LINKS to the live coverage:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-21/george-pell-appeal-live-stream/11432748
Faces of Cardinal Pell’s Appeal Judges
National Catholic Register: Perspective 8/20, just before appeal was rejected, and after the appeal decision:
LifeSite News:
Dissenting judge in Cdl. Pell’s appeal: Evidence should ‘lead inevitably to acquittal
|
From all the evidence from the testimonies of this trial, I just find Cardinal Pell’s guilt very unlikely. It would’ve had to have been the perfect storm of a Holy Mass: with Cardinal Pell not greeting the congregation as normal, along with a host of other inconsistencies. And why did the first jury fail to reach a decision (and thus dismissed), but the 2nd jury delivered a unanimous verdict?
I somehow feel like no one on the original jury, nor the judges who rejected the appeal were basing their decision on emotions. They failed to look at the facts. While emotions are powerful, they do not equate to truth.
Lord Forgive me if I am wrong (and if I am wrong: he deserves to be jailed and laicized), but somehow it just seems that the stories in combination with a Mass do not line up.
I mean, the 2nd jury didn’t look at facts.