Your blow-off attitude is precisely why the association between the Catholic Church and pederasty has stuck like napalm.
You don’t get the level of outrage a normal person should have over it - at all.
The jurors probably figured that if Pell didn’t do this particular crime, there’s no way he could have held that position as long as he did and not at the very minimum aided and abetted a whole lot of other such crimes.
Because the Catholic Church is run and operated by a global homo-pederasty ring. That is a reality that has nothing to do with anyone you may point the finger at in your clueless, blind self-righteousness.
Thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned reply.
Except there were no jurors involved in this case level; it was 3 judges, 2 of whom ruled against the cardinal, one who said the evidence didn’t support the conviction and ruled for the cardinal. So who were the two judges who ruled against the cardinal and what are their backgrounds? I suspect pre-bias on their part.
Wow, so you believe in "justice" on the principle of "even if you're innocent of this offense, you're probably guilty of a lot of others, so we'll punish you just the same"?
Last time I checked, the *legal* framework required "guilt [of the offenses *charged under the indictment*] beyond a reasonable doubt," not "well, you've got it coming anyway, so you're toast".
You would not want to be judged by a jury like that, I'll wager.