Vatican treasurer in Australian court for hearing on sex offence charges

[webfact]

Vatican treasurer in Australian court for hearing on sex offence charges

By Sonali Paul and Byron Kaye

 

Cardinal George Pell arrives at the Melbourne Magistrates Court in Melbourne, Australia March 5, 2018. AAP/Stefan Postles/via REUTERS

 

MELBOURNE (Reuters) - Vatican treasurer Cardinal George Pell arrived in an Australian court on Monday for the start of a four-week pre-trial hearing on charges of historical sexual offences.

 

Pell, 76, a top adviser to Pope Francis, did not speak as he was escorted to Melbourne Magistrates' Court by police through a group of media and protesters. Pell has so far not been required to enter a plea.

 

Pell was summoned by Australian police last year and is the most senior Catholic official to face such charges. Details have not been made public.

 

Pell's lawyers have said at past administrative hearings that he will plead not guilty to all charges. He is not required to enter a formal plea until a magistrate determines if prosecutors have enough evidence for a case to be committed to a full trial.

 

Court authorities have said they will close the court in Melbourne to the public for most of the first two weeks to protect the privacy of people giving evidence.

 

Pell is on a leave of absence from his Vatican role as Pope Francis' economy minister, which he started in 2014. The pontiff has said he will not comment on the case until it is over.

 

(Reporting by Sonali Paul in MELBOURNE and Byron Kaye in SYDNEY: editing by Neil Fullick, Jane Wardell and Paul Simao)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-05

[grumbleweed]

Catholic: (noun) (i) child molester, (ii) one who supports child molesting, (iii) one who protects child molesters

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, grumbleweed said:

Catholic: (noun) (i) child molester, (ii) one who supports child molesting, (iii) one who protects child molesters

Too large a 'brush'. 

 

You should have restricted it to too many catholic priests, plus of course, the hierarchy - who apparently still prefer to hide the truth 'under the carpet' .

[ncc1701d]

2 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Too large a 'brush'. 

 

You should have restricted it to too many catholic priests, plus of course, the hierarchy - who apparently still prefer to hide the truth 'under the carpet' .

No, I think he covered all bases there.

[JulesMad]

ALL (religious) sects are guilty of this, be it catholics, protestants, buddhists and moslims...
At least the guy showed up and is not running away (yet)

[Benmart]

8 hours ago, grumbleweed said:

Catholic: (noun) (i) child molester, (ii) one who supports child molesting, (iii) one who protects child molesters

Your post is absurd, juvenile and paints a sad picture of your twisted view of a larger world.

[Benmart]

5 hours ago, ncc1701d said:

No, I think he covered all bases there.

Personal experience or personal bias?

[Benmart]

2 hours ago, JulesMad said:

ALL (religious) sects are guilty of this, be it catholics, protestants, buddhists and moslims...
At least the guy showed up and is not running away (yet)

ALL? I've not met them ALL, investigated them ALL or know it ALL.

[observer90210]

The Vatican with the catholic clergy is one of the most corrupt countries of the world...not to mention all the [hushed up] pedophilia issues by the catholic priests, that would make the stats of the Pattaya pedos to blush !

[ncc1701d]

19 hours ago, Benmart said:

Personal experience or personal bias?

If you are a catholic then you fall under category ii ) or iii)     Imo...

Edited March 6, 2018 by ncc1701d

[Ulic]

As far as I am concerned there are two types of priests. Priests who are pedophiles,

and priests who covered up for pedophiles. All fall into one group or the other.

[CharlesSwann]

Whatever, presumption of guilt is a disgrace.

 

The charges are apparently 'inappropriate touching' at a swimming baths. Despite everyone's prejudice against the church, there's no way such a thing can be verified. People's childhood memories are fallible to say the least. Could easily be someone holding a grudge for one reason or another who have nurtured a sense of abuse in their minds and who now seek sympathy and attention on account of all their other failings in life.

 

In any case, morality has radically changed in recent decades. C.S. Lewis once observed that in Britain's public schools pederasty was less frowned upon than an improperly buttoned coat. Presumably kids were tougher then. Nowadays people are being conditioned by the media to call their lives ruined on account of hurt feelings  The danger of miscarriage of justice is high, and the penalty for the falsely-accused is arguably worse than death.

 

All these historic cases should be chucked out. Start afresh. New standards of behaviour, new laws, new punishments so everyone is clear on the matter - and educate children so they know how to deal with it immediately rather than decades later.

[ncc1701d]

4 hours ago, CharlesSwann said:

Whatever, presumption of guilt is a disgrace.

 

The charges are apparently 'inappropriate touching' at a swimming baths. Despite everyone's prejudice against the church, there's no way such a thing can be verified. People's childhood memories are fallible to say the least. Could easily be someone holding a grudge for one reason or another who have nurtured a sense of abuse in their minds and who now seek sympathy and attention on account of all their other failings in life.

 

In any case, morality has radically changed in recent decades. C.S. Lewis once observed that in Britain's public schools pederasty was less frowned upon than an improperly buttoned coat. Presumably kids were tougher then. Nowadays people are being conditioned by the media to call their lives ruined on account of hurt feelings  The danger of miscarriage of justice is high, and the penalty for the falsely-accused is arguably worse than death.

 

All these historic cases should be chucked out. Start afresh. New standards of behaviour, new laws, new punishments so everyone is clear on the matter - and educate children so they know how to deal with it immediately rather than decades later.

I disagree with everything you have said.

 

There are countless cases against the Catholic Church globally with regards to this. If you choose to align yourself with their beliefs and teachings and join their club, you do so in the full knowledge of the cover ups from the highest of levels - including the pope. And as such, you are guilty at the very least of enabling.

Edited March 7, 2018 by ncc1701d

[CharlesSwann]

3 hours ago, ncc1701d said:

I disagree with everything you have said.

 

There are countless cases against the Catholic Church globally with regards to this. If you choose to align yourself with their beliefs and teachings and join their club, you do so in the full knowledge of the cover ups from the highest of levels - including the pope. And as such, you are guilty at the very least of enabling.

You disagree that presumption of guilt is a disgrace? That completely undermines any position you might take. And in your zeal you slur those who simply have an opinion on the matter?

I argue from a rational, legal standpoint, you argue from emotion, which is just another reason why trials over historic events based on fallible childhood memory and subject to the most sweeping prejudice (see several comments above) should be thrown out.

[nausea]

Catholic priest colleges were a haven for gay guys in times past; like you had the gay guys and the straight guys; and these formed two totally different camps. Nothing to do with pederasty I suppose, still if it was a haven for gay guys I reckon the pederasts may have found a home there too.

[ncc1701d]

On 3/7/2018 at 8:52 PM, CharlesSwann said:

You disagree that presumption of guilt is a disgrace? That completely undermines any position you might take. And in your zeal you slur those who simply have an opinion on the matter?

I argue from a rational, legal standpoint, you argue from emotion, which is just another reason why trials over historic events based on fallible childhood memory and subject to the most sweeping prejudice (see several comments above) should be thrown out.

Just as Bill Cosby is guilty even though he had a hung jury, just as Roger Ailes is guilty even though no conviction has taken place. So, no it doesn't undermine the position I take. Yes, I will slur anyone who tries to defend those that willingly chose to belong to a "club" that for centuries have committed atrocities, aligned themselves with fascists and actively either encouraged paedophilia or spent millions trying to cover it up.

 

You may think you are being rational and legal, but "Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man". Because when you get 4,444 people in Australia alone all saying the same thing about widespread endemic child abuse at the hands of the catholic church - you may want to pay attention. 

 

To suggest that diddling children was acceptable before and now its not is a reason to "wipe the slate clean" is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time.