To be honest, I haven't been following the ins and outs of the investigation of George Pell for child sex abuse offences in any close detail. I had the impression that the evidence was very old and not very convincing, but as I say, that was just an impression.
So I am a bit surprised to see that the Victorian Police have charged him.
This will, I expect, infuriate the Catholics and other sundry conservatives of Catallaxy, as well as Andrew Bolt and Gerard Henderson, who have been convinced for many a year that Pell is a lovely, lovely man the subject of a witch hunt. And, to be honest, there is a witch hunt air about the reaction to Pell from many on the Left.
I suspect the truth in Pell's behaviour lies somewhere between the two extremes: whether any of it results in a criminal conviction, I would be surprised; but I also suspect people might have been right to worry a little bit about his behaviour at one time.
The whole thing is unfortunate in many respects. But for now, watch the steam rise from the predictable defenders.
5 comments:
Count me in here as well. I read/saw the RC on Pell and found all allegations very unconvincing.
If these charges are the result of different evidence then I shall wait and see.
The other thing for me is what Pell did in relation to the sex charges once he was in a position of power. It was not the behaviour of a sex offender indeed quite the opposite.
The charges seem doubtful to me. I don't think they'll be upheld.
However I do notice a contingent of people - mostly lapsed Catholics, I'd guess? - who are absolutely breathing vengeance about Pell.
I don't think they'll be upheld.
You know, in my completely unprofessional, unlegal, pissfarty-arty-farty opinion.
Tim, do I detect some sensitivity remaining to how I treated Clive James' terrible climate change piece? :)
No, he typed from the comfort of his padded cell.
Post a Comment