Australia’s top court has reserved its ruling on whether Cardinal George Pell’s bid to quash his sexual abuse convictions has been successful.<\/p>\n
The ex-Vatican treasurer is serving a six-year jail sentence after a jury found he abused two boys in a Melbourne cathedral in the 1990s.<\/p>\n
He is the most senior Catholic globally to be jailed for such crimes, but maintains his innocence.<\/p>\n
Pell has challenged the verdict in the High Court of Australia.<\/p>\n
During hearings on Wednesday and Thursday, defence and prosecution teams sparred over whether the jury had fairly considered all evidence.<\/p>\n
The seven appeal judges then reserved their decision until a later date. They did not specify when.<\/p>\n
The long-running case has rocked the Catholic Church, where Pell had been one of the Pope’s most senior advisers.<\/p>\n
The Vatican has been under pressure to defrock the cleric, but it has maintained he deserves a full and fair legal process.<\/p>\n
In December 2018, a jury unanimously found Pell guilty of sexually abusing two 13-year-old choir boys in private rooms in St Patrick’s Cathedral. Pell was archbishop of Melbourne at the time.<\/p>\n
The convictions included one count of sexual penetration and four counts of committing indecent acts.<\/p>\n
Pell’s trial heard testimony from the only surviving victim. The abuse was not witnessed by anyone else, but the trial also heard evidence from dozens of churchgoers.<\/p>\n
In sentencing Pell in 2019, Judge Peter Kidd said the cleric had committed “a brazen and forcible sexual attack on the two victims”.<\/p>\n
The verdict was upheld in Victoria’s Court of Appeal last year<\/a>, after an earlier challenge by Pell.<\/p>\n His central argument was that the jury and previous appeal court relied too heavily on evidence from the victim who testified.<\/p>\n His lawyers described that victim’s testimony as “compelling” but argue it was uncorroborated. They asserted the jury did not properly consider other evidence.<\/p>\n “No matter how favourable a view was taken of the complainant, it was not open to the jury, acting rationally, to conclude that the prosecution had eliminated all reasonable doubt,” his lawyers argued.<\/p>\n Prosecutors rejected these assertions.<\/p>\n It’s unclear, but it does not seem imminent. The judges have asked the legal teams to make additional written submissions in the coming week.<\/p>\n Local media reported it could even take months.<\/p>\n Pell was among the highest-ranking figures in the Church’s global hierarchy.<\/p>\n Made a cardinal in 2003, he was summoned to Rome in 2014 to help clean up the Vatican’s finances.<\/p>\n He forged a reputation as a disciplined Church leader who held strict conservative views against same-sex marriage, abortion and contraception.<\/p>\n In Australia he circulated among the political elite, and even after his conviction he received public statements of support from two former prime ministers.<\/p>\n Source: bbc.co.uk<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"How did Pell challenge?<\/h2>\n
When will there be a decision?<\/h2>\n
Who is George Pell?<\/h2>\n
Timeline of key events in Pell’s case<\/h2>\n
\n