Pell v The Queen: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 18:

== Background ==

On 22 June 2017, [[Victoria Police]] announced Pell's arrest on historical sexual assault offences, referring to crimes committed in the past.{{Sfnp|Zauzmer|2017}} Pell was accused of sexually assaulting two choirboys at St. Patrick's Cathedral in East Melbourne after Mass, soon after Pell had been appointed the Archbishop of Melbourne.{{Sfnp|Bonnor|2020|p=28}} The accusers, known as victims 'A' and 'B', remain unnamed.{{Sfnp|Bonnor|2020|p=28}} B died before the allegations went to court. Pell was tried twice in the County Court of Victoria and convicted on the second trial.{{Sfnp|Bonnor|2020|p=28}} He appealed this conviction to the Supreme Court of Appeal which was rejected.{{Sfnp|Silbert|p=37|2020}}

=== County Court Trials ===

Two trials were conducted at the [[County Court of Victoria]], where Pell pleaded not guilty to all charges.{{Sfnp|Dyer|Hamer|p=109|2020}} The prosecution alleged that Pell encountered A and B drinking wine in the church [[Sacristy]]. Pell was said to have forced B's head towards his genitalia, and then forced A to [[Fellatio|fellate]] him. Pell was then said to have fondled A's genitals while masturbating for five to six minutes.{{Sfnp|Dyer|Hamer|p=109|2020}} A claimed that about one month later, Pell pushed himself against him and touched A's genitals through his choir robes.{{Sfnp|Dyer|Hamer|p=109|2020}} The key issue at both trials was whether A's evidence was credible and reliable.{{Sfnp|Dyer|Hamer|p=109|2020}} B was now deceased, and had stated to his mother before his death that he had never been sexually abused while a choirboy. The prosecution's case against Pell was wholly dependent on the evidence of A being truthful and reliable.{{Sfnp|Silbert|p=37|2020}}

In both trials, the juries considered several other factors. After mass, A and B were part of a strict procession, and Pell's defence team argued it would be impossible for either to leave this procession without being noticed.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} A witness testified that he introduced Pell to his mother on the steps of the church, which the prosecutier condeded if true, this meant Pell would not have had the opportunity to commit the sexual abuse of A and B in the first alleged instance.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} The prosecution argued Pell may have been left alone for a short period while church aides tended to other duties. The initial trial ended in September 2018 with a [[hung jury]], as they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} ▼

The key issue at trial was whether A's evidence was credible and reliable.{{Sfnp|Dyer|Hamer|p=109|2020}} B was now deceased, and had stated to his mother before his death that he had never been sexually abused while a choirboy. The prosecution's case against Pell was wholly dependent on the evidence of A being truthful and reliable.{{Sfnp|Silbert|p=37|2020}}

AThe secondinitial trial ended in September 2018 with a [[hung jury]], as they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} A second was held in December 2018. Pell was represented by barrister Robert Richter, who claimed "only a madman" would sexually assault children in the sacristy after mass given the number of people coming and going from the room.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} The defence team also argued that the church robe worn by Pell, by nature of its design, would have made it impossible for Pell to expose himself. Questions were also raised as to why the choirboys never informed anyone of what happened until A contacted police in 2015. [[Peter Kidd|Judge Peter Kidd]] informed the juries that many sexual abuse victims do not immediately report the abuse, if ever.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} The defence team argued Pell could not have conducted the second alleged act of abuse, submitting that someone would have noticed Pell pushing a small child into a wall.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}}. The second jury found Pell guilty of all charges.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}}▼

▲In both trials, the juries considered several other factors. After mass, A and B were part of a strict procession, and Pell's defence team argued it would be impossible for either to leave this procession without being noticed.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} A witness testified that he introduced Pell to his mother on the steps of the church, which the prosecutier condeded if true, this meant Pell would not have had the opportunity to commit the sexual abuse of A and B in the first alleged instance.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} The prosecution argued Pell may have been left alone for a short period while church aides tended to other duties. The initial trial ended in September 2018 with a [[hung jury]], as they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}}

▲A second trial was held in December 2018. Pell was represented by barrister Robert Richter, who claimed "only a madman" would sexually assault children in the sacristy after mass given the number of people coming and going from the room.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} The defence team also argued that the church robe worn by Pell, by nature of its design, would have made it impossible for Pell to expose himself. Questions were also raised as to why the choirboys never informed anyone of what happened until A contacted police in 2015. [[Peter Kidd|Judge Peter Kidd]] informed the juries that many sexual abuse victims do not immediately report the abuse, if ever.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}} The defence team argued Pell could not have conducted the second alleged act of abuse, submitting that someone would have noticed Pell pushing a small child into a wall.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}}. The second jury found Pell guilty of all charges.{{Sfnp|Cooper|2019}}

=== Supreme Court Appeal ===

Pell appealed to the [[Supreme Court of Victoria|Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal]], arguingthat itthe conviction was unreasonable for the jury to convict him and that the Court should overturn the convictionsit and find him [[Acquittal|acquitnot guilty]] him of all charges. The appeal was dismissed, with a majority of the Court, consisting of [[Anne Ferguson (judge)|Chief Justice Ferguson]] and [[Chris Maxwell (jurist)|Justice Christopher Maxwell]],{{Sfnp|Silbert|p=37|2020}} it was open for the jury to be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt on the evidence presented that Pell was guilty.{{Sfnp|Dyer|Hamer|p=109|2020}}

== High Court appeal ==