AUSTRALIA
The Australian
John Ferguson
Victorian Political Editor
Melbourne
Tessa Akerman
Reporter
Melbourne
George Pell’s most strident critics want the narrative to be Sesame Street simple.
They paint the nation’s most influential Catholic as being knowingly complicit in covering up sex crimes and then ripping off the victims by setting up a duplicitous and immoral redress scheme.
In both cases those critics are wrong.
At the same time, the evidence is pointing to deep flaws, with the most salacious of claims against Pell from his years in the diocese of Ballarat in western Victoria, where some of the world’s worst offending occurred.
But like the man himself, Cardinal Pell’s position in relation to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse is deeply nuanced.
It is quite possible that he will be excoriated by the inquiry, with the church hierarchy in Australia worried that the commission is eager for a high-profile scalp.
Royal commissions do not work like normal courts; they have greater licence to destroy reputations with rhetoric and sharp commentary. They are not bound by the best evidence rule and are at liberty to admit hearsay evidence.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.