Australian Politics Forum

Prime Minister for Canyons Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 26906 Canberra Gender:	Re: Pell walks Reply #390 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented. If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.
Back to top	In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act. No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy) IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 22363
A cat with a view

Re: Pell walks
Reply #391 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #392 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 146178
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #393 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:03pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

The guy who died never accused Pell of any wrongdoing.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #394 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:09pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:03pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

The guy who died never accused Pell of any wrongdoing.

Can you point to where that states, I'm trying to find something

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 26906 Canberra Gender:	Re: Pell walks Reply #395 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:19pm I have to admit I'm far more comfortable with gregs and Aussies opinion of the decision, which seems to be on the basis of good faith in regards to the law. Yaddas on the other hand, seems to be on te basis, that Pells a catholic archbishop therefore he could not have done it.
Back to top	In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act. No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy) IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39465
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #396 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:36pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:03pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

The guy who died never accused Pell of any wrongdoing.

Can you point to where that states, I'm trying to find something

There was his own Mother asking him if anyone had interfered with him, and according to her, he then insisted no-one had.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 146178
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #397 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:43pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:03pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

The guy who died never accused Pell of any wrongdoing.

Can you point to where that states, I'm trying to find something

"His mother twice asked him if he had been sexually abused, but he never revealed what had happened to him."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-04/george-pell-abuse-victims-family-police-s...

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #398 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:44pm

Gnads wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 9:15am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 8:48am:

Gnads wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 8:27am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 10:24pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 7:26pm:

Squires, lieges, altar boys...apprentices. The British Empire was founded on man/boy relations. What did you think boys were doing when they carried a soldier's 'sword'?

Yes... What was Captain Cook doing with a 12 year old cabin boy, Nicholas Young.

And Tradies used to employ 14 & 15 yr old Apprentices ...... were they all being buggered at smoko & lunch time?

Was making a Grade 12 education level a requirement for Apprentices to save them from being sodomised? Roll Eyes

You're comparing a 16-year-old apprentice in a workshop where he gets to go home after work to a 12-year-old on a wooden ship for years at a stretch, couped up with sex-starved hardened sailors and beholden to a captain in a time when 'rum, buggery and the lash' was the standard descriptor for life in the Royal Navy?

In the Navy you can learn to be a queer
In the Navy you can cop it up the rear
In the Navy, in the Navy.

There ya go... See, you do get it ... (so to speak) !

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 146178
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #399 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:47pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:43pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:03pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

The guy who died never accused Pell of any wrongdoing.

Can you point to where that states, I'm trying to find something

"His mother twice asked him if he had been sexually abused, but he never revealed what had happened to him."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-04/george-pell-abuse-victims-family-police-s...

"The choirboy’s evidence had nothing to corroborate it: no witnesses in his favour, no incriminating objects, no photographs or CCTV from this very public event, no DNA or other chemical clues, nothing like the stained dress of Monica Lewinsky. The defence had all the potentially corroborating evidence on its side, including a statement from the dead boy’s mother, whose son had told her he had never been sexually assaulted. Pell’s case was not, like many other trials of sexual assault, a contest of “my word versus your word”. It was a case of the word of one person, relying on memory, versus a substantial volume of evidence by more than twenty people, both remembered and written down at the time."

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/09/the-contradictions-of-the-choirboy/

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Pell walks
Reply #400 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:54pm

Aussie wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 1:57pm:

cods wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 12:25pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 10:45am:

cods wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 11:25pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 6:57pm:

Quote:

he still tenses up when it comes on TV......he has been compensated but it doesnt take away the years of living with it does it?....

By whom, cods?

what the heck does that mean?

Follow the money, cods. You can bet it did not come out of Pell's bank account.

I still dont know what you are talking about....

only an idiot would think pell was personally paying out compensation.. Undecided

So.....where did the money come from? It likely was a cheque. Whose cheque?

I dont pry like you do...

and I wouldnt now..so stop asking.

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Pell walks
Reply #401 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:56pm

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 12:36pm:

cods wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 12:27pm:

Captain Nemo wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 9:54am:

I came across this 'blast from the past' the other day ... David Marr: who has made what seems to be a life study of Pell has a way with words.

I particularly enjoyed the mental image of Pell ascending the stairs to the accompaniment of trumpets. Grin

If you can spare just under an hour to view this video ... IMHO it is well worth it. Cool

no thanks nemo... Marr is all yours....hes never said a nice word about anyone as far as I know.

He actually says a few nice words about Tony Abbott in this interview. He also gives a little credit to Pell saying that Pell "gets it" about the damage caused by the church.

and you think that makes it all right for all the things he says other times.......

Pell does get he says so loud and clear but those who condemn refuse to listen.....they really only see what they want to see..

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39465
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #402 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 4:24pm

cods wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:54pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 1:57pm:

cods wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 12:25pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 10:45am:

cods wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 11:25pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 6:57pm:

Quote:

he still tenses up when it comes on TV......he has been compensated but it doesnt take away the years of living with it does it?....

By whom, cods?

what the heck does that mean?

Follow the money, cods. You can bet it did not come out of Pell's bank account.

I still dont know what you are talking about....

only an idiot would think pell was personally paying out compensation.. Undecided

So.....where did the money come from? It likely was a cheque. Whose cheque?

I dont pry like you do...

and I wouldnt now..so stop asking.

Which means you really don't give a stuff about actually finding who the accomplices were. You'd rather rant. Okay. I get it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #403 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 4:32pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:43pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:09pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 3:03pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:54pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:52pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2020 at 2:43pm:

on the basis of having NO SUBSTANTIATING EVIDENCES OF THE WRONGDOING being presented.

If you're referring to Pell, there actually was substantiating evidence, it just didn't get to the point of beyond reasonable doubt.

The accusation, of a lone accuser, would not be regarded as a 'substantiating evidence', in an Australian court of law.

Indeed, but that's not what happened. Just one still alive.

The guy who died never accused Pell of any wrongdoing.

Can you point to where that states, I'm trying to find something

"His mother twice asked him if he had been sexually abused, but he never revealed what had happened to him."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-04/george-pell-abuse-victims-family-police-s...

"The choirboy’s evidence had nothing to corroborate it: no witnesses in his favour, no incriminating objects, no photographs or CCTV from this very public event, no DNA or other chemical clues, nothing like the stained dress of Monica Lewinsky. The defence had all the potentially corroborating evidence on its side, including a statement from the dead boy’s mother, whose son had told her he had never been sexually assaulted. Pell’s case was not, like many other trials of sexual assault, a contest of “my word versus your word”. It was a case of the word of one person, relying on memory, versus a substantial volume of evidence by more than twenty people, both remembered and written down at the time."

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/09/the-contradictions-of-the-choirboy/

Fair enough, too tired to debate the source.

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Pell walks
Reply #404 - Apr 14^th, 2020 at 4:50pm

Aussie wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 6:53pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 4:09pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 3:45pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 3:38pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 13^th, 2020 at 3:19pm:

Quote:

If I was on the jury the question you pose would have been irrelevant and not even put to me to consider....My point is I am entitled to weigh every accusation and known fact in forming my opinion, I am not constrained to only consider evidence put forward in the trial....I also question your claim that Pell did not know that others were abusing kids under his leadership when witness have testified Pell was told of abuse and brushed aside such allegations....You also failed to answer if you believe I am not entitled to form such an opinion based on all known facts???

Huh Huh

Believe what you like Phil. Come to whatever opinion you prefer. Personally, I have zero faith that there are fairies at the bottom of the garden or that there is a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, but that's just me, I guess.

So, having answered your question, how about the same courtesy? If you were on that Jury, would you have convicted Pell of the charges made against him?

You answered SFA mate and instead made an off the cuff remark insinuating I have based my opinion on emotion not facts which is bullshit....If I was a juror on Pell's trial I have no idea what verdict I would have reached based only on the facts presented, however the witness (you believe is a liar and fraud) was apparently very believable and had no ulterior motive to pursue Pell over false allegations....I have every right to believe in Pell's guilt and accept the accusations made against him!!!

Roll Eyes

What are those 'facts' Phil?

The fact Pell has been accused by multiple people whom all tell a similar story about his abuse....The fact he was in charge of priests whom were moved because of abusing children which Pell claims to know nothing about....The fact the Church have a history of telling lies and covering up abuse (whilst Pell was in charge)....The fact that I am entitled to reach what ever opinion I want based on what ever evidence I chose to accept....Your problem is you believe opinion needs to be proven in a court of law and that accusations carry no weight in accessing someone's guilt or innocence....Why do you believe those making allegations against Pell are liars and frauds mate???

Huh

Can you tell me why those alleged "facts" never became part of either of the two Pell Trials? Are you asserting that the Crown failed to call relevant witnesses? What level of legal incompetence are you alleging?

Why do you think allegations against Pell not pertaining to the case being tried was not introduced by the prosecution Aussie....If you claim you are a lawyer you know the prosecution cannot introduce allegations not proven in court unless the defence introduces the material or they are relevant to the criminal proceedings on trial....The prosecution more than likely tried to introduce witnesses to tell there story and were rebuffed by the judge....Now the criminal trial is over Pell will face civil action which is where these allegations will be judged....There was no incompetence just laws that protect the innocent and the guilty???

Roll Eyes

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/apr/14/police-investigating-geor...

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/apr/08/civil-claims-expected-aga...

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 14^th, 2020 at 5:02pm by philperth2010 »

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged