The Meeting Place

George Pell sentenced six years in prison

George Pell has been sentenced to six years in prison, with no chance for parole for three years and eight months.

Mr Pell was convicted on five counts in December, the most senior Catholic official and first bishop to be found guilty in a criminal court for sexually abusing minors. By law, his sentence could have been up to 50 years.

“I would characterize these breaches and abuses as grave,” said chief judge Peter Kidd.

Speaking directly to Cardinal Pell, he added: “You had time to reflect on your behavior as you offended, yet you refused to desist.”

Do you think the sentence fits the crime?

FirstPrev123(page 3/3)
35 comments

Carefully read the wise comments of Alan and Digby, and be saddened by Jackie's hasty and abusive comments. If Pell is still found guilty after Appeal, he should be imprisoned. However, there will be continued argument about 'justice', in a case where there was no actual evidence, one (uncorroborated) accuser, and many witnesses asserting the lack of opportunity. Sadly, Jackie is expressing religious or political biases, rather than contributing to a reasoned and fair-minded discussion. It reminds me of the costly and embarassing case of Lindy Chamberlain who was subject to years of judgmental and hateful reaction by the media and many people, was found guilty by a jury in 1982 of murdering her baby, but was fully cleared of any crime and received a large compensation from the Australian Government. Let's maintain a sense of reason and 'Australian fair play'.

Carefully read the wise comments of Alan and Digby, and be saddened by Jackie's hasty and abusive comments. If Pell is still found guilty after Appeal, he should be imprisoned. However, there will be continued argument about 'justice', in a case where there was no actual evidence, one (uncorroborated) accuser, and many witnesses asserting the lack of opportunity. Sadly, Jackie is expressing religious or political biases, rather than contributing to a reasoned and fair-minded discussion. It reminds me of the costly and embarassing case of Lindy Chamberlain who was subject to years of judgmental and hateful reaction by the media and many people, was found guilty by a jury in 1982 of murdering her baby, but was fully cleared of any crime and received a large compensation from the Australian Government. Let's maintain a sense of reason and 'Australian fair play'.

 

Testimony from a victim is hardly lack of evidence, it may be one word against another, but an accuser has the right to be heard, just as the accused is.  In this case the accused refused to take the stand in which case I would say the veracity of evidence would lean towards the accuser.

I also believe there were ample written statements that were enough to prove the case.  In any case, if you or I were not in the court room and did not hear all the evidence it would be impossible to make that judgement.

A Judge deliberated over this case and agreed that there was enough evidence to convict, he, as you stated made a very determined and considered address to the court on how and why he pronounced sentence, unless he gets off on appeal we must be prepared to accept that he was guilty. 

I would ask this, if this man was a house painter from Inala, would he have received this amont of " Justice?".

People have their own opinions but I cannot understand how anyone can support this paedophile. I am appalled by John Howard's glowing character reference.

The fact is he was a man in a very trusted position, a man of the church, these boys would have been in awe of him before their abuse. He has ruined their lives and others. The Vatican itself needs to be cleaned out.

I agree, let's clean out all religions which prey on children, especially those who practice female genital mutilation. Lets let Pell's conviction send a warning to other religions, that it will not be tolerated.

... not only Howard but Tony Abbott also endorses this creep!  Will be visiting him!!    Nice!

The Chaser comedians added something to George Pell's plaque.

 

A comedian from The Chaser group has “updated” George Pell’s plaque at St Mary’s Cathedral in Sydney. Poor ole Georgie porgie.

In Victoria victims of an assault can receive up to $70,000 from the Government/taxpayer.

Further the jury would have been influenced by  international news organisations published articles despite the suppression order for local news being in place.

Whilst paedophelia happened in the catholic church, I believe Pell is innocent of charges made against him.

Suze, glad to see

1/ you have the full court transcript & appeal transcript & studied it in its full entirety

or

2/ You actually attended every court session & took notes & also was in attendance for the appeal.

REALLY, innocent when convicted by a jury & his appeal rejected. He's done more harm to all those poor innocent victims when he covered up paedophiles in the church & denied to accept the complaints of victims & their parents but he's never been to court or charged for those atrosities.

I would say let God be his judge but unlike a lot of people including Pells I don't believe in a fictious character in a story book

But let him rot in hell if there is one but until then let him rot in jail.

Isn't it marvelous, all paedophiles plead 'not guilty'?  The Catholic Church would have been better if they had channelled the money they paid out on lawyers, to help those poor children/adults who have been the victims of these vermin. When I was a young girl at a Catholic school, we had a Monsignor, who is higher in ranking than a priest., at my school. He quite often came over to our school at Playtime and talked with the children. He often gave the little ones in Kinders a ride with his hands cupped between their legs. As senior girls we were disgusted but hesitated to report him to  the Nuns as we would be labeled troublemakers. We steered well clear of him.  Oh, he was disgusting. 

........ just hope that the Catholic Church is funding Pell's Appeals and NOT the taxpayer?

I often see parents do this and wonder why when I never once found it necesary.

 

 

We accept the law and its mechanisms of review since we see no better way to keep ourselves on the straight and narrow and particularly, from each other's throats. Just the same, without corroborated confessions we can only brand people as guilty under the law. Not as necessarily actually guilty of an offence. A jury is only made up of a handful of citizens and a judge only also one who happens to be placed to manage the mechanisms of the law. We can all get it wrong. Now that (Mr.) Pell has been judged and sits quietly in reverie or expectation of a further opportunity to prove his innocence there is no need for us to do other than accept that he has been found guilty by the system we use to govern ourselves by. No reason for most of us to have an opinion of actual guilt or innocence of either he or his church. The processes of community security and repair can do their job. They do that routinely and they do not always get it right...that is about all we as insiders with little more impact than outsiders can be sure of. 

FirstPrev123(page 3/3)
35 comments