Special Link Post of Outrage

[highlyeccentric]

Don't follow the links unless you're equipped to deal with A Lot on the topic of clerical child abuse. The suppression order on the Pell 'Cathedral case' lifted today*, and Australia is... having a Lot Of Responses. Some of them good. Some of them righteous outrage. Some of them sheer arseholery. Be cautious of the comments sections today. (And if you bring arseholery into MY comments sections, I will not be generous.)



Context and explainers:

• Melissa Daley (Guardian Aus) Who is George Pell and what has he been convicted of?
  
• Lawyer X (Guaridan Aus, December 2018) Suppression orders in Australia: Why you can't read what you may want to
  
• BBC report: Why was conviction kept secret (has the advantage of being written for a non-Australian audience, and being the beeb is allergic to taking sides, so is not taking a side on the issue of Are Suppression Orders Good And Did This One Work)

*The Cathedral Case suppression order was dropped because the second case against Pell was dropped, after the Cathedral Case findings were ruled inadmissible as tendency evidence. Rumour has it that up to 100 journalists may face charges for breaking the suppression order, and we don't yet know how much of the decision to drop the case / rule the tendency evidence inadmissible is because of the overseas reporting.

Responses that are Good, but A Lot:

• David Marr (Guardian AU), Brutal and dogmatic, George Pell waged war on sex - even as he abused children
  

  He was big on sex. Inside and outside the church, George Pell built his career preaching the sex rules of his faith. Intransigence made Pell a celebrity. Standing up to the zeitgeist, demanding obedience, listing sins and condemning sinners kept him in the news.

  He was always there with a crisp, dogmatic grab. Universal innocence? “A dangerous myth.” Original sin? “Alive and flourishing.” Drug taking? “Wrong and sinful.” IVF for single mothers? “We are on the verge of creating a whole new generation of stolen children.” That created a most satisfying uproar.

  He accused his own church of being “frightened to put forward the hard teachings of Christ”. That he never hesitated earned him few friends, many enemies and high office.

  As an archbishop in Melbourne and a cardinal in Sydney Pell poured his energies into combating contraception, homosexuality, genetic engineering, divorce, equal marriage and abortion.

  
  This is honestly David Marr at his finest: incisive and yet impassioned journalism.
  
• Patrick Marlbourough (Meanjin blog), The Dead Aren't Clapping: 'Cardinal Pell has been arrested and everyone I want to call is dead.'
  

  It is disingenuous in 2019 to expect anything resembling an apology from this cabal of duds and bullies. For them, to apologise is to cease to function.

  So I propose branding. Not literally, of course. But in the hyper-market conscious hellscape that is modern politics and media, I know nothing matters more to these people than their brands. What are their brands after Pell’s conviction? What did they defend as allies of Pell.

  Tony Abbott: Ally of Pell. Andrew Bolt: Defender of Pell. Miranda Divine: Attacker of Pell’s victims. And so on. Never let them forget it.

Also good: Grace Jennings-Edquist and Sana Qadar have advice for looking after yourself in the face of this news cycle.

Responses that are Odious:

To which I shall not link.

- Andrew Bolt. Nuff said.
- Lyle Shelton, see above.
- Frank Brennan. His piece in Eureka Street is calm, erudite, and ... exactly as damnable as Bolt's. I cannot quite process that 'I have doubts about this trial's validity because I don't believe a bishop could raise his own alb to get his dick out' is an opinion being put forth by a leading legal scholar, and not the punchline of a 14th c falbiau. He blames the Royal Commission for putting it into the jury's heads that victims may have fuzzy recall for detail around long-ago assaults, and quietly, calmly insinuates that the complainant must be lying although the jury believed him.
- Overseas media outlets crowing about having reported the conviction back in December. I WILL link to a comment on that:

I guess we'll never know how much the Daily Beast's decision to break the law affected the decision to dump the second trial, depriving other alleged victims of their chance for justice https://t.co/M5iqb7WDbB

— Angus Livingston (@anguslivingston) February 26, 2019

I'm particularly aggrieved about Frank Brennan, about the way he was consistently idolised throughout the marriage referendum by leftists who ought to know better. Hopefully we can just... put aside the facade that he's The Good Priest, now?

I will probably have more Pell related links by Thursday. Will try to keep them under cuts. I would generally advise caution for the next few days if you're interacting with Australian news at all and are sensitive to this sort of thing.

Comments

[oracne]

That is a LOT.

[highlyeccentric]

It's a Lot in so many directions! The offences themselves! The specific context and niceties of suppression orders in Australia! The fact he was the treasurer of the Vatican at the time the charges were laid! The context of these charges happening after, but not as a result of, a Royal Commission into institutional child abuse in which he was raked over the coals for covering up (he continues to deny full knowledge) other abuses!

Also since I posted the link, the Marr piece has been edited to soften its final rhetorical punch.

[greghousesgf]

disgusting.