Only one person I've spoken with out of dozens has the reaction of Lion that this is just a conspiracy...
Really?
There was a lot of 'real catholics' vox pops in the media yesterday and today expressing the view that the jury got it wrong.
Pell was convicted
…more two decades after the alleged event,
…on the uncorroborated evidence
…of one single witness,
…without any forensic evidence,
…without a pattern of behaviour,
…without a confession.
It is rare to even run a serious case like this on the word of one witness - let alone gain a conviction.
Pell certainly does not fit the usual pattern of paedophile clergy abusers who typically;
...identify vulnerable potential victims,
...groom them
...isolate them,
...commit the offences in private
...pressure the victims into silence.
...admit their (born-that-way) sexual preference for minors
Historically, the vast majority of (successful) prosecutions have involved multiple individual victims who all (on their own behalf) testify to similar pattern of offending.
Pell had access to hundreds of boys over his career from among whom he could have easily groomed the vulnerable.
Instead, he supposedly;
…perpetrated a one off, opportunistic attack
…on two unknown boys
…whom he unexpectedly found in the sacristy
…immediately after High Mass at Australia’s largest cathedral
…on the busiest day of the Church week
…when the Cathedral precinct was teeming with several hundred church goers and dozens of diocesan officials.
…in broad daylight in an unsecured, unlocked public area.
…where the risk of being caught in the act was unfathomably high for the sort of crimes paedophiles commit.
In the words of one crime reporter, he had no idea whether one of these nameless boys was the son of the Chief Police Commissioner, the Prime Minister or the Chief Justice who were waiting outside to collect them.
Pell could not have known if one of them would scream for help or walk straight out and blow the whistle on him - and with two kids (two witnesses) in the room he would have been sunk. These are not the actions of a cunning, experienced paedophile who usually turns out to be a serial offender.
Yet no-one has alleged Pell had a history of this type of crime.
Consider also the public record of Pell's behaviour leading up to the alleged events.
16th July 1996 Pell takes up appointment as Archbishop of Melb
Thereupon, Archbishop Pell almost immediately instructs the respected law firm Corrs Chambers Westgarth (Corrs), solicitors for the Archdiocese of Melbourne, to put together a new scheme for responding to claims of child sexual abuse within the Archdiocese. (Remember, lawyers are officers of the court - this isn't Better Call Saul.)
30 October 1996, Archbishop Pell announced the Melbourne Response and appoints independent Commissioners to inquire into allegations of sexual abuse, with an explicit, and transparent public accountability mandate that they must;
...immediately inform any/every complainant that they have an unfettered and continuing right to take their complaint to the police
...And that they must encourage the exercise of that right
...And that they must not act in any way that would prevent or hinder any police investigation in respect of allegations of sexual abuse by Church personnel.
November 1996, less than one month after the Melbourne Response was announced, Pell along with the Bishops Conference approves the Towards Healing protocol – confidential payments to victims who wish to remain anonymous and explicitly don’t want exercise their rights to take the matter to police.
A month later December 2016….
Archbishop Pell allegedly returns to the cathedral sacristy after having just presided over the 11am Mass, and allegedly discovers the highly unusual presence of an unidentified 13 year old choir boy (who should not have been there at the time) sneaking a sip or two of altar wine in the company of another boy - also a choir boy (of course.)
Pell apparently forgets that he himself has just authorised the most unprecedented level of scrutiny and no-holds-barred investigation into the scourge of clergy paedophilia in the history of RCC in this country. And, despite the lack of locks, on the open doors, and the regular passers by, he allegedly decides to molest both boys - one after the other.
Surely all the atheist skeptics here at TFF can appreciate my skepticism. And these alleged events aren't even 2000 years old yet.
