Why can’t they report it in Australia? I should think they’d be dancing in the streets!
As to why a media gag? Pell has some other charges pending and the court was hoping to avoid publicity in order to ensure a fair trial. Seems totally insane when a quick google brings up umpteen stories from international media sites.
He has very expensive lawyers who argued it would taint the jury pool for the next case against him. Everybody knows, it is only the media banned from talking about it, the rest of us are jabbering on fine.
[Moderating]
There’s a new thread on the issue of Cardinal Pell’s conviction over here. Since this thread is long and old, and in the interest of not having discussion of this issue fractured across two threads, I’m closing this one.
[/Moderating]
Actually it was the prosecution requesting the ban.
Barn doors and horses notwithstanding.
Thanks, I should have paid more attention whilst dancing about 
That man made my young queer life much harder than it should have been by encouraging discrimination every chance he got.
I believe it would have been the Crown arguing for the injunction. Which reduces the chances of his very expensive lawyers arguing your point on appeal.
Tabloid news here in Aus tonight had reporters following Pell into a hospital, asking why he had been removed from the Pope’s ‘Inner Circle’. :rolleyes:
We can’t be allowed to see the news of his convictions, but we can sidle right up to the edge. What a load of utter bullshit.
[Moderating]
I got talked into reopening this thread, and merging the other one into it. The OP from the merged thread is now post 399 in this thread.
[/Moderating]
Thank you, Miller.
… render unto Caesar …
Still waiting with bated-breath for Bricker to wander in here since the latest revelations were made public. Well, not public in Australia where the offences occurred, but public for the rest of the world.
Why I’m sure he’ll be along presently to acknowledge his error. I’ll drop him a message though just in case he’s missed this.
Maybe if I BAIT my breath, I might be able to lure Bricker?
Hey** Bricker**, my breath smells like cat food. 
That’s no way to attract Bricker. Tell him your breath smells like liberal hypocrisy.
Having breath that smells like cat food is unconstitutional.
Don’t know about unconstitutional but it certainly says something about my constitution.
I’m sure he’ll be along any day now.
I liked this quote from Counterpunch’s coverage, The Case that Dare Not Speak Its Name: the Conviction of Cardinal Pell:
Give me a second…
::closing eyes … swaying gently … humming::
Liberalhypocrisyican!!! … Legalnitpicklely!!! … Condescenditatocorrector!!!
::Eyes flash open. Breathing calms. Smug smile creeps across face::
Must I restate this every single time something happens with Cardinal Pell’s case? Idiots.
As I clearly stated last year, I will only admit I was wrong when there is a “final judgment of criminal guilt”. Cardinal Pell, like every person charged and convicted of a crime, has the right to appeal. And due to the “terrible injustice” and “outrageous bias” of this jury verdict, Pell will likely appeal. And will likely win.
Do I need to lecture you further on appellate law and what constitutes a “final judgment” (say if the 77 year old Pell dies before he has finished every possible appeal)? Or will you expect me to drop everything and come running to do your bidding every time something minor happens in the case again?
::eyes slam shut…rapid breathing… MaximumConceitium!!! ::
Oh. My. It takes a ton out of me to channel Brick…
::vomiting furiously:::
Ugh. I feel dirty all over.