Cardinal George Pell Charged With Diddling Kids - Australia's most senior Catholic will return from Rome to face charges

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/cardinal-george-pell-charged-sexual-assault-offences/8547668

Cardinal George Pell says he is looking forward to his day in court after being charged with historical sexual assault offences.

Key points:
  • Charges involve multiple complainants
  • Pell has always maintained his innocence and strenuously denied any wrongdoing
  • Victoria Police says charging process has involved "common and standard practice"
DDc96YCVoAAeAbs.jpg

Australia's most senior Catholic cleric has been ordered to appear in the Melbourne Magistrates' Court on July 18, after Victoria Police served charges on his legal representatives.

"Cardinal Pell will return to Australia, as soon as possible, to clear his name following advice and approval by his doctors, who will also advise on his travel arrangements," a statement released by the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney said.

"He has again strenuously denied all allegations."

He is expected to make a further statement in Rome at 4:30pm AEST.

Victoria Police Deputy Commissioner Shane Patton earlier told reporters the charges involved multiple complainants.

A magistrate will decide next week whether to release the details and the nature of the charges. A hearing will take place on July 6.

Last July, police confirmed they were formally investigating complaints about offences alleged to have occurred in Ballarat in the 1970s.

Pell has always maintained his innocence and denied any wrongdoing.

Deputy Commissioner Patton said the "process and procedures" being followed had been the same as those applied "in a whole range of historical sex offences, whenever we investigate them".

"The fact that he has been charged on summons — we have used advice from the Office of Public Prosecutions and also we have engaged with his legal representatives, which is common and standard practice."

As head of the Vatican's finances, Pell is considered number three in the Catholic hierarchy behind the Pope.

In July, Pell said the allegations were part of a smear campaign by the media.

"The allegations are untrue, I deny them absolutely," Pell said.

"I'm like any other Australian — I'm entitled to a fair go."

However, he said he was "quite prepared to co-operate" with the process.

Cardinal's rise in the ranks

Cardinal George Pell has long been one of the most prominent and controversial figures in the Australian Catholic Church.


In October, three Victoria Police detectives flew to Rome to interview Pell.

A Victoria Police statement issued at the time said: "Cardinal George Pell voluntarily participated in an interview regarding allegations of sexual assault."

Australia does not have an extradition treaty with the Vatican, even though it does with Italy.

Child sexual assault survivor advocate Chrissie Foster said it was right that the allegations would now be heard in the courts.

"I've been waiting to see what happens with this investigation for a long time," she said.

Ms Foster's daughters Emma and Katie were raped by Melbourne paedophile priest Father Kevin O'Donnell when they were in primary school in the 1980s.

VIDEO: ABC journalist Paul Kennedy speaks about the decision to charge George Pell (ABC News)

Conservative cardinal's road to Vatican
Pell was the son of a Ballarat publican, a head prefect at school and a talented Australian Rules footballer, who was signed as a ruckman by the Richmond Football Club.

We're in uncharted territory now

Now Victoria Police are charging Cardinal Archbishop George Pell with multiple sexual offences we are in an unprecedented historical position, writes Noel Debien.

His studies took him to Rome and then Oxford.

In 1971 he returned to Victoria as an ordained priest, and rose through the ranks to eventually become Archbishop of Melbourne.

He rankled progressive Catholics with his resistance to reform.

He opposed the ordination of female priests, was anti-divorce and anti-abortion and also refused communion to gay activists at one of his masses.

In 1990 he said: "Homosexuality — we're aware that it does exist. We believe such activity is wrong and we believe for the good of society it should not be encouraged."

His hardline conservatism caught the attention of Rome, and he was chosen to join a Vatican congregation dedicated to enforcing orthodoxy.

"There are many smorgasbord Catholics who choose a bit of this and that ... my business as bishop is to proclaim the whole of the message," he said.

In 1996, then-Archbishop Pell was the first Catholic leader to address the child sexual abuse that has plagued the church.

PHOTO: George Pell was made Archbishop of Sydney in 2002 where he later became a cardinal. (Reuters: Mark Baker [file photo])


He instigated a redress scheme called the Melbourne Response.

When announcing the scheme he said: "It's a matter of regret that the Catholic Church has taken some time to come to grips with the sex abuse issue adequately."

But the Melbourne Response, which capped compensation for victims at $50,000, was widely criticised as being legalistic and not offering enough support to victims.

He then became Archbishop of Sydney and was made a cardinal.

In 2014, he was chosen by the Pope to get the Vatican's finances in order and he moved to Rome.

Ill health prevented him from returning to Australia in 2016 to give evidence to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.


Holy shit boys, it's about to get interesting.
 
No matter where you stand on the Catholic Church, the evidence in this case had more holes than gruyere cheese. This was an obvious outcome.
 
No matter where you stand on the Catholic Church, the evidence in this case had more holes than gruyere cheese. This was an obvious outcome.
There was a lot of ambiguity about how it could have happened, considering Pell's role and requirements during and after service.

A lot of people go back to their partisan priors when considering this case, not the evidence.
 
The thing that this reminds me the most of was that Rolling Stone case from a few years back of "A Rape On Campus" - where an incident was narratively convenient but when you looked at the actual details of the allegations it was implausible as a real series of events.

Now, I wonder whether Bolt and friends are going to turn back to those rumors of the unofficial "Catholic Hunters" unit in Victoria Police...
 
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."
The jury OUGHT to have decided a different way! Lmao
 
Yes Frank, I'm sure you're just jumping for joy that one of your major conservative opponents got acquitted. But of course if you can use any opportunity to virtue signal, I'm sure you'd take it.
 
Yeah, my perspective was that Pell was almost certainly guilty of collusion and coverups of pedophiles in the church, but was unlikely to himself be guilty of this particular accusation. So he likely deserves punishment, but it would be best if he could be convicted of his actual crimes. Like, they might have only got Al Capone on tax evasion, but he definitely committed that tax evasion.

But because of the high-profile cases, and the even more high-profile revelations that the Catholic Church covered for their pedophile priests as much as they did, people (understandably if a little unfairly) have been defaulting to believing any accusation of pedophilia against a Catholic priest, no need to hear evidence, it just must be true. And I know the opinion of a number of people was that it didn't really matter if he didn't commit this crime, it was just good to get him on something... and I honestly sympathise with that point of view, because it feels like the closest thing to justice anyone might ever get.

So it's more emotionally and morally complicated than it might seem, but at the end of the day I can't disagree that if he didn't commit this particular crime then he shouldn't be punished for it, and there really did seem to be not nearly enough certainty in this case.

But who knows. They'll likely try again with other findings if they can, and those might be more solid. He might be guilty of pedophilia, just not this one case. We'll see.
 
There are a couple of others that could've been brought up:
(i) the complainant says Pell exposed his genitalia through a slit in the robes. Archbishop robes to do no have any slit in them. (ii) the date when the offending was alleged to have occurred, the Cathedral was closed and under renovation. As the matter went to retrial, DPP were able to patch this up by changing the date of the alleged offences.

Both of those, if true, seems like they should have immediately destroyed the case. Was the defense not allowed to bring them up or what?
 
Googling for clerical sexual abuses almost exclusively brings up catholic ones. Seems to be framed as a catholic problem due to the vow of celibacy.
I think the focus on Catholic pedo priests isn't necessarily from the amount of pedo priests, but more so from the combination of a respected holy man, someone who you would think is the last person to offend (after all, when it broke out iirc the image of what a pedo was in the public eye was the creepy man in a van with candy) and how prolific it seemed.

However, it wasn't truly as prolific as it appeared, where it seemed every town had a pedo priest. While the number of offenders is low, because of the way the Church dealt with it (by hiding it and moving the person to another place) they allowed the predator access to a new group of kids who weren't aware of him and had no defense.

Hopefully I'm explaining it correctly? Basically the pedo priests were like traveling conmen - when the gig was up, they'd move on to another place, making it seem like there were more than actually existed.

Of course, fedora atheists loved to crow about how imperfect they were, which is also why the image is so set in pop culture.
 
I think the focus on Catholic pedo priests isn't necessarily from the amount of pedo priests, but more so from the combination of a respected holy man, someone who you would think is the last person to offend (after all, when it broke out iirc the image of what a pedo was in the public eye was the creepy man in a van with candy) and how prolific it seemed.

However, it wasn't truly as prolific as it appeared, where it seemed every town had a pedo priest. While the number of offenders is low, because of the way the Church dealt with it (by hiding it and moving the person to another place) they allowed the predator access to a new group of kids who weren't aware of him and had no defense.

Hopefully I'm explaining it correctly? Basically the pedo priests were like traveling conmen - when the gig was up, they'd move on to another place, making it seem like there were more than actually existed.

Of course, fedora atheists loved to crow about how imperfect they were, which is also why the image is so set in pop culture.
Yes, but the celibacy thing is a massive part of it. You don't see this type of mass scandal among Christian denominations that permit their priests to marry.
 
Huh, so now he'll be staying in Carmel Monastery in Kew. Very leafy and nice kind of secluded place in a secluded hllly pocket of Kew a fair bit off the high street. Interesting place to hide out in.
 
I think it has more to do with the way that priests, vicars, ministers etc, were seen as above suspicion. If you make any group in society above suspicion predators will move into that group.

A bit like how so many convicted male sex offenders are suddenly claiming to be troons. In the past, a paedo who claimed to be religious could get away with all sorts.
 
Huh, so now he'll be staying in Carmel Monastery in Kew. Very leafy and nice kind of secluded place in a secluded hllly pocket of Kew a fair bit off the high street. Interesting place to hide out in.
If the Church put him there I am not surprised; One of the things they seem to usually do when it comes to this sort of mess (assuming they are not so blatantly guilty they are arrested) is to just move them to a Monastery where they never interact with the public. Out of sight, out of mind I guess.
:fapcup:
 
Let's see if the Attorney General is going to release the sealed sections of the Final Report of the Institutional Abuse Royal Commission, which have as yet remained redacted so as not to prejudice Pell's case.

If not, there could very well be additional charges in the pipeline. The AG mentioned that before he came to a decision, he would need to speak to several stakeholders.
FUCKING CALLED IT.
Capture.JPG
 
Back
Top Bottom