Share Button

The Cardinal Pell appeal continues.   Here is the link to access the live stream coverage of the Pell appeal

This is painful to watch.  Painful.  Unfortunately  I think perhaps the lawyer for the Crown has a speech impediment of some kind?  perhaps a stutter?   Whatever the case, it is very difficult to listen to and/or follow his arguments.  And, sadly, further to that, at this very moment, and if I am hearing correctly, he seems incapable of articulating  why two young teenage boys did not discuss with each other, their  mother, or anyone else, the abuse they endured at the hands of Pell.

Heartbreaking.  In this day and age.  Heartbreaking.

Eventually and thankfully the judges themselves explained that there is now allowance at trials for such matters.

Oh my!   Hopefully I am missing the gems of the Crown  arguments, …

Anyway, I did post a file with several articles regarding the fund-raising which was transpiring last year to pay Pell’s legal costs:

08 May 2018:  “Sydney archdiocese runs ads seeking donations for Cardinal George Pell’s legal fees” & elated articles

As you see, Pell’s defence lawyer daily fees are rumoured to be in the order of $16,000.  Further to that, I have heard – unconfirmed – that the daily fee for Pell’s appeals lawyer is in the range of $22,000!

Are you like me?  Do you ever wonder why a defendant with deep pockets or access to the same can pick the ‘cream of the crop’ while victims must accept the Crown – competent or otherwise – assigned to his/her case?

Is this just?

Is it fair?

Questions. Questions. Questions.

For now, back to the live-stream.

Please keep the victims in your prayers.

Enough for now,


This entry was posted in Accused or charged, Bishops, Cardinal Pell, Clerical sexual predators and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Heartbreaking

  1. Sylvia says:


    There has been much ado regarding testimony that Pell, as Bishop of Melbourne, sexually abused two young choirboys in the sacristy after Mass at the cathedral. The common refrain seems to have been that since Pell was fully vested at the time it would have been impossible for him to have sexually abused the boys.

    A jury found Pell guilty.

    The issue of the vestments was raised yesterday by Pell’s lawyer. It was raised again today.

    Well, it turns out that at trial a set of vestments was entered as an exhibit, and the vestments were available to the jurors during deliberations. That means that the jurors could try on the vestments, and in so doing they could sort out for themselves what can or cannot be done when one is fully vested.

Leave a Reply