Vibe recidivism in Victoria: Judge’s ruling paves way for choirboy’s father to sue church and Pell.
-
Latest Posts
- Blubbering Blowhards Battered
- Noticeably eager to escalate Labor’s national war on Catholics
- 2023: “Novak Djokovic has stirred anger after calling for peace”
- I’ll tell you what rule I applied, sir. I applied rule D.S.C!
- Few causes are more satisfying than routing the Spanish left
- The Ma’am With The Golden Smarm
- Mentally vulnerable ‘No’ voters officially stigmatised as racists
-
Recent Comments
-
TCL Archive
- May 2023 (88)
- April 2023 (90)
- March 2023 (118)
- February 2023 (84)
- January 2023 (101)
- December 2022 (62)
- November 2022 (72)
- October 2022 (83)
- September 2022 (81)
- August 2022 (82)
- July 2022 (83)
- June 2022 (113)
- May 2022 (80)
- April 2022 (114)
- March 2022 (117)
- February 2022 (120)
- January 2022 (126)
- December 2021 (116)
- November 2021 (112)
- October 2021 (126)
- September 2021 (84)
- August 2021 (6)
-
Post Categories
- Art, music, letters
- Australian police state
- Climate hoax
- COVID
- COVID hysteria
- Culture
- Defence and national security
- Economics and the economy
- Education
- Elections
- Ethics and morality
- Fake conservatism
- Fake news
- Fake science
- Federal politics
- Foreign policy
- Freedom
- General
- History
- Hypocrisy of the left
- Innovation and technology
- International
- Left-wing extremism
- Legal affairs
- Media
- Politics
- Religion and faith
- Rule of law
- Social media
- Sport
- State politics
- US politics
- War and peace
- War on Christianity
- Whatever
-
The Cat Empire
Blogroll
-
I want to sue the useless father.
“A Victorian court.”
That figures.
As mentioned at Dover’s site: the basis for the father to sue seems to be that of the 2015 allegations in the first instance having caused trauma, albeit that the allegations according to the HCA were false. The question then is, who is responsible for the false allegations – not the Catholic Archdiocese nor Cardinal Pell. Rather the allegations can be sourced to the complainant and Vicpol and the DPP.
Note the brazen lie in the ABC headline:
Catholic Church suffers setback as court rules lawsuit brought by Pell accuser’s father can continue.
He never accused Pell of anything.
In fact he told his mother it never happened.
The father seems to not believe his own son.
and that is why I want to sue the despicable so called “father”.
Come out of her, my people.
So what next? Every trial that ends in a nit guilty verdict will be followed by the DPP, Police and Complainant being sued for loss of reputation and discomfort?
Pell had his chance to sue the ABC, right? Unlike the poor and meek, he failed to fight the ABC even though he would have the wealth and resources to win. We suffer because of this. A missed opportunity.
Agree, this is the result of turning the other cheek.
he would have the wealth and resources
He actually doesn’t.
Yeah the Catholic church is hard up.
The civil case will be interesting in light of the many issues with the criminal case. How was it that the investigators or DPP did not seem to do research to work out the time taken/distance for the formal procession to get back inside the Cathedral and the composition of the procession with the senior altar servers playing a major role (and carrying out ‘cleaning up’ duties inside the sacristy when the alleged offending was supposed to have taken place), the large number of choristers (sopranos, altos, basses) and lastly in the procession – the senior clergy? The jury and judges seem to have visited the Cathedral on a weekday not at a busy Sunday Solemn Mass time. The moving animation prepared by the defence was not permitted to be shown. How did the complainant describe finding wine in a storage cupboard in the sacristy that was not yet built in 1996? Evident in the Rome interview with VicPol online. Watch the video of K Judd on the HC website 12 March 2020 around 2:50 to see some of the issues in the case.
Yeah the Catholic church is hard up.
It doesn’t fund his legal cases.
A little bit hard to take legal action against Pell if Pell hasn’t been accused of anything.
the ABC article says He is taking action against Pell so no the ABC is not lying CL has not read his link.
If this bloke wants to take legal action then he is entitled. It will cost a bit of money and if he does not have a good case he will be giving away good money after bad.
Non Mentis
A little bit hard to take legal action against Pell if Pell hasn’t been accused of anything.
the ABC article says He is taking action against Pell so no the ABC is not lying CL has not read his link.
These sentences seem contradictory, but that might just be your usual incoherent sentence construction. Regardless, Pell has been found Not Guilty by the High Court, which would seem to leave only those who made the allegations to have caused the trauma, including Witness J, Their ABC, and various other journalists and public figures.
“Pell had his chance to sue the ABC, right? Unlike the poor and meek, he failed to fight the ABC even though he would have the wealth and resources to win. We suffer because of this. A missed opportunity.”
1. Whilst I have some sympathy with your sentiment about suing the ABC, Pell is an elderly man. It takes enormous stamina to endure what he endured. He’s tired, he went to prison for a crime he did not commit, I think he just wants to lead a quiet life.
2. Pell himself, along with some private donors (that leftist scum tried to out) paid his legal fees, not the Church. He actually admitted, in his interview with Andrew Bolt the day after his HC verdict, that he had very little money left.
3. However, moving forward I do think it’s time for those on the right to fight back against the endless smears, lies and ridicule routinely vomited up by progressives and their buddies in the MSM. I’m pleased that Lachlan Murdoch is suing Crikey. Bernard Keane, activist journalist at Crikey, wrote and published a piece last month that inferred that Lachlan Murdoch and his father, as owners of Fox News, incited the January 6 riot. Firstly, such a claim is balderdash and secondly, it’s defamatory. I want to see Crikey pay up…big time.
The link:
Catholic Church suffers setback as court rules lawsuit brought by Pell accuser’s father can continue.
The father’s son never accused Pell of anything.
That is a lie.
Bankrupted would be better.
A Victorian court has ruled the father of a former choirboy who prosecutors had alleged was sexually abused by George Pell can pursue civil action against both the cardinal and the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne
no as usual you are lying and can’t even read the first paragraph of your link.
Civil action is legal action. you cannot take legal action unless you are accusing someone of something.
This is simply embarrassing
You are either stupid, lacking reading comprehension, or just disingenuous.
Or maybe all three.
The link:
Catholic Church suffers setback as court rules lawsuit brought by Pell accuser’s father can continue.
The father’s son never accused Pell of anything.
That is a lie.
Non Mentis
Civil action is legal action. you cannot take legal action unless you are accusing someone of something.
The action is a claim for trauma after hearing of the allegations against Cardinal Pell.
As the allegations have been found to be false, it is hard to see (but perhaps not in the corrupt state of Victorian law administration) how Cardinal Pell or the Archdiocese can be sued over allegations that they did not make. The obvious targets should be the Victorian Police and DPP, Their ABC and other media organisations that amplified the allegations (thus increasing the trauma), individual journalists who wrote books on the subject, and silly politicians who also sought the limelight.
Glad that you wrote that, not me, John.
As a Melburnian, if I wrote it I might get a visit from the local constabulary and wind up being arrested and handcuffed, in pyjamas, in my own living room!
Lee
Implicitly supporting me might bring the same result.
LOL.
I make, of course, no imputations about the quality of the Victorian judiciary.
But I note as an unadorned, neutral matter of fact, that the judge in this case made his way into the law as a union advocate – a fact from which I draw no inferences.
Similarly, I note the coincidence between the filing of this case and the approach of the Victorian election in November. But of course I make no inferences about cause, effect or motivation.
I am sure that Victoria has the best system the Socialist Left of the state ALP can find.
So what did happen to those secretive transfers of money from the Vatican bank to an Australian account which have been disbursed into the ether ?
The ABC providing free advertising at the taxpayers’ expense for its pet gaggle of leftist compo lawyers:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-26/families-clergy-abuse-victims-legal-precedent-litigation/101374948
Interesting that the period is July 1996 to December 1996, and that the February 1997 alleged incident is not included.
John says:
31 August, 2022 at 7:28 pm
Interesting that the period is July 1996 to December 1996, and that the February 1997 alleged incident is not included.
He probably has not caught up with the changes made in the accuser’s story, to make the dates fit with reality.