The Tragic Story of Rod Owen

[rjay 24,929]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Was Heritier mentioned?

Rod came to Melbourne to clean up and he would have done it, if not for that knee injury. 
Lot of my friends knew him ( i met him a couple of times) and he was genuinely upset that he couldn’t play out 1991. His time at Melbourne was taken seriously. Sad it didn’t work out 

 

9 hours ago, rjay said:

I think one of the big differences is that St Kilda have not hesitated to own the problem and apologise.

Collingwood seem to bury their heads in the sand and are if my recollection is correct yet to apologise to Heritier for example.

 

6 hours ago, Ugottobekidding said:

He should apologise to us for take us for a ride

 

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

24 minutes ago, rjay said:

 

 

 

Cryptic but ok ? 

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

9 hours ago, dieter said:

The whole system - as has been highlighted by the drama in Canberra - is corrupt and stacked in favour of the perpetrators of these horrific crimes. Not much has changed: Pell was able to buy his freedom, for example.

Pell bribed the High Court did he ?

[dieter 3,325]

9 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

Pell bribed the High Court did he ?

Nah. Just had the funds available to hire the most notorious practitioners of the art of sophistry in Australia. The law as practiced in our English speaking 'civilisations' is ruled by the rich. And the so-called Law when it comes to sexual assault means in essence that the victim has to prove he or she is not guilty. 

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

1 hour ago, dieter said:

Nah. Just had the funds available to hire the most notorious practitioners of the art of sophistry in Australia. The law as practiced in our English speaking 'civilisations' is ruled by the rich. And the so-called Law when it comes to sexual assault means in essence that the victim has to prove he or she is not guilty. 

Fair enough - maybe just revert to the lynch mob.  No doubt you & your pitchfork would be in the front row.

[dieter 3,325]

57 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

Fair enough - maybe just revert to the lynch mob.  No doubt you & your pitchfork would be in the front row.

Yep, indeed. THat's where true Demons lurk.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

1 hour ago, Cranky Franky said:

Fair enough - maybe just revert to the lynch mob.  No doubt you & your pitchfork would be in the front row.

He was notorious in Ballarat 

[Biffen 12,943]

5 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

He was notorious in Ballarat 

I'm no fan of either the C. Church or Pell but the media and the prosecution clearly F.ed up the case.

He was notoriously good at shifting priests like Risdale and Best around but his personal abuse was not proven , or proven properly and at the time the case looked flimsy and media driven.

In my opinion his shifting of culprits and peretrators around the state was more damaging to more people than that which he was accused of in Melbourne .

It was a poorly run and executed case against Pell which begs the bigger question of why such a case was allowed to be run when there was a much larger case to answer with the evidence of an entire Royal Commission behind it.

 The Crimes of  some Judges and many of the Police force in Victoria were also allowed to escape punishment for decades of cover ups and inaction as well as  participation in the abuse.There is plenty of evidence supporting this.

The entire legal system ,State and Federal Politicians and other  promininent members of society were involved in the deliberate cover up and participation of the abuse for decades .

Pell went away for the wrong thing to save a lot of faces,reputations,systems.

It was a bad legal case,run with the intention of it failing.It was in fact ,a diversion.

 

 

Edited April 6, 2021 by Biffen

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

4 hours ago, Biffen said:

I'm no fan of either the C. Church or Pell but the media and the prosecution clearly F.ed up the case.

He was notoriously good at shifting priests like Risdale and Best around but his personal abuse was not proven , or proven properly and at the time the case looked flimsy and media driven.

In my opinion his shifting of culprits and peretrators around the state was more damaging to more people than that which he was accused of in Melbourne .

It was a poorly run and executed case against Pell which begs the bigger question of why such a case was allowed to be run when there was a much larger case to answer with the evidence of an entire Royal Commission behind it.

 The Crimes of  some Judges and many of the Police force in Victoria were also allowed to escape punishment for decades of cover ups and inaction as well as  participation in the abuse.There is plenty of evidence supporting this.

The entire legal system ,State and Federal Politicians and other  promininent members of society were involved in the deliberate cover up and participation of the abuse for decades .

Pell went away for the wrong thing to save a lot of faces,reputations,systems.

It was a bad legal case,run with the intention of it failing.It was in fact ,a diversion.

 

 

Not disputing any of that Biff. 
but i worked with a few Cameramen who started their careers in Ballarat 

They had stories to tell about George, and he got away with all of them. It disgusts me that he was able to fly back to The Vatican during Lockdown last year. 

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

38 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not disputing any of that Biff. 
but i worked with a few Cameramen who started their careers in Ballarat 

They had stories to tell about George, and he got away with all of them. It disgusts me that he was able to fly back to The Vatican during Lockdown last year. 

A shame you didn't pass your anecdote on to the High Court. They would've tossed out his appeal & he'd still be in jail.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

2 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

A shame you didn't pass your anecdote on to the High Court. They would've tossed out his appeal & he'd still be in jail.

Thanks for your input Cranky

[dieter 3,325]

5 hours ago, Biffen said:

I'm no fan of either the C. Church or Pell but the media and the prosecution clearly F.ed up the case.

He was notoriously good at shifting priests like Risdale and Best around but his personal abuse was not proven , or proven properly and at the time the case looked flimsy and media driven.

In my opinion his shifting of culprits and peretrators around the state was more damaging to more people than that which he was accused of in Melbourne .

It was a poorly run and executed case against Pell which begs the bigger question of why such a case was allowed to be run when there was a much larger case to answer with the evidence of an entire Royal Commission behind it.

 The Crimes of  some Judges and many of the Police force in Victoria were also allowed to escape punishment for decades of cover ups and inaction as well as  participation in the abuse.There is plenty of evidence supporting this.

The entire legal system ,State and Federal Politicians and other  promininent members of society were involved in the deliberate cover up and participation of the abuse for decades .

Pell went away for the wrong thing to save a lot of faces,reputations,systems.

It was a bad legal case,run with the intention of it failing.It was in fact ,a diversion.

 

 

The bottom line is that the so-called Law regarding Rape is stacked in favour of the rapist. What has also magnified the damage is the guilt and shame the victims feel, their powerlessness, the fact that in Pell's Ballarat time, abuse victims were also victimised by the authorities they reported to, parents in some cases the victimisers. Pell basically got off because one of his victims had suicided and it boiled down to Pell's word against the remaining victim's. You may recall that in the early 2000's a retired judge heard a similar complaint about Pell and ended up coming down in Pell's favour, though he found Pell's victim a credible witness. 

And, for what it's worth, I know people in the medical profession who know some of the policemen involved in the investigation. They don't divulge much but they have certified that the legal case was not 'bad' in any sense: Pell could simply hire better lawyers. And, as they  say in the classics, this is where our Legal System fails and why most people who are the victims of sexual crimes don't report.

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

35 minutes ago, dieter said:

The bottom line is that the so-called Law regarding Rape is stacked in favour of the rapist. What has also magnified the damage is the guilt and shame the victims feel, their powerlessness, the fact that in Pell's Ballarat time, abuse victims were also victimised by the authorities they reported to, parents in some cases the victimisers. Pell basically got off because one of his victims had suicided and it boiled down to Pell's word against the remaining victim's. You may recall that in the early 2000's a retired judge heard a similar complaint about Pell and ended up coming down in Pell's favour, though he found Pell's victim a credible witness. 

And, for what it's worth, I know people in the medical profession who know some of the policemen involved in the investigation. They don't divulge much but they have certified that the legal case was not 'bad' in any sense: Pell could simply hire better lawyers. And, as they  say in the classics, this is where our Legal System fails and why most people who are the victims of sexual crimes don't report.

Sorry to be pedantic Dieter but you continually make assertions without evidence or based on hearsay ie "a mate told a mate told an acquaintence".

Nobody likes Pell & he is clearly a grub but to say he got off simply because he could afford better lawyers is cr@p unless u provide some evidence.

The prosecutors in the case had excellent, high profile SC lawyers yet the High Court decision to allow the appeal was unanimous 7 zit.

Evidence not assertions please.

 

[Accepting Mediocrity 1,418]

3 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

Nobody likes Pell & he is clearly a grub but to say he got off simply because he could afford better lawyers is cr@p unless u provide some evidence.

Only Pell and his alleged victim(s) know for sure if he's guilty or not. 

But the fact is that he was found guilty by a jury. Rightly or wrongly, he got off in the end because he had the financial backing to go through every possible avenue of appeal. 

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

2 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

Only Pell and his alleged victim(s) know for sure if he's guilty or not. 

But the fact is that he was found guilty by a jury. Rightly or wrongly, he got off in the end because he had the financial backing to go through every possible avenue of appeal. 

Actually he got off because the High Court said the jury got it wrong based on the evidence presented.

Don't forget at his first trial the jury was unable to reach a verdict.

And finally lets not forget that the juries at the "Joh" trial, the David Eastman trial and the Lindy Chamberlain trial all got it dreadfully wrong.

 

[dieter 3,325]

5 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

Actually he got off because the High Court said the jury got it wrong based on the evidence presented.

Don't forget at his first trial the jury was unable to reach a verdict.

And finally lets not forget that the juries at the "Joh" trial, the David Eastman trial and the Lindy Chamberlain trial all got it dreadfully wrong.

 

Um, you don't get a lot of things, Crank, because you have a very closed mind. Not only that, by quoting Eastman and CHamberlain, you are actually proving my point that the Justice System we are yoked to, is flawed. Why should it take repeated trials to 'get it right'?

And last but not least, the catalogue of complaints about Pell is as long as the conga line of suckholes like you who point out that Pell is innocent because a  couple of High Court judges said so. You live in a Fantasyland which automatically classifies the victims of evil maggots like Pell as liars. Men like you are part of the problem. No wonder victims of rape don't bother reporting anything.

 

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

3 minutes ago, dieter said:

Um, you don't get a lot of things, Crank, because you have a very closed mind. Not only that, by quoting Eastman and CHamberlain, you are actually proving my point that the Justice System we are yoked to, is flawed. Why should it take repeated trials to 'get it right'?

And last but not least, the catalogue of complaints about Pell is as long as the conga line of suckholes like you who point out that Pell is innocent because a  couple of High Court judges said so. You live in a Fantasyland which automatically classifies the victims of evil maggots like Pell as liars. Men like you are part of the problem. No wonder victims of rape don't bother reporting anything.

 

Well Diet its a full time job for me trying to point out your continuous logical fallacies because you don't understand reason and logic.

Your last para doesn't make any sense & is on par with some of your classic statements.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

5 hours ago, Cranky Franky said:

A shame you didn't pass your anecdote on to the High Court. They would've tossed out his appeal & he'd still be in jail.

News Cameramen in County towns, back in 80’s got to see and hear everything that went on. 
i have no reason at all to doubt what i was told, when people do the same job at different times and recall the same stories

Pell is an evil Rock Spider who was given permission to fly back to Peadophile Head Office.

He beat the System and he must be so proud of that fact

[Cranky Franky 2,061]

20 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

News Cameramen in County towns, back in 80’s got to see and hear everything that went on. 
i have no reason at all to doubt what i was told, when people do the same job at different times and recall the same stories

Pell is an evil Rock Spider who was given permission to fly back to Peadophile Head Office.

He beat the System and he must be so proud of that fact

Well Pell isn't exactly on my Xmas card list. He is an appalling human being & my ex parish priest is Kevin O'Donnell who died in jail & was a convicted pedophile.

The point is that we have a legal system which I think you'll agree is better than a lynch mob some seem  to be advocating or a Countrytown Cameraman's Court.

As I said one jury failed to reach a verdict. Justice Weinberg in the Court of Appeal and 7 High Court judges all said the verdict was wrong.

[dieter 3,325]

1 minute ago, Cranky Franky said:

Well Pell isn't exactly on my Xmas card list. He is an appalling human being & my ex parish priest is Kevin O'Donnell who died in jail & was a convicted pedophile.

The point is that we have a legal system which I think you'll agree is better than a lynch mob some seem  to be advocating or a Countrytown Cameraman's Court.

As I said one jury failed to reach a verdict. Justice Weinberg in the Court of Appeal and 7 High Court judges all said the verdict was wrong.

' Justice Weinberg in the Court of Appeal and 7 High Court judges all said the verdict was wrong.'  As they always say when it falls into their 'Learned' laps. Your statement  'Well, our legal system is better than a lynch mob,' just about sums up your position, Crank. And you love adding ammunition to your detractors by ' or a Countrytown Cameraman's Court.'

Well, your Honour, if it pleases the court, these are just Countrytown Cameramen: they know nothing about the finer points of the law. 

[dieter 3,325]

48 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

News Cameramen in County towns, back in 80’s got to see and hear everything that went on. 
i have no reason at all to doubt what i was told, when people do the same job at different times and recall the same stories

Pell is an evil Rock Spider who was given permission to fly back to Peadophile Head Office.

He beat the System and he must be so proud of that fact

'He beat the System and he must be so proud of that fact' . 

The trouble is, Pell WAS the System in the Catholic Church and since his reign of Terror, it has been proven that the Courts and the so-called Justice System were in total cohorts with Pell and his rapists clan.

The trouble is that it wasn't only Pell, and the Salesians, the Christian Brothers and the Marists etc, you had the same level of abuse in the Salvation Army and the other so-called Christian Churches as well. Other religious institutions were also involved.Funny how rape and religion go hand in hand in our 'Civilised' world.

For the record, my best friend at school - we're talking from 1964 to 1966 - was also molested at the Catholic school we attended. He kept it to himself until 2016. Not even his wife knew...

The brother who molested him was accused by two other boys and it went to court in 2015. The verdict boiled down to the Pell defence, namely that the Brother maintained his innocence and it was therefore the allegations of two boys versus his defence. AS I have written numerous times in the course of Rod Owen's tragedy,  it is always the raped who has to prove his or her innocence.  In this regard, our legal system is a lynch mob, in that it lynches the victims.

Edited April 7, 2021 by dieter

[Demonstone 22,558]

52 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Pell is an evil Rock Spider

I heard him described as "the rock under which the spiders were hiding".

[daisycutter 29,616]

53 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

News Cameramen in County towns, back in 80’s got to see and hear everything that went on. 
i have no reason at all to doubt what i was told, when people do the same job at different times and recall the same stories

Pell is an evil Rock Spider who was given permission to fly back to Peadophile Head Office.

He beat the System and he must be so proud of that fact

so these news cameramen in country towns back in the 80s saw pell commit paedophilia

right!

[dieter 3,325]

5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

so these news cameramen in country towns back in the 80s saw pell commit paedophilia

right!

Yep: like the camera men at the Whitehouse who watched Clinton and Lewinsky. 

I don't think you get it. DC: the Pells of the world don't rape in front of cameras. 

FYI there is a list of complaints about Pell's behaviour which goes back to the 1960's.  Obviously all this is a Leftie, David Marr, and ABC-inspired plot to de-frock the man Greg Sheridan wanted to be the next Pope after the German Pope said Let me outta here.

And you can't keep hiding behind the specious defence that there were no witnesses. There very, very rarely are because people who rape kids and women always take this legal loophole into account. 

[daisycutter 29,616]

1 minute ago, dieter said:

Yep: like the camera men at the Whitehouse who watched Clinton and Lewinsky. 

I don't think you get it. DC: the Pells of the world don't rape in front of cameras. 

FYI there is a list of complaints about Pell's behaviour which goes back to the 1960's.  Obviously all this is a Leftie, David Marr, and ABC-inspired plot to de-frock the man Greg Sheridan wanted to be the next Pope after the German Pope said Let me outta here.

And you can't keep hiding behind the specious defence that there were no witnesses. There very, very rarely are because people who rape kids and women always take this legal loophole into account. 

oh i get it, dieter......and i have no respect for the rc church and their dirty little goings on

what i don't get is wyl's little contribution here re pell's guilt of paedophilia based on some third-hand gossip from the 80's with absolutely no details or proof..............absolutely pointless and unhelpful post......but there ya go, it's wyl

i can understand your anger too. going to school at rupertswood was obviously traumatic