Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
George Pell sexual abuse trials and fresh investigation

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 31, 32, 33  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:27 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Jezza wrote:
David wrote:
I doubt there was a single person in Australia who didn't know this by now (which perhaps indicates the pointlessness of suppression orders in this day and age), but it's now able to be reported that Pell has been found guilty of sexually abusing two boys.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/cardinal-george-pell-found-guilty-of-child-sex-abuse-20181214-p50m86.html

I wouldn't usually call into question court findings, but after a long conversation with someone who attended all of the hearings in the days after the verdict was handed down, I do have serious doubts about whether the jury came to the right result here. Just to consider a few factors, a) there were no witnesses to any of the events claimed, and several whose claims clashed with fundamental aspects of the first victim's testimony; b) the second alleged victim died years ago, never claimed to have been abused and denied it when questioned; c) the first jury was suspended and a retrial had to be held because jurors couldn't agree on a verdict, which at least shows how difficult this case was to assess; d) Pell was found guilty on all charges, including ones relating solely to the deceased alleged victim; and e) the predictable social media commentary today – start with "rot in hell" and allow your imagination to proceed from there – shows just how much hate there already was for George Pell in the broader community (some of it arguably justified due to his role in covering up other sexual abuse claims), and how unlikely it must have been that a jury could have ever reached an unbiased verdict. Still, from what I've heard, journalists who'd spent months covering the case and hearing the testimony were audibly shocked by the guilty verdict, as there had been a prevailing sentiment there that presumption of innocence and the lack of clear evidence, along with issues with the plaintiff's testimony, would have been enough to get him off.

Regardless of where one stands on all that, what's inevitable now, I would think, is that there will be an appeal. The question is: if Pell wins (as he may well), will anyone accept it? Or have they already decided he's guilty, and nothing could possibly convince them otherwise?

Interesting assessment of the case, David. Thanks for that.

Would love to access the full judgment of the case. Can't find anything on Austlli or any other legal databases at the moment.

There won't be a "judgment" from the trial. Just the jury verdict, because the trial judge didn't decide the case. You will get to see sentencing reasons when the sentence is handed down and you will, in due course, get to read the Court of Appeal's reasons for judgment on the appeal.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Jezza Taurus

2023 PREMIERS!


Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:38 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ Thanks for clarifying, P4S.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:48 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
David wrote:
I doubt there was a single person in Australia who didn't know this by now (which perhaps indicates the pointlessness of suppression orders in this day and age), but it's now able to be reported that Pell has been found guilty of sexually abusing two boys.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/cardinal-george-pell-found-guilty-of-child-sex-abuse-20181214-p50m86.html

I wouldn't usually call into question court findings, but after a long conversation with someone who attended all of the hearings in the days after the verdict was handed down, I do have serious doubts about whether the jury came to the right result here. Just to consider a few factors, a) there were no witnesses to any of the events claimed, and several whose claims clashed with fundamental aspects of the first victim's testimony; b) the second alleged victim died years ago, never claimed to have been abused and denied it when questioned; c) the first jury was suspended and a retrial had to be held because jurors couldn't agree on a verdict, which at least shows how difficult this case was to assess; d) Pell was found guilty on all charges, including ones relating solely to the deceased alleged victim; and e) the predictable social media commentary today – start with "rot in hell" and allow your imagination to proceed from there – shows just how much hate there already was for George Pell in the broader community (some of it arguably justified due to his role in covering up other sexual abuse claims), and how unlikely it must have been that a jury could have ever reached an unbiased verdict. Still, from what I've heard, journalists who'd spent months covering the case and hearing the testimony were audibly shocked by the guilty verdict, as there had been a prevailing sentiment there that presumption of innocence and the lack of clear evidence, along with issues with the plaintiff's testimony, would have been enough to get him off.

Regardless of where one stands on all that, what's inevitable now, I would think, is that there will be an appeal. The question is: if Pell wins (as he may well), will anyone accept it? Or have they already decided he's guilty, and nothing could possibly convince them otherwise?


Here's one for the record books, you and Andrew Bolt in agreement.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/andrew-bolt/andrew-bolt-why-pell-has-been-falsely-convicted/news-story/60da7b90f8035ca52c748d6c59fb730a

Much to the disgust of Clementine Ford.

I'd also heard the comments that people in attendance during the trial were stunned he was convicted, which does raise the spectre of jury bias.

When our current legal system of trial by jury was put in place, not only was the amount of media miniscule compared to today but a fair proportion of the population was illiterate. whether or not those jurors decided on the merits of the case or not, there almost a zero chance they did not have a pre conceived opinion on Pell and his guilt or innocence.

There's a high probability that Pell has been convicted as a symbol of the Catholic Church and it's servants misdeeds rather than the facts of the case, but even if he was found innocent on appeal would that cause more harm than good? The people who are convinced he's guilty won't be swayed.

In a way, if he is innocent, it's almost a metaphor. A devout servant of the church put to death (metaphorically) for others sins.

Sth Africa is a country that does trials by Judge alone, no Jury, in line with Dutch Law rather than English I believe. Maybe in this information age, with social medai rampant and people prone to form lasting opinions on snippets of information that conform to their ideals and views, that's worth considering.

You can expect that the jury understood all of the issues of doubt that were raised but that they were, in this case, persuaded beyond reasonable doubt that the offence occurred. Perhaps the defence strategy of trying (and failing) to prove that the crime was impossible is a hint. Pell wasn't called. The jury was thus really left to decide whether or not it believed the complainant, given a whole raft of circumstantial evidence that might or might not have been capable of persuading a jury that it was inherently unlikely that the allegations were true. It is certainly unusual for a jury to convict in such circumstances but that probably just means that the evidence in this case was more than usually compelling to them. I certainly don't think anyone should be rushing around looking for "bias" on the jury - 12 people selected after you go through the process of kicking off people who might be especially biased for or against a particular defendant is, generally-speaking, less likely to lead to a biased result than choosing a judge who will certainly have biases (everyone does) that you will probably never know about (unless they're wearing their Amnesty International lapel pin).

Let's be clear - this was a high-ranking member of the Catholic Church being tried in Melbourne by a bunch of Melbournians, not a black boy being tried by white racists for allegedly raping a white girl in Alabama in 1950.

If the Court of Appeal considers that the jury verdict was perverse, it will quash the conviction on appeal.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Wokko Pisces

Come and take it.


Joined: 04 Oct 2005


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:03 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:


...If the Court of Appeal considers that the jury verdict was perverse, it will quash the conviction on appeal.


I was going to ask if a jury verdict can be overturned just because it's shit, not on a point of law. I think that answers that.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:03 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^

Cheers P4s. Appreciate the 1950's Alabama reference and have no argument.

To be clear from my side, I'm not Catholic or even religious, I don't particularly like the Catholic Church, I think they have a lot to answer for, but I also have no skin in this game so I can be somewhat impartial or at least try to be.

If he's guilty, fine. But for mine there's reasonable doubts (granted I wasn't there for the evidence)

It is what it is, and will be what it will be.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:07 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Are you clear from his or her side he or she'm not Catholic or religious he or she don't like the Catholic Church he or she think they have to answer for but he or she have no skin in this game so he or she can be impartial or try to be ?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:23 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
Jezza wrote:
...
Would love to access the full judgment of the case. Can't find anything on Austlli or any other legal databases at the moment.

There won't be a "judgment" from the trial. Just the jury verdict, because the trial judge didn't decide the case. You will get to see sentencing reasons when the sentence is handed down and you will, in due course, get to read the Court of Appeal's reasons for judgment on the appeal.

As for the jury's reasons,

"After the trial has finished, it is still important that you do not discuss certain aspects of your jury experience, including:

anything that would reveal the identity of another juror
how you reached your verdict
what happened during deliberations
anything else specifically about the case that is not in the public domain.

If anyone approaches you to talk about the trial, you should report this to the Juries Commissioner.

Even though the trial is over, there may be an appeal or other legal matters that are related to the trial you served on. Anything you say about this trial could make it harder to get a fair result in these other matters. It is also important to preserve the anonymity of your fellow jurors."


It doesn't say what punishment a juror could face for not following this.

https://www.courts.vic.gov.au/jury-service/after-trial
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:44 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Generally, it's thought that execution is a sufficient punishment but it is sometimes thought that some of the more serious offenders need to appointed to be Magistrates.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:47 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a little weird the media can say whatever they want while an appeal is going on. What if the appeal succeeds?

And jurors in some other countries can talk as much as they want.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:48 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Alternatively, section 78(2) of the Juries Act 2000 (Vic) provides that:

(2) A person who is or has been a juror must not
disclose any statements made, opinions expressed,
arguments advanced or votes cast in the course of
the deliberations of that jury if the person has
reason to believe that any of that information is
likely to be or will be published to the public.

Penalty: 600 penalty units or imprisonment for
5 years.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

What does 600 penalty units mean practically?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:51 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^

I had the "pleasure" of standing up in front of Darcy Dugan once, he of the bow tie.

He seemed undeserving of punishment.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:53 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

What happened to it?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:55 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

A penalty unit is currently $161.19. So, the maximum fine is 600 times that.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 10:06 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

A question P4S, I could google this but I like your brevity.

My understanding is a court of appeal in this case would be a number of judges (however titled) who would review the case based on the appellants argument.

can you please explain what the grounds for appeal are, what the powers and limitations of the court of appeal are and how much discretion they have?

Can they just quash a conviction or does that send it back to another trial? do they have to stick to the grounds or do they have scope to go outside?

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 31, 32, 33  Next
Page 2 of 33   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group