George Pell has lost his appeal in the Supreme Court of Victoria today (21/8/19) and will stay in jail for at least a minimum jail term of three years and eight months. He will return to the remand center where he has been staying and be classified if he hasn’t already been and then sent to a jail to serve his sentence.
George Pell lost the appeal decision 2 judges to 1 and it is guaranteed that Pell will appeal to the High Court of Australia. (Click here to read a summary of the judgment)
The dissenting judge who found in George Pell’s favour was Justice Mark Weinberg who also came under scrutiny by this website in 2017 after he suggested that the media shouldn’t report allegations about judicial bribery.
In June 2017 I published an article titled “Australian judges attack political free speech and try to cover-up judicial corruption” (Click here to read more) and said:
Justice Weinberg asked Mr Houghton whether The Australian would have published a story where judges were alleged to have been bribed and corrupt.
“It would depend on the context,” he answered.
“Is that a serious answer?” the judge responded. (Click here to read more)
Why would a judge ask a question about the media reporting judicial bribery and then say, “Is that a serious answer?” when he got a response he didn’t like. Of course, the media should report judicial bribery. Fairfax Media and the ABC’s Four Corners reported in 2015 that the Australian Mafia bribed NSW judges $2.2 million. (Click here to read more) Was Justice Weinberg suggesting judicial bribery like that shouldn’t be reported? From what he said it seems so.
Below is the video of Justice Weinberg talking about the media shouldn’t report allegations of judges taking bribes:
To me, Justice Mark Weinberg isn’t up to the job of being a judge let alone an appeals court judge and he shouldn’t have been hearing George Pell’s appeal. I certainly hope the High Court of Australia allow Pell special leave to appeal and then put him in his place. But there is a fair chance that the High Court won’t allow Pell special leave to appeal as there doesn’t seem to be anything exceptional about the case except that George Pell was previously the 3rd highest ranked official in the world in the Catholic Church.
I have written many articles about George Pell (click here to read more) but the one that stands out is the article I wrote in March 2014 titled “Alleged paedophile Cardinal George Pell gives perjured evidence at the Royal Commission” (Click here to read more) I was able to refer to Pell then as an “alleged paedophile” because he already had form on the board from a 2002 allegation of child sex abuse and an investigation by the church who swept in under the carpet. The 2014 article was long before the police started investigating Pell in 2015 which led to his current conviction. (Update 21/8/19: The 7.30 Report said tonight that the police started investigating George Pell in 2013).
George Pell’s conviction is a huge win for his victims. It is also a win for the thousands that were abused by fellow priests while Pell and others in the church actively tried to conceal it. His conviction is likely to encourage others to come forward to seek justice.
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 or left of this page and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article.
Thank you for your support.
Categories: Cardinal George Pell