That is not the South Link rd, it’s the south ring road
Bodger
Thanks, Ronan, fixed now. Sorry.
topsy
Where’s my comment?
alphasully
Its neither, it’s the Ballincollig By-pass
Hansel
Yep, N22, not N40.
Verbatim
I just see roads with endless possibilities!
newsjustin
As empty as the folder containing any update on the Cardinal Pell case. What’s the story, Bodger?
I found another (4th) story BS did on Pell. https://www.broadsheet.ie/2019/03/12/did-you-like-it/ This one was just prior to his sentencing for the crime he’s been found not-guilty of by a unanimous (7 judges) decision of the Australian High Court. There’s even a comment from me there explaining the flimsiness of the case against him. So I won’t repeat that here.
When is BS going to follow up on this case, a case they produced 4 articles on in the past?
scottser
careful news, BS might insinuate that you do da cha cha like a sissy girl.
newsjustin
That one went over my head Scottser :-)
Ghost of Yep
Can someone get this man a mass for jaysus sake.
Papi
Or even one mention of the victims would be appropriate.
newsjustin
Yes. Any article by BS on the facts of this case should include acknowledgment that sexual abuse of minors by clergy is abhorrent. I doubt there’s a word limit on BS’s posts.
As it happens, I found a 5th BS post on this case. https://www.broadsheet.ie/2019/03/13/accountable/
So that’s 5 posts on a case. But then when there’s a very major development, which affects the entire outcome for all concerned, nothing……just silence from BS.
Why is that? Is BS afraid to report facts that don’t happen to chime precisely with their view on the whole world? Can BS ignore a factual development in a case it’s followed from day one, just because they don’t like it?
…non-jury courts have such a sound record…in this jurisdiction and beyond…
newsjustin
I don’t know if there are any courts of appeal in the whole world that use juries. Maybe you do? Is it the whole notion of an appeal system you object to? Because they’re kind of fundamental.
…what is it you christians say…dancing on the head of a pin…he was found guilty by a jury of his peers…this judgement was over-ruled by a non-jury Court on a point of law…ok…but he does have other charges pending…
newsjustin
It’s not dancing on the head of a pin Busted. It’s one of the cornerstones of our (and the Oz) legal system.
The judgement of the jury was quashed by 7 judges because it was found to be wholly unreasonable and unsafe. The judges found that based upon the evidence before them, no jury, acting reasonably could find a person guilty without reasonable doubt of the crimes he was accused of. Therefore the jury’s decision was unsafe and they quashed it and found him not guilty…..read the decision for yourself.
The “point of law” you mention is actually THE point of trial law, to be able to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It’s not a mere technicality or loophole. Pell was found not guilty on appeal because 7 High Court judges said the evidence showed he was not guilty.
Papi
Wasn’t referring to BS, but to yourself.
newsjustin
I know that.
Janet, I ate my avatar
news ..I’m not a militant atheist, I have no pleasure in taking away your faith, apart from the fact I believe logic alone should do it ..of it gives you comfort that makes me happy. I’m guessing you are not so young, my own Mother prays for me relentlessly,
I’m not going to argue at you, may I suggest you do the same here, it’s a loosing battle, enjoy your faith and ignore that it’s being chipped away at by today’s evolving including BS ?
just a thought
Janet, I ate my avatar
of * if…sorry I’m left handed these days
Janet, I ate my avatar
evolving society…sorry mods,
Papi
Ah, but shur a priest got let off and that’s really all that matters. Suffer: the little children.
newsjustin
That’s not what matters. What matters is that in THIS case, and this case only, a man found guilty in a trial with extraordinarily and worryingly flimsy evidence has had that conviction quashed due to the thoroughly unsafe nature of the conviction. That is something worth commenting on and, for the Australian legal system and society, worth analysing. If you need to use the suffering of children who have been sexually abused to have a go at this man or a church you don’t like, I feel a bit sorry for you.
Janet, I ate my avatar
well maybe understand there will be collateral damage in the fallout ..there certainly had the other way,
I’m sorry for the man if he is innocent but he is part of a much larger insidious group who’s crimes are countless, it’s unfortunate for him, lucky he has legal recourse unlike so many victims
newsjustin
That response wasn’t for you Janet btw.
My faith has little or nothing to do with the issue at hand. But I suspect Pell being a Catholic cardinal has everything to do with his conviction on unsafe evidence, eventually rectified by 7 judges on appeal, and BS’s failure to cover this latest development in the case, despite covering (as they should) every step preceding it.
I don’t know Pell. A lot of people, a lot of catholics even, don’t like him. Something could emerge tomorrow about him or he could be convicted of something else next year. But he’s not guilty here. That’s a fact. Read the High Court’s decision.
Janet, I ate my avatar
I’ll give it a more in-depth look but please understand why people or indeed this site are not leaping to his defense,
it’s to be expected
Papi
Must be tough having to wait this long for a priest to be let off. But, hey, good times now, you can point to this whenever more children get abused. As I’m sure you will.
newsjustin
Nobody benefits, least of all victims of clerical sexual abuse, from shoddy, shambolic, and ultimately wrong convictions of people.
People shouldn’t settle (or in some cases cheerlead) for pseudo-justice as good enough for victims.
newsjustin
Janet, I’m certainly not asking anyone, least of all Broadsheet to leap to Pell’s defence.
I’m simple asking BS to recognise the facts of a case they’ve reported on in at least 5 different posts before now.
Being factual is not defending anyone.
Janet, I ate my avatar
yeah I understand, but you are still on a bit of a mission, excuse the terminology, I think you are missing my point, and I’m not sure how more clearly I can put it because at the end of the day, we are looking through a different lense, but I believe you are thrashing a dead horse here
Papi
At the risk of invoking Godwins law, Stephen Toltz said being a Catholic today is like staying in the Nazi party cos you like Autobahns.
newsjustin
Being happy that a person is convicted, despite a lack of evidence to ensure that conviction is safe, because you dislike their religion or affiliation is exactly like being a Nazi.
That is not the South Link rd, it’s the south ring road
Thanks, Ronan, fixed now. Sorry.
Where’s my comment?
Its neither, it’s the Ballincollig By-pass
Yep, N22, not N40.
I just see roads with endless possibilities!
As empty as the folder containing any update on the Cardinal Pell case. What’s the story, Bodger?
I found another (4th) story BS did on Pell. https://www.broadsheet.ie/2019/03/12/did-you-like-it/ This one was just prior to his sentencing for the crime he’s been found not-guilty of by a unanimous (7 judges) decision of the Australian High Court. There’s even a comment from me there explaining the flimsiness of the case against him. So I won’t repeat that here.
When is BS going to follow up on this case, a case they produced 4 articles on in the past?
careful news, BS might insinuate that you do da cha cha like a sissy girl.
That one went over my head Scottser :-)
Can someone get this man a mass for jaysus sake.
Or even one mention of the victims would be appropriate.
Yes. Any article by BS on the facts of this case should include acknowledgment that sexual abuse of minors by clergy is abhorrent. I doubt there’s a word limit on BS’s posts.
As it happens, I found a 5th BS post on this case. https://www.broadsheet.ie/2019/03/13/accountable/
So that’s 5 posts on a case. But then when there’s a very major development, which affects the entire outcome for all concerned, nothing……just silence from BS.
Why is that? Is BS afraid to report facts that don’t happen to chime precisely with their view on the whole world? Can BS ignore a factual development in a case it’s followed from day one, just because they don’t like it?
…ok…I’ll do a draft…’Aus judges overrule jury decision…covid-19 claims another victim’…
Unsafe convictions should always be overturned by appeal courts in any properly functioning legal system.
…non-jury courts have such a sound record…in this jurisdiction and beyond…
I don’t know if there are any courts of appeal in the whole world that use juries. Maybe you do? Is it the whole notion of an appeal system you object to? Because they’re kind of fundamental.
…ok..lets accept that the jury verdict has been over-ruled…Pell is declared innocent…now…unto the next one…
He was declared not guilty. He is presumed innocent.
…what is it you christians say…dancing on the head of a pin…he was found guilty by a jury of his peers…this judgement was over-ruled by a non-jury Court on a point of law…ok…but he does have other charges pending…
It’s not dancing on the head of a pin Busted. It’s one of the cornerstones of our (and the Oz) legal system.
The judgement of the jury was quashed by 7 judges because it was found to be wholly unreasonable and unsafe. The judges found that based upon the evidence before them, no jury, acting reasonably could find a person guilty without reasonable doubt of the crimes he was accused of. Therefore the jury’s decision was unsafe and they quashed it and found him not guilty…..read the decision for yourself.
The “point of law” you mention is actually THE point of trial law, to be able to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It’s not a mere technicality or loophole. Pell was found not guilty on appeal because 7 High Court judges said the evidence showed he was not guilty.
Wasn’t referring to BS, but to yourself.
I know that.
news ..I’m not a militant atheist, I have no pleasure in taking away your faith, apart from the fact I believe logic alone should do it ..of it gives you comfort that makes me happy. I’m guessing you are not so young, my own Mother prays for me relentlessly,
I’m not going to argue at you, may I suggest you do the same here, it’s a loosing battle, enjoy your faith and ignore that it’s being chipped away at by today’s evolving including BS ?
just a thought
of * if…sorry I’m left handed these days
evolving society…sorry mods,
Ah, but shur a priest got let off and that’s really all that matters. Suffer: the little children.
That’s not what matters. What matters is that in THIS case, and this case only, a man found guilty in a trial with extraordinarily and worryingly flimsy evidence has had that conviction quashed due to the thoroughly unsafe nature of the conviction. That is something worth commenting on and, for the Australian legal system and society, worth analysing. If you need to use the suffering of children who have been sexually abused to have a go at this man or a church you don’t like, I feel a bit sorry for you.
well maybe understand there will be collateral damage in the fallout ..there certainly had the other way,
I’m sorry for the man if he is innocent but he is part of a much larger insidious group who’s crimes are countless, it’s unfortunate for him, lucky he has legal recourse unlike so many victims
That response wasn’t for you Janet btw.
My faith has little or nothing to do with the issue at hand. But I suspect Pell being a Catholic cardinal has everything to do with his conviction on unsafe evidence, eventually rectified by 7 judges on appeal, and BS’s failure to cover this latest development in the case, despite covering (as they should) every step preceding it.
I don’t know Pell. A lot of people, a lot of catholics even, don’t like him. Something could emerge tomorrow about him or he could be convicted of something else next year. But he’s not guilty here. That’s a fact. Read the High Court’s decision.
I’ll give it a more in-depth look but please understand why people or indeed this site are not leaping to his defense,
it’s to be expected
Must be tough having to wait this long for a priest to be let off. But, hey, good times now, you can point to this whenever more children get abused. As I’m sure you will.
Nobody benefits, least of all victims of clerical sexual abuse, from shoddy, shambolic, and ultimately wrong convictions of people.
People shouldn’t settle (or in some cases cheerlead) for pseudo-justice as good enough for victims.
Janet, I’m certainly not asking anyone, least of all Broadsheet to leap to Pell’s defence.
I’m simple asking BS to recognise the facts of a case they’ve reported on in at least 5 different posts before now.
Being factual is not defending anyone.
yeah I understand, but you are still on a bit of a mission, excuse the terminology, I think you are missing my point, and I’m not sure how more clearly I can put it because at the end of the day, we are looking through a different lense, but I believe you are thrashing a dead horse here
At the risk of invoking Godwins law, Stephen Toltz said being a Catholic today is like staying in the Nazi party cos you like Autobahns.
Being happy that a person is convicted, despite a lack of evidence to ensure that conviction is safe, because you dislike their religion or affiliation is exactly like being a Nazi.