Cardinal George Pell was convicted on the 11th of December 2018 for sexually abusing boys but the media was not allowed to report it until today (26/2/19) because of suppression orders. Some media are reporting that Pell is likely to be remanded in custody tomorrow and be sentenced in a couple of weeks.

The Guardian reports:

On the day of the dramatic verdict, after a four-and-a-half-week trial, Pell stood in the dock showing no reaction and staring straight ahead. The room was silent as the foreman told the court that the jury had found the cardinal guilty on all charges. Pell’s defence barrister, Robert Richter QC, when asked by journalists if he would appeal, responded: “Absolutely.”

Pell will now almost certainly face jail time.

The case against Pell centred around events of more than 22 years ago.

The jury found that in the second half of December 1996, while he was archbishop of Melbourne, Pell walked in on two 13-year-old choirboys after a Sunday solemn mass at St Patrick’s Cathedral and sexually assaulted them. (Click here to read more)

Bringing George Pell to account for his crimes has been a long road. Allegations against George Pell have been around for almost 20 years and the old media, until recent times, never pushed the issue like they should have. Small websites like this one have helped drive the issue. I published an article in September 2013 titled “Tony Abbott and his friend Cardinal George Pell. Perceived bias for the Royal Commission into child sex abuse” and said:

Mr Pell and the paedophile allegations

“A decade ago, a Melbourne man claimed he was sexually molested as a 12-year-old at a Catholic youth camp by a student priest he knew as “big George” and later recognised as the Archbishop of Sydney. After a church-appointed inquiry, Pell said he was grateful to God to have been exonerated.”

“In fact, retired Victorian Supreme Court judge Alec Southwell had said that both Pell and his accuser gave the impression they were speaking the truth. Taking into account questions about the accuser’s credibility (he had a criminal  record) and the fact that the alleged incidents occurred so long ago, Southwell found he was “not satisfied that the complaint had been established”.”

“Tony Abbott hadn’t waited for the judge’s decision. “It should not surprise any Christian that there would be people who want to make unfair, wrong, mischievous, malevolent accusations against the strongest and most public Christian of the time,” the politician said when the allegations were first aired. “I’m more than ready to accept Pell’s testimony.”” (Click here to read more)

The retired Victorian Supreme Court judge Alec Southwell was on the Church’s payroll as it was an internal Church inquiry so he was hardly impartial. The full report was put on the Churches website in 2002 but has since been taken down. Part of the report was on the Broken Rites Australia website but has since been taken down. Maybe a legal threat?

Cardinal George Pell said to parents of abuse victims: “It’s all gossip until it’s proven in court”

Some of George Pell’s background regarding child sex abuse can be found in previous articles. In March 2014 I published an article titled “Alleged paedophile Cardinal George Pell gives perjured evidence at the Royal Commission” and in July 2017 I wrote an article titled “Cardinal George Pell said to parents of abuse victims: “It’s all gossip until it’s proven in court” and said:

“In 1997 Cardinal George Pell said to the parents of abuse victims who were whistleblowing on 5 paedophile priests: “We won’t believe any of this. It’s all gossip until it’s proven in court”. It’s one of many examples of George Pell covering up for paedophile priests over many years with some saying he was involved in the cover-ups as far back at the 1970’s. So, it no surprise that Cardinal Pell himself has been charged.”

I wonder what George Pell and his supporters have to say now?

Victorian DPP threats of contempt against KCA publisher Shane Dowling for reporting on George Pell

Last Monday (18/2/19) I received the below letter via email from the Victorian CPP Kerri Judd QC:

I responded:

From: SHANE DOWLING
Sent: 18 February 2019 14:09
To: Director <director@opp.vic.gov.au>
Cc: Zandra.Carino@opp.vic.gov.au
Subject: RE: DPP correspondence to Mr Shane Dowling – 15Feb19

Dear Kerri Judd QC

I have deleted the article which was published on the 27^th of January 2019 and Tweet mentioned in your letter as well as a Facebook post promoting the article. But do not take this as an admission of liability. I have a few questions.

1. In your letter at the 3rd last paragraph you say “I request that you immediately and no later than 9.00am on Monday the 18 February 2019 remove these online publications and any other publications which either breach the suppression orders made in this case or constitute sub judice contempt.” How would I know if they breach the suppression orders given the court refused to tell me, when I contacted them before publication, if I wrote the article would it be in breach of any orders and also refused to give me a copy of the court orders?
2. Why is your letter dated the 15^th of February (Friday) and you gave me until 9am on the 18^th of February (Monday) to comply with the demands in letter but you did not email me the letter until 12.36pm on the 18^th of February 2019 which automatically put me in breach of the demands in the letter?
3. Given I published the article on the 27^th of January and I put the court on notice beforehand that I was going to publish, which they did not complain as per the emails in the article between myself and the court (also see attached email chain), why have you waited until the now to send me an email complaining?
4. Your email says suppression orders were issued twice in the matter in Victoria which if that is the case then NSW Supreme Court Judge Lucy McCallum is on breach of those suppression orders as she discussed it in open court in NSW. Have you sent her a cease and desist letter and/or email and also threatened her with contempt for breaching the suppression orders or sub judice contempt? If not, why not given my article was about her saying what she said in open court?

Can you please respond ASAP so I can publish.

Regards

Shane Dowling

Kangaroo Court of Australia

.

Kerri Judd QC responded yesterday (25/2/19) with basically a palm off and did not address the main questions that I asked. She would have likely known yesterday when she responded to my email that the suppression orders were going to be lifted today. (Click here to read the letter)

Once I read on the internet that the suppression orders had been lifted I put the article back up. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that the suppression orders should have never been on the matter in the first place and once the international media started reporting the judgment last December the suppression orders became a waste of time. This was re-enforced but Justice Lucy McCallum’s comments in court and the article I wrote about it.

George Pell’s barrister has already said he will appeal so the matter has a long way to go. I wonder if other victims might come forward now.

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance of this site, please click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options. (Click here to go to the Donations page)

If you would like to follow this website, you can by email notification at the top right of this page and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article.

Thank you for your support.