Cardinal Pell

Why, as Paul Kelly alleges, is the Justice System on trial here?

Second Chance wrote: Why, as Paul Kelly alleges, is the Justice System on trial here? Nothing in his typically overblown and self-centric piece adequately supports his notion any more so than would any other criminal trial.

Im not sure. but 'sub judice' certainly had an effect in here on a few posters. the back flip and diplomacy was lol.

Second Chance wrote: Why, as Paul Kelly alleges, is the Justice System on trial here? Nothing in his typically overblown and self-centric piece adequately supports his notion any more so than would any other criminal trial.

I have no idea who Paul Kelly is (unless the song writer has done a 180 degree turn) but I'm guessing he goes in the RWNJ category of journalists? I gave up on aussie "journalism" years ago.

I think it's pretty clear what he and Pell and many (most?) ordinary people without a chip on their shoulder (even the victims of abuse, actually) have been saying for a while now. Geez even Judge H said it, unless I read it wrong.

Ironically, Tim Minchin and his kind may end up causing a guilty man to go free!

subastral wrote: Someone has to hold your idiocy to account.  But do explain how this and subsequent cover-ups aren't grounds for criminal charges. I am all ears.

Not sure about the "all ears" claim. As usual you completely missed the point. My understanding of paedophilia is that it is not a condition that you can easily turn off & on. I would have thought that would be even more so for a fellow with that sort of power & access to his "prey". So to have only 3 victims come forward across a 40 year plus period I find a touch unusual....suspicious if you like. I mean its not as if victims would be not aware of the circus....its been going on for years.

Interesting turns this thread is taking.

cabosanlucas wrote: stayer wrote: Interesting turns this thread is taking. seems to coincide with the public call of sub judice in effect.

Zzz

Wow, Kelly's lost it. What a load of shrill nonsense. He used to be good, looks like he's now thrown his lot in with the culture warriors at the Oz. Pretty obvious how they're going to play this, but will be interesting to see how New Ltd run it in their tabloids, given the lynch mob mentality of most of their readers.

Whale wrote: Bolt was at it again defending his mate. Not directly, just saying it is impossible to him to get a fair trial. In other words Bolta knows he is innocent and will disregard any guilty verdict if it turns out that way. And this guy gets paid a fortune for his various media gigs

What club would that be stayer?

Go Flash Go wrote: Whale wrote: Bolt was at it again defending his mate. Not directly, just saying it is impossible to him to get a fair trial. In other words Bolta knows he is innocent and will disregard any guilty verdict if it turns out that way. And this guy gets paid a fortune for his various media gigs Bolt's met the guy have you Whale that can make a big differance. Have a sister that worked with Pell for years first thing she said about him when he appeared on the News re this is "he's been framed" As have advised Sub .... save yself the grief    Or if you enjoy it excuse me join the que of the clueless

most amusing, you think and patting yourself on the back for your "cleverness"

of course you completely miss my point, it is irrelevant to the article he wrote if he has met him or not.  He is saying Pell will not get a fair trial because Bolt is always with the establishment 100% of the time. I on the other hand think Pell will get a fair trial, don't need to have met him to make that judgement. I know if I was on the jury I would reach a verdict only on the evidence,not my gut instinct

But hey keep at it sniper

I'm not sure who gets a fair trial these days, there is bound to be at least one or two nutjobs on the jury, which I guess works against a conviction more than for one. Lots of people walking the streets because an obstinate juror would not convict out of motives un-related to
the relevant evidence.

Detailed? Put down the bottle stayer. I made a comment in regards to an article reproduced in this forum. Hadn't read the guy in probably a decade. Thought it was a poor piece and said so. You're all over the place.

for an "educated " man you are an ignoramus. Is one of the most respected and long serving political journalists in Australia.  Was respected maybe

hahaha that is mildly amusing

I'd google him but I'm pretty sure I'd get the actual Paul Kelly - the songwriter.