It was a high profile trial, the most senior Catholic clergy was brought before the court on historic sex offense charges. In the trial by media spectacle, he had already been tried, was found guilty and was awaiting sentencing. Did this influence the jury? It is my belief that this precisely occurred, George Pell was found guilty and sentenced to 6 years imprisonment. Pell’s legal team sought to appeal the sentence, this was initially unsuccessful so then applied to the High Court of Australia.

I have no doubt Pell covered up abuse in the Catholic Church in Australia; however, this is not what he was on trial for. The onus is on the prosecution to prove their case, instead of tendering evidence, they put their case forward on emotional grounds and not based on facts. Did George Pell commit sexual offenses? I was not there so I will never know; however, through reconstructions, it was determined to be highly unlikely he could have committed the offenses he was on trial for.

So, there was no way Pell could be guilty of what he was accused of, the jury was swayed on less than credible testimony and media reports. When viewed on appeal, the High Court upheld the appeal arguing a rational jury must entertain doubt with respect to each of the offenses where Pell was found guilty. Therefore, George Pell cannot be held legally responsible for what he was accused of. But now George Pell is dead, his legacy is interesting, He more than likely covered up and protected pedophile priests but was not guilty of what he was convicted of. Pell was certainly divisive in life and in death.