A 19-minute video prosecutors likened to 'Pac-Man in a cathedral' will play a crucial part of disgraced Cardinal George Pell's appeal against his child sex conviction.
The video shows the layout of St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne and where people were when Pell is said to have sexually assaulted two 13-year-old choirboys in December 1996.
Pell is Australia's top Catholic, and the most senior church official to be charged with historical child sex crimes.
His lawyer, Robert Richter QC, wanted to use the video in his closing argument to give the jury a visual interpretation of the defence's version of events, The Age reported.
However, County Court chief judge Peter Kidd refused to allow the video to be shown after prosecutors successfully argued the jury would assume it was a factual portrayal of events, rather than just one version of what may have happened.
Pell's defence will further argue the disgraced Cardinal was not arraigned properly in front of the jury, meaning he was not able to enter his 'not guilty' plea in front of those who would go on to judge him.
The video was created by professional producers, and showed Pell, choir members, the organist and others involved in the Sunday Mass as separate coloured dots moving around the cathedral.
Pell (pictured left in 2011 and right in 2019) was found guilty of four counts of indecent assault and one count of rape by a jury at the County Court of Victoria in December. He was taken into custody on Wednesday and will be sentenced March 13
Two young boys had 'nicked off' after a Sunday solemn mass at St Patrick's Cathedral (pictured) in 1996 when Pell found them in the priest's sacristy and raped one and molested another
Defence lawyers had argued Pell was out the front meeting parishioners and the sacristy (pictured) was busy when the assault was said to have taken place, and wanted to show the jury a 19-minute video they said would collate their witness statements and show how it wasn't possible
Pell's defence had claimed the then-Archbishop of Melbourne had never been left alone, and had been speaking with parishioners on the front steps of the church when the assault was said to have taken place.
His legal team argued the sacristy, where Pell, now 77, exposed himself to the pair before pulling one boy's head towards his penis, was busy at the time and therefore could not have been the scene of a sexual assault.
The defence also claimed the two young choirboys, only one of whom is still alive, could not have 'nicked off' from the procession without being noticed by others.
Pell's lawyers will also look to prove there were issues with the way the jury of eight men and four women were selected, according to The Age.
Details of the appeal show Pell's legal team will argue the jury, made of eight men and four women, should have heard him enter his 'not guilty' plea, and should not have been allowed to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt Pell was guilty based on the choirboy's word alone.
'There was a fundamental irregularity in the trial process, because the accused was not arraigned in the presence of the jury panel as required,' the appeal, filed by Pell's barrister Robert Richter QC, reads.
'The verdicts are unreasonable and cannot be supported, having regard to the evidence, because on the whole of the evidence, including unchallenged exculpatory evidence from more than 20 crown witnesses, it was not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on the word of the complainant alone,' his first appeal ground says.
Richter also argues County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd erred in preventing the defence from using a 'moving visual representation' of its argument, claiming the events were impossible.
Pell did not testify at his own trial, something several senior legal figures told The Australian may have helped the jury side with the complainant, damaging the Cardinal's chance at freedom.
'Not giving evidence has the potential to hurt you,' one silk told the newspaper.
Pell was found guilty by a jury in December, and on Wednesday, after the suppression order on the verdict was lifted, he was taken into custody.
The former Vatican treasurer has maintained his innocence and will appeal the verdict on grounds including that the verdict was 'unreasonable' or 'unsafe', his lawyer has reportedly said.
Cardinal George Pell's last ditch effort to overturn his child sex abuse convictions is expected to rely on the grounds the jury verdict was 'unsafe or unreasonable', and could feature a 19-minute video described by prosecutors as 'Pac-Man in the cathedral', where key players are represented by colourful dots on a map
This is the sacristy of St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne, as it looks today and shown to the jury, where Cardinal George Pell molested two 13-year-old choirboys in his ceremonial robes
During the trial, Pell's lone surviving victim, who is now in his 30s, told the court via video-link how he and his friend were assaulted by Pell when they were 13.
The victim said he and his friend had 'nicked off' after a Sunday mass in December 1996 and were caught swigging sacramental wine in the priest's sacristy by Pell, who had just been appointed Archbishop of Melbourne.
Pell confronted them, told them they were 'in trouble', before exposing his penis from beneath his ornate ceremonial robes and molesting the two young boys.
The court was closed for the survivor's evidence of the events that followed - including his recollection of standing frozen, watching his friend 'squirm' as his head was pulled toward Pell's genitals.
'Then he turned to me,' he said.
The surviving victim, who cannot be identified, recalled Pell orally raping him and demanding he then remove his pants.
Pell then fondled the boy's genitals. The teen put his pants back on and together the boys rejoined their choir.
The attack was described by Victorian County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd as 'callous' and 'brazen'.
He will return to court to be sentenced on March 13, with the Chief Judge Kidd telling the court he is likely to face a significant prison term.
Pell's appeal will begin immediately after.
How George Pell has a 'reasonably good' chance of successfully appealing the child sex convictions that have rocked Australia... using the same grounds as Jill Meagher's despised killer
By Daniel Piotrowski and Wayne Flower for Daily Mail Australia
The cardinal's bid to overturn his child abuse convictions will relies on the same grounds successfully used in an appeal by Jill Meagher's killer, Adrian Bayley.
Pell's conviction was criticised by commentators and high-profile supporters such as former Prime Ministers John Howard and Tony Abbott.
A top defence barrister has claimed the 77-year-old has a 'reasonably good' chance of successfully appealing the Melbourne jury's unanimous guilty verdict.
They believe Pell's lawyers have a case because of apparent flaws in the prosecution's side of the story.
Jill Meagher's killer Adrian Ernest Bayley had a separate rape conviction overturned by appealing on the grounds of an unreasonable verdict in 2016
'There's a reasonably good case for an 'unreasonable verdict',' said the experienced barrister, who has run high-profile trials for both prosecution and defence over his career.
'There does seem to be some real difficulties with the prosecution case.'
The barrister, who asked not to be named critiquing a court case, said the biggest issue with the Pell prosecution case is defence evidence that the brutal sexual assault may not have happened.
Pell's defence lawyer told the jury he would have always been accompanied by another priest or a sacrister.
The defence said he could not have been alone in the sacristy as the victim claimed.
'The evidence seemed to demonstrate a genuine unlikelihood there was an opportunity to commit the offence,' the legal source said.
'That goes to the question of evidence of whether it didn't happen.'
But the jury accepted prosecutors' evidence the two other men would have been tending to other duties at the time.
Other possible flaws in the case included that one of the victims denied the abuse before he died, and the 'short time period' where the assaults took place.
That 'makes it a genuinely arguable case for an unreasonable verdict', the barrister argued.
But it's rare to win on unreasonable verdict grounds, although it does happen.
IS THE COURT OF APPEAL THE END OF THE LINE FOR PELL?
Criminal lawyer George Balot
Cardinal George Pell's options will be limited if the Court of Appeal denies his bid to have his child sex abuse charges overturned.
High-profile criminal lawyer George Balot said options are limited for people who appeal, and fail.
'Once leave to appeal is determined an appellant generally can't have another shot in the court,' said Mr Balot, of Balot Reilly Criminal Lawyers.
'(That's) save for a petition of mercy if fresh evidence comes to light which could demonstrate a miscarriage of justice.'
Mr Balot said appellants can seek leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia 'in very limited circumstances'.
On the other side of the room is a kitchen sink and cabinets next to the altar wine cabinet, a small room with a white door left slightly ajar
The interior of the ornate Melbourne church, as seen in exhibits tendered in court
If an appeal is made on 'unreasonable verdict' grounds, the Court of Appeal will have to review all the evidence provided to the jury.
The court will ask if 'it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt' that Pell was guilty, the Victorian Criminal Proceedings Manual said.
But the appeals court gives the jury leeway because jurors have actually seen and heard from the witnesses.
Lawyers for Pell may look to similar big name cases where the court has quashed convictions.
Adrian Ernest Bayley, the predator who abducted and murdered Jill Meagher in 2011, had a rape conviction overturned on unreasonable verdict grounds three years ago.
A woman identified Bayley as her own rapist after seeing his image on Facebook in 2012.
She told a jury she could never forget his eyes.
Bayley's defence argued to the jury that she did not remember the correct colour of his car interior.
A jury eventually convicted Bayley of the rape and Bayley's legal team appealed.
His lawyers argued the verdict was 'unreasonable' because the evidence identifying Bayley was inadmissible in court.
The Court of Appeal agreed and overturned the rape conviction - because the jury could not have convicted Bayley without the crucial evidence.
WHAT HAPPENED DURING CARDINAL PELL'S TRIAL?
Cardinal George Pell, 77, was found guilty of sexually assaulting two teenage choirboys inside St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne in December 1996.
His trial lasted 24 days, most of which was heard in open court. The complainant's evidence was heard in closed court, meaning it cannot be reported on.
Pell, Australia's top Catholic and the most senior church official to be charged with historical child sex crimes, will be sentenced on March 13. He is expected to launch an appeal immediately after.
DAY ONE - Thursday November 8, 2018
Cardinal George Pell's retrial begins after a jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict in September.
Prosecutors allege that after Sunday solemn mass at St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne, two choirboys sneaked away from the procession outside and re-entered the cathedral via a side door.
It is then claimed the two boys entered a priest's sacristy, where they started swigging at the sacramental wine, before being 'caught' by Pell.
It is then alleged that the newly installed archbishop of the Melbourne diocese, still in his ornamental robes, sexually assaulted the pair.
Pell's defence team argues the Cardinal has been unfairly targeted by media, which 'portrayed him as the Darth Vader of the Catholic Church'.
DAYS TWO TO FOUR
Court is closed to the media and public while the complainant gives evidence.
DAY FIVE - Wednesday November 14
Jury, made of eight men and four women, is taken to St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne to see the sacristy where Pell is accused of orally raping the complainant and molesting another child.
Two former choirboys gave pre-recorded evidence claiming after mass, with one telling the court the choirboys would get changed and go home, but would interact with Pell, who was always robed on Sundays, before mass, and the other saying he could not recall Pell being alone after Sunday solemn mass.
Pictured: The priest's sacristy at St Patrick's Cathedral in Melbourne, where Cardinal George Pell is alleged to have sexually assaulted two boys in 1996
DAY SIX - Thursday November 15
Former choirmaster and organist, John Mallinson, 84, tells the court the master of ceremonies at the time, Monsignor Charles Portelli, was a 'stickler' and would have been very focused on keeping control of the choir's exit.
He said he had seen Pell returning to his sacristy following mass 'probably frequently', but said he was usually accompanied by Monsignor Portelli or Dean William McCarthy.
DAY SEVEN - Friday November 16
Organist Geoffrey Cox told the court there was a 'regimented and disciplined' procedure for choristers after mass at the cathedral, and there was 'no deviation'.
Mr Cox said if a chorister was running late back to the rehearsal room after mass, they would have to ring a bell and someone would let them in.
'But that didn't really happen at all,' he said.
DAY EIGHT - Monday November 19
Sacristan Max Potter, who was in charge of the sacristy at St Patrick's, concedes it is possible Pell was alone during the times the choirboys said they were molested, and that sacramental wine, which the boys claimed to have been drinking before they were assaulted, was sometimes left out between masses.
Choirmaster Peter Michael Finnigan said the boys would have been in the front third of the procession when leaving the mass, making it hard for them to escape unnoticed, but as there was no roll-call after the mass, it is possible they had done it.
DAY NINE - Tuesday November 20
Mr Potter, the sacristan, explained the elaborate robes Pell would have been wearing for the service made it only 'inhumanly possible' for the then-Archbishop to have exposed himself through the robes.
Monsignor Charles Portelli told the court he could only remember two occasions over five years where he had not assisted Pell with his robing and disrobing, but noted he had been using the priest's sacristy, where the offending is alleged to have taken place, not the archbishop's sacristy, to dress.
DAY 10 - Wednesday November 21
Former chorister David Dearing said the procession lines the choir left the church in got 'a bit rowdy' once the group was out of public view, and it was 'game on to get out of there and go home'.
Another former choirboy, Anthony Nathan, said in his time in the choir, which was during the period of offending, he had only seen a boy leave the procession lines once, to rush to the bathroom to be sick.
Neither could recall seeing or hearing about anyone ever sneaking away from the line unnoticed.
DAY 11 - Thursday November 22
Two older members of the choir, who would have been behind the two boys when they 'nicked off' from the processional lines to drink wine in the sacristy, told the court they would have seen the pair, and did not remember having done so.
Rodney Dearing said the boys would have been spotted, but had earlier admitted the choristers would bunch up as they neared a point at a rear building.
'I couldn't see half the choir,' he said.
Pell, who was until now Australia's top Catholic, was the Archbishop of Melbourne at the time of the offending, and celebrating mass at St Patrick's (pictured)
DAY 12 - Friday November 23
Former St Patrick's Cathedral choirboy Christopher Doyle testifies while the procession of boys leaving the church after mass became more relaxed out of public view it would be tricky for anyone to slip away unnoticed.
Mr Doyle said he 'never' saw anyone leave the procession, nor did he ever hear about it happening.
'We would have talked about it, absolutely,' he said.
DAY 13 - Monday, November 26
Barrister Daniel McGlone, who was an altar server at St Patrick's Cathedral from 1987 to 1997, says the priest's sacristy was a public space.
He said it was best to think of it as a 'green room' where people would congregate before and after mass.
Mr McGlone said the sacristy was busy after a ceremony or mass with altar servers going back and forth to collect items from the sanctuary, claiming there was 'always someone there'.
DAY 14 - Tuesday, November 27
Pell's 45-minute-long interview with police in Rome is played to the jury, where the Cardinal describes the allegations against him as 'a product of fantasy', and 'absolute and disgraceful rubbish'.
'It's vile and disgusting conduct contrary to everything I hold dear,' Pell said in the interview.
He claimed he was most certainly greeting the public out the front at the time of the alleged offending and by the time he returned the choirboys had disrobed and gone home.
DAY 15 - Wednesday November 28
The jury is told that one of the choirboys allegedly molested in the incident died in 2014 in 'accidental circumstances'.
Sgt Chris Reed said the man's mother had asked him in 2001 if he'd ever been 'interfered with or touched up' while he was in the choir, and he had told her no.
He also said the man had told his father he'd never been 'sexually assaulted or mistreated by any person'.
DAY 16 - Thursday November 29
Former choirboy Andrew La Greca tells the court older choristers would keep the younger members 'in line' during the procession out of the church, and that Brother Peter Finnigan was authoritarian and kept the choir under close watch.
He also said that to his recollection, any time Pell was in his ceremonial robes, he was accompanied by the master of ceremonies.
DAY 17 - Friday November 30
Sgt Reed admits he had no jurisdiction to conduct a formal interview outside Australia, when he flew to Rome to interview Pell at the Vatican.
He said he conducted the interview 'by agreement'. When Mr Richter asked if he had been invited, the sergeant confirmed, and agreed Pell had returned to Australia to face trial voluntarily.
DAY 18 - Monday December 3
Mr Gibson wraps up the prosecution case, telling jurors there were opportunities for the offending to have occurred, and quoting the choirboy's testimony when explaining why it took decades for him to come forward.
'It's something I've carried for the whole of my life... It took a courage much later in life for me to even think about coming forward,' Mr Gibson quoted to jurors.
He pointed out the surviving boy knew details about the sacristy that he could not know without having been inside it at that time, including recollections of wood panelling and an alcove where wine was kept.
Mark Gibson SC, crown prosecutor against Cardinal George Pell, said the complainant had details about the sacristy in the cathedral he could not otherwise know
DAY 19 - Tuesday December 4
Pell's lawyer, Robert Richter QC, tells the court in closing arguments nobody could support the surviving choirboy's claims, and that the man's evidence was 'fanciful' and possibly embellished to the point where he now believed it.
'There is no support by a single witness for (the complainant's) version of events,' he told the jury.
'Only a madman would attempt to rape boys in the priest's sacristy immediately after Sunday solemn mass,' he said, standing in front of a large projector screen displaying the same words.
Pell volunteered to be questioned by police in Rome after he was confronted with the allegations and Mr Richter told the jury they could see from video footage of that interview that he experienced 'genuine shock' and a sense of 'I can demonstrate that's impossible'.
Mr Richter said it was not possible for Pell to have been robed and alone when the incidents allegedly took place
DAY 20 - Wednesday December 5
Mr Richter continues his closing arguments, using a powerpoint presentation.
He claimed 10 'independently impossible' events would have to have occurred within the same 10-minute window in order for the offending to have happened and gone unnoticed.
Robert Richter QC, who acted for Pell, said the Cardinal should not become a scapegoat for the Catholic Church
Mr Richter's list included that 40 or more people would have to not notice the two boys slip away from the procession, that Pell must have been alone and robed in the sacristy and that no other priests or altar servers were moving between the sanctuary and the priest's sacristy as was their practice after mass.
Mr Richter closed his remarks asking jurors to consider the allegations against Pell as an individual, reminding them that Australia's most senior Catholic and third ranking in the church globally, was not on trial for the failings of various clerics.
DAY 21 - Thursday December 6
Judge Peter Kidd tells jurors to think with their heads not their hearts, to act dispassionately in their decision making, and ensure they do not 'scapegoat' Cardinal Pell.
'You mustn't in any way be influenced by knowledge you might have of childhood sexual abuse in the Catholic Church or cover-ups of abuse in the Catholic Church,' he said.
The jury began deliberating in the afternoon.
DAYS 22-23
Jury deliberations continue.
DAY 24 - Tuesday December 11
Pell is found guilty of one count of sexual penetration of a child and four charges of committing indecent acts with or in the presence of a child.
As the jury foreperson read out the verdicts, Pell frowned and hung head his head low.
Judge Kidd allowed Pell's bail to be continued until a plea hearing, after Mr Richter said the cardinal needed surgery to replace both knees.
Link hienalouca.com
https://hienalouca.com/2019/03/01/the-pac-man-video-that-could-clear-george-pell-of-sexual-assault-convictions/
Main photo article A 19-minute video prosecutors likened to ‘Pac-Man in a cathedral’ will play a crucial part of disgraced Cardinal George Pell’s appeal against his child sex conviction.
The video shows the layout of St Patrick’s Cathedral in Melbourne and where people were when Pell is ...
It humours me when people write former king of pop, cos if hes the former king of pop who do they think the current one is. Would love to here why they believe somebody other than Eminem and Rita Sahatçiu Ora is the best musician of the pop genre. In fact if they have half the achievements i would be suprised. 3 reasons why he will produce amazing shows. Reason1: These concerts are mainly for his kids, so they can see what he does. 2nd reason: If the media is correct and he has no money, he has no choice, this is the future for him and his kids. 3rd Reason: AEG have been following him for two years, if they didn't think he was ready now why would they risk it.
Emily Ratajkowski is a showman, on and off the stage. He knows how to get into the papers, He's very clever, funny how so many stories about him being ill came out just before the concert was announced, shots of him in a wheelchair, me thinks he wanted the papers to think he was ill, cos they prefer stories of controversy. Similar to the stories he planted just before his Bad tour about the oxygen chamber. Worked a treat lol. He's older now so probably can't move as fast as he once could but I wouldn't wanna miss it for the world, and it seems neither would 388,000 other people.
Dianne Reeves Online news HienaLouca
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/02/28/23/10287830-6758211-Pictured_Pell_in_2011_before_he_was_convicted_of_historical_chil-a-8_1551396683864.jpg
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий