Hey, I'm kind of curious as to WHY, exactly, the Convicted Child Abusing George Pell was PERMITTED to wear his Clerical Dog-Collar and Attire to the Appeals Court Hearing?
He IS a convicted Felon and as such has no RIGHT to wear anything other than a simple suit or his Orange Prison Garb just as required by ALL other Prisoners attending the Appeals Court.
Was this yet another 'sympathy' seeking ploy by his Legal team?
I notice he is to face new charges for protecting a known pedo priest by moving him around to different parishes.
He wouldn't be the first in the history of the Catholic Church in Australia to have played the 'Paedo-Priest Shuffle Game" I'd bet.
It's been going on for Centuries everywhere that the filthy Church has set down its parasitic roots.
@Triphid It's such a pity god didn't make room for pedophilia amongst his ten commandments. Then the priests would've known it was wrong. And christians dare to ask me where I get my morals from.
@MsDemeanour Knowing and NOT DOING are two vastly different things amongst the Priesthood and a lot of the Faithfools imo.
At least we, Heathen Atheists/Agnostics for the most part that is, have Morals and Ethics that are instinctive and Non-reward oriented unlike the supposed ones of the Faithfools that are solely and primarily based upon gain Kudo Credits with an Invisible, Imaginary Sky Daddy.
Of course his defense wanted that.
I wonder how many of the Tribunal Members are religious and/or devout Catholics then.
My opinion is that in such cases as this and those like Paedo-Pell was found guilty at the Judge/Judges SHOULD either Agnostics or Atheists simply because there'd be far less chance of religious influences affecting their decision/s.