwhile the verdict in the Cardinal Pell case has resulted in many  people who have been abused reliving their nightmares.
 
* Support services inundated since George Pell's conviction *
Counsellors say defence of cardinal in the media has been distressing for people affected by child sexual abuse
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...vices-inundated-since-george-pells-conviction


----------



## IFocus (4 March 2019)

I read that Bas compelling article worth a read.







basilio said:


> I* never* take anything Andrew Bolt offers as factual without independent, verifiable evidence. So  I put his eloquent waxing about how he believes Cardinal Pell was wrongly convicted in the same bin as almost everything else he says.
> 
> In this case however it is far more serious because his column is attacking the courts, complainant and jury which spent considerable effort examining all the evidence as fairly as possible.
> 
> ...


----------



## Darc Knight (4 March 2019)

Good to see you posting more @explod It's invaluable to hear the views of an ex Plod, on any number of issues.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 March 2019)

After Four Corners tonight, one's opinion of Pell could be significantly changed.


----------



## Zaxon (5 March 2019)




----------



## Junior (5 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> After Four Corners tonight, one's opinion of Pell could be significantly changed.




How was it?


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2019)

Junior said:


> How was it?




A number of witnesses said that Pell had a pattern of pedophile behaviour beyond that which was bought out in the recent trial.

I never had much respect for him as a person, I though he was very arrogant and dismissive of complainants but I thought that laying charges after such a long time period was a bit unfair.

Now I think he got what he deserved.


----------



## Logique (5 March 2019)

Quite damning of the Cardinal's character that 4Corners program last night. The witnesses all seemed believable


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2019)

Pell's barrister Richter quits.

Sore loser, sinking ship , or has the money run out ?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...lead-counsel-george-pells-legal-team/10873112


----------



## satanoperca (5 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Pell's barrister Richter quits.
> 
> Sore loser, sinking ship , or has the money run out ?



Richter is an excellent barrister, with a count out sore of <3 losses in his entire career, which is impressive. 
He is just upset that he could not defend the indefensible, the case that was almost unlosable. Don't blame him, the church and it's actions have never been challenged or help up to account.

Has Pell been prosecuted for offences that he did not commit? Hard to tell
Do Pell cover up and protect the church for crimes that any normal person would have informed the police? YES
Should he go to hell, his belief not mine? YES
Should the greater catholic community suffer for his sins? NO unless that keep denying this could not have happened.

Under any current day situation, would not the church be held to account as an organisation that allowed crimes to flourish and should not be allowed the privileges that our community bestows on this organisation? ie tax free organisation, NO

So for the sack of the catholic religion, I hope there leaders grow some balls and face up to the facts, they decided to hide crimes against children, to protect their own power at the cost of all those that believe in their god.

I feel for those that believe in this so of pure organisations that has let them and their beliefs down.

PS. I am agnostic. There may be a god, but he/she if they exist needs at this time to show the believers the true path of enlightenment, and persecute, not forgive the likes of Pell.

And for those that disagree, remember he was convicted of pedophilia, a heinous crime, that in normal circumstances would see the wrath of the community, what makes him special, because he is meant to be connected to GOD?


----------



## satanoperca (5 March 2019)

Tink said:


> *One of the most sacred principles in our society; innocent until proven guilty*



 He was proven guilty and given a fare trial, even after a media blackout. 

Tink, you do not need to question your religion, but should question those that control it in the name of GOD.


----------



## IFocus (6 March 2019)

"Our criminal system is built on a simple but powerful premise: every man and woman accused of a crime *is assumed innocent until found guilty by columnist Andrew Bolt.* Derived from the Latin maxim _‘ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat Andrew Bolt’_, it is a fundamental pillar of our democracy, and has been for centuries."


----------



## basilio (6 March 2019)

This story encapsulates the trauma of people who have been sexually abused by clergy in Australia and the recovery they experienced when they were finally able to tell their story and have it believed.

*Georgie Burg is survivor 577 in the Royal Commission's Book of Messages held in the National Library*

*A priest who raped me changed my life. My daughter inspired me to jail him*
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...ed-me-my-daughter-taught-me-survivor/10872444


----------



## explod (6 March 2019)

I did not really like it Bas, it made me shed tears.

The more we get it out the better in the hopes of stopping it.


----------



## basilio (6 March 2019)

Another analysis of the determination by many conservative voices to defend George Pell and suggest he should never have been convicted.

*The Cardinal and Mr Anonymous: George Pell's defenders mustn't repeat the mistakes of the past *

......However, we lawyers can become too convinced by our own sophistry about proof. The jurors seem to have been given a choice between a detailed account maintained through intense cross-examination, and a brief denial on videotape. If we could hear from the anonymous complainant, we too might find ourselves persuaded as the jury was. We might come to admire, respect and empathise with him, acknowledging his enormous courage and determination.

We won't hear his voice because he owes no obligation to the public. He has no responsibility to persuade the powerful people who have leapt to Cardinal Pell's defence. He deserves his privacy and anonymity now.

Why do I speak up for him? Because the Christian faith requires me to treat everyone as equal in God's eyes, whether they are princes of the Church or anonymously ordinary. Because I know how hard it is for victims of sexual crimes to get through the multiple stages of the criminal trial process. Because I know the different ways in which, through intensive and lengthy cross-examination, defence counsel seeks to undermine the victim's credibility. Because in nearly twenty-five years of engagement with the issue of child sexual abuse in church communities, I know how often men like this complainant have not been listened to. And because I recall how often I have heard from senior Catholic leaders that the scurrilous accusations being made by victims are an attack on the Church; or that complainants are just making up claims in order to get compensation.

And in the chorus of criticism about the conviction of Cardinal Pell, there is an echo again of those voices of denial by senior religious leaders, which has led the Catholic Church to the crisis it finds itself in today. It is a crisis from which the Catholic Church may never fully recover.

Professor Patrick Parkinson AM is Dean of Law at the University of Queensland and author of "Child Sexual Abuse and the Churches: Understanding the Issues."

https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-cardinal-and-mr-anonymous/10874492


----------



## SirRumpole (6 March 2019)

basilio said:


> *The Cardinal and Mr Anonymous: George Pell's defenders mustn't repeat the mistakes of the past *




Bas,

Have you given any thought to what you will say if Pell gets off on appeal ?


----------



## IFocus (6 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Bas,
> 
> Have you given any thought to what you will say if Pell gets off on appeal ?





I have Rumpole for me it will simply be justice as we insist happens.  

Note that if the appeal is successful it wont be because the victims evidence is in question.


----------



## basilio (7 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Bas,
> 
> Have you given any thought to what you will say if Pell gets off on appeal ?




It's not that simple Rumpy. There might be a retrial.  I don't believe he can be found "innocent".  Perhaps "not proven "? The other information that has subsequently surfaced and the civil cases have reinforced teh case against the man.

As I see it Professor Parkinsons' analysis is the key.  Powerful figures who abuse children rely on their prestige to deny everything and comfortable with the fact that in almost every situation their word and power will be accepted because it would be unthinkable to do otherwise.

Twelve ordinary people  in a jury room have decided otherwise.


----------



## basilio (8 March 2019)

More observations on child sexual abuse.

 Michael Jackson 
* Believe the victims of child sexual abuse? If only we did *
Suzanne Moore
It’s taken years for people to see Michael Jackson for what he was. With abuse, the world prefers to look the other way
 
 @suzanne_moore 

Fri 8 Mar 2019 04.09 AEDT   Last modified on Fri 8 Mar 2019 05.25 AEDT

Shares
5,888



‘In the documentary Leaving Neverland, Wade Robson (left) and James Safechuck talk sometimes blankly, sometimes shakily, about what Michael Jackson did to them.’ Photograph: Joshua Bright/The Guardian
Here are some things I don’t really want to think about but have had to over the years: Jimmy Savile’s penchant for tracksuits, as the bottoms can be pulled up and down so easily; vulnerable 13-year-old girls in Rochdale ignored by local police; seven-year-old boys sleeping in the bed of a pop star and being introduced to masturbation; or the day long ago when I was teaching film studies and a film I showed (Terence Davies’ Distant Voices, Still Lives) produced extreme distress for one of my mature students.

Something in that film, a shot of a sofa I think, had caused a rush of terrible memories. In those days there were groups for survivors of sexual abuse and I was able to find some kind of help for them. Never for one moment did I disbelieve the distress I saw in front of me. Nor did I find it strange that sometimes people did not clearly remember what happened to them as children and that they could not talk about it till many years later.

What I find shocking at the moment is that we all know about the sexual abuse of children but we still remain in such a deep state of denial about it. The NSPCC estimates that one in 20 children in this country has been sexually abused. The police say that if they were to prosecute every case there would be no time to do anything else. Everyone who works in mental health services, or with addiction, or with the homeless, will tell you how sexual abuse is a factor in the background of so many people they deal with. The detritus of abuse is all around us. We turn a blind eye to that which disturbs us in order to protect ourselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/07/child-sexual-abuse-victims-michael-jackson


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2019)

basilio said:


> Believe the victims of child sexual abuse? If only we did




Interesting that the Royal Commission did not examine the entertainment industry. Saville and Jackson's exposes may just be the tip of the iceberg.

Also Rolf Harris and Robert Hughes.  And surely a lot of the "camp followers" of rock stars were minors eager to give themselves to their heroes.

Another group of people with power over others who abuse it. Don Burke ?

Why did these allegations take so long to come out ? Other actors, producers, directors must have known.


----------



## basilio (8 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Interesting that the Royal Commission did not examine the entertainment industry. Saville and Jackson's exposes may just be the tip of the iceberg.
> .




The trouble is always deciding on the practical limits of Royal Commission. They decided on looking at "Institutional response" to  child sex abuse. The other examples are broader industries and individuals.

I agree with you that the entertainment industry has plenty of examples of abuse. And much of that has come out as a result of the Commission


----------



## PZ99 (13 March 2019)

6 years of porridge


----------



## SirRumpole (13 March 2019)

PZ99 said:


> 6 years of porridge




3 years 8 months actually.

If he lives through it and his appeal is dismissed.


----------



## grah33 (13 March 2019)

Can someone tell me what the evidence was against him, or how he was proven guilty?  I been too busy lately to follow news issues.


----------



## Zaxon (13 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> Can someone tell me what the evidence was against him, or how he was proven guilty?  I been too busy lately to follow news issues.




This is good summary:


----------



## grah33 (13 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> This is good summary:




When I get some time later I might look at it,  but if you know u may as well just tell us


----------



## PZ99 (13 March 2019)

It's not a five minute answer @grah33

It's almost a given that anyone responding to your query will be quizzed at length by sycophants from both sides of the argument. You are better off doing your research and posting your own conclusions so that you can be quizzed at length by sycophants from both sides of the argument


----------



## basilio (13 March 2019)

Cardinal Pell was convicted on the uncorroborated  testimony  of one  victim. There was no physical evidence available or offered. Just a single person who came forward with the story of what had happened to him and a friend in the sacristy of St Patricks Cathedral after mass one Sunday.

In the legal world,  finding a Cardinal guilty of a sexual outrage over the word of teenager (but now and adult) would be unthinkable. Based on that reasoning Cardinal Pell has been steadfast in denying he ever touched the boys. His supporters have been equally steadfast in saying it was "unthinkable"  and "impossible" for such behavior.

However the victim has stood by his testimony through police interrogation, DPP interrogation, the commital trial and finally the full trial. He was cross examined by the best barristers of the land for two days in front of the jury of his peers. His life was investigated to the last inch by private detectives.

In the end the jury believed the kid was telling the truth and found Cardinal Pell guilty. It's worth noting that Cardinal Pell had the absolute Rolls Royce of a legal defence team. This was financed by his personal friends not the Catholic Church.  They apparently undertook every possible step to undermine the case against Pell - and failed.

Check out what the  Chief Justice Peter Kidd Judge had to say in his sentencing.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-13/-george-pell-being-sentenced/10879958
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...y-four-years-in-jail-for-child-sexual-assault


----------



## basilio (13 March 2019)

Anyone can view the full explanation of the Chief Justice on ABC Facebook.
It is an excellent example of how the legal process works and the reasons behind  the Judges acceptance or otherwise of defense arguments.
The final presentation of the sentence and the various factors in play is also a learning point.

Put aside an hour and understand why George Pell was convicted  and what the jury accepted he had done.


----------



## satanoperca (13 March 2019)

Firstly, I do not know if you agree with the outcome or not, Basilio, so I will give my interpretation of the facts :

*HE WAS FOUND GUILTY, he has the right of appeal.*



basilio said:


> Cardinal Pell was convicted on the uncorroborated  testimony  of one  victim. There was no physical evidence available or offered. Just a single person who came forward with the story of what had happened to him and a friend in the sacristy of St Patricks Cathedral after mass one Sunday.




The court found he was guilty



basilio said:


> In the legal world,  finding a Cardinal guilty of a sexual outrage over the word of teenager (but now and adult) would be unthinkable. Based on that reasoning Cardinal Pell has been steadfast in denying he ever touched the boys.




He was found guilty and based on that fact he has always denied doesn't mean he was innocent.



basilio said:


> His supporters have been equally steadfast in saying it was "unthinkable"  and "impossible" for such behavior.




F--k me, the church has turned a blind eye to these sins, actually criminal offenses since the creation of this religious order.

Unthinkable - maybe, for me it is unthinkable that there is a god without evidence, he was found guilty on evidence.
Impossible - nothing is impossible, nothing is 100%, there is always a chance. For his supporters to support this train of thought seems stupid to me, when it is very clear, he was well aware of the crimes committed by his institution but choose not to do anything. For that alone he should be sent to hell - but that doesn't include that he should be found guilty of crimes other committed. 

He was found guilty of crimes he committed.



basilio said:


> However the victim has stood by his testimony through police interrogation, DPP interrogation, the commital trial and finally the full trial. He was cross examined by the best barristers of the land for two days in front of the jury of his peers. His life was investigated to the last inch by private detectives.




This to me is the most important evidence, find me a child who has become an adult after being f--kd up the arse, who is sound and reasonable and not gone off the rails. This witness is 1 in a Million and should not be discredited, well he hasn't hence why Pell was found guilty.

I am sure there are other witnesses, but after being abused turned to drugs/alcohol/crime and so were not found to be credible.



basilio said:


> It's worth noting that Cardinal Pell had the absolute Rolls Royce of a legal defence team. This was financed by his personal friends not the Catholic Church.  They apparently undertook every possible step to undermine the case against Pell - and failed.




Again, this is worth note, even with the best of the best and no expense, could he avoid the truth.

The church leaders are devoid of being human and are all guilty for allowing this to happen in the name of God.

_*I feel for the believers who have been let down by their leaders.

*_


----------



## satanoperca (13 March 2019)

Also like to add, if this was not someone so high up in a religious institution, that the masses believes is correct in it teachings, would so many come out to support Pell.

I think not, this about people coming to grips with their own beliefs and it is impossible, some who is divine could be a Pedo.


----------



## basilio (13 March 2019)

satanoperca said:


> Firstly, I do not know if you agree with the outcome or not, Basilio, so I will give my interpretation of the facts :




In my view justice was done in this trial. As I said it really is worth viewing the Chief Justices summary to understand what happened and how the Chief Justice arrived at the final sentence.


----------



## basilio (13 March 2019)

Bigger picture view of the history of teh Catholic Church losing it's untouchability in Australia.

* George Pell's jailing defies the might of Rome but his fall is too appalling for celebration *
David Marr
Pell’s sentencing showed he was accountable to the law – and the bravery of his accuser must be acknowledged

• Cardinal George Pell to spend nearly four years in jail for child sexual assault

Wed 13 Mar 2019 00.36 GMT   Last modified on Wed 13 Mar 2019 00.45 GMT

Shares
1,207




Cardinal George Pell has been sentenced to six years in prison with a non-parole period of three years and eight months. Photograph: Con Chronis/AFP/Getty Images
In the squalor of this moment there is little to celebrate. Few are jumping for joy that George Pell may spend at least three years and eight months in prison. His fall is too appalling for celebration.

But by jailing a cardinal for these sordid crimes Australia has demonstrated once again that the rule of law runs in this country. Getting here hasn’t been easy but no other country stares down the Catholic church as we do now. This is a day to be proud of that record.

In their rage and confusion, Pell’s supporters have declared their man a martyr to the mob, a victim of press vendettas, a great priest whose reputation has been sullied beyond repair by the left. But that’s not what his fall is about. Somewhere in the past few years, Rome lost the power to protect men like him.

This secular country at the far end of the Earth stood up to Rome to hold the first national inquiry in the world into the role of faiths – particularly the Catholic faith – in a systematic, old and hidden regime of child abuse.

Pell led the opposition to any such inquiry for decades. He was always there saying it wasn’t necessary. And he was backed to the hilt by John Howard, who declared the other day that he still reckoned this convicted paedophile was a man of “exemplary character”.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...but-his-fall-is-too-appalling-for-celebration


----------



## Darc Knight (13 March 2019)

PZ99 said:


> It's not a five minute answer @grah33
> 
> It's almost a given that anyone responding to your query will be quizzed at length by sycophants from both sides of the argument. You are better off doing your research and posting your own conclusions so that you can be quizzed at length by sycophants from both sides of the argument




More than twelve angry men in this place 

Grah33: to answer your question I will need to know how you define "the separation of powers", "evidence" and "beyond reasonable doubt".


----------



## bellenuit (13 March 2019)

satanoperca said:


> He was found guilty and based on that fact he has always denied doesn't mean he was innocent.




I am half way through the sentencing video, but this question confuses me. Perhaps those with a better legal understanding than me could explain.

During the trial and even after being found guilt, Pell always claimed innocence. But the judge in his summation stated that Pell's counsel tried to suggest that Pell was not of a rational mind at the time as there was a high probability that someone could walk in on him during those acts and also that there were lockable rooms close by that would have been less risky. Doing it under those circumstances indicated a lack of rationality. The judge rejected those claims for several reasons, one of which was that no medical evidence had been put to the court to suggest that Pell had any mental impairment at the time in question.

Although I have heard people say in letters to the press that Pell couldn't have done it because the sacristy was too open to conceal such an act, from what the judge has said, it seems that on this point Pell's counsel was not arguing his innocence but that he was not of rational mind when he committed the acts.

So my question is: How can Pell argue innocence (that he has not committed those acts) when his counsel seems to be arguing that he had done those acts but was not of rational mind at the time?


----------



## bellenuit (13 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> I am half way through the sentencing video, but this question confuses me. Perhaps those with a better legal understanding than me could explain.
> 
> During the trial and even after being found guilt, Pell always claimed innocence. But the judge in his summation stated that Pell's counsel tried to suggest that Pell was not of a rational mind at the time as there was a high probability that someone could walk in on him during those acts and also that there were lockable rooms close by that would have been less risky. Doing it under those circumstances indicated a lack of rationality. The judge rejected those claims for several reasons, one of which was that no medical evidence had been put to the court to suggest that Pell had any mental impairment at the time in question.
> 
> ...




An addendum to this post.

As I progressed another 15 minutes or so, the judge stated (to Pell) "The argument by your counsel that this crime was committed by you, George Pell, the man, and not by you, George Pell, the Archbishop should be soundly rejected"

Again an admission by Pell's counsel that Pell did commit the deeds. So why the claims of innocence by Pell? Surely his counsel should be arguing his innocence if that is so.


----------



## basilio (13 March 2019)

For those quicker at reading than viewing the full video there is a complete transcript of the Judges sentencing remarks on the ABC website.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...-sentencing,-as-issued-by-peter-kidd/10897650


----------



## Zaxon (13 March 2019)

A boy that had been sexually abused by another priest reported it to George Pell.  Pell's response was, "Did you like it?"


----------



## satanoperca (13 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> So my question is: How can Pell argue innocence (that he has not committed those acts) when his counsel seems to be arguing that he had done those acts but was not of rational mind at the time?




He cannot, and who cares, he is a pedo, found guilty and should be damned to hell, if it even exists.

I cannot believe our society is wasting so much time and energy over a pedo, who abused children in the name of god.

We all should be focused on doing good, not defending and trying to understand the crimes committed in the name of God, terrorism, the catholic church.


----------



## wayneL (13 March 2019)

As an interesting aside:


----------



## basilio (13 March 2019)

That is a really interesting comparison Wayne.  I thought the Judge did an  excellent job of weighing up all the factors with regard to Cardinal Pells case and coming up with the sentence. Frankly I would have given a few more years but  I'm not the judge.
On the other hand the theoretical harshness of the sentences faced by David Boyle are bloody scary. That is dangerous BS.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> But the judge in his summation stated that Pell's counsel tried to suggest that Pell was not of a rational mind at the time as there was a high probability that someone could walk in on him during those acts and also that there were lockable rooms close by that would have been less risky. Doing it under those circumstances indicated a lack of rationality. The judge rejected those claims for several reasons, one of which was that no medical evidence had been put to the court to suggest that Pell had any mental impairment at the time in question.




Were these suggestions put by the defence during the trial or at the sentencing hearing ?

If at the trial, then the defence might have meant that he couldn't have done it because it would not be a rational act to do it in such an open place and there was no sign that Pell was not rational..

If at the sentencing hearing the defence tries to mitigate the act for a lower sentence in case the appeal does not succeed.


----------



## satanoperca (13 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> As an interesting aside:




maybe if he was a catholic, he would have only got 1 life sentence for doing the right thing. If he had f--ked young boys then even less, just a few years, stands to reason, better to believe in god and get away with a light sentence than to the right thing and stand by your moral convictions and get 6 life sentences.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone in Aus being given a sentence so long.


----------



## bellenuit (13 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Were these suggestions put by the defence during the trial or at the sentencing hearing ?




I had assumed during the trial. But if only at the sentencing then the dichotomy might make sense. However, if at the sentencing, could it have an impact on the appeal? Perhaps anything said outside of the actual trial is excluded?


----------



## cynic (13 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> I had assumed during the trial. But if only at the sentencing then the dichotomy might make sense. However, if at the sentencing, could it have an impact on the appeal? Perhaps anything said outside of the actual trial is excluded?



It sounded to me, more like a cover all bases scenario, somewhat akin to the four dog defence.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/the-four-dog-defence.25939/


----------



## SirRumpole (13 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> However, if at the sentencing, could it have an impact on the appeal? Perhaps anything said outside of the actual trial is excluded?




From what the judge said at the sentencing, the appeal is a completely different process. I don't think the appeal court takes any notice of what is said at the sentencing hearing, they only deal with the trial itself, matters like whether the jury was properly instructed or whether relevant evidence was allowed to be presented.


----------



## grah33 (14 March 2019)

I might have to do some research as Bas suggests .  I don't think this will stop at all , but just get worse (more news to come).


----------



## cynic (14 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> I might have to do some research as Bas suggests .  I don't think this will stop at all , but just get worse (more news to come).




In this case, I simply cannot understand what evidence, could possibly have been presented, to eliminate all reasonable doubt.

As such, I strongly suspect that, irrespective of Pell's guilt (or absence thereof), that the jury was likely incorrect in delivering a guilty verdict, and was more likely driven, by emotively formed opinions, rather than objective assessment of the facts.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

cynic said:


> In this case, I simply cannot understand what evidence, could possibly have been presented, to eliminate all reasonable doubt.
> 
> As such, I strongly suspect that, irrespective of Pell's guilt (or absence thereof), that the jury was likely incorrect in delivering a guilty verdict, and was more likely driven, by emotively formed opinions, rather than objective assessment of the facts.




They took 5 days to reach a verdict on what seems a simple case of believe either the witness or defendant so there probably was a good deal of doubt in the jury's mind.


----------



## Zaxon (14 March 2019)

cynic said:


> In this case, I simply cannot understand what evidence, could possibly have been presented, to eliminate all reasonable doubt.




So child molesters can't be found guilty unless there's, say, security cam footage of it, to make sure 100% it happened?


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

satanoperca said:


> He cannot, and who cares, he is a pedo, found guilty and should be damned to hell, if it even exists.
> 
> I cannot believe our society is wasting so much time and energy over a pedo, who abused children in the name of god.
> 
> We all should be focused on doing good, not defending and trying to understand the crimes committed in the name of God, terrorism, the catholic church.




Not sure they abused "in the name of God". More likely that the rules of celibacy of catholic priests is too much for some to handle.


----------



## Tink (14 March 2019)

This was the second trial, first trial was a hung jury.

Do your own research.

The ABC in my view has been a disgrace.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

Tink said:


> The ABC in my view has been a disgrace.




Why ?


----------



## lindsayf (14 March 2019)

Tink said:


> This was the second trial, first trial was a hung jury.
> 
> Do your own research.
> 
> The ABC in my view has been a disgrace.




Yes,   Why do you think that?


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

Good luck getting an answer out of Tink


----------



## explod (14 March 2019)

Tink said:


> This was the second trial, first trial was a hung jury.
> 
> Do your own research.
> 
> The ABC in my view has been a disgrace.



I do know who the disgrace really is, the real stories of Pell and his peodophile mates years back at Ballarat will now start to come out clearly and bigger shocks yet to hit.   The Royal Commission got into those revelations but only about 40% of it and our lovely press skimped over it also.

Two sides to a coin.


----------



## Value Collector (14 March 2019)

Tink said:


> This was the second trial, first trial was a hung jury.
> 
> Do your own research.
> 
> The ABC in my view has been a disgrace.




Once again Tinks loyalty to her cult shines through, face it Tink, you’re cult is morally bankrupt.


----------



## Tink (14 March 2019)

Labour suspends paedophilia rights campaigner

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35587959


----------



## Ann (14 March 2019)

I found the sentencing process very interesting.


----------



## Zaxon (14 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Not sure they abused "in the name of God".




Question: What would the priest say to you when he was abusing you?
Answer from a victim: "It's God's way! God's teachings. Do it. Put up. Or go to hell."


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> Question: What would the priest say to you when he was abusing you?
> Answer from a victim: "It's God's way! God's teachings. Do it. Put up. Or go to hell."









That's more an abuse of Power. The victim doesn't know that the abuser is lying. The Bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin. Why do you think the Catholic Church is against SSM. Why do you think Bas hates them more than she does Wayne 

Proper/true Christians would never harm Children .........  or vote for Trump.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> Once again Tinks loyalty to her cult shines through, face it Tink, you’re cult is morally bankrupt.




The hierarchy of the Catholic Church is certainly morally bankrupt, I doubt you could say the same for the ordinary churchgoers who believed what they were told and were betrayed.


----------



## Value Collector (14 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The hierarchy of the Catholic Church is certainly morally bankrupt, I doubt you could say the same for the ordinary churchgoers who believed what they were told and were betrayed.




If the “church goers”, continue supporting their morally bankrupt hierarchy financially every week, and in the face of convictions continue to make weaseling excuses for their masters and try to confuse issues to hide facts, then they are morally bankrupt also.

I have no idea why anyone would be turning up and putting money in the plate to support this institution. 

The pope himself has been guilty of hiding pedos in South America.


----------



## Value Collector (14 March 2019)

https://www.americamagazine.org/fai...ancis-record-sexual-abuse-threaten-his-legacy


----------



## satanoperca (14 March 2019)

VC, if I don't go to church and pledge my money and soul, then I am going to hell.

What should I do, support a corrupt institution and go to heaven or disown the church and go to hell.

Not an easy choice.


----------



## tech/a (14 March 2019)

satanoperca said:


> VC, if I don't go to church and pledge my money and soul, then I am going to hell.
> 
> What should I do, support a corrupt institution and go to heaven or disown the church and go to hell.
> 
> Not an easy choice.




And what would you do if you found out there is neither heaven nor hell?


----------



## Tink (14 March 2019)

We are talking about the George Pell case, VC.

That is what the trial was.


----------



## PZ99 (14 March 2019)

My GF reckons there is a hell for as long as Farcebook is down


----------



## grah33 (14 March 2019)

In the meantime (until I do my research) , if anyone can explain what evidence was used to convict him, let me know.


----------



## grah33 (14 March 2019)

cynic said:


> In this case, I simply cannot understand what evidence, could possibly have been presented, to eliminate all reasonable doubt.
> 
> As such, I strongly suspect that, irrespective of Pell's guilt (or absence thereof), that the jury was likely incorrect in delivering a guilty verdict, and was more likely driven, by emotively formed opinions, rather than objective assessment of the facts.



It is suspicious for many people.  That other priest ,Brenner , normally on the side of the media , doesn't seem convinced as well.  I think this saga with the Church will just keep on going  now.


----------



## satanoperca (14 March 2019)

tech/a said:


> And what would you do if you found out there is neither heaven nor hell?




Sorry forgot to add to the post SARC.


----------



## cynic (14 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> So child molesters can't be found guilty unless there's, say, security cam footage of it, to make sure 100% it happened?




If I were to accuse you of molesting me as a child, would you not want stronger evidence than merely my say so, before being sentenced to gaol, registered as a sex offender for life, publicly vilified etcetera?


----------



## Value Collector (14 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Proper/true Christians would never harm Children .........  or vote for Trump.




That is called the “no true Scotsman fallacy”

Simply pointing to anyone that does wrong doing and saying “well that person can’t be a real Christian”, is just simply putting the concept of “Christianity” on a pedestal which it doesn’t diserve.

The fact is many Christian groups do follow dogma that harms children both directly and indirectly.


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

This is a life sentence for Pell. His career is gone. No Super or savings to fall back on after he does his porridge. In the community, on the pension, ducking and diving from people who want to attack him - for the rest of his life.


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> That is called the “no true Scotsman fallacy”
> 
> Simply pointing to anyone that does wrong doing and saying “well that person can’t be a real Christian”, is just simply putting the concept of “Christianity” on a pedestal which it doesn’t diserve.
> 
> The fact is many Christian groups do follow dogma that harms children both directly and indirectly.




???

Have you read the Bible? Particularly the New Testament? Anything other than the Bible is NOT the word of God. Love, benevolence, self sacrifice for your fellow man. That's why they have nothing, are supposed to pursue nothing except the path of Jesus.

Stuff it if I could do it. I've seen true Christians die very young, used and abused. Sacrificing their life for others.


----------



## basilio (14 March 2019)

cynic said:


> If I were to accuse you of molesting me as a child, would you not want stronger evidence than merely my say so, before being sentenced to gaol, registered as a sex offender for life, publicly vilified etcetera?




So you reckon it's simple Cynic ?  Anyone can just make an accusation against the third most powerful Catholic in the world and get it accepted by the police, the DPP, a committal court  and a unanimous  12 person jury with just a persons word?

In fact, of course, the reason why so many 10's of thousands of children were abused and nothing happened was precisely because of your POV. And the people in power understood that -
1) These kids wouldn't have the courage to tell on them
2) Their parents wouldn't believe them anyway
3)  The cops would look at the case and decide it was *way* too hard to prove and not lay charges - particularly in a Christian country where priests were next to God.

And so that is what happened time after time after time.

So, yeah. Let's accept your statement and pretend that almost all the world wide horror of child sex abuse didn't happen. (Not to mention nuns,  adults and other religious. Yep they also were targeted.


----------



## cynic (14 March 2019)

basilio said:


> ...
> So, yeah. Let's accept your statement and pretend that almost all the world wide horror of child sex abuse didn't happen. (Not to mention nuns,  adults and other religious. Yep they also were targeted.



Let's not pretend anything about what does and does not happen!

If I were to accuse you of molesting me as a child, would you not want stronger evidence than merely my say so, before being sentenced to gaol, registered as a sex offender for life, publicly vilified etcetera?


----------



## basilio (14 March 2019)

cynic said:


> Let's not pretend anything about what does and does not happen!
> 
> If I were to accuse you of molesting me as a child, would you not want stronger evidence than merely my say so, before being sentenced to gaol, registered as a sex offender for life, publicly vilified etcetera?



What simplistic rubbish you sprout Cynic.  I don't know you from Adam. You don't know me. We have no relationship in any way. Taking you at face value in what universe would anyway take such an accusation seriously ?
______________________________________________
There are really strong legal processes for *testing *peoples accusations. How about respecting the process that has been undertaken in George Pells case to ensure his million dollar defense had every opportunity to create reasonable doubt in the mind of at least one juror.

And in the end the jury believed the victim (as well as his friend ho went off the rails  and died as a result of the abuse)


----------



## basilio (14 March 2019)

Perhaps this story sums up the situation.

*Pell thought the boys would never tell. One did - and millions believe*
Send via Email
The child abuse royal commission and its revelations about the extent of the Catholic Church's crimes against children formed the shock and grief stage of our response to this global tragedy. The conviction and sentencing of disgraced cardinal George Pell for child sex crimes has brought forth the anger.

As the ugliness of crimes by church figures, the cover-ups, and the damage done was revealed over five years of the royal commission, people were numbed. There were tears, but the magnitude of what had occurred and the horrifying culpability of the church required time to come to terms with after the commission's final report in December, 2017.

.... Royal commission chair Justice Peter McClellan summed up well why institutional child sexual abuse continued for so long in this country, in one of his final speeches before the final report was made public. Police in Sydney and Melbourne had an “understanding ... for many years” about protecting church figures accused of child sex allegations, Justice McClellan said.

This “understanding” reflected a broader view that the community would suffer if its “pillars” were exposed as criminals, so that "assumed stability of society was seen to be more important than the protection of the child or justice for children through the prosecution of offenders”, he said.
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/pell-20190313-p513ya.html


----------



## wayneL (14 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> The fact is many Christian groups do follow dogma that harms children both directly and indirectly.



Notwithstanding what are agreed to be heinous transgressions:

1/ what are these dogmas that harm children?

2/ which Christian groups practice such dogmas?


----------



## cynic (14 March 2019)

basilio said:


> What simplistic rubbish you sprout Cynic.  I don't know you from Adam. You don't know me. We have no relationship in any way. Taking you at face value in what universe would anyway take such an accusation seriously ?



What universe, you ask! This universe, apparently!


> ______________________________________________
> There are really strong legal processes for *testing *peoples accusations. How about respecting the process that has been undertaken in George Pells case to ensure his million dollar defense had every opportunity to create reasonable doubt in the mind of at least one juror.
> 
> And in the end the jury believed the victim (as well as his friend ho went off the rails  and died as a result of the abuse)



That seems to be the problem!

The jury was faced with a situation where it was the plaintiff's word against the defendant'. 

It would appear that the jury chose to believe the plaintiff and disbelieve the defendant.  

Apart from their conflicting testimonies, what evidence was presented?

It is my understanding that the now deceased friend, had, whilst alive, denied that the abuse, alleged by his friend, had ever taken place!


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

basilio said:


> So you reckon it's simple Cynic ? Anyone can just make an accusation against the third most powerful Catholic in the world and get it accepted by the police, the DPP, a committal court and a unanimous 12 person jury with just a persons word?




Nothing is simple.

Pell may well have done what he was convicted of, I have my doubts but the jury didn't, so he's now it gaol.

I don't think "real" pedophiles ever give up. It's like a sickness they can't get over. A couple of events in an otherwise "blameless" life (as the judge said) doesn't add up to the villain that he's portrayed to be in my view. I think he's very arrogant with not a lot of respect for humble mortals but that doesn't make him a monster in my opinion.

If he is being punished for covering up for others, then that is a different matter for which he should be charged.


----------



## Value Collector (14 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> ???
> 
> Have you read the Bible? Particularly the New Testament? Anything other than the Bible is NOT the word of God. Love, benevolence, self sacrifice for your fellow man. That's why they have nothing, are supposed to pursue nothing except the path of Jesus.
> 
> Stuff it if I could do it. I've seen true Christians die very young, used and abused. Sacrificing their life for others.




Dude there is like 10,000 brands of Christians, all believeing different things, and I don’t think any of them would accept you as an authority on what is and isn’t “Christian”

The Bible is a big book of multiple choice, that can be interpreted in many ways, and again I doubt many of the 10,000+ brands of Christians would accept you as an authority on its correct interpretation.

For example “Christians” have killed there children by denying medical treatment or trying to beat badness out of them eg spare the rod spoil the child etc


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> Dude there is like 10,000 brands of Christians, all believeing different things, and I don’t think any of them would accept you as an authority on what is and isn’t “Christian”
> 
> The Bible is a big book of multiple choice, that can be interpreted in many ways, and again I doubt many of the 10,000+ brands of Christians would accept you as an authority on its correct interpretation.
> 
> For example “Christians” have killed there children by denying medical treatment or trying to beat badness out of them eg spare the rod spoil the child etc




You haven't got a clue. The Bible is the word of God, having been brought up by a Christian. Anything else outside the Bible is NOT.
You're just grinding an Axe.


----------



## basilio (14 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Nothing is simple.
> 
> Pell may well have done what he was convicted of, I have my doubts but the jury didn't, so he's now it gaol.
> 
> ...




Everyone has a view on this. Obviously.

I suggest that the view that Cardinal Pell has only transgressed a couple of times may be misinformed.
Yes the judge said he lived an otherwise "blameless" life.  He had to say that because strictly speaking Cardinal Pell has never been convicted of any other sexual offence.

On the hand there are at least two separate accusations made against Cardinal Pell. These have not resulted in criminal charges because the police/DPP didn't believe they had a sufficiently strong  legal case. Which means of course no reference can be made in any trial.

In my view the Judge made quite strong observations of the way in which Cardinal Pell took control of the boys in his sacristy and a month later on in the corridor.  The subtext of that,  was suggesting that this was a person who was practiced at such behaviours. We may never know is there are other victims because unless they are willing to come forward, willing to make statements and be prepared to face the pressures of a trial nothing will happen.

This was a relatively unusual case in terms of child sexual abuse. The victim who came forward did not have the  personal baggage that many such people have carried. His friend had broken down, become a heroin addict and died of an overdose. Around Ballarat the numbers of suicides, mental health problems and drug problems attributable to  sex abuse by local religious is very marked. But these people rarely  make strong and believable witnesses. But the victim who testified is reasonably intact despite ongoing anxiety. He was credible.


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

And where are these "Christian teachings/dogma to abuse Children" VC?


----------



## Macquack (14 March 2019)

Does anyone know if the choir boy who is now deceased, provide a statement to police before he passed away?


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

Macquack said:


> Does anyone know if the choir boy who is now deceased, provide a statement to police before he passed away?




I don't think so. Apparently he always denied anything happened.


----------



## Darc Knight (14 March 2019)

You people do realise a lot of the charity work being done out there is done by Christians. Bad apples and bad behaviours of a few is giving the rest, the good ones the charitable ones, a bad name and a hard time.

@Tink you give Christians a bad name on here by your adulation of a lying, sociopathic, sexual predator, who worships money and doesn't care about the sick, the poor the less fortunate etc. The complete opposite of a Christian.

I'm not a Christian but I've sadly seen those who are, those who are too busy trying to help others to care for themselves. Those good charitable self sacrificing people don't need the grief due to a few bad apples.


----------



## Macquack (14 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think so. Apparently he always denied anything happened.



I have read that he denied anything happening. Who did he deny that to?  Because if it was, say his parents, would they not be great witnesses in Pells defence? ( I think Pell did it, but we are not being told the full story by the media).


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

Macquack said:


> I have read that he denied anything happening. Who did he deny that to?  Because if it was, say his parents, would they not be great witnesses in Pells defence? ( I think Pell did it, but we are not being told the full story by the media).




I believe he said that to his mother. 

https://www.theherald.com.au/story/5253830/court-told-man-denied-abuse-by-george-pell/


----------



## cynic (14 March 2019)

Macquack said:


> Does anyone know if the choir boy who is now deceased, provide a statement to police before he passed away?





Macquack said:


> I have read that he denied anything happening. Who did he deny that to?  Because if it was, say his parents, would they not be great witnesses in Pells defence? ( I think Pell did it, but we are not being told the full story by the media).



https://www.couriermail.com.au/news...l/news-story/4016aac84126940efbbcb84798e6f3ec


----------



## Macquack (14 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I believe he said that to his mother.
> 
> https://www.theherald.com.au/story/5253830/court-told-man-denied-abuse-by-george-pell/



That article did not say he told his mother that he was not abused by Pell.
The angle of that story was that by inference, the deceased choirboy did not use the abuse at Pell's  hands as an excuse to get a lesser sentence in a case against the choirboy.


----------



## cynic (14 March 2019)

Macquack said:


> That article did not say he told his mother that he was not abused by Pell.
> The angle of that story was that by inference, the deceased choirboy did not use the abuse at Pell's  hands as an excuse to get a lesser sentence in a case against the choirboy.



According to that Courier Mail article, I linked earlier, Sgt Reed testified that the mother had asked her boy, in 2001, if he had ever been "interfered with or touched up",whilst in the choir.(To which she said he'd said no.)
Furthermore, the father was told that he'd never been sexually assualted ,or mistreated, by any person.


----------



## bellenuit (14 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I believe he said that to his mother.
> 
> https://www.theherald.com.au/story/5253830/court-told-man-denied-abuse-by-george-pell/




That is what I read too. But the impression I got was that his mother thought he was hiding something or holding back something, rather than it being an emphatic denial.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 March 2019)

bellenuit said:


> That is what I read too. But the impression I got was that his mother thought he was hiding something or holding back something, rather than it being an emphatic denial.




Yes, his parents said he went downhill fast at the time of the (alleged) incident but whether it had anything to do with the abuse was not known.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> You haven't got a clue. The Bible is the word of God, having been brought up by a Christian. Anything else outside the Bible is NOT.
> You're just grinding an Axe.




No, the Bible is the word of men, and is interpreted by each Christian group differently, otherwise we wouldn’t have so many different groups of Christians.

————

saying any Christian that does something bad is obviously not a Christian, Is like saying any Australian that breaks Australian Law is obviously not Australian.

Eg.in your opinion,  No Australian has ever committed a crime, because the fact that they Broke Australian Law is evidence they weren’t a “TRUE” Australian to begin with.

See how silly it is to claim that any Christian that breaks biblical rules can’t be a Christian.

It’s simply the no true Scotsman fallacy, it’s an appeal to purity.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> Notwithstanding what are agreed to be heinous transgressions:
> 
> 1/ what are these dogmas that harm children?
> 
> 2/ which Christian groups practice such dogmas?




Plenty of dogmas, take for example the groups such as jehovah witnesses who may deny blood transfusions etc to children, or Christians groups that believe physical violence is a justified way to “lead children to the lord”




These parents beat their child to death for god.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> And where are these "Christian teachings/dogma to abuse Children" VC?




Take a look at this video.



Now I am sure you will have excuses as to why they aren’t “true Christians” but as I said, the Bible is interpreted in many different ways by many different people, hence the reason there is 10,000  brands of Christian.


----------



## wayneL (15 March 2019)

Well damn VC, I guess the jw blood transfusion thing is a valid one. The others are abberant and isolated. 

Humans of all sorts of creeds find ways of hurting children though, from Islam,  to veganism,  to child labour,  maybe even radical gender theory. 

Its just humans and I would posit that mainstream Christianity would be a lesser offender.


----------



## Darc Knight (15 March 2019)

You're a disgrace VC. Posting vids of Extremists without having read the New Testament (the Christian Bible).

Give away your money VC. Live on the bare bones of your ass spending all your time helping the sick the poor the handicapped etc like these Christian groups like the Salvation Army, St Vincent de Paul, Father John Riley and the thousands of others who do the charitable works while you're serving yourself and attacking these charitable loving people.

Yeah, lets bash a self sacrificing loving Christian. If someone hits you on the right cheek turn and give them your left cheek as well is their motto (Matthew 5.39). Easy targets hey VC, because of a few bad apples.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> See how silly it is to claim that any Christian that breaks biblical rules can’t be a Christian.




Would you care to point out any passages in the Bible that say child abuse is OK ?

Unlike the leader of another religion who had a child bride, so child abuse in that religion is probably endemic.


----------



## Zaxon (15 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Would you care to point out any passages in the Bible that say child abuse is OK ?












https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/10/29/child-marriage-in-the-bible/


----------



## wayneL (15 March 2019)

It must be remembered that the Old Testament is a document of ancient Judaism, whereas Christian ideals come primarily from the New Testament. 

That Numbers passage is several hundred years BC, ie several hundred years before the advent of Christianity


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> View attachment 92919
> 
> View attachment 92920
> 
> https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/10/29/child-marriage-in-the-bible/




So priests who abuse little* boys* are not carrying out the Bible's instructions ?


----------



## Darc Knight (15 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> View attachment 92919
> 
> View attachment 92920
> 
> https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/10/29/child-marriage-in-the-bible/




Taking a passage of the Old Testament, and out of context. You do realise Christians are followers of Christ - Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ only came into it in the New Testament. The New Testament, love, forgiveness, benevolence, self sacrifice and all that. The New Testament overides the Old Testament.
If someone raped and killed someone you love Saxon, the New Testament teaches you to forgive that person and love that person etc.etc. etc.

Edit: once again, I'm NOT a Christian, but was raised by one.


----------



## Tink (15 March 2019)

Just looking at Joe's beautiful photos in the travel thread.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/posts/1018058/

That cross wouldn't last a day in our political PC climate, and VC would be the first to say pull that down.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Would you care to point out any passages in the Bible that say child abuse is OK ?
> 
> .



Besides the Bible vs that call for children to be stoned to death for being brats, there is this little gem that is often quoted by Christians.

Proverbs 13-24
spare the rod and spoil the child.

Obviously that is saying hitting a child with a rod is recommended, but as we know different groups will interpret things differently, but offcourse as the videos I posted show, some Christians interpret that as children should recieve harsh beatings. 

dark night saying that they aren’t Christians just because they don’t interpret the Bible the same as his favorite brands of Christians is silly.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> You're a disgrace VC. Posting vids of Extremists without having read the New Testament (the Christian Bible).
> .




They may be extremists, but they are still “christian” extremists.

I am not saying all Christians act like that offcourse they don’t.

But you are saying no Christians act like that, which is silly.

As I said from the start of our exchange, I simply have an issue with you reverting to the no true Scotsman fallacy.

————-
Also there are passages in the NT where Jesus says none of the OT rules are to change, I have heard Christians quote those verses when they bring up OT quotes to prove their points.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> Its just humans and I would posit that mainstream Christianity would be a lesser offender.




I don’t disagree that “mainstream” Christianity is at the lesser end.

But, dark nights point was using the no true Scotsman fallacy, eg. Any one that did any harm wasn’t a Christian.

He was basically saying it’s impossble for Christians to do damage, because anyone that does damage, immeadiately loses that label,that is what I had an issue with.


----------



## Darc Knight (15 March 2019)

VC, I'll apologise for my reaction to your posts. Just making a point that the New Testament is all about love and benevolence and all that. Some denominations do have issues I agree. I apologise again for my previous reply.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> That Numbers passage is several hundred years BC, ie several hundred years before the advent of Christianity




So is the 10 commandments, But Christians still quote that all the time.

This is the cherry picking part and not all Christians will cherry pick the same bits.

Some Christians also avoid pork, and that’s from the Old Testament too.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> VC, I'll apologise for my reaction to your posts. Just making a point that the New Testament is all about love and benevolence and all that. Some denominations do have issues I agree. I apologise again for my previous reply.




There is still some evil in he New Testament, but most modern Christians gloss over and ignore that, but some don’t.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

Tink said:


> That cross wouldn't last a day in our political PC climate, and VC would be the first to say pull that down.



Muslims build beautiful building too, a  beautiful building doesn’t mean the religion that built it is good. 

Tink, you can build as many crosses or churches as you like, I fine with that, as long as you don’t ask for government subsidy.

You seem to miss the fact that I am probably the biggest supporter of religious freedom here, I am happy for anyone to invent any religion they like, but they have no right to force it on anyone else.

Keep your religion out of the public purse, and out of the government, and don’t use it to harm others and I am fine with it.


----------



## wayneL (15 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> So is the 10 commandments, But Christians still quote that all the time.
> 
> This is the cherry picking part and not all Christians will cherry pick the same bits.
> 
> Some Christians also avoid pork, and that’s from the Old Testament too.



I agree that the cherry picking from the ot is irritating and probably not warranted if one regards  themself as a Christian.

And it is true that both books are full of contradictions, enabling Scallywags to form all sorts of weird doctrines.

However if you look at the overall picture and the cultures that have been created around the various mainstream religions, I think most of us agree that our culture which has been built around Christianity is the most progressive and benevolent.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

wayneL said:


> However if you look at the overall picture and the cultures that have been created around the various mainstream religions, I think most of us agree that our culture which has been built around Christianity is the most progressive and benevolent.




I think the fact our culture has become progressively more secular is the cause of our prosperity.

Our society has improved pretty steadily, as we have become more and more secular, the fact our past is based in Christianity is a bit of an accident of history, and in most cases religion has been an anchor slowing us down, not driving us forward.


----------



## Zaxon (15 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> There is still some evil in he New Testament, but most modern Christians gloss over and ignore that, but some don’t.



New Testament reference:


----------



## Darc Knight (15 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> New Testament reference:
> View attachment 92932




"Ephesians 6:5–9 gives specific instructions for both servants and masters. Servants should give a good effort, more than just for show, in all things they are required to do. This shows respect for their master, but it also provides a good example of one's relationship to Christ. At the same time, masters are explicitly told not to be abusive to their underlings. God sees masters as no better than those they command, and He is the ultimate Master of both."

https://www.bibleref.com/Ephesians/6/Ephesians-6-5.html#verse

You just going to cherrypick and take things out of context without regard to the whole ie. troll?

When was the last time you did some volunteer work @Zaxon ?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> I think the fact our culture has become progressively more secular is the cause of our prosperity.




So the "I want it all and I want it now" creed is good for us you think ?

All right up to a point, but then you get the banks and their shareholders who want it all at the expense of others.


----------



## cynic (15 March 2019)

To my understanding, Christianity is the practice of living according to Christ's teachings.
Many of the cherry picked biblical quotations, posted to this thread, run counter to those teachings.

When someone claiming to be a Christian, acts in a manner contrary to Christ's teachings, it is fair to say that person is not being true to Christianity.

Many denominations of Christianity are guilty of incorporating non Christian practices into their interpretational brand of "Christianity". Those preferring such practices over Christ's actual teachings cannot rightly claim to be true Christians.

The "no true scotsman fallacy" has no relevance to such observations.


----------



## grah33 (15 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> New Testament reference:
> View attachment 92932



I see no problem at all.  Plus the translation factor .  I doubt it means to be petrified of your master.  That same author described the necessity for perfect calm at all times.  And a Christian in today's time would try to do the same.  There service  would then become a source of 'grace'.  And when you think about it, for those who do believe in morality and human dignity, it actually does make sense to act like that.


----------



## basilio (15 March 2019)

I'm not sure where all this trashing of Christianity or religions get us.
I would hope most people with any religious knowledge would accept that the Christian gospel is fundamentally good. "Love thy neighbour as you love yourself".

The tragedy about what has happened in the Catholic Church as well as many others lies in the Institutional behaviors  of the clergy.   This is about corruption and abuse and then concealment in the name of protecting the reputation of the organisation. Unfortunately that process is universal.  Unless one is vigilant and diligent  the risks of people abusing their positions of power is always there and, somehow, needs  some sort of strong external overview.

I note that many people believe that if there were some strong  lay women having roles in the Churchs education and ministries there would have been far more  chance of nipping these behaviors in the bud so to speak. I suppose a critical problem of the Churches is that they would always resist such intervention. 

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

For the sake of remembering history, the Catholic Church has had many periods of corrupt and outrageous behavior. There were often internal efforts to challenge these actions - but these were generally unsuccessful. In fact in the 1500's  the  Church  was  "out of control". This behavior was also responsible for the Reformation when many people just decided to establish their own form of Christianity. Think of Martin Luther.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
https://www.khanacademy.org/humanit...an-introduction-to-the-protestant-reformation
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Roman-Catholicism/The-age-of-Reformation-and-Counter-Reformation


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> So the "I want it all and I want it now" creed is good for us you think ?
> 
> All right up to a point, but then you get the banks and their shareholders who want it all at the expense of others.




If you had a choice, I don’t think you would want to go back to the dark ages, when the churches ruled the world.

What ever faults you can find with modern society, our lives are a lot better now that we are less religious than they were in the dark ages when religion was the strongest.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> If you had a choice, I don’t think you would want to go back to the dark ages, when the churches ruled the world.




No I wouldn't, but at least I have some appreciation that a lot of our laws and morals were inherited from Christianity, the concept of charity for example.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

basilio said:


> I'm not sure where all this trashing of Christianity or religions get us.




As I said I am not trashing Christianity, I just take issue with people that make out that being “Christian” automatically makes a person good, especially when they use the no true Scotsman fallacy to try and eject all the bad examples that disprove their position.

If true Christianity really was about self sacrificing to help others, then Christianity must be one of the smallest religions, because the bulk of the 10,000+ versions obviously aren’t real according to DK’s definition, certainly not the Catholic Church and all the jet setting USA evangelicals, preaching prosperity gospel.


----------



## Darc Knight (15 March 2019)

Have you read the New Testament VC?

Don't listen to Benny Hinn or any of those dodgey buggers. As the Book of Revelations says "he who adds or takes away from this message will have his punishment multiplied". People aren't supposed to be adding to The Bible.

Everyone, read the New Testament and make up your own mind.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...FjABegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw3Y9h9l2lchTttrXx7Hjb8I


----------



## bellenuit (15 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Have you read the New Testament VC?




I don't think there is anything in there that is more moral than what was expounded by some other religions of the time or secular thinking of the time. After all it was written by men and likely reflects the consensus morality of the time. However, this has been discussed ad nauseam in the "Religion, science, philosophy and things metaphysical" forum.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> No I wouldn't, but at least I have some appreciation that a lot of our laws and morals were inherited from Christianity, the concept of charity for example.



Which important laws come from Christianity? I think you will find any important law or rule such as those outlawing stealing or murder exist across pretty much every society and predate Christianity. 

I am pretty sure the concept of charity existed before Christianity too, and exists across many religions and societies.

As for morals, the important ones are secular any way, and also exist across different religions and societies, they have evolved as our social species evolved, and often “religious morals” and up getting in the way and slowing down the progression.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2019)

Value Collector said:


> Which important laws come from Christianity? I think you will find any important law or rule such as those outlawing stealing or murder exist across pretty much every society and predate Christianity.
> 
> I am pretty sure the concept of charity existed before Christianity too, and exists across many religions and societies.
> 
> As for morals, the important ones are secular any way, and also exist across different religions and societies, they have evolved as our social species evolved, and often “religious morals” and up getting in the way and slowing down the progression.




I have a feeling that we have been here before many times so I won't go on about it, except to say look at a "Godless" society like China or North Korea and ask yourself if you would prefer to live there.


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

Darc Knight said:


> Have you read the New Testament VC?




A lot of it yes, probably more than most Christians, I own a copy of the skeptics annotated Bible.

I find the Bible to be very over rated, certainly many better books out there


----------



## Value Collector (15 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> I have a feeling that we have been here before many times so I won't go on about it, except to say look at a "Godless" society like China or North Korea and ask yourself if you would prefer to live there.




Korea is a religious state, their state religion is leader worship, the head of state is a dead guy who could do miracles,  just like Christianity.


----------



## grah33 (16 March 2019)

Indeed we have discussed these things numerous times before  when I was last around, and yes, it's possible NT teachings were around before (probably not all of them though), but that wouldn't matter anyway.  

A parish priest that I know  has been following it and he reckons there is no evidence at all against Pell.  I hope my predictions aren't  coming true .   State control of religion would  be devastating for Aus.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> A parish priest that I know has been following it and he reckons there is no evidence at all against Pell.




So you think the witness who gave evidence for 4 days was lying ?

That may well be possible but the jury believed him.


----------



## grah33 (16 March 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> So you think the witness who gave evidence for 4 days was lying ?
> 
> That may well be possible but the jury believed him.



I don't have a feeling toward either possibility.  I suspect many people believe Pell is guilty  though, since it's natural to believe what we're told.  I'm not convinced yet at all though.  I'll wait to see what happens.


----------



## basilio (16 March 2019)

_"A parish priest that I know has been following it and he reckons there is no evidence at all against Pell."
Graph 33
_
I suggest that observation says more about the parish priest than anything else. 

How was he "following" the case ?  Had he been there every day or even most days ?  Had he somehow been privy to the closed cross examinations of the victim ?

I go back to what I have said which, to be fair,  simply echoes the known public facts. Cardinal Pell had the absolute best legal team available representing him. All avenues of defence were explored in detail. Every attempt possible was made to create reasonable doubt in the minds of at least one juror.

In the end the jury was faced with hearing the detailed and cross examined testimony of the accused and surrounding evidence vs the denials of Cardinal Pell. *They unanimously believed the Kid.*


----------



## Zaxon (16 March 2019)

I look at it like this. Say there's a teacher at your local primary school. You hear from your neighbour that he's touched up her son. The next week, you hear from your cousin that the same teacher molested her son. And the next day, you hear from a former student, who's now an adult, who tells you the same teacher molested him when he was a kid.

Your son tells you that he's been invited over to this teacher's house for 1-on-1, special tuition. Do you let him go?

I'd hope your answer would be no.  Pedophiles have patterns of behaviour. Rarely do they offend only once.  It's the corroborating testimonies from independent people that gives you all the evidence you need.

In the case of George Pell, there are numerous, similar sounding stories from multiple sources. The forced sex with the choirboys he's been convicted of in Melbourne. The indecent grabbing of genitals in the swimming pool at Ballarat.  The interest he's shown in the change rooms to make sure boys dry their genitals while he watched. The incident incident in Torquay where he stood naked in a change room in from of young boys for a lengthy period of time, and had to be told by Les Tyack, "I know what you're doing George. Clear out or I'll report this to the police."

We as non jurors, are allowed to weigh up all the independent evidence, the eerily similar stories from different parts of the state. You can form your personal opinion on that.  In a court of law, the restrictions of what can be considered are extremely different. Very relevant evidence can be stricken, just because the judge said so. Other similar cases and testimonies can't be considered.  The verdict could be overturned on appeal due to a technicality. And that's just how our legal system works.  And that makes sense if the outcome is to imprison someone, you need extreme rigor in the process.

But as a member of the public who isn't a juror, you should consider the wider evidence you have available.  Pedophiles have a track record supported by the testimonies of their victims.  If you still conclude that George did nothing, then by all means, let your son go over to the teacher's house for 1-on-1, special tuition.


----------



## grah33 (16 March 2019)

basilio said:


> _"A parish priest that I know has been following it and he reckons there is no evidence at all against Pell."
> Graph 33
> _
> I suggest that observation says more about the parish priest than anything else.
> ...




Just to add Pell actually came around not too long ago. He snuck in , they were saying, this tall man, to get away from the media. The new guy,  Comensoli , was also here not too long ago. 

This discussion is  a bit like the evolution thing. You got people that would believe if they felt the evidence was better.  I imagine though that many Catholics do believe he is guilty since it's natural to believe what you've been told.


----------



## grah33 (17 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> I look at it like this. Say there's a teacher at your local primary school. You hear from your neighbour that he's touched up her son. The next week, you hear from your cousin that the same teacher molested her son. And the next day, you hear from a former student, who's now an adult, who tells you the same teacher molested him when he was a kid.
> 
> Your son tells you that he's been invited over to this teacher's house for 1-on-1, special tuition. Do you let him go?
> 
> ...



Informative.  You know lots about it.  I am open minded to him being guilty though.


----------



## Value Collector (17 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> Just to add Pell actually came around not too long ago. He snuck in , they were saying, this tall man, to get away from the media. The new guy,  Comensoli , was also here not too long ago.
> 
> This discussion is  a bit like the evolution thing. You got people that would believe if they felt the evidence was better.  I imagine though that many Catholics do believe he is guilty since it's natural to believe what you've been told.




There are religious nutters that deny evolution regardless of the evidence, same would go here, hard line Catholics will not want to believe spell did anything, regardless of any evidence.


----------



## noirua (17 March 2019)

Probably they need to advance technology on whether the truth is being told both by accusers and the accused.  That can get complicated as in one case in the states. They spent many weeks discussing and arguing over how questions should be worded. Then whether the questioner could request how it is answered.
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-lie-detector-results-not-permissible-in-American-courts


----------



## basilio (17 March 2019)

Zaxon said:


> I look at it like this. Say there's a teacher at your local primary school. You hear from your neighbour that he's touched up her son. The next week, you hear from your cousin that the same teacher molested her son. And the next day, you hear from a former student, who's now an adult, who tells you the same teacher molested him when he was a kid.
> 
> Your son tells you that he's been invited over to this teacher's house for 1-on-1, special tuition. Do you let him go?
> 
> ...




The notion of " legal evidence" is always interesting.  As you would be aware Zaxon, the Pell jury would never have been told or, in theory know, about the other  sexual misconduct* allegations.  *Even now, despite whatever views we have, the legal view is that Cardinal Pell lived a blameless life apart from the incidents he was charged and convicted on.

In the outside world people have a broader view of what they accept as evidence.  If a parent heard a few independent people saying a particular teacher or priest was   fiddling with kids - actually we would wonder why that person wasn't having serious talks with the police.

But lets say the person just seemed "too friendly"  with children ? That could stir some talk couldn't it ? Trouble is I have seen  examples of either unwitting  honest friendly behavior by teachers  and nasty minded people who have spread misunderstandings or down right lies to take down teachers.

It's complicated isn't it ?


----------



## explod (17 March 2019)

In a remarkable admission, German Cardinal Reinhard Marx said Saturday that documents that could have contained proof of clergy sexual abuse in the Catholic Church were destroyed or never drawn up.

"Files that could have documented the terrible deeds and named those responsible were destroyed or not even created," said Marx, the archbishop of Munich and president of the German Bishops' Conference.
"The stipulated procedures and processes for the prosecution offenses were deliberately not complied with," he added, "but instead canceled and overridden.
"Such standard practices will make it clear that it is not transparency which damages the church, but rather the acts of abuse committed, the lack of transparency, or the ensuing coverup."
Marx's stunning admission came on the third day of a historic Vatican summit focused on combating clergy sexual abuse. The day's theme was transparency, which Marx said could help to tackle abuse of power.
A member of Pope Francis' inner circle of advisers, Marx is one of the most powerful men in the Catholic Church.
The four-day summit of 190 Catholic leaders, including 114 bishops from around the world, will conclude Sunday with an address by Pope Francis. On Thursday, at the beginning of the unprecedented summit, Francis urged the bishops to take "concrete measures" to combat the clergy abuse scandal.
At a press conference later Saturday, Marx said that the information about destroying files came from a study commissioned by German bishops in 2014. The study was "scientific" and did not name the particular church leaders or dioceses in Germany that destroyed the files.
"The study indicates that some documents were manipulated or did not contain what they should have contained," Marx said. "The fact in itself cannot be denied."
Marx said he doubts the destruction of files related to clergy sexual abuse was limited to one diocese.
"I assume Germany is not an isolated case."
The report commissioned by the German bishops also revealed that "at least" 3,677 cases of child sex abuse by German clergy occurred between 1946 and 2014.
CNN's Lauren Said-Moorhouse and Livvy Doherty contributed to this report.




https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/23/...iXmCEWSeDqR-zL_XUp9e5AzeiVRM08bvQogYOFQBr2hco


----------



## basilio (19 March 2019)

There is a powerful story  on ABC which shows the ongoing destruction of historiuc sex offenses by priests against children. 

Very relevant when remembering there were two students abused by George Pell one of home became a heroin addict in response to the attack and subsequently died of an accidental overdose.

*The paedophile priest who abused my husband lives on in our home every day*
By Winnie Mulherin
Updated about 3 hours ago





* Photo:* Winnie and her son Alex are secondary victims of clerical abuse. (Supplied) 
*Related Story:* Pell abused two choirboys. One of them didn't live to see justice
*Related Story:* Two childhood photos show how being raped by a paedophile priest changed my life
*Related Story:* A stranger raped me at knife-point. Until now, I thought it was partly my fault
*Related Story:* If you met me a year ago, you'd never guess that I abused my partner
When my husband was 11 years old, a Catholic priest revered by his parents singled him out to go for a drive to the beach.

His family was not financially well off, his home life was devout, strict and unhappy. Rarely were there family outings.

He jumped at the chance to fossick along the shoreline.

But when he got to the beach, he was sexually assaulted.

The priest told him it was "God's will". He'd always been told that priests were "close to God". He could not comprehend what had just happened to him.

This Irish priest was jovial, likeable, the life of the party. Articulate, witty and involved in local groups in this small, far north Queensland community.

He groomed parents and adults before moving onto their children.

The beach was just the first of twelve sexual assaults between 1977-1980, the depravity increasing with every attack.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03...bused-my-husband-secondary-survivors/10914174


----------



## basilio (25 April 2019)

More fallout from the Royal Commission into child sexual abuse.
Be very interesting to see where this led.

*Survivors of church abuse speak out about mafia-style intimidation tactics*
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04...speak-out-about-intimidation-tactics/11041506


----------



## SirRumpole (25 April 2019)

basilio said:


> More fallout from the Royal Commission into child sexual abuse.
> Be very interesting to see where this led.
> 
> *Survivors of church abuse speak out about mafia-style intimidation tactics*
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04...speak-out-about-intimidation-tactics/11041506




Maybe they were part of a wider ring of child abusers who were afraid of the real story getting out.


----------



## basilio (27 April 2019)

The April edition of The Monthly has a story on Cardinal Pell  and the effects of his conviction by Anne Manne. Well worth reading.

The introduction is very telling.

"BACK IN THOSE DAYS, they were entitled to think of paedophilia as simply a sin you repent of, "
Cardinal Pell told_ The Australian _in 2012.


----------



## basilio (20 May 2019)

This a long read. However IMV it is well worth the effort if people are interested in another view of how the Catholic Church is travelling and has behaved with regard to sex abuse.  
I have quoted only one  powerful lowlight.

*Abolish the Priesthood*
To save the Church, Catholics must detach themselves from the clerical hierarchy—and take the faith back into their own hands.

....In the United States, also in 2018, a Pennsylvania grand jury alleged that over the course of 70 years, more than 1,000 children had been abused by more than 300 priests across the state. Church authorities had successfully silenced the victims, deflected law enforcement, and shielded the predators. The Pennsylvania report was widely taken to be a conclusive adjudication, but grand-jury findings are not verdicts. Still, this record of testimony and investigation was staggering. *The charges told of a ring of pedophile priests who gave many of their young targets the gift of a gold cross to wear, so that the other predator priests could recognize an initiated child who would not resist an overture. “This is the murder of a soul,” said one victim who testified before the grand jury.
*
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazin...e-the-church-dismantle-the-priesthood/588073/


----------



## basilio (31 May 2019)

Some things *never ever *change..
The Catholic Archdiocese of Ballarat is back in court defending itself against one of the hundreds of children raped by Gerard Risdale.  Gerard was one of the most notorious child abusers in the district - and the Royal Commission found that his abuse was well known to his superiors.

But that was then and this is now... Archbishop Bird is now attempting to deny the evidence of the Royal Commission to save their sorry asses. Just astonishing and heart breaking.

On a similar note one of the big stories in Ballarat this week was a recognition male suicide in Ballarat was at record levels - in fact far higher than anywhere else in Australia. I wonder if the fact that Gerard Risdale and his fellow abusers ripped through hundreds and hundreds of children in their time as priests had any long term effect ?

Any chance  of there being a connection ?
http://brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/55
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05...commission-abuse-astonishing-defence/11165522
https://www.amhf.org.au/addressing_men_s_health_crisis_in_ballarat
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05...d-abuse-to-start-hearings-in-ballarat/6477132


----------



## basilio (1 June 2019)

George Pell is appealing against his conviction on charges of rape and abuse of 2 choir boys. 
There is an excellent analysis of just how complex these cases are and the difficulties faced by judges and courts when dealing with historical child sex abuse cases. The rest of the story as it delves into other current cases under appeal is compelling. 


* The George Pell story is a long way from ending – even if he wins his appeal *
David Marr
The high court has often backed trial juries in child abuse cases, and looms over the verdict of the Melbourne judges

Fri 31 May 2019 23.24 BST   Last modified on Sat 1 Jun 2019 00.16 BST


George Pell stands a good chance of winning his appeal next week. Not that that would be the end of the matter. Lately the Victorian court of appeal has overturned a number of jury verdicts in child abuse cases, only to see those verdicts restored by the high court.

Child abuse cases are hard. The rules of evidence are complex. Witnesses are few. These assaults are inherently outlandish. Victims are frequently damaged. Often at stake is the ruin of old men who have never before been accused of crimes.

A gap has opened up between the Canberra and Melbourne courts in the past few years in child abuse cases. The language of the high court has been polite but its rebukes have been emphatic. Again and again it has backed trial judges and juries. Offenders set free on appeal in Melbourne find themselves behind bars once again.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ng-way-from-ending-even-if-he-wins-his-appeal


----------



## basilio (21 August 2019)

Pell has lost his appeal.  Back to jail.

The Appeal judges thought the jury got it right.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-21/george-pell-appeal-live-stream/11432748
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08...ex-abuse-convictions-appeal-decision/11432066


----------



## basilio (21 August 2019)

Interesting comment about Cardinal Pell and his role in setting up the Catholic church response to sexual abuse.

Simple point.  Here was a now convicted child sex abuser setting up a system that was intended to  keep these abuses quiet and ensure that victims did not go to the legal system for any redress.

And the person who set up this system .... is now a convicted abuser of children. 

Protecting his own interest perhaps ?

Longer version of how the Judges ruled on the appeal.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-5d5c886a8f08a0805bcc18e4#liveblog-navigation


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2019)

He could still take it to the High Court. The split decision gives him some incentive to do so.


----------



## cynic (21 August 2019)

I know that Pell has been convicted of a crime, and yet I still don't know whether or not he is actually guilty, of the crime, of which he has been convicted.

What I do know, (provided the media has reported matters comprehensively and accurately), is that Victorians are no longer protected by the presumption of innocence.

The outcome of this appeal has only served to compound my loss of confidence in the Victorian legal system.

I ask those celebrating the verdict, and subsequent appeal dismissal, to ask themselves how they would feel, if personally brought to trial, and convicted, solely on the basis of the uncorroborated testimony of a solitary complainant or plaintiff!


----------



## basilio (21 August 2019)

Cynic I would suggest almost every old case of child sex abuse by cleric or scout master or whoever ended up largely as the testimony of the victim versus the accused.  Very unlikely to be physical evidence. Generally no one else in the room. That is just the way of rape/abuse.

Courts around the world  have had  many, many cases of these  horrendous acts that what were previously "unthinkable" and therefore "unbelievable".  Unfortunately they have almost all proven true. We have discovered how depraved some adults can be when given the opportunity to take out their sexual interests on children who, becasue they are children, won't be believed.

Cardinal Pell was convicted because the jury found the complaint a totally credible witness. Over 30 hours of interviews they decided he was telling the truth.  That in fact George Pell had behaved the way he as alleged.

George had the best legal defence money could buy. He exercised all his legal rights  He was then found guilty and now the appeal judges still accept  there was no miscarriage of justice.

This is the statement from the surviving victim. Maybe this tells us they type of person who finally went to the police.


_I am relieved at the decision of the Court of Appeal.

It is four years since I reported to the police. The criminal process has been stressful. 

The journey has taken me to places that, in my darkest moments, I feared I could not return from. The justice machine rolls on with all of its processes and punditry, almost forgetting about the people at the heart of the matter.

Despite this, I appreciate that the criminal process afforded Pell every opportunity to challenge the charges and to be heard. 

I am glad he had the best legal representation money can buy. There are a lot of checks and balances in the criminal justice system and the appeal process is one of them.

I just hope that it is all over now.

Some commentators have suggested that I reported to the police somehow for my own personal gain. 

Nothing could be further from the truth.

I have risked my privacy, my health, my wellbeing, my family. 

I have not instructed any solicitor in relation to a claim for compensation. This is not about money and never has been.

Some commentators have suggested that I am somehow out to cause damage to the Catholic Church. I'm not on a mission to do anybody any harm. Although my faith has taken a battering it is still a part of my life, and part of the lives of my loved ones.

I am not an advocate. You wouldn't know my name. I am not a champion for the cause of sexual abuse survivors, although I am glad those advocates are out there. But that is not my path.

After attending the funeral of my childhood friend, the other choirboy, I felt a responsibility to come forward. I knew he had been in a dark place. I was in a dark place. I gave a statement to the police because I was thinking of him and his family. 

I felt I should say what I saw and what happened to me. I had experienced something terrible as a child, something that marked my life. I wanted at least some good to come of it.

I would like to acknowledge my friend who passed away, the other choirboy, and pay my deep respect to him and to his family. I would like to acknowledge the courage of those people who reported to the police. For one reason or another, your cases were not advanced. My heart goes out to all of you.

I would like to acknowledge the Victoria Police and the Office Public Prosecutions. I am grateful for the steady hand of His Honour Chief Judge Kidd in guiding the trial and his compassionate, balanced and fair sentencing. 

In February, due to other cases not going ahead, I ended up in the spotlight alone. The suppression order was to be lifted and I suddenly found myself at the centre of worldwide media interest.

I asked Viv Waller to help me manage the considerable media interest in the case and to protect my identity and my family.

I could not afford legal representation but that did not matter to her. I will be forever grateful that Viv agreed to help me and to do so for free. She has liaised with the media on my behalf. She has allowed the storms of public opinion to buffet her so that my young family could find safe harbour.

My journey has not been an easy one. It has been all the more stressful because the case involved a high-profile figure. I thank the media for respecting my privacy and for continuing to protect my identity.

I need to be able to define myself away from all of this. Recently I have started a new chapter in my life as a father. The experiences I have been through have helped me understand what is truly important.

I am grateful for a legal system that everyone can believe in, where everybody is equal before the law and no one is above the law

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08...ng-victim-reacts-to-appeal-dismissal/11434894

_


----------



## grah33 (21 August 2019)

cynic said:


> I know that Pell has been convicted of a crime, and yet I still don't know whether or not he is actually guilty, of the crime, of which he has been convicted.
> 
> What I do know, (provided the media has reported matters comprehensively and accurately), is that Victorians are no longer protected by the presumption of innocence.
> 
> ...



it looks pretty suss to me. beneath the lines  the Church figures seem to be saying that they can't find any solid evidence against him.
also, quite a few are viewing this as complimentary to the recent removal of religious freedom (progressively in the last few months).  not good at all.


----------



## basilio (21 August 2019)

grah33 said:


> he Church figures seem to be saying that they can't find any solid evidence against him.




Really ?  Why not just consider what has happened. There was trial where a jury of 12 people looked at all the evidence and testimony and decided the victim as telling the truth.

The there was an appeal to a higher court. Three Judges went through the trial and reviewed all the evidence again. Two were  totally convinced the victim was telling the truth and found so.


_Appeals from jury decisions in sex abuse cases can be extraordinarily complex. This wasn’t. All the judges had to do – once they unanimously flicked away a couple of technical arguments about evidence and procedures – was to decide whether the facts stacked up against the cardinal.


He will soon be shifted to a country jail where Victoria houses its paedophiles. He will know so many of the priests and brothers there


They were a third jury. The first jury couldn’t make up its mind. The second convicted. And, after looking at all the evidence again – they watched the videos, toured the cathedral, examined the robes – the judges of the court of appeal by two to one upheld Pell’s conviction.

_
*Juries don’t give reasons. Judges do. The key to their decision was clearly the accuser whose name we can never publish and whose evidence we will only ever read in summary. Ever since his allegations emerged a couple of years ago, those who have met him speak of an extraordinarily convincing young man.


Two of the three judges agreed. They did not doubt his evidence: “[He] was a very compelling witness, was clearly not a liar, was not a fantasist and was a witness of truth.” Pell’s failure is set out in hundreds of pages of judicial prose but it’s really as simple as this: most of the judges believed his accuser.*
_
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...l-pursed-his-lips-he-was-going-back-to-prison_


----------



## cynic (21 August 2019)

basilio said:


> Cynic I would suggest almost every old case of child sex abuse by cleric or scout master or whoever ended up largely as the testimony of the victim versus the accused.  Very unlikely to be physical evidence. Generally no one else in the room. That is just the way of rape/abuse.



What am I to make of this?!!
I hope you are not suggesting that this justifies the mere acceptance of a solitary witness, as to what may, or may not, have actually happened!

I am personally aware of at least three instances where innocent people have been falsely accused of similarly heinous sex crimes.
Sometimes the motivation was vindictiveness.
Other times accusers were primarily motivated  by fear driven misperceptions,misperceptions to the effect that the subject (of their accusations), was perchance, inclined toward sexually perverse behaviours.


> Courts around the world  have had  many, many cases of these  horrendous acts that what were previously "unthinkable" and therefore "unbelievable".  Unfortunately they have almost all proven true. We have discovered how depraved some adults can be when given the opportunity to take out their sexual interests on children who, becasue they are children, won't be believed.
> 
> Cardinal Pell was convicted because the jury found the complaint a totally credible witness. Over 30 hours of interviews they decided he was telling the truth.  That in fact George Pell had behaved the way he as alleged.
> 
> George had the best legal defence money could buy. He exercised all his legal rights  He was then found guilty and now the appeal judges still accept  there was no miscarriage of justice.



No! Only two, out of the three, judges presiding over the appeal, ruled for dismissal.


> This is the statement from the surviving victim. Maybe this tells us they type of person who finally went to the police.
> 
> 
> _I am relieved at the decision of the Court of Appeal.
> ...



From your response, it would seem that you do not have a problem with the possibility of being:


cynic said:


> ...brought to trial, and convicted, solely on the basis of the uncorroborated testimony of a solitary complainant or plaintiff!


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2019)

basilio said:


> *most of the judges believed his accuser.*




The fact that one did not may indicate a reasonable doubt.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The fact that one did not may indicate a reasonable doubt.



In some peoples minds, there never is reasonable doubt, no matter what the subject. IMO


----------



## cynic (21 August 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> The fact that one did not may indicate a reasonable doubt.



It might not be that the acccuser was disbelieved by the judge.

It may simply be that the testimony, from a solitary complainant (irrespective of credibility or lack thereof), might not have been seen as sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.


----------



## orr (24 August 2019)

If only there were any doubt about so much else of his putrid activities to delay and deny and evert; the tragic consequences of which can only be guessed at. But Pell wasn't on trail for these obsequious obsequious failures, the aim of which was protect the power privilege and money of very manmade institution...
But in this time of darkness the lord has given me Ms Devine(and others) for discomfort.


----------



## IFocus (24 August 2019)

The appeal court was to look at the process of law not to evaluate the evidence is how I understand the process.

1st dog summery


----------



## basilio (27 September 2019)

If this precedent becomes the norm the Catholic Church in Australia could well be bankrupted. I don't think the insurance companies will be paying up the $1m.

*Gerald Ridsdale victim reaches abuse compensation settlement with Catholic Church*
Updated 25 minutes ago

 * Photo:* Gerald Ridsdale is believed to have abused hundreds of children. (Supplied) 
*Related Story:* Catholic Church admits liability for damaging claims, lawyers say
The Catholic Church is expected to pay more than $1 million in compensation after reaching a settlement with a man who was raped by Australia's worst paedophile priest, Gerald Ridsdale

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09...ches-settlement-with-catholic-church/11555748


----------



## cynic (14 November 2019)

Whilst I still do not know whether or not Pell is truly guilty of the crimes for which he has been convicted, I am of the definite opinion that Victoria has well and truly lost sight of the importance of, the presumption of innocence, until guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt.

I cling to the hope, that the testing of Pell's criminal conviction, before the High court, will result in a finding that will restore some of my lost faith in the Australian justice system.


----------



## basilio (4 February 2020)

Couldn't resist this..


----------



## basilio (19 February 2020)

The merde has well and truly hit the fan with the 4 Corners story on  the elite St Kevins College in Melbourne.
The stories about grooming of students, cover ups,  attacking teachers who tried to report the problems and multiple abuse are roiling the school community. The Principal has already resigned.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02...ted-sex-offender-over-student-victim/11957510
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-19/st-kevins-headmaster-stephen-russell-resigns/11980008
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-17/investigation-into-teacher-behaviour-at-st-kevins/11972138
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-19/st-kevins-allegations-mandatory-reporting/11981188


----------



## SirRumpole (19 February 2020)

basilio said:


> The merde has well and truly hit the fan with the 4 Corners story on  the elite St Kevins College in Melbourne.
> The stories about grooming of students, cover ups,  attacking teachers who tried to report the problems and multiple abuse are roiling the school community. The Principal has already resigned.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02...ted-sex-offender-over-student-victim/11957510
> ...




Multiplied by how many ?


----------



## basilio (19 February 2020)

And into the breach of abuse rides the great white  Christian hope.

Yes Andrew de Bolt is out  there trying to minimise the allegations by saying the teacher was just "hitting on" the Year 9 boy. Not *that *serious surely.

Just read what the teacher did/said to the student  (and Andrew knew this) and ask yourself if anyone should ever believe anything Andrew Bolt ever says.

*Child protection groups condemn Andrew Bolt for saying convicted St Kevin's groomer 'hit on' victim*
Bolt denies he minimised the seriousness of Peter Kehoe’s offending in his Sky News program

....  The victim, Paris Street, told Milligan he was repeatedly exposed to offensive comments by former coach Peter Kehoe, who was convicted in 2015 for grooming.

According to the ABC, when Kehoe was coaching Street he sent him messages via Facebook, which eventually escalated to the coach taking Street to his house and inviting him into his bed.

Kehoe told Street about having an erection and asked him if he knew what pre-cum was, Street told Four Corners.

“‘Then he asked me if I know what pre-cum is, and then I said, ‘no’. Then he said, ‘it’s the premature stages of ejaculation’. Then he said, ‘you can lick it off whenever you like’,” Street said.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...ing-convicted-st-kevins-groomer-hit-on-victim


----------



## cynic (12 March 2020)




----------



## basilio (17 March 2020)

ABC is running a 3 part series called Revelations.  Sounds like necessary viewing for all of us to understand what has happened in our churches and schools and some of the reasons.

* You'll need a strong stomach to digest Revelation's insights into child sexual abuse in the Catholic church *
Brigid Delaney
ABC’s documentary about a convicted paedophile priest is difficult to watch, but perhaps it’s necessary to bear witness

Despite an extensive royal commission, scores of criminal trials and excellent books such as Louise Milligan’s Cardinal and David Marr’s The Prince, there are still some unanswered questions about child sexual abuse in the now-tattered narrative of the Catholic church in Australia.

These include: why did these priests do such horrible things? How did they justify their crimes to themselves and to God? What kind of conversations may they have had with, say, their archbishop or monsignor, once they were rumbled by a parent or teacher or victim?

Accounts from the paedophiles themselves that may go some way towards answering those questions are also missing from this narrative. Perhaps this is because paedophiles do not want to talk due to shame or due to the media’s preference for – in some cases – giving victims airtime and denying a platform to abusers. And then there’s us, the audience. Do we really want to hear from them?

There are arguments for listening to perpetrators explain themselves. You can better understand the crime if you understand the criminal. And the Catholic church has for a long time been so opaque on matters of sexual abuse that any interview, no matter how painful to watch, is illuminating.

The first episode of the three-part documentary Revelation is built around such an interview. ABC journalist Sarah Ferguson sits down with Fr Vincent Ryan (yes he is still a priest, yet to be defrocked despite his horrendous crimes against children) and tries to answer all these questions.
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...nto-child-sexual-abuse-in-the-catholic-church


----------



## basilio (17 March 2020)

More on Fr Vincent Ryan.  See above
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03...-ryan-thinks-he-should-remain-priest/12059530


----------



## basilio (2 April 2020)

The third episode of "Revelations" is coming up tonight. 

*It  will hammer home the last nails on the coffin of  Cardinal Pells reputation.*
I'm not sure if many people are aware that there were many more allegations made against Cardinal Pell than were finally taken to court. The prosecutors and police had to weigh up which allegations could stand the pressure of court case which could only come don down to word against word.

IMV its worth reading the full story.

*Two new accusers say George Pell abused them when they were boys in the 1970s *
For decades, 53-year-old Bernie* kept the secrets of his childhood deeply buried.
As a boy growing up in a Ballarat orphanage in the 1970s, Bernie told the ABC's Revelation program that he was abused on multiple occasions by George Pell, then a priest in the diocese of Ballarat.
For years Bernie was convinced that if he reported the abuse, he would not be believed.
"I would hear Pell's become Bishop," Bernie says.
"Pell's become Archbishop. Pell's become a Cardinal. Who's gonna believe a little boy from a home against that conglomerate? You know against that bloody goliath?"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-02/george-pell-ballarat-allegations-revelation/12109952


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2020)

High Court quashes Pell conviction, and he will be released.


----------



## cynic (7 April 2020)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-appeal-child-sex-abuse-convictions/12048726


----------



## Humid (7 April 2020)

cynic said:


> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-appeal-child-sex-abuse-convictions/12048726



Me and you would still be locked up


----------



## cynic (8 April 2020)

Humid said:


> Me and you would still be locked up



Yes!

I fear you may well be correct in that.

Hence my intense dissatifaction with the Victorian judicial system in allowing a case, with such inadequate evidence, to be brought to trial etc.


----------



## Humid (8 April 2020)

This High Court appeal did not ask whether Pell committed the offences. It asked whether the two majority judges in the Victorian Court of Appeal, in dismissing Pell’s earlier appeal, made an error about the nature of the correct legal principles, or their application.


----------



## macca (8 April 2020)

cynic said:


> Yes!
> 
> I fear you may well be correct in that.
> 
> Hence my intense dissatifaction with the Victorian judicial system in allowing a case, with such inadequate evidence, to be brought to trial etc.




If it had been allowed to stand it would be a very dangerous precedent in law.

I grew up in Newcastle, one of the worst places for this abuse, I personally know people who were abused by these mongrels (Catholic teachers) and it still affects them today.

It was a disgrace and has blighted the reputation of the Church immensely but the case presented simply was not anywhere near as strong as those in Ncle


----------



## rederob (8 April 2020)

Humid said:


> This High Court appeal did not ask whether Pell committed the offences. It asked whether the two majority judges in the Victorian Court of Appeal, in dismissing Pell’s earlier appeal, made an error about the nature of the correct legal principles, or their application.



A jury listening to weeks of evidence found no reason to doubt the claims of a witness and reached a unanimous decision of Pell's guilt.  An appellant court upheld the decision.

Pell further appealed and the High Court, in reviewing matters, found their Honours' analysis failed to engage with the question of whether there remained a reasonable possibility that the offending had not taken place, such that there ought to have been a reasonable doubt as to the applicant's guilt.

In terms of logic it would be almost impossible to disagree with the High Court's decision because most cases of sexual abuse and rape rely on the credibility of the witness and the judgement of reasonable people hearing the matter.  The alternative view is that it never happened, for any number of reasons.

Extending the logic of Pell's case to similar convictions, we could reasonably conclude that other priests *never *had the "opportunity" to do what was claimed because their routines and practices precluded such an event from happening.

However, the real world is not like that, and paedophiles are adept at finding ways to conceal their behaviour.  What would make Pell any different?

Pell has powerful friends and as a result we again have Australia's vile media turning a victim into a perpetrator.

This might be a win for Pell and the Church, but is a heavy blow to the many each year who will never press charges against those who abuse them, in order to seek justice, because of verdicts handed down by the Highest Court in Australia.


----------



## cynic (8 April 2020)

Professor Greg Craven provides some interesting counterperspectives to certain victim narratives that had been promoted, and/or popularised, by mainstream media (including, and perhaps even notably, by the ABC!).


----------



## rederob (8 April 2020)

cynic said:


> Professor Greg Craven provides some interesting counterperspectives to certain victim narratives that had been promoted, and/or popularised, by mainstream media (including, and perhaps even notably, by the ABC!).



That Craven considers that the acts of a paedophile which, inter alia, leads victims to suicide should not be pursued in criminal proceedings really says enough about the quality of his commentary. 
His comments about the ABC suggesst he is a bit unhinged.
It is widely known that Pell has a history of dealing with young boys, but Craven has deliberately overlooked this aspect of his life.  He also overlooked how Pell has done his best to hide the sick acts of some of his colleagues.
I reckon Andrew Bolt is more credible than Craven!


----------



## SirRumpole (8 April 2020)

rederob said:


> That Craven considers that the acts of a paedophile




Can you prove that ?


----------



## cynic (8 April 2020)

rederob said:


> That Craven considers that the acts of a paedophile which, inter alia, leads victims to suicide should not be pursued in criminal proceedings...



Craven most certainly did not say that(in the interview linked to my post)!


----------



## rederob (8 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Can you prove that ?



It was proven in the courts.  You might want to speak to the parents of the suicide victim if you remain in doubt.
But you missed the point.
Criminal court proceedings exist to prosecute the charges against Pell, so straight off the bat Craven's comments were a nonsense.
I believe the victim here has asked his lawyer to now proceed with charges against Pell in a civil action.


----------



## grah33 (8 April 2020)

You could see some other holes earlier on.  Quality bishops out there, who would have made negative comments about Pell if he truly was found guilty, but had nothing to say.  Or the priest in the media (the defector ) .  He also thought the case was flawed, going by the comments he made.

We shouldn't rashly judge anybody.  It goes against human dignity.


----------



## rederob (8 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> You could see some other holes earlier on.  Quality bishops out there, who would have made negative comments about Pell if he truly was found guilty, but had nothing to say.  Or the priest in the media (the defector ) .  He also thought the case was flawed, going by the comments he made.
> 
> We shouldn't rashly judge anybody.  It goes against human dignity.



Pell's acquittal was based on a legal technicality.


----------



## basilio (8 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Pell's acquittal was based on a legal technicality.




That was a complex but very significant analysis.  Obviously  all his supporters are happy he is out of jail. 
At least now he can come to terms with the ruined lives of the thousands of children abused by Catholic priests under his watch and their families.

*  How George Pell won in the High Court on a legal technicality  *
April 7, 2020 12.23pm AEST
https://theconversation.com/how-george-pell-won-in-the-high-court-on-a-legal-technicality-133156


----------



## SirRumpole (8 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Pell's acquittal was based on a legal technicality.




A technicality of insufficient evidence.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Catholic and dislike what they have done throughout history and Pell himself is an arrogant sod who likely enabled the abuse of many children by ignoring complaints and moving pedophiles around, but you can't convict people on allegations alone in our judicial system.


----------



## rederob (8 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> A technicality of insufficient evidence.



Completely wrong.
The High Court considered that the majority judgment of the appellant court failed to consider whether there was a reasonable possibility the offending had not taken place.
That kind of logic can be applied to the vast majority of decisions where the only evidence is from a victim.


----------



## macca (8 April 2020)

basilio said:


> That was a complex but very significant analysis.  Obviously  all his supporters are happy he is out of jail.
> At least now he can come to terms with the ruined lives of the thousands of children abused by Catholic priests under his watch and their families.
> 
> *  How George Pell won in the High Court on a legal technicality  *
> ...




That is not what he was on trial for............. He was charged with personally committing an illegal act.

He readily admits that the Church has a lot to answer for, he was the one who started looking into the disgusting  behaviour within the Church

In Newcastle when they started a court case against a priest there were usually numerous other boys/men that came forward to make statements to support the accusations.

In this case the only other statement was from a boy who said that nothing happened.

Right there is reasonable cause for doubt, on top of that there was very little opportunity for it to have happened in that location at that time.

As posted before, I personally know men who were abused at school by Priests, these priests have been convicted and imprisoned and I sure as hell won't be saying anything in their support.

The case was legally faulty from the start, it was weak and poorly run, they got caught up in their enthusiasm to make Pell a scapegoat for all the mongrels dressed as priests.

I understand their hatred for the Church but an individual was put on trial and that individual is entitled to a fair trial according to the law, he did not get it, now the case is thrown out.

If this case had been upheld it would mean that anyone could make an accusation and even without corroborating evidence, even if the probable time line was very unlikely, one could still be found guilty.

I could accuse anyone of anything and using this as a precedent I would not need evidence at all


----------



## SirRumpole (8 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Completely wrong.
> The High Court considered that the *majority judgment of the appellant court failed to consider whether there was a reasonable possibility the offending had not taken place.*
> That kind of logic can be applied to the vast majority of decisions where the only evidence is from a victim.




That is actually the job of the juries and appeal judges to do, not a technicality, so the High Court found that the appeal judges hadn't done their jobs properly.


----------



## rederob (8 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> That is actually the job of the juries and appeal judges to do, not a technicality, so the High Court found that the appeal judges hadn't done their jobs properly.



The respective courts did their jobs to the best of their ability.
Based on the evidence presented to a jury of reasonable people the witness testimony was credible.
The defence QC was no lightweight in the jury trial, so any flaws in the witness testimony would certainly have provided grounds for reasonable doubt.  Instead the defence was based on lack of opportunity.
The High Court decision appears to have given credibility to this type of defence in that if there is a chance something did not take place then that chance takes precedence over testimony.


----------



## cynic (8 April 2020)

Was the altar wine white or red?

That aspect of the complainant testimony alone, could have raised reasonable doubt as to the dependability of same!


----------



## basilio (8 April 2020)

macca said:


> That is not what he was on trial for............. He was charged with personally committing an illegal act.
> 
> He readily admits that the Church has a lot to answer for, he was the one who started looking into the disgusting  behaviour within the Church
> 
> ...




Agreed. Cardinal Pell was charged on  the grounds of personal sexual abuse.

However he was  also  ultimately responsible for  hundreds  of priests and teaching brothers in his roles at Ballart and Melbourne diocese. The Royal Commission was not kind in  its assessment of  lack of protection of the Catholic Church for the children under its care (and Cardinal Pell). And by the way - George Pell was singularly incurious about sexual abuse of children in the Church. He saw nothing.

George Pell was also the architect of the Melbourne  response.   The Royal Commission examination of this is scathing.
https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/...16_-_findings_report_-_melbourne_response.pdf
https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/religious-institutions


----------



## macca (8 April 2020)

basilio said:


> Agreed. Cardinal Pell was charged on  the grounds of personal sexual abuse.
> 
> However he was  also  ultimately responsible for  hundreds  of priests and teaching brothers in his roles at Ballart and Melbourne diocese. The Royal Commission was not kind in  its assessment of  lack of protection of the Catholic Church for the children under its care (and Cardinal Pell). And by the way - George Pell was singularly incurious about sexual abuse of children in the Church. He saw nothing.
> 
> ...




Bas,

I am not saying that Pell is snow white, far from it ! But if the police wanted to charge him with concealing or enabling these disgusting acts then that is what he should have been charged with.

I am saying the legal impact of this current case is very important, it has been shown to be a weak case with terrible implications if established as a precedent.

If it had been upheld it would literally mean that any person could accuse any other person of sexual abuse and the accused person could be deemed to be guilty on the evidence of that single complainant.

Any person who did not like another person could simply go to the Police, make a statement and the accused could be judged to be guilty.

What about a teacher ? Imagine if a student they have disciplined or reported to the Headmaster decides to make a complaint............. dozens of innocent peoples lives ruined by vexatious accusations

Very, very dangerous situation.


----------



## IFocus (8 April 2020)

rederob said:


> The High Court decision appears to have given credibility to this type of defence in that if there is a chance something did not take place then that chance takes precedence over testimony.




That's a good summary Rob


----------



## cynic (8 April 2020)

IFocus said:


> That's a good summary Rob



Not really!

It is merely another work of fiction by someone who is either unwilling, or unable, to comprehend and entertain the actual facts of the High Court ruling.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-of-australia-full-judgment-summary/12128468


----------



## rederob (9 April 2020)

macca said:


> I am saying the legal impact of this current case is very important, it has been shown to be a weak case with terrible implications if established as a precedent.



First, as I said previously, sexual abuse cases often involve the word of the victim against that of the alleged perpetrator, without other collaborative evidence.  Neither Police nor Prosecutors are keen to bring weak cases to the courts so significant efforts are made to ensure cases do not waste everyone's time.
Second, it seemed the defence team - led by one of the highest profile QCs in the State - was unable to find holes in the complainant's testimony that would lead a jury to doubt.
Third, the unanimous jury finding was appealed and found safe.
These are not the characteristics of a *weak case*.

Quite separately Pell was to be the subject of a civil case that later did not proceed.

A hallmark of successful convictions to date has been multiple victim statements against alleged perpetrators.  Pell fits that mould, but was only tried on events alleged at one venue. 

The High Court's precedent in quashing Pell's conviction is legally sound in that in such cases there is always a chance the crime never occurred.  However, an implication here is that we have thrown out bath; the bath being a jury system.

Victims of sexual abuse can no longer have confidence that perpetrators will remain incarcerated.  Perpetrators will be emboldened.


----------



## IFocus (9 April 2020)

cynic said:


> Not really!
> 
> It is merely another work of fiction by someone who is either unwilling, or unable, to comprehend and entertain the actual facts of the High Court ruling.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-of-australia-full-judgment-summary/12128468




In your article

"The Court held that, on the assumption that the jury had assessed the complainant's evidence as thoroughly credible and reliable, the evidence of the opportunity witnesses nonetheless required the jury, acting rationally, to have entertained a reasonable doubt as to the applicant's guilt in relation to the offences involved in both alleged incidents."


----------



## SirRumpole (9 April 2020)

rederob said:


> First, as I said previously, sexual abuse cases often involve the word of the victim against that of the alleged perpetrator, without other collaborative evidence.  Neither Police nor Prosecutors are keen to bring weak cases to the courts so significant efforts are made to ensure cases do not waste everyone's time.
> Second, it seemed the defence team - led by one of the highest profile QCs in the State - was unable to find holes in the complainant's testimony that would lead a jury to doubt.
> Third, the unanimous jury finding was appealed and found safe.
> These are not the characteristics of a *weak case*.
> ...




I agree with what you have said. A lot of rapists have been acquitted due to lack of evidence too.

The point is what principles do we most value ? That the prosecution must prove its case, given that in some cases it can't do so and a guilty person walks free ? I think that is preferable to conviction by allegation which would lead to travesties of justice in the other direction.


----------



## cynic (9 April 2020)

IFocus said:


> In your article
> 
> "The Court held that, on the assumption that the jury had assessed the complainant's evidence as thoroughly credible and reliable, the evidence of the opportunity witnesses nonetheless required the jury, acting rationally, to have entertained a reasonable doubt as to the applicant's guilt in relation to the offences involved in both alleged incidents."



Did you fail to notice the last sentence (of the linked article reporting the summary of that High Court ruling), which ended with the following quote:

"a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted because the evidence did  not establish guilt to the requisite standard of proof".


----------



## rederob (9 April 2020)

cynic said:


> Did you fail to notice the last sentence (of the linked article reporting the summary of that High Court ruling), which ended with the following quote:
> 
> "a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted because the evidence did  not establish guilt to the requisite standard of proof".



Nowhere is there stated in law what a *requisite standard of proof* would actually be, so it is mere opinion.
Based on the complainant's testimony, and the cross examination of some 50 witnesses, there is a significant possibility that a guilty man has been set free.
A reason we have a jury system, and an appeals court, is to test the evidence, and the veracity of the judgement.
Nobody is suggesting it is perfect.


----------



## Tink (9 April 2020)

In Victoria, we also have the Royal Commission on Lawyer X


----------



## cynic (9 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Nowhere is there stated in law what a *requisite standard of proof* would actually be, so it is mere opinion.
> Based on the complainant's testimony, and the cross examination of some 50 witnesses, there is a significant possibility that a guilty man has been set free.
> A reason we have a jury system, and an appeals court, is to test the evidence, and the veracity of the judgement.
> Nobody is suggesting it is perfect.



What is it, exactly, that you are trying to explain here?

Are you suggesting that one should imprison anyone, tried for a serious crime, because there is a possibility that they might be guilty?

And, if so, is that assessment of the possibility of guilt, not also founded upon one's opinion/s of what constitutes evidence and/or proof of the existence of the possibility of guilt?

Do you understand the important role that, the presumption of innocence, until guilt is established *beyond reasonable doubt*, plays in protecting all members of the Australian populace?


----------



## Humid (9 April 2020)

You can be judged by your peers and you can be judged by your real peers
Money permitting


----------



## Tink (9 April 2020)

Twice now in the last 15 months, Australia's highest court has called out serious problems in Victoria's legal system.


----------



## IFocus (9 April 2020)

cynic said:


> What is it, exactly, that you are trying to explain here?
> 
> Are you suggesting that one should imprison anyone, tried for a serious crime, because there is a possibility that they might be guilty?
> 
> ...




That's not what is being said trying to put words into people mouths is not helpful..

First lets be clear

The high court's decision is final as it should be.

However its important to understand the decision and as a result the process.
Note the high court did not clear Pell of guilt as much as it did not find him guilty.

It did not find a problem with the process or procedures of the case as used to be for case or reason for appeals before case "M"

Also note it did not question the evidence of the witness.

It has how ever overruled a jury's decision of guilt which used to be but no longer sacrosanct this is important.

Nothing you have said is relevant.


----------



## IFocus (9 April 2020)

Tink said:


> Twice now in the last 15 months, Australia's highest court has called out serious problems in Victoria's legal system.




No it hasn't please understand the decisions.


----------



## cynic (10 April 2020)

IFocus said:


> That's not what is being said...



Why are you replying to questions directed to another? Don't you have confidence in rederob's capacity to answer these for himself? 


> ...trying to put words into people mouths is not helpful....



Then why are you doing that?!


> ...Nothing you have said is relevant.



Well what would you expect when attempting to furnish answers, to questions, that were never intended for you in the first place?


----------



## orr (10 April 2020)

Any head of an institution that knowingly moved predatory paedophiles from one precinct to another within the organisation of which they had control to continue their obscene activities, because this was much better than embarrassing the Church. And then persecuted the damaged individuals that were cursed by those actions; *AS PELL DID... *Is, in  any moral humans perspective a vile putrid (unchristian) criminal. And will be known by history as such...
Say what you like as to what the 'Law' now has to say About a twice convicted child abuser, trail and appeal.... simple fact is ...The man is filth.
hat's off of course to his efforts in protecting the Church's gold.

P.S you carn't help them Focus... This evil organisation holds the stiletto of fear to their eyeball as infants and from there they are lost to reason.
...god help them.


----------



## rederob (10 April 2020)

cynic said:


> Do you understand the important role that, the presumption of innocence, until guilt is established *beyond reasonable doubt*, plays in protecting all members of the Australian populace?



If you understood the justice system you would know that based on *all *the evidence presented (ie some 50 witnesses), and tested by respective parties,* the jury was in no doubt*.  
That point has been made many times above.


----------



## cynic (10 April 2020)

rederob said:


> If you understood the justice system you would know that based on *all *the evidence presented (ie some 50 witnesses), and tested by respective parties,* the jury was in no doubt*.
> That point has been made many times above.



You seem to have very conveniently overlooked the first trial which resulted in a hung jury!

But as the saying goes "if at first you do not succeed, try and try again!"


----------



## Humid (10 April 2020)

cynic said:


> You seem to have very conveniently overlooked the first trial which resulted in a hung jury!
> 
> But as the saying goes "if at first you do not succeed, try and try again!"



Pretty much what Pell's lawyers did


----------



## Tink (10 April 2020)

All abuse, wherever it is found, is disgraceful and must be opposed.

Innocent until proven guilty
That is the basis of our justice system.

The decision was 7-0.

With this case now and lawyer X

Police informants in Victorias case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicola_Gobbo

Those are the two in Victoria, ifocus.


----------



## rederob (10 April 2020)

Tink said:


> Innocent until proven guilty
> That is the basis of our justice system.



He was found "*guilty*."
The High Court found the appellant court erred on a technical matter.
The High Court was not judging the evidence leading to the jury conviction.
You seem to be confusing a number of issues.


----------



## cynic (10 April 2020)

Humid said:


> Pretty much what Pell's lawyers did



Given what was happening, do you blame them?


----------



## cynic (10 April 2020)

cynic said:


> Not really!
> 
> It is merely another work of fiction by someone who is either unwilling, or unable, to comprehend and entertain the actual facts of the High Court ruling.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-of-australia-full-judgment-summary/12128468



"...
The High Court found that the jury, acting rationally on the whole of the evidence, ought to have entertained a doubt as to the applicant's guilt with respect to each of the offences for which he was convicted, and ordered that the convictions be quashed and that verdicts of acquittal be entered in their place.
..."


----------



## grah33 (10 April 2020)

There may be an ulterior motive .  I've heard they no longer have confession at various places . Religious freedom has been taken away (the beginning).  We may be in fact at the very beginning of a terrible battle.


----------



## IFocus (10 April 2020)

Tink said:


> All abuse, wherever it is found, is disgraceful and must be opposed.
> 
> Innocent until proven guilty
> That is the basis of our justice system.
> ...




Agree about the abuse something no one here accepts I believe, Tink I haven't followed the lawyer x case so won't comment will have a read when I get a chance.


----------



## grah33 (15 April 2020)

From the interview:

“It’s a little bit like Victoria,” Pell said. “You’re not quite sure where the vein runs, how thick and broad it is, and how high it goes.” Asked if police had persecuted him, Pell said: “Well I think the onus is on them, in the face of that evidence, to show why that’s not true.”  I can only wonder why they're charging him yet again.

Also, regarding his point about past allegations, that he had heard stories but didn't believe them to be true (while the town ? new).  Even if he were lying , his point is a good one:  A religious person , or anybody, ought not to accept rumors as being true.


----------



## rederob (15 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> I can only wonder why they're charging him yet again.



Because someone has, again, brought a case to the attention of the police.
It is estimated that about one in 20 cases of sexual abuse are reported. Of that number about 20% get to court and about half result in convictions.
It's a pretty gruelling process.

As to "rumours" I know you are serious, but Pell is far from stupid and there is more chance that pigs fly than Pell not knowing the reason behind what was actually going on.


----------



## grah33 (16 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Because someone has, again, brought a case to the attention of the police.
> It is estimated that about one in 20 cases of sexual abuse are reported. Of that number about 20% get to court and about half result in convictions.
> It's a pretty gruelling process.
> 
> As to "rumours" I know you are serious, but Pell is far from stupid and there is more chance that pigs fly than Pell not knowing the reason behind what was actually going on.




I can't argue a good point expressed in the clip.  It's a well known Christian tenant  that you don't believe rumors about a person  unless you know it to be true .  Preachers will tell you this, it's in the spiritual books,  and devout Christians know this.  That he was trained to act like this is believable, and that he was practicing this virtue seems entirely possible.


----------



## rederob (16 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> I can't argue a good point expressed in the clip.  It's a well known Christian tenant  that you don't believe rumors about a person  unless you know it to be true .  Preachers will tell you this, it's in the spiritual books,  and devout Christians know this.  That he was trained to act like this is believable, and that he was practicing this virtue seems entirely possible.



Priests confess their sins so the many sins known within the Catholic hierarchy were never rumour.
To *not *wonder why so many unusual transfers were occurring beggars belief. 
For Pell to profess ignorance is only makes sense if Pell was complicit.
This is one Cardinal who will never be elevated by the smoke of his smouldering fire.


----------



## basilio (16 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Priests confess their sins so the many sins known within the Catholic hierarchy were never rumour.
> To *not *wonder why so many unusual transfers were occurring beggars belief.
> For Pell to profess ignorance is only makes sense if Pell was complicit.
> This is one Cardinal who will never be elevated by the smoke of his smouldering fire.




Lets be clear. The issues of priests interfering with children or having relations with their parishioners often arose at senior levels. The solution of just moving them on was commonplace.
It is probable that the explicit reasons for moving priests on wasn't minuted or openly discussed.  That doesn't change the fact that it was well understood why Gerald Risdale was continually moved.  

_*Career and allegations of offences*
Ridsdale was born at St Arnaud in central Victoria and grew up in Ballarat.[5] It was alleged in 2013 that Ridsdale sexually abused boys as early as 1955, when he was aged 21.[6] Ridsdale took his vows in 1961.[6]

Ridsdale worked at St Alipius Primary School, Ballarat, a boys' boarding school, from 1971, where he was a chaplain. He also worked in Apollo Bay in 1972-73.[5][7] At his 1994 trial it was said that he had been sent to a psychologist as early as 1971, though the bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Ballarat, Ronald Mulkearns, said he had no idea of Ridsdale's actions until 1975, when the priest was in Inglewood.[5] One parent said Ridsdale had molested their son, but they were reluctant to let the boy be questioned by police, and the priest had moved.[5] When a police officer involved with the case spoke to Mulkearns, the latter promised to handle Ridsdale but moved him on instead.[5] Operation Arcadia, a three-month police investigation into what Mulkearns knew about Ridsdale, concluded that he knew about Ridsdale's crimes earlier than he admitted.[5]

Ridsdale was moved repeatedly. In 1976 he was moved to Edenhope.[5] In 1980 he was moved to the National Pastoral Institute in Elsternwick in Melbourne.[5] In 1981 he was moved to Mortlake and at the end of 1982 he was transferred to Sydney. In 1986 he was moved to Horsham, where two people made complaints about him in 1988.[5] In 1990 he was sent to New Mexico "for treatment".[5] He returned to Australia after nine months and was appointed chaplain at St John of God Hospital in Richmond, New South Wales, on the northwestern outskirts of Sydney.[5]_
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ridsdale

*Full story: Father Ridsdale's life of crime — and the church's cover-up*
http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/55


----------



## grah33 (16 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Priests confess their sins so the many sins known within the Catholic hierarchy were never rumour.
> To *not *wonder why so many unusual transfers were occurring beggars belief.
> For Pell to profess ignorance is only makes sense if Pell was complicit.
> This is one Cardinal who will never be elevated by the smoke of his smouldering fire.






basilio said:


> Lets be clear. The issues
> 
> *Full story: Father Ridsdale's life of crime — and the church's cover-up*
> http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/55




I have to say i'm not as familiar with Pell's past as I should be.  I have numerous hobbies I suppose.  However from that interview alone his explanation was a good one.  And although they do confess their sins, a priest can NEVER tell anybody,  so Pell couldn't  have known from other confessions.  It would be a mortal sin for them to reveal secrets, or even to reveal lesser venial sins.  I'd need to research things, but it might have to do with some kind of vow to God that they make.  A vow can make something that isn't serious, very serious.

Confession should be and must be left alone.  It's good for the people, as a priest will keep their personal stuff to themselves.  Also, a priest being forced to disclose any sin would have to violate his conscience.  Unfortunately its resembling communism. 

The practice of confession goes way back to the early Church, and is a very critical ministry in the older and traditional denominations.  It simply can't be tampered with, and a priest must be free in order to practice this ministry.


The secularists shouldn't get too happy.  They say that when living conditions get really bad  , Christianity starts to pull in  big numbers.  A virus, poor living , Church persecution ...  It may play out like this, but let's see.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> I have to say i'm not as familiar with Pell's past as I should be.  I have numerous hobbies I suppose.  However from that interview alone his explanation was a good one.  And although they do confess their sins, a priest can NEVER tell anybody,  so Pell couldn't  have known from other confessions.  It would be a mortal sin for them to reveal secrets, or even to reveal lesser venial sins.  I'd need to research things, but it might have to do with some kind of vow to God that they make.  A vow can make something that isn't serious, very serious.
> 
> Confession should be and must be left alone.  It's good for the people, as a priest will keep their personal stuff to themselves.  Also, a priest being forced to disclose any sin would have to violate his conscience.  Unfortunately its resembling communism.
> 
> ...




That's just covering up crimes in the name of religion. Something the Catholic church has had a lot of practice at over the centuries.


----------



## grah33 (16 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> That's just covering up crimes in the name of religion. Something the Catholic church has had a lot of practice at over the centuries.



What is just covering up crimes?


----------



## basilio (17 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> What is just covering up crimes?




Did you read the history of Gerard Risdale ?  That's what a life of child abuse systematically covered up by the Catholic Church looks like. 

And it was repeated many, many times.

*Full story: Father Ridsdale's life of crime — and the church's cover-up*
http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/55


----------



## rederob (17 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> What is just covering up crimes?



Well, the Mafia are wonderful Catholics and contributors to their Church.
Maybe they are just misunderstood?
I confess, I am unsure.


----------



## Tink (17 April 2020)

Do you understand Lawyer X?
The reason for confidentiality.

As I put in the ABC thread...
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/abc-is-political.23929/page-160

I would call a pedophile an animal.

What distinguishes human and animal in your world?


----------



## grah33 (17 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> That's just covering up crimes in the name of religion. Something the Catholic church has had a lot of practice at over the centuries.






basilio said:


> Did you read the history of Gerard Risdale ?  That's what a life of child abuse systematically covered up by the Catholic Church looks like.
> 
> And it was repeated many, many times.
> 
> ...






rederob said:


> Well, the Mafia are wonderful Catholics and contributors to their Church.
> Maybe they are just misunderstood?
> I confess, I am unsure.





Not aware of the mafia.  Hope this isn't one  of those Strawman arguments ...

If Rumple is referring to the seal as a means of covering up stuff, that's just ridiculous.  I suppose the government will utilize that for leverage to bring the Church down.  It's going to script really.  It's actually all about privacy, for the sake of the penitent.  Otherwise you would have priests divulging people's shameful secrets  , which certainly isn't limited to criminal activity.

Nothing like embarrassing yourself a little on a regular basis .  It's good for the soul . But  for them to attack this critical ministry...big mistake.  I suspect its origin goes back to Christ's command to "absolve"  human beings, thereby utilizing human agency for reconciliation with God.  It's powerful, sacred, very essential for the traditional, bigger churches.  The government has decided to attack God.  Their behavior is increasingly spurious.  They really don't know what they're doing.


----------



## rederob (17 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> Not aware of the mafia.  Hope this isn't one  of those Strawman arguments ...



Really?
Mafia are mostly practicing Catholics who go to the confessional and would tell of their crimes, including killings.  The point is that the Catholic Church *knows *these things happen.  Just as Pell would not be doubting what was happening because it was "rumoured."  It was well *known*.
Moreover, it is a disgusting dereliction of duty to turn a blind eye and not even contemplate investigating such vile acts alleged to be occurring within his flock.
The reasonable inference to draw is collusion, if not complicity.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> If Rumple is referring to the seal as a means of covering up stuff, that's just ridiculous. I suppose the government will utilize that for leverage to bring the Church down. It's going to script really. It's actually all about privacy, for the sake of the penitent. Otherwise you would have priests divulging people's shameful secrets , which certainly isn't limited to criminal activity.
> 
> Nothing like embarrassing yourself a little on a regular basis . It's good for the soul . But for them to attack this critical ministry...big mistake. I suspect its origin goes back to Christ's command to "absolve" human beings, thereby utilizing human agency for reconciliation with God. It's powerful, sacred, very essential for the traditional, bigger churches. The government has decided to attack God. Their behavior is increasingly spurious. They really don't know what they're doing.




Nice ramble but illogical.

Priests can tell about crimiaal activity, but not about "embarrassments" that's their choice. They should be treated like anyone else under the law. If an individual becomes aware of a criminal act, the law says they have to report it. Why should priests be immune from that ?

"The government has decided to attack God". The churches behaviour has become so separated from the Bible, especially the teachings of Jesus that they cannot claim to represent the Bible even for those who choose to believe that book, let alone secular society.


----------



## basilio (17 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Mafia are mostly practicing Catholics who go to the confessional and would tell of their crimes, including killings.



??? I don't think so Redrob.  Where would you get the idea the Mafia would be so Cathollic they would confess their sins ?


----------



## SirRumpole (17 April 2020)

basilio said:


> ??? I don't think so Redrob.  Where would you get the idea the Mafia would be so Cathollic they would confess their sins ?




They do, then they shoot the priest.


----------



## grah33 (17 April 2020)

basilio said:


> ??? I don't think so Redrob.  Where would you get the idea the Mafia would be so Cathollic they would confess their sins ?



It was pretty funny though.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Really?
> Mafia are mostly practicing Catholics who go to the confessional and would tell of their crimes, including killings.  The point is that the Catholic Church *knows *these things happen.  Just as Pell would not be doubting what was happening because it was "rumoured."  It was well *known*.
> Moreover, it is a disgusting dereliction of duty to turn a blind eye and not even contemplate investigating such vile acts alleged to be occurring within his flock.
> The reasonable inference to draw is collusion, if not complicity.




Believing rumors would be incompetent.   Regarding Pell's other past conduct , or the complete aspects of this part , I'd need to catch up on some news first to comment.  But confessors certainly wouldn't be telling one another of criminal activity, or anything in the confessional, as it's forbidden.  The point is, you don't mix two law systems together (canon law and secular law).  You don't say , "Hey secular world,  come and take control of our institution".  Your idea  or strategy would be  preety foolish, to say the least.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Nice ramble but illogical.
> 
> Priests can tell about crimiaal activity, but not about "embarrassments" that's their choice. They should be treated like anyone else under the law. If an individual becomes aware of a criminal act, the law says they have to report it. Why should priests be immune from that ?
> 
> "The government has decided to attack God". The churches behaviour has become so separated from the Bible, especially the teachings of Jesus that they cannot claim to represent the Bible even for those who choose to believe that book, let alone secular society.




No, afaik, and from what i just read today, anything said DURING confession can't be relayed.  It isn't their choice at all.  Your group seems to  have this default (erroneous) way of thinking, where the secular law is the only one that matters , or exists.  For many people it isn't the only law that matters.  We live in a world with multiple law systems,  such as Catholic cannon law, secular law, Judaic laws, Islamic laws , etc ... It's a democratic feature to give each freedom , and works out for the best.

I don't know what you mean by "so separated".   You shouldn't freak out too much if you see bad examples from time to time.  Not that much of a surprise.   If you want to see good examples, you  can read about people like Joan of Arc, St Benedict, Frances, Faustina , Catherine of Siena , Mary Mackillop (Aus.), and other such royalty down through the ages .  Faustina and Leopold are probably my favorites in the last 100 years, but I like Mary Mackillop too.  From what little I know, swarms of people went looking for Leopold  to confess their sins.  He also made a marvelous prophecy before his death which came true:  "The church and the friary will be hit by the bombs, but not this little cell. Here God exercised so much mercy for people, it must remain as a monument to God's goodness."  And not to mention Mary Mackillop, who started heaps of schools for children.


----------



## rederob (18 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> No, afaik, and from what i just read today, anything said DURING confession can't be relayed.



We do not live in a caliphate!
It is vile that priests can hold the lives of sinners above those sinned against.
And how exactly is that *Christian *or *Gods will*?


grah33 said:


> We live in a world with multiple law systems, such as Catholic cannon law, secular law, Judaic laws, Islamic laws , etc ... It's a democratic feature to give each freedom , and works out for the best.



Australia has *one *law for all.


grah33 said:


> You shouldn't freak out too much if you see bad examples from time to time. Not that much of a surprise.



Maybe not a surprise in the Catholic Church, but not condoned in the real world.
But you are right, we should not be "_surprised_", we should be outraged.
Our society rightly rails against some Sharia practices which are anathema and so too should we against *any *religion that disrespects individual freedoms.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> We live in a world with multiple law systems, such as Catholic cannon law, secular law, Judaic laws, Islamic laws , etc ... It's a democratic feature to give each freedom , and works out for the best.




The law of the land takes precedence of any religious "club rules", otherwise anyone calling themselves a religion could make up their own rules that infringe on the rights of others.


----------



## Tink (18 April 2020)

Australia's Highest Court.

Decision 7-0

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-14/cardinal-george-pell-andrew-bolt-sky-news-interview/12146594

Twice in 15 months in Victoria.


----------



## basilio (18 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> And not to mention Mary Mackillop, who started heaps of schools for children.




Well worth mentioning Mother Mary Mackillop. A very down to earth woman who started a new religious order to specifically educate the children of the poor and working class.

She also didn't put up  with any xhit. In 1870 she heard about a Catholic priest who was sexually abusing children. She made a formal complaint to the Bishop.  The priest was sent back to Ireland; Mother Mary was excommunicated !  Shoot the messenger indeed.
https://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3021839.htm


----------



## basilio (18 April 2020)

Check out this link if you are interested in a concise analysis of the findings of the Royal Commision with regard to the Catholic Church. 
Its a long read but this is a defining story.

* Five years in the Royal Commission: key lessons *
Wednesday 28 March 2018
David Halliday, Media and Communications Office (Melbourne Archdiocese)

Last week Commissioner Robert Fitzgerald AM delivered the keynote address to the MacKillop Family Services national conference Child Safe Organisations: Prevention and Practice Beyond the Royal Commission at the MCG in Melbourne. In his presentation, Key Learnings from Five Years at the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse: Important Messages for Child and Family Welfare and Education Sectors, the commissioner was uncompromising in his assessment of the key lessons Australian institutions need to learn. 

Throughout the Royal Commission, Mr Fitzgerald bore witness to the voices of 8000 victims of child sexual abuse and their narratives. In that time, over 4000 institutions were reported.

One of the main points he made was the importance of examining the past in order to proceed to a safer future. ‘Australia cannot trust organisations until they have proved they have learned the lessons of the past,’ said Mr Fitzgerald. ‘Many organisations are now busy making changes to create child safe environments. But it really fails the test if you don’t examine what went wrong in the first place.’

‘The Australian community should not trust institutions until you can demonstrate you have heard the stories of the past, you’ve heard the voices of victims of survivors, and you have learnt those lessons,’ he said.

Abuse is not a recent phenomenon, explained Mr Fitzgerald, and the Catholic Church is no different to any other church in Australia with a long history where there’s been abuse. ‘In the early colonial days of Australia about 33 priests were removed from Australia and returned overseas—some for child sexual abuse,’ he said.

‘In 1870, Mary MacKillop and her sisters were excommunicated and disbanded for reporting Franciscan priest Fr Ambrose Patrick Keating who was sexually abusing children. After a further investigation, MacKillop and her sisters were reinstated.’ 

‘We look to the past to see failure but also to see people who have stood up and done the right thing. There have always been people who have had the courage to stand up when they saw abuse. It’s not without risk when you do—there will be sometimes adverse consequences.’ 

Unsafe environments for children were present in institutions of all types across Australia, he explained. The fact that risk exists is not up for discussion, ‘but it’s a question of whether you can reduce that risk.’ Throughout his address, Mr Fitzgerald outlined a number of points essential for each institution to act upon to create safe environments for children.

http://www.cam.org.au/grovedale/Serve/Serve-Our-World/Royal-Commission


----------



## chiff (18 April 2020)

A little bit of history.Martin Luther was a Catholic priest until he made a trip to the Vatican.He was shocked by what he saw-the orgies and licentious behaviour.He then started the breakaway Lutheran church .Also the start of the reformation.
One thing that he wanted reformed was the idea that priests had to be paid to pray for ordinary,mostly illiterate people.He taught that people had a direct line to God,bypassing priests.
This,to Luther's horror,led the peasants to believe that they were as good as their masters and led to social unrest.These results were soon forcibly put down etc


----------



## rederob (18 April 2020)

chiff said:


> One thing that he wanted reformed was the idea that priests had to be paid to pray for ordinary,mostly illiterate people.



I suspect it was more the other way around in that it was the wealthy who *bought *indulgences to absolve themselves of sins and go straight to heaven.
Anyway, Churches became wealthy institutions, and to this day still offer a path to glory for creative individuals - let's call them *actors *- who find meaning in worshiping money and power.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

rederob said:


> We do not live in a caliphate!
> It is vile that priests can hold the lives of sinners above those sinned against.
> And how exactly is that *Christian *or *Gods will*?
> Australia has *one *law for all.
> ...





I didn't mean to have freedom for Sharia law.  My wording wasn't good there. Nonetheless Christian democracy calls for certain religious freedoms to be allowed.

As per your logic priests should then reveal all criminal offences, and probably other things too, in which case this critical ministry would cease , or be inhibited.  That's not going to work.  And God is far above any human being, in terms of worth.  This ministry is God's idea,  and so cannot have human interference.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> The law of the land takes precedence of any religious "club rules", otherwise anyone calling themselves a religion could make up their own rules that infringe on the rights of others.




Do you think Scott Morrison, a religious man it would seem (from some of those clips out there),  would obey the  law of the land if it was opposed to his personal morals? 

This is exactly how the first Christian persecutions started.

Ever heard of "Big Brother" ?  You seem to be very trusting in the "law of the land" ...

(Regards Sco Morr., i'm assuming he really does practice what he believes.  In any case, there are many other people out there )


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> This ministry is God's idea,




Prove it.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> Do you think Scott Morrison, a religious man it would seem (from some of those clips out there), would obey the law of the land if it was opposed to his personal morals?




If he doesn't obey the law of the land which he is a participant in creating, then he shouldn't be Prime Minister, he should go into a monastery.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> Prove it.





SirRumpole said:


> Prove it.



Can you prove it's false? 

An eternal person,  worth much more than a human being,  deserves privileges.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> If he doesn't obey the law of the land which he is a participant in creating, then he shouldn't be Prime Minister, he should go into a monastery.



Not really.  The land isn't a land just for non-believing people


----------



## rederob (18 April 2020)

grah33 said:


> I didn't mean to have freedom for Sharia law.  My wording wasn't good there. Nonetheless Christian democracy calls for certain religious freedoms to be allowed.
> 
> As per your logic priests should then reveal all criminal offences, and probably other things too, in which case this critical ministry would cease , or be inhibited.  That's not going to work.  And God is far above any human being, in terms of worth.  This ministry is God's idea,  and so cannot have human interference.



Confessionals are only "critical" to the Catholic Church: They are the perfect solution for the perpetuation of a multitude of guiltless crimes!
As to your idea that somehow "this ministry" is Gods idea, it wholly conflicts with the very same Abrahamic God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam who do not need it.
Many at this site who are atheists marvel at the ingenuity of religions to get such mixed messages from God, but it does explain why they *babble* *on.*


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

basilio said:


> Well worth mentioning Mother Mary Mackillop. A very down to earth woman who started a new religious order to specifically educate the children of the poor and working class.
> 
> She also didn't put up  with any xhit. In 1870 she heard about a Catholic priest who was sexually abusing children. She made a formal complaint to the Bishop.  The priest was sent back to Ireland; Mother Mary was excommunicated !  Shoot the messenger indeed.
> https://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3021839.htm





Yes, she was persecuted by the Church.  It often happens when one of these come along. 

"Never see a need without doing anything about it"  .  I think she was like this all the time.


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

chiff said:


> A little bit of history.Martin Luther was a Catholic priest until he made a trip to the Vatican.He was shocked by what he saw-the orgies and licentious behaviour.He then started the breakaway Lutheran church .Also the start of the reformation.
> One thing that he wanted reformed was the idea that priests had to be paid to pray for ordinary,mostly illiterate people.He taught that people had a direct line to God,bypassing priests.
> This,to Luther's horror,led the peasants to believe that they were as good as their masters and led to social unrest.These results were soon forcibly put down etc





The Catholic Church doesn't  teach that people don't have a "direct line with God" (no doctrine saying that). It also utilizes 'personal repentance' (consistent with the beliefs of modern denominations).  Although, from way back (early Church) , they also confessed their sins verbally, and Christ gave authority to "absolve", so it seems to me that Catholicism and other older churches utilize all these methods.  Reconciliation between God and man is valued more, and made more visible (important), when human agency is involved, and that's probably why Christ ordered it so.  Before Christ we see that they went to John the Baptist and confessed their sins (out loud) ...


----------



## grah33 (18 April 2020)

rederob said:


> Confessionals are only "critical" to the Catholic Church: They are the perfect solution for the perpetuation of a multitude of guiltless crimes!
> As to your idea that somehow "this ministry" is Gods idea, it wholly conflicts with the very same Abrahamic God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam who do not need it.
> Many at this site who are atheists marvel at the ingenuity of religions to get such mixed messages from God, but it does explain why they *babble* *on.*




Read the Old Testament.  The Jewish people  were also confessing.   Lots of blood, sin sacrifices .  Also  Isaiah's oracles on the need for a  human sacrifice...  It all helps us to get the message of the New Testament. 

And my post to Chiff before ...


----------



## rederob (7 May 2020)

We now know Pell is a liar.
"*Cardinal George Pell was aware of abuse being committed by clergy as early as the 1970s, and on two occasions did not take action to remove paedophile priests, the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has found*."​The Jury which found Pell guilty were likely on solid ground, as this man is accomplished in defending his inappropriate actions and being believed, despite regular *implausibility*.
What is retrospectively pivotal is who should be believed.  And perhaps justices on the High Court might be less prone to overturn jury verdicts where the only real defence offered was lack of apparent opportunity.


----------



## cynic (7 May 2020)

As usual, important distinctions are once again being overlooked.

Falsely claiming no knowledge of others' criminal activities, does not equate to having personally engaged in those same activities.


----------



## rederob (7 May 2020)

cynic said:


> As usual, important distinctions are once again being overlooked.
> 
> Falsely claiming no knowledge of others' criminal activities, does not equate to having personally engaged in those same activities.



If you think *lying *is not an important consideration in the justice system, then you have a point.


----------



## cynic (7 May 2020)

rederob said:


> If you think *lying *is not an important consideration in the justice system, then you have a point.



Do not presume to know what I think until you have taken the time to understand what I actually posted!

Do you understand that the words 'liar' and 'pedophile' are not synonymous (nor are they conjoined).

It may come as a surprise to some, but there are many more liars in the world than there are pedophiles! Being guilty of the former, does not necessarily make one guilty of the latter!


----------



## rederob (8 May 2020)

cynic said:


> Do not presume to know what I think until you have taken the time to understand what I actually posted!
> 
> Do you understand that the words 'liar' and 'pedophile' are not synonymous (nor are they conjoined).
> 
> It may come as a surprise to some, but there are many more liars in the world than there are pedophiles! Being guilty of the former, does not necessarily make one guilty of the latter!



Your comprehension skills continue to be sub-par.
Pell was a former housemate and friend of convicted paedophile Risdale.
Pell had knowledge of Risdale's activities and has been dishonest about this fact.
Pell has had other accusers of his activities as a paedophile but only one has been brave enough to take his case to court.
A trial by jury found Pell guilty, and the appellant court upheld the verdict.
We know the High Court overturned Pell's verdict on a curious technicality, having never heard the evidence against him.
The original verdict of Pell's guilt was predicated on the honesty of the victim's testimony.
Pell is known to be a liar of long standing, a friend and supporter of a convicted paedophile, and clearly a person who did nothing to stop Risdale's activities.  Furthermore, if he were a person of compassion he would have swiftly put an end to Risdale's vile activities, yet he allowed it continue within his diocese for decades.
Pell was lucky the redacted evidence of the Royal Commission did not taint earlier considerations.  However, the truth about Pell is now in the public domain and it is absolutely damning.


----------



## cynic (8 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Your comprehension skills continue to be sub-par.
> Pell was a former housemate and friend of convicted paedophile Risdale.
> Pell had knowledge of Risdale's activities and has been dishonest about this fact.
> Pell has had other accusers of his activities as a paedophile but only one has been brave enough to take his case to court.
> ...



And what pray tell, has any of this to do with the alleged crimes at the cathedral in 1996 and 1997?

If Pell had been charged and convicted for lying about his knowledge of Ridsdale's criminal activities, we wouldn't be having this interchange!

Do you comprehend what I am actually trying to convey here!

There does exist a difference between mendacity and paedophilia!
(Pell was charged and tried for the latter, not the former!)


----------



## rederob (8 May 2020)

cynic said:


> And what pray tell, has any of this to do with the alleged crimes at the cathedral in 1996 and 1997?
> 
> If Pell had been charged and convicted for lying about his knowledge of Ridsdale's criminal activities, we wouldn't be having this interchange!
> 
> ...



You continue to fail to grasp the concept of *credibility*, so I will leave it there.


----------



## basilio (8 May 2020)

It's interesting to see George Pell attempt to keep his pristine reputation intact.
The Royal Commission  judges heard and interrogated hundreds of witnesses over thousands of accusations of abuse. They made decisions on the overall credibility or otherwise of these often conflicting statements.

With regard to George Pell they were inclined to disregard a number of accusations as possibly mistaken or whatever. * However on other allegations ie the likelihood that he was aware of specific allegations about abusive priests and that he did not take action to stop these practices they found there was a credible case.
*
So it seems that while George Pell acknowedges the awful reality of  all those priests around him who repeatedly abused children with multiple complaints made, he won't accept the findings that as a very intelligent Bishop and Church leader he was aware of the situation and chose not to do anything about it.

_I know nuthing..._

No one believes that. It is not true. The findings of he Royal Commission judges  confirm the obvious.


----------



## basilio (8 May 2020)

Analysis of the findings of the Royal Commission regarding George Pells knowledge of sexual abuse by priests over 25 years.
We can understand why this was not published before his trial.

*History will not be kind to George Pell, as royal commission reveals its secret findings*

.. Today, it's clear judges presiding over the five-year Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse repeatedly rejected the Cardinal's evidence to them about the extent of his knowledge that other priests were paedophiles.

Pell had always emphatically asserted that he was kept in the dark. The royal commissioners say he wasn't.
*
While in some cases his evidence about notorious allegations was accepted by the commission, many of his submissions in relation to what he knew about offending in Ballarat and Melbourne were described as "implausible", "inconceivable" or "not tenable".*

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-08/george-pell-royal-commission-findings-revealed/12225690


----------



## orr (8 May 2020)

cynic said:


> Do you comprehend what I am actually trying to convey here!




Don't We?


You're defending, threw obfuscation( your standard) a man who through  his actions procured children for Ridsdale to sexually assult...
The final scene of 'The Postman Always Rings Twice' whilst an injustice was true Justice.

And Pell should be charged as being an enabler of paedophiles a facilitator a pimp. A nonse's nonse....

Do some thing useful for once; send a few Bucks to BraveHearts. Or don't ... best  to 'Know thy self' .


----------



## cynic (8 May 2020)

orr said:


> Don't We?
> 
> 
> You're defending, threw obfuscation( your standard) a man who through  his actions procured children for Ridsdale to sexually assult...



I have never, ever, defended such reprehensible activities!!! 

I object to any suggestion to the contrary.

Furthermore, you have indignified yourself, by levelling such a false accusation against me!


> The final scene of 'The Postman Always Rings Twice' whilst an injustice was true Justice.



A creative work of fiction! 

How is that relevant?

Injustice is injustice in the real world!


> And Pell should be charged as being an enabler of paedophiles a facilitator a pimp. A nonse's nonse....



Perhaps he should be charged, provided there is actually a case to be made, with a strong body of supportive evidence!

If so, then I would be in wholehearted agreement!

So the question then becomes, why hasn't this been done?



> Do some thing useful for once; send a few Bucks to BraveHearts. Or don't ... best  to 'Know thy self' .



My philanthropic activities are none of your business!!!


----------



## basilio (9 May 2020)

It will be interesting to see what the Catholic Churchs  official response is to the unredacted Royal Commission findings with regard to Cardinal Pell.


----------



## basilio (9 May 2020)

basilio said:


> It will be interesting to see what the Catholic Churchs  official response is to the unredacted Royal Commission findings with regard to Cardinal Pell.




They could begin by talking to the people in Ballarat

* ‘Why didn’t he help those little boys?’: how George Pell failed the children of Ballarat *
The cardinal maintains he didn’t know about the Victorian town’s notorious paedophile priests, a claim the royal commission found ‘implausible’
*
“Why isn’t all of Australia talking about what happened here in Ballarat?”*

That’s the question Clare Linane remembers asking her husband, Peter Blenkiron, 12 years ago as they were sitting in the kitchen talking about his abuse. Linane’s husband, brother and cousin had all been abused when they were children between 1973 and 1974 by Christian Brother and now convicted paedophile Edward “Ted” Dowlan. They knew they were among thousands of people living in and around Ballarat – Victoria’s largest inland city – who had been affected by child sexual abuse perpetrated by clergy.

On Thursday, Australia’s five-year inquiry into child sexual abuse in Australian institutions published its findings about Ballarat in full, more than two years after its inquiry was complete. Previously, a heavily redacted version of the report had been published, missing details about Cardinal George Pell and what he knew about abuse in the town located about 100km north-west of Melbourne. At the time Pell was working in the diocese, Ballarat was home to some of the Catholic church’s, and Australia’s, most notorious paedophile priests. Survivor groups say at least 50 suicides in the town over the past few decades are the result of clergy abuse.

With Pell’s court case now complete and his convictions overturned, there is no longer a risk of jurors being prejudiced by the findings – so they were released. *Ballarat survivors have begun a petition to have Pell defrocked following the findings.*

Pell was a parish priest in Ballarat from 1972 and was also a member of the College of Consultors of the Ballarat diocese, a group of senior priests who advised the then bishop Ronald Mulkearns.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...w-george-pell-failed-the-children-of-ballarat


----------



## orr (11 May 2020)

cynic said:


> A creative work of fiction!
> 
> How is that relevant?




If you knew anything of it? you'd know it is a morality tale... like a fable or a scripture, a warning as to consequences. It's consequences a couple fictional of deaths... Ahh the young Lana Turner, even Nina Simone sung of her.
The consequences of the putrid Pell? Incalculable. And will ring down generations. 
I look forward to the day when Pell is out in public with his arch protectors, Abbott, Bolt, Kenny, Devine, Howard, the ghastly toad Henderson(and some incredulous fools).... the look and smell of an open sewer. 

and you think I do myself an indignity to point to your gaping failures of comprehension...
For Pell comes the second ring on the bell.


----------



## cynic (11 May 2020)

orr said:


> If you knew anything of it? you'd know it is a morality tale... like a fable or a scripture, a warning as to consequences. It's consequences a couple fictional of deaths... Ahh the young Lana Turner, even Nina Simone sung of her.
> The consequences of the putrid Pell? Incalculable. And will ring down generations.
> I look forward to the day when Pell is out in public with his arch protectors, Abbott, Bolt, Kenny, Devine, Howard, the ghastly toad Henderson(and some incredulous fools).... the look and smell of an open sewer.
> 
> ...



Before accusing me, yet again, of your own failing, I suggest you take the time to revisit and reread my posts carefully.

If you do, you will hopefully come to the realisation that I was not actually defending Pell, I was defending the right of every Australian citizen, to an important legal protection!!


----------



## rederob (11 May 2020)

cynic said:


> ...I was defending the right of every Australian citizen, to an important legal protection!!



Very few Australians get to take their case to the High Court, and fewer still win on a technicality.
The legal standard is trial by jury, and that is moderated by an appellant court.
The curious judgement of the High Court boiled down to them determining that inadequate consideration was given to a chance the offence never happened. It is curious in that a Crofts direction was not given by the trial judge, as this consideration would have been formed were he concerned about the credibility of the witness.
In matters of allegation without material evidence, the only weight that can carry is *credibility*.
Pell is liar.


----------



## cynic (11 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Very few Australians get to take their case to the High Court, and fewer still win on a technicality.
> The legal standard is trial by jury, and that is moderated by an appellant court.
> The curious judgement of the High Court boiled down to them determining that inadequate consideration was given to a chance the offence never happened. It is curious in that a Crofts direction was not given by the trial judge, as this consideration would have been formed were he concerned about the credibility of the witness.
> In matters of allegation without material evidence, the only weight that can carry is *credibility*.
> Pell is liar.



Perhaps these will refresh one's failing recollections :


cynic said:


> Did you fail to notice the last sentence (of the linked article reporting the summary of that High Court ruling), which ended with the following quote:
> 
> "a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted because the evidence did  not establish guilt to the requisite standard of proof".







cynic said:


> What is it, exactly, that you are trying to explain here?
> 
> Are you suggesting that one should imprison anyone, tried for a serious crime, because there is a possibility that they might be guilty?
> 
> ...


----------



## rederob (11 May 2020)

cynic said:


> Perhaps these will refresh one's failing recollections :



Om the contrary.
There is a more likely chance from what we all know that the High Court has acquitted a guilty person.


----------



## cynic (11 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Om the contrary.
> There is a more likely chance from what we all know that the High Court has acquitted a guilty person.





rederob said:


> ...
> In matters of allegation without material evidence, the only weight that can carry is *credibility*.
> Pell is liar.



Again to refresh one's failing recollections:


cynic said:


> "...
> The High Court found that the jury, acting rationally on the whole of the evidence, ought to have entertained a doubt as to the applicant's guilt with respect to each of the offences for which he was convicted, and ordered that the convictions be quashed and that verdicts of acquittal be entered in their place.
> ..."






cynic said:


> ...
> There does exist a difference between mendacity and paedophilia!
> (Pell was charged and tried for the latter, not the former!)


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

cynic said:


> Again to refresh one's failing recollections:



You simply have no concept of the importance of "*credibility*" in this case.
In all cases where a complainant has no ability to provide material evidence the case rides wholly on what is most credible.
If you had ever sat on a jury you would find it offensive that anyone, let alone the High Court, considered you did not properly entertain "doubt."  It's the very reason people are found not guilty from the outset (or sometimes leads to a hung jury).
It is a logical nonsense statement from the High Court that "doubt" was not "entertained," as if there is no doubt then the matter either never goes to court, or the plea becomes immediate.
Pell managed to destroy one life, and has gravely harmed another.
As an accomplished liar Pell will never admit his wrongdoings, and nowhere is this better proven than in the unredacted sections of the Royal Commission that forensically reviewed his many deeds.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Very few Australians get to take their case to the High Court, and fewer still win on a technicality.




The burden of proof is hardly a technicality, it's the "Golden Thread" as someone once said.


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> The burden of proof is hardly a technicality, it's the "Golden Thread" as someone once said.



You need to read the thread more carefully.
Courts with juries assess the evidence and determine the burden of proof.
The High Court ruled on a technicality.  The nub of this technicality is that the High Court considered the claimant was dishonest.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> The nub of this technicality is that the High Court considered the claimant was dishonest.




That's your conclusion that the High Court decided that the claimant *was* dishonest. They left open the possibility that he was mistaken.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Courts with juries assess the evidence and determine the burden of proof.




The burden of proof is clear,  juries don't determine it. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.

The High Court determined that the jury had not properly considered the "alibi" evidence put forward by the defence.


----------



## cynic (12 May 2020)

Again to refresh the failing memory of the one pushing the incredible credibility argument:


cynic said:


> Was the altar wine white or red?
> 
> That aspect of the complainant testimony alone, could have raised reasonable doubt as to the dependability of same!






cynic said:


> Not really!
> 
> It is merely another work of fiction by someone who is either unwilling, or unable, to comprehend and entertain the actual facts of the High Court ruling.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...t-of-australia-full-judgment-summary/12128468






cynic said:


> Did you fail to notice the last sentence (of the linked article reporting the summary of that High Court ruling), which ended with the following quote:
> 
> "a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted because the evidence did not establish guilt to the requisite standard of proof".






cynic said:


> "...
> The High Court found that the jury, acting rationally on the whole of the evidence, ought to have entertained a doubt as to the applicant's guilt with respect to each of the offences for which he was convicted, and ordered that the convictions be quashed and that verdicts of acquittal be entered in their place.
> ..."






cynic said:


> ...
> There does exist a difference between mendacity and paedophilia!
> (Pell was charged and tried for the latter, not the former!)


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> That's your conclusion that the High Court decided that the claimant *was* dishonest. They left open the possibility that he was mistaken.



Seriously?
It's farcical to think a person could mistake being violated and recount the details as well as he did.


SirRumpole said:


> The burden of proof is clear, juries don't determine it. The burden of proof is on the prosecution.



Again, the only way such cases can be prosecuted is on *credibility*.  If we took your stance then it would be futile to bring such cases to court.


SirRumpole said:


> The High Court determined that the jury had not properly considered the "alibi" evidence put forward by the defence.



Not quite.
*"The Court held that, on the assumption that the jury had assessed the complainant's evidence as thoroughly credible and reliable, the evidence of the opportunity witnesses nonetheless required the jury, acting rationally, to have entertained a reasonable doubt as to the applicant's guilt in relation to the offences involved in both alleged incidents"*​As a jury member, if the complainant is credible, and the defence witnesses can only describe an unlikely opportunity, rather than impossible one, then acting rationally their conclusion is naturally with what is credible.  It is ironic that this is the exact opposite of the Lindy Chamberlain case in that she was not considered credible and the "dingo" defence was regarded as impossible.


----------



## cynic (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Seriously?
> It's farcical to think a person could mistake being violated and recount the details as well as he did.
> Again, the only way such cases can be prosecuted is on *credibility*...



Seriously?!!!


cynic said:


> Was the altar wine white or red?
> 
> That aspect of the complainant testimony alone, could have raised reasonable doubt as to the dependability of same!


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

cynic said:


> Seriously?!!!



The appellant court had no doubt about the credibility of the witness, having regard to all the arguments.
Paedophiles are "opportunists" and will know if what they are doing is likely to be found out. 
Most individual acts never get to be heard until the paedophile's pattern behaviour is investigated, and brave young people have an authority to represent their allegations.  
In Pell's case the complainant had nothing to gain. 
To this day we do not know who he is.
But we all know who Pell is, and his propensity for dishonesty.

In overturning this jury verdict the High Court sets a new *low bar* for defence lawyers: simply line up enough "opportunity witnesses" and don't even worry about the facts in play.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> The appellant court had no doubt about the credibility of the witness, having regard to all the arguments.




Wrong again.

_"
In his dissenting judgment, Justice Weinberg found that, at times, the complainant was inclined to embellish aspects of his account. 

He concluded that his evidence contained discrepancies, displayed inadequacies, and otherwise lacked probative value so as to cause him to have a doubt as to the applicant's guilt. 

He could not exclude as a reasonable possibility that some of what the complainant said was concocted, particularly in relation to the second incident. 

Justice Weinberg found that the complainant's account of the second incident was entirely implausible and quite unconvincing. 

Nevertheless, Justice Weinberg stated that in relation to the first incident, if the complainant's evidence was the only evidence, he might well have found it difficult to say that the jury, acting reasonably, were 'bound' to have a reasonable doubt about the Cardinal's guilt. 

He went on to note, however, that there was more than just the complainant's evidence. 

In Justice Weinberg's view there was a significant body of cogent and, in some cases, impressive evidence suggesting that the complainant's account was, in a realistic sense, 'impossible' to accept."
_

_To his mind, there is a significant possibility that the Cardinal may not have committed the offences. 

In those circumstances, Justice Weinberg stated that in his view the convictions could not stand. 

Nevertheless, the appeal on the unreasonableness ground was dismissed because the other two judges took a different view of the facts."_

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-21/george-pell-appeal-judgment-summary-transcript/11434304


----------



## cynic (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> The appellant court had no doubt about the credibility of the witness, having regard to all the arguments.
> Paedophiles are "opportunists" and will know if what they are doing is likely to be found out.
> Most individual acts never get to be heard until the paedophile's pattern behaviour is investigated, and brave young people have an authority to represent their allegations.
> In Pell's case the complainant had nothing to gain.
> ...



How do you know that the complainant had nothing to gain?
And even if he did have nothing to gain, how does that absence of agenda guarantee a correct recounting of events?
Again I remind you that mendacity and paedophilia are not synonymous!

Based upon your own oftstated reasoning, it would seem that you believe otherwise.

Given that the complainant altered parts of his testimony when factual errors were pointed out to him, that would make the complainant guilty, in your personalised universe, of the crime for which Pell was on trial (i.e.mendacity=paedophilia according to your twisted logic).


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

cynic said:


> How do you know that the complainant had nothing to gain?
> And even if he did have nothing to gain, how does that absence of agenda guarantee a correct recounting of events?
> Again I remind you that mendacity and paedophilia are not synonymous!
> 
> ...



You write nonsense - your points are not about the matter at hand as you cannot come to grips with the concept of credibility (which is the exact opposite of mendacity), which gave rise to the jury verdict.  
The complainant was seeking justice.
Furthermore, your surmise is both dishonest and incorrect.
You seem to have a very poor understanding of how courts operate and the jury system.  For example, the complainant was not being tried!


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> _In Justice Weinberg's view there was a significant body of cogent and, in some cases, impressive evidence suggesting that the complainant's account was, in a realistic sense, '*impossible*' to accept."_



Did I mention the Lindy Chamberlain case?

(Dissenting views are always good to read.)


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> Did I mention the Lindy Chamberlain case?
> 
> (Dissenting views are always good to read.)




What has the Chamberlain case to do with the Pell case ?

The dingo wasn't the appellant !


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> What has the Chamberlain case to do with the Pell case ?
> The dingo wasn't the appellant !



It was regarded as "*impossible*" that the dingo could have taken the baby.  
Chamberlain was convicted.
The dissenting judge in the appellant case had a mindset of Pell's offending to be "*impossible*."


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> It was regarded as "*impossible*" that the dingo could have taken the baby.
> Chamberlain was convicted.
> The dissenting judge in the appellant case had a mindset of Pell's offending to be "*impossible*."




The jury made a mistake in the Chamberlain case and they made a mistake in the Pell case by not considering all the evidence.


----------



## cynic (12 May 2020)

rederob said:


> You write nonsense - your points are not about the matter at hand as you cannot come to grips with the concept of credibility (which is the exact opposite of mendacity), which gave rise to the jury verdict.
> The complainant was seeking justice.
> Furthermore, your surmise is both dishonest and incorrect.
> You seem to have a very poor understanding of how courts operate and the jury system.  For example, the complainant was not being tried!



It is you, not I,  who has repeatedly, and dishonestly equated paedophilia with mendacity!

Do not blame me for your faulty logic.

Consider the following hypothetical:

(i) All thieves are known to be liars.
(ii) Rederob has been known to tell lies and as such is a known liar.
(iii)Therefore Rederob is a thief, and is simply lying when he denies same!

Now substitute the word thief/theives with pedophile/s, and the name Rederob with Pell, and, hopefully, even you, will be able to recognise the deficit in the logic underlying your argument!


----------



## explod (12 May 2020)

cynic said:


> It is you, not I,  who has repeatedly, and dishonestly equated paedophilia with mendacity!
> 
> Do not blame me for your faulty logic.
> 
> ...



Absolute disgusting rubbish. You are on different plains of understanding and belief. Rederob is a sincere gentleman with strong community concerns at the base level.


----------



## rederob (12 May 2020)

cynic said:


> It is you, not I,  who has repeatedly, and dishonestly equated paedophilia with mendacity!
> 
> Do not blame me for your faulty logic.
> 
> ...



I am putting you ignore after this post as you have poor comprehension skills,  unsound logic, yet continue with your mindless characterisation.
You are completely wrong.
A charge was laid against Pell.
Evidence was offered by the parties.
Jurors determined that the witness testimony was credible and found Pell guilty.
Pell did not take the stand.
Your claims are consistently erroneous.


----------



## cynic (12 May 2020)

explod said:


> Absolute disgusting rubbish. You are on different plains of understanding and belief. Rederob is a sincere gentleman with strong community concerns at the base level.



Plod, perhaps you do not recognise the close relationship between, my posted hypothetical, and the argument that rederob has been promoting.

Or could it be that, you, like your "gentleman" friend, have chosen not to recognise it!


----------



## explod (12 May 2020)

cynic said:


> Plod, perhaps you do not recognise the close relationship between, my posted hypothetical, and the argument that rederob has been promoting.
> 
> Or could it be that, you, like your "gentleman" friend, have chosen not to recognise it!



Having been a former prosecutor, senior manager and university graduate as well at one time studying to be a priest I do feel that I know. And I was in the same dioses as Pell and do know a lot.  You are in dreamland my good son and should pull your head in.


----------



## cynic (12 May 2020)

explod said:


> Having been a former prosecutor, senior manager and university graduate as well at one time studying to be a priest I do feel that I know. And I was in the same dioses as Pell and do know a lot.  You are in dreamland my good son and should pull your head in.



And what, pray tell, do you know about the charges brought against him?

Were you called as a witness for the prosecution?

If not, why not?

And, even more importantly, what has any of this to do with the importance of the presumption of innocence, until guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt?


----------



## basilio (21 May 2020)

There is petition being circulated to ask that Cardinal Pell be defrocked because of his failure to take appropriate action against child  sex abusers under his jurisdiction. It was started after the  full release of the  Royal Commission report came out highlighting his failure to act.

Check it out.
https://www.change.org/p/defrock-cardinal-george-pell?pt=AVBldGl0aW9uANHwTwEAAAAAXsX2hFako+piYmE3ZGVhNg==&source_location=topic_page

On the same topic the the third episode of Revelation covers the career of George Pell .
Powerful story. Goes for 100 minutes and it builds up to some devestating exposes.

https://iview.abc.net.au/show/revelation


----------



## cynic (24 October 2020)

Hmmmm....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10...gations-george-pell-senate-estimates/12795476


----------



## orr (24 October 2020)

Pell and Risdale...
And to quote Conrad..'_the horror the horror_'


----------



## basilio (13 June 2021)

Could child sex abuse be  successfully treated ? 
A German program that claims to prevent the sexual abuse of children.

Can a Radical Treatment for Pedophilia Work Outside of Germany?​ 
A German sexologist wants to export his controversial approach, but the idea faces legal and cultural hurdles.​ 
_Top: Klaus Beier is the director of the Institute of Sexology and Sexual Medicine. For more than 15 years, Beier has been running Project Dunkelfeld, a treatment program for pedophilia that aims to prevent the sexual abuse of children._


By Jordan Michael Smith

06.07.2021

Visuals: Jacobia Dahm

Klaus Beier is the archetypal German sexologist. Terse, bald, and, during a Zoom call last fall, wearing a blue blazer and clear-rimmed eyeglasses, he exudes annoyance at questions about his work with pedophiles — which, he suggests, is now widely accepted in his country, and is supported by politicians and major philanthropies. Beier heads an institute at one of Europe’s biggest university hospitals and has appeared on numerous national talk shows. In 2017, he was even awarded the Order of Merit, Germany’s equivalent of the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Nearly everywhere outside Germany, however, what Beier has been doing for more than 15 years would be not just controversial but illegal. He founded and directs Prevention Project Dunkelfeld, arguably the world’s most radical social experiment in treating pedophilia. The experiment hinges on a risky proposition: not reporting those who have offended. Instead, Beier and his team promote prevention, rather than punishment, by encouraging people who are sexually attracted to children and adolescents to come forward to receive therapy and medication instead of acting on their urges or going untreated by health professionals. Dunkelfeld guarantees all patients anonymity and free outpatient treatment. After completing the one-year program, patients receive follow-up treatment, never having to interact with the justice system. Since 2005, Beier says, thousands have reached out to take up the offer.









						Can a Radical Treatment for Pedophilia Work Outside of Germany?
					

A German sexologist wants to export his controversial approach, but the idea faces legal and cultural hurdles.




					undark.org


----------



## basilio (13 September 2021)

The story behind child sexual abuse in the Jehovah Witnesses community is coming out. 
The ABC has a story which looks at a number of examples and highlights how the witnesses control their members. 
Check it out on 4 Corners tonight









						Inside the secretive world of the Jehovah's Witnesses and those fighting back
					

Not much has changed since the cruel treatment of abuse victims in the Jehovah's Witnesses was exposed. Now, former members are fighting back.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## basilio (22 November 2021)

The story of Grace Tame is quite powerful. What we were told originally was that she had been groomed by her teacher in a Hobart Private school.   But the larger story of her life and the factors that allowed/encouraged this abuse are also compelling.

Perhaps worth considering because she clearly speaks for the hundreds of children who were also abused but havn't had the capacity to be heard, believed and stand up.

Grace under fire​Grace Tame raised her voice and started a revolution that would change the national conversation. But being Australian of the Year has taken a toll.

_Grace Tame has lost track of the number of speeches she’s given since being named Australian of the Year. She just knows she can’t keep up this pace forever.

But the speech that had perhaps the most profound impact on her is the one she gave to senior students and teachers at St Michael’s Collegiate school in Hobart.

For it was here, 11 years earlier, that she was groomed and sexually abused over six months by a teacher. She was 15, he was 58.

Grace Tame is an exceptional communicator, capable of delivering a clear, powerful message and talking about her own personal trauma in a way that doesn’t alienate her audience.

“She’s so fiercely strong while being incredibly vulnerable at the same time,” says close friend Maddison Cutler. “And I think that’s why so many people can connect with her.”

But it wasn’t easy being thrust into the limelight in January this year and telling her story over and over again while still processing her trauma.

“I’m a 26-year-old survivor of child sexual abuse on this healing journey while under intense public scrutiny,” Grace explains.

“I have a sense of humour and I present as being robust but the re-traumatisation of being asked questions repeatedly that force me to relive my past, you know, I’m taken back there.”

“A lot of people see her talking about the rape, the sexual abuse and they think she’s distanced herself from it, she’s processed it,” Maddison says. “When in reality, she’s just learnt how to talk about this because it’s important and it needs to be talked about.”
_








						'He's been in this room': Grace Tame's most powerful speech yet back at former school
					

Just 26, and still processing years of trauma, Grace Tame was thrust into the limelight when she became Australian of the Year. She looks back over a turbulent 10 months.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## basilio (5 January 2022)

The Courts have finally woken up. 
A Judge has ruled that the Catholic Church can't pretend it isn't responsible for a priest  when the priest abuses a child in his community.

Victorian Catholic diocese found vicariously liable for child sexual abuse in landmark ruling​Church’s argument that it was not responsible for the abuse was rejected and described as ‘affront to common sense’

Follow our live blog for the latest updates
Get our free news app; get our morning email briefing





The church argued the priest who had committed the abuse was not a formal employee and so it could not be held liable for his actions. Photograph: Dave Hunt/AAP

Christopher Knaus

@knausc
Wed 5 Jan 2022 03.30 AEDT
Last modified on Wed 5 Jan 2022 03.32 AEDT



The Catholic church’s failed attempt to argue it was not responsible for a priest’s abuse of a five-year-old, because it took place during after-hours “social” visits, has been slammed as “ruthless” by the survivor and an “affront to common sense” by a judge.
In December 2021, the Victorian supreme court handed down a judgment finding the current diocese of Ballarat was vicariously liable for the abuse of the boy, who cannot be named, by Father Bryan Coffey in Port Fairy in the early 1970s.

The survivor’s lawyers, Ken Cush & Associates, say the ruling is a landmark win that will help countless other survivors.
Coffey abused the boy during pastoral care visits to his home on two occasions in 1971.
The critical issue in the case was whether Coffey, an assistant parish priest, could be considered a formal employee of the diocese at the time, thereby making it vicariously liable for his actions.



Bid by Catholic church to stop child sexual abuse case rejected by NSW supreme court
Read more
The church argued Coffey was not a formal employee and so it could not be held liable for his actions.

It also said Coffey’s home visits were “social outings” not connected to his work for the church.

The judge in the case, Justice Jack Forrest, described the suggestion as “sheer nonsense”.

“It is, in my view, both inconceivable and an affront to common sense to suggest (as the Diocese put it) that these visits to parishioners’ houses and [the survivor’s] home were unconnected with Coffey’s pastoral role within the Church and merely social outings separate to his role as an assistant priest,” he said.

The court found the abuse occurred and that the diocese was vicariously liable for Coffey’s actions.

Forrest found Coffey was not a formal employee of the church, given the absence of any formal employment contract or arrangement, and the lack of immediate control or supervision by the diocese of his work.

But it found the diocese was still vicariously liable for the abuse due to the close nature of relationship between the bishop, the diocese and the Catholic community in Port Fairy; the diocese’s general control over Coffey’s role and duties; and the fact that Coffey had a pastoral role in the town, which included home visits.









						Victorian Catholic diocese found vicariously liable for child sexual abuse in landmark ruling
					

Church’s argument that it was not responsible for the abuse was rejected and described as ‘affront to common sense’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## SirRumpole (7 January 2022)

basilio said:


> The Courts have finally woken up.
> A Judge has ruled that the Catholic Church can't pretend it isn't responsible for a priest  when the priest abuses a child in his community.
> 
> Victorian Catholic diocese found vicariously liable for child sexual abuse in landmark ruling​Church’s argument that it was not responsible for the abuse was rejected and described as ‘affront to common sense’
> ...



'Vicar' ously liable.

Very good.


----------



## basilio (1 May 2022)

Another horrific story of child sex abuse. 

This time it happened at the Footsrcay Football club in the 80's. Very ugly story.  Certainly raises questions of accountability.









						Adam's parents thought he was Footscray's water boy, but their shy little boy had entered 'perpetual hell'
					

When Adam Kneale was offered a chance to help out around the Footscray Football Club as an 11-year-old, he thought he was realising every kids' dream. Instead, he faced unimaginable trauma. WARNING: This story contains graphic descriptions of sexual abuse.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## SirRumpole (1 May 2022)

basilio said:


> Another horrific story of child sex abuse.
> 
> This time it happened at the Footsrcay Football club in the 80's. Very ugly story.  Certainly raises questions of accountability.
> 
> ...




Terrible. But you have to ask why he kept 'volunteering' instead of just saying he didn't want to do it any more.


----------



## basilio (1 May 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Terrible. But you have to ask why he kept 'volunteering' instead of just saying he didn't want to do it any more.




"You have to ask... " Indeed if you read the whole story the picture  becomes clearer.

The story is detailed and horrific. Perhaps worth reading it to get a sense of what had happened.
There is another story which looks at how Adam Kneales life turned out as consequence of this abuse.









						Adam's parents thought he was Footscray's water boy, but their shy little boy had entered 'perpetual hell'
					

When Adam Kneale was offered a chance to help out around the Footscray Football Club as an 11-year-old, he thought he was realising every kids' dream. Instead, he faced unimaginable trauma. WARNING: This story contains graphic descriptions of sexual abuse.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## basilio (8 October 2022)

More stories coming to light on sex abuse by Christian Brothers
Christian Brother Darcy Murphy accused of sexually assaulting boy at Yeppoon's St Brendan's College in 1970s​By Rory Callinan
Posted 1h ago1 hours ago, updated Just now




 The Christian Brother is accused of assaulting the 14-year-old boarder in 1978.(ABC News: Erin Semmler)
Share this article

One morning in mid-1978, the phone rang in the home of a public servant in western Queensland.

On the line was his 14-year-old son Nic* with possibly one of the strangest confessions a father might ever hear.

*This story contains references to allegations of child sexual abuse that may be distressing to some readers.*

The boy said he was calling from his boarding school to say he had been sexually fantasising about his school's middle-aged headmaster, a stocky chain-smoking Christian Brother called Darcy Fidelis Murphy.
He said he had even acted out his fantasy with the 46-year-old Brother in the boarding house at his school, St Brendan's College in Yeppoon.




 Darcy Fidelis Murphy worked at Queensland Christian Brothers schools from the 1970s to the '90s.(Supplied)
Then Nic hung up, leaving his father stunned.

Minutes later the phone rang again, this time with the tell-tale clunk of a coin dropping to reveal the call was from a public telephone.
It was his son: "I don't know what you have heard but none of it is true."

The father was left shocked after Nic told him he had just been forced to play a role in a bizarre deception arranged by the Christian Brothers.

The call had been orchestrated to cover up the sexual abuse of his son and had even involved forcing the confused boy to sign a "confession" and then reading it to his father over the phone.









						Nic says after being molested by a Christian Brother, he was handed a 'confession' and forced to call his dad
					

An ABC investigation uncovers the suppression of sexual abuse at St Brendan's College in Yeppoon involving Christian Brother Darcy Murphy who was later made boarding master and the deputy headmaster of the order's most prestigious Queensland boarding school.




					www.abc.net.au


----------

