en.news
112K

Vatican Licks Bottom Of Australia’s Injustice System

After Victoria's Supreme Court, Australia, rejected Martyr Cardinal George Pell's appeal, the Vatican reiterated submissively its "respect” for the Australian [in]justice system. In an August 21 …More
After Victoria's Supreme Court, Australia, rejected Martyr Cardinal George Pell's appeal, the Vatican reiterated submissively its "respect” for the Australian [in]justice system.
In an August 21 statement, the Vatican's press office stressed that Pell has always maintained his innocence and that it is Pell's right to appeal to the High Court.
In a second statement, Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni added that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is awaiting the outcome of the ongoing proceedings prior to taking up the case for investigation.
The Vatican disregarded the fact that the charges against Pell are implausible and impossible.
The prosecution claimed that Pell left the recessional procession without anybody noticing it in order to abuse a boy in the very public sacristy of the cathedral.
A forensically diagnosed liar used the same allegations against an American priest who was convicted and died in prison.
Unlike the Vatican, English deacon Nick Donelly understood, “…More
Lion IRC
You are wrong. Cardinal Pell has emphatically denied the accusation in court, just as he has outside court. (Most pedophiles plead guilty).
And every legal expert in Australia has agreed that Pell would have been instructed by his barristers NOT to take the stand.
One of the reasons that delayed accusations...decades old child sex abuse cases... are hard to prosecute, is because child victims …More
You are wrong. Cardinal Pell has emphatically denied the accusation in court, just as he has outside court. (Most pedophiles plead guilty).
And every legal expert in Australia has agreed that Pell would have been instructed by his barristers NOT to take the stand.
One of the reasons that delayed accusations...decades old child sex abuse cases... are hard to prosecute, is because child victims typically can't remember sufficient detail (under cross examination) to attain the burden of proof beyond all reasonable doubt. The passage of time generally leaves victims with recall of only the sex act trauma itself - not day, date, time, what color were the curtains, etc etc.
But in the Pell case the accuser had an extraordinarily uncharacteristic level of recall - in vivid detail.
So the uneducated juror mistakes this for "credible testimony" when what they should have realised is that something is not quite right here.