George Pell's Appeal "Glosses over" Evidence That Supports Conviction, DPP Says

By Luke Henriques-Gomes
The Guardian
February 2, 2020

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/feb/03/george-pells-appeal-glosses-over-evidence-that-supports-conviction-dpp-says

George.jpg George Pell’s lawyers have argued that Victoria’s court of appeal relied on their ‘belief’ in the complainant to eliminate doubt and uphold the conviction. Photograph: Andy B

George Pell’s appeal to the high court “glosses over” evidence that supports his conviction for child sexual abuse, Victoria’s Director of Public Prosecutions has argued.

Pell, who has won the right to have Australia’s top court review his conviction, argues in legal submissions that the Victorian court of appeal erred when it found that jurors were not unreasonable to believe the testimony of his victim.

But in its own submission to the court, Victoria’s Director of Public Prosecutions said Pell’s appeal “glosses over evidence supportive of the account of the complainant”.

“There was a significant body of evidence at trial,” the submission said. “The applicant refers only to a small portion of that evidence. Consequently, the … Applicant’s Submissions provide an incomplete and inaccurate picture of the facts.”

In a two-one majority decision handed down in August, Victoria’s court of appeal upheld Pell’s conviction on one count of sexual penetration of a child under the age of 16 and four counts of an indecent act against a child under the age of 16. He is currently serving a six-year sentence.

In his submission, published in early January, Pell’s lawyers argue that, in the face of exculpatory evidence, the court of appeal relied on their “belief” in the complainant to eliminate doubt and uphold the conviction.

“Any conflation of the concepts of ‘belief’ and ‘elimination of doubt’ is an attempt to fundamentally depart from the defining safeguards of the accusatorial system of criminal justice,” the submission from Bret Walker SC said. “These safeguards protect people from the risk of being wrongfully convicted of crimes they did not commit.”

Victoria’s Director of Public Prosecutions rejected this argument in documents now published by the high court. “The applicant suggests that the majority proceeded on the basis of ‘believing’ [the victim] – that this was ‘the end’ of the majority’s enquiry,” wrote the Victorian Director of Public of Prosecutions, Kerri Judd QC.

“The majority did not reason on the basis of ‘belief’ in [the victim]. Rather, they ‘reviewed the whole of the evidence’ and made an ‘assessment of [the victim]’s credibility and reliability’.”

In December 2018, a jury in the county court of Victoria returned a unanimous guilty verdict on five charges, finding that Pell had sexually abused two 13-year-old choirboys St Patrick’s Cathedral after catching them drinking sacramental wine in the priests’ sacristy. He assaulted one of them again a few weeks later.

Judd said the submission from Pell’s legal team “disregards” evidence that supported the victim’s account, including his accurate description of the sacristy. Two of the three appeal court judges had described the complainant as a compelling, truthful witness.

The majority of the court of appeal had not been “persuaded that the jury must have had a reasonable doubt about [Pell]’s guilt”, Judd said.

“In addition, the majority formed the view on the whole of the evidence that they themselves did not experience a doubt about [Pell]’s guilt.”

The full court will hear the case in Canberra on 11 March.

In Australia, Blue Knot Foundation can be contacted on 1300 657 380 or at www.blueknot.org.au; Bravehearts Inc, which offers counselling and support for survivors and child protection advocacy, can be contacted on 1800 272 831; 1800 Respect is a 24-hour telephone and online crisis support service available on 1800 737 732 or at www.1800respect.org.au; for 24-hour crisis support and suicide prevention call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or visit www.lifeline.org.au.

• This article was amended on Wednesday 5 February 2020. The previous version incorrectly stated that George Pell was convicted in the Victorian supreme court, it was in fact the county court of Victoria.