Leave Granted - The High Court will hear Cardinal Pell's appeal against his conviction on historic child sex offence charges

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

(edited )

George Pell's case to be heard by High Court

Disgraced Cardinal George Pell will get another bid to overturn his child-sex convictions and restore his reputation after the High Court announced it would hear his application to appeal.

Australia’s highest court said on Wednesday it had referred Pell's application to appeal his convictions to the court's full bench after March 4.

Pell's lawyers will now need to prepare for a hearing before seven judges.

Robert Richter, the prominent QC who represented Pell at trial, said on Wednesday morning: "I hope the appeal comes on quickly."

Pell was jailed in March for raping one choirboy and sexually assaulting another at St Patrick’s Cathedral in East Melbourne more than 20 years ago.

Immediately after the High Court's decision was announced, Pell's lawyers held a meeting with him at the Melbourne Assessment Prison.

Cardinal Pell is now able – in principle at least – to apply for bail, although it is understood that he won't at this stage.

Pell, 78, who was once Australia's most senior Catholic and rose to become the Vatican's treasurer, is isolated from the general prison population, serving a six-year jail term.

He will not be eligible for parole until he has served three years and eight months.

Lisa Flynn, who represents the father of Pell’s deceased victim, said her client was "gutted" by the decision, but remained hopeful.

"He was really hopeful that this would be over for him today because as the process goes on, and has gone on for some time, it is extremely retraumatising for him," Ms Flynn of Shine Lawyers said.

The decision to refer the matter to the full bench of the High Court means the Vatican will likely delay taking any action against Pell, who retains his title of Cardinal.

It will also delay the release of any findings against Pell made by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

About 60 pages of the royal commission's report on the activities of clergy in the Ballarat diocese – where Pell lived and worked alongside a number of priests who have since been jailed for molesting children – were redacted so as not to prejudice his criminal proceedings.

Attorney General Christian Porter said in March that the redacted portion of the report would remain hidden until at least after Pell’s appeal had been heard.

Pell was unanimously convicted by a Victorian County Court jury last December of sex offences against two children when he was Archbishop of Melbourne.

The case against Pell was heavily reliant on the testimony of a former choirboy, who described how Pell assaulted the two boys after he caught them drinking altar wine in the cathedral sacristy after Sunday mass.

His conviction was upheld by a 2-1 majority decision of the Court of Appeal in August.

At the heart of Pell’s appeal to the High Court is the question of whether the evidence of a complainant in a sexual abuse case, no matter how compelling and believable, can eliminate all reasonable doubt raised by other witnesses.

Wednesday's decision is a part win for the Cardinal: he has not won the right to appeal, but two judges of the High Court ruled the matter should be considered by the full bench.

In August Chief Justice Anne Ferguson and Court of Appeal President Chris Maxwell found Pell’s accuser was neither a liar nor a fantasist, but a compelling witness of truth.

Pell’s appeal to the High Court hinges on the argument that the decision of Justices Ferguson and Maxwell failed to properly weigh the evidence of other witnesses who testified to the unlikelihood and in some cases near impossibility, of Pell being alone in the sacristy with two choristers.

The Cardinal's legal counsel, Brett Walker, SC, submitted that although the choirboy was compelling and believable, this other evidence created reasonable doubt about Pell’s guilt.

Loading According to Mr Walker, the dissenting judge, Justice Mark Weinberg, got it right.

"The majority's erroneous judicial method prevented them from recognising that, even on their own incomplete analysis of the evidence, doubt was raised and left," Mr Walker submitted.

In response, Kerri Judd, QC, Victoria’s director of public prosecutions, said there was no error in the Court of Appeal’s majority decision and no important question in law raised by Pell’s legal team.

Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported the High Court would hear Pell's appeal. The High Court has referred his application for special leave to appeal to the full bench of the High Court.

**George Pell's case to be heard by High Court** Disgraced Cardinal George Pell will get another bid to overturn his child-sex convictions and restore his reputation after the High Court announced it would hear his application to appeal. Australia’s highest court said on Wednesday it had referred Pell's application to appeal his convictions to the court's full bench after March 4. Pell's lawyers will now need to prepare for a hearing before seven judges. Robert Richter, the prominent QC who represented Pell at trial, said on Wednesday morning: "I hope the appeal comes on quickly." Pell was jailed in March for raping one choirboy and sexually assaulting another at St Patrick’s Cathedral in East Melbourne more than 20 years ago. Immediately after the High Court's decision was announced, Pell's lawyers held a meeting with him at the Melbourne Assessment Prison. Cardinal Pell is now able – in principle at least – to apply for bail, although it is understood that he won't at this stage. Pell, 78, who was once Australia's most senior Catholic and rose to become the Vatican's treasurer, is isolated from the general prison population, serving a six-year jail term. He will not be eligible for parole until he has served three years and eight months. Lisa Flynn, who represents the father of Pell’s deceased victim, said her client was "gutted" by the decision, but remained hopeful. "He was really hopeful that this would be over for him today because as the process goes on, and has gone on for some time, it is extremely retraumatising for him," Ms Flynn of Shine Lawyers said. The decision to refer the matter to the full bench of the High Court means the Vatican will likely delay taking any action against Pell, who retains his title of Cardinal. It will also delay the release of any findings against Pell made by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. About 60 pages of the royal commission's report on the activities of clergy in the Ballarat diocese – where Pell lived and worked alongside a number of priests who have since been jailed for molesting children – were redacted so as not to prejudice his criminal proceedings. Attorney General Christian Porter said in March that the redacted portion of the report would remain hidden until at least after Pell’s appeal had been heard. Pell was unanimously convicted by a Victorian County Court jury last December of sex offences against two children when he was Archbishop of Melbourne. The case against Pell was heavily reliant on the testimony of a former choirboy, who described how Pell assaulted the two boys after he caught them drinking altar wine in the cathedral sacristy after Sunday mass. His conviction was upheld by a 2-1 majority decision of the Court of Appeal in August. At the heart of Pell’s appeal to the High Court is the question of whether the evidence of a complainant in a sexual abuse case, no matter how compelling and believable, can eliminate all reasonable doubt raised by other witnesses. Wednesday's decision is a part win for the Cardinal: he has not won the right to appeal, but two judges of the High Court ruled the matter should be considered by the full bench. In August Chief Justice Anne Ferguson and Court of Appeal President Chris Maxwell found Pell’s accuser was neither a liar nor a fantasist, but a compelling witness of truth. Pell’s appeal to the High Court hinges on the argument that the decision of Justices Ferguson and Maxwell failed to properly weigh the evidence of other witnesses who testified to the unlikelihood and in some cases near impossibility, of Pell being alone in the sacristy with two choristers. The Cardinal's legal counsel, Brett Walker, SC, submitted that although the choirboy was compelling and believable, this other evidence created reasonable doubt about Pell’s guilt. Loading According to Mr Walker, the dissenting judge, Justice Mark Weinberg, got it right. "The majority's erroneous judicial method prevented them from recognising that, even on their own incomplete analysis of the evidence, doubt was raised and left," Mr Walker submitted. In response, Kerri Judd, QC, Victoria’s director of public prosecutions, said there was no error in the Court of Appeal’s majority decision and no important question in law raised by Pell’s legal team. Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported the High Court would hear Pell's appeal. The High Court has referred his application for special leave to appeal to the full bench of the High Court.

link

(post is archived)