Cardinal George Pell, an Australian who is one of the most senior people in the hierarchy of the Catholic church, was found guilty in December and no one till now has been allowed to know the details of the charges against him, the trial proceedings, the identity of the complainants, or his conviction.

It left a pretty big gap in the community's knowledge of a serious event in the affairs of the nation.

The county court in Melbourne ordered that any Pell-related criminal information be kept under wraps pending the outcome of a planned second trial on a number of separate charges.

The notion was to protect prospective jurors at a second trial from having their thoughts contaminated and their views prejudiced by what happened at the first.

Now that we know there will be no second trial, the suppression order remaining in place against reporting the verdict on the first trial looks, to my mind and in this age of the ubiquitous internet, rather nonsensical.

Indeed, suppression and non-publication orders from the courts increasingly take on a ludicrous quality, where locally based mainstream publishers and broadcasters with significant assets lie down and abide by judicial edicts, while those with one finger on a social media app blissfully ignore them.

One law for big publishers and no law for everyone else.

It's as though we are in Fantasia, where a large proportion of the population know something that they are not supposed to know.

Such was the case with Pell's conviction. Some of the big media outlets in this country gave us a whiff that there was something in the public interest going on that could not be reported, with headlines like "Censored", "Secret scandal" and so on.

Meanwhile, it became evident that the internet does not stop at the sovereign borders of the nation.

Online publishers beyond the writ of the county court of Victoria were doing their level best to pump out the story.

Among the notable reports were those by the Washington Post, the Daily Beast (which was published and then geo-blocked) and a US Jesuit news site.

The grapevine effect was up and running - so much for the holy writ of suppression orders.

Following the publication of those teasing headlines - after Pell's conviction on the choirboy charges - there was a tense session in the county court in which the chief judge, Peter Kidd, and the director of public prosecutions, Kerri Judd QC, expressed their concern that the suppression order may have been breached - even without Pell being identified directly.

Since then the office of the Victorian DPP has notified media organisations, along with some of their senior editorial employees, that she is "considering charges" for sub-judice contempt and scandalising the court.

The Melbourne lawyer Justin Quill, from Macpherson Kelley, is acting for a combined group of media organisations who will defend the charges, including the Nine newspapers and TV outlets, News Corp, Channel Ten, Mamamia and Macquarie Media.

As many as 100 editors, online content people and journalists are potentially in the frame. Continue reading

• Richard Ackland is an Australian journalist, publisher and lawyer, who graduated with degrees in economics and law and was admitted as a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New South Wales before going on to pursue a career in journalism.
• Image: SMH.com.au

In December, a jury of 12 of his fellow citizens found him guilty of five offences of child sexual abuse.

• No other charges are to proceed.
• Cardinal Pell has appealed the convictions.
• The verdict was unanimous.
• The jury took three days to deliberate after a four-week trial.
• The trial was in fact a re-run.
• At the first trial, the jury could not agree.
• The trial related to two alleged victims, one of whom had died.

Members of the public could attend those proceedings if they knew where to go in the Melbourne County Court.

Members of the public could hear all the evidence except a recording of the complainant's evidence from the first trial.

The complainant, who cannot be identified, did not give evidence at the retrial; the recording from the first trial was admitted as the complainant's evidence.

The recording was available to the public only insofar as it was quoted by the barristers in their examination of other witnesses or in their final addresses to the jury, and by the judge in his charge to the jury.

So, no member of the public has a complete picture of the evidence and no member of the public is able to make an assessment of the complainant's demeanour.

The complainant's evidence at the first trial lasted two and a half days.

He had been cross-examined for more than a day by Pell's defence barrister, Robert Richter QC, who has a reputation for being one of the best and one of the toughest cross-examiners in the legal profession.

Pell did not give evidence, but a record of his police interview, denying the allegations, was in evidence.

Complainant's evidence

The complainant's evidence related to events that occurred back in 1996 or 1997 when he was a 13-year-old choir boy at St Patrick's Cathedral Melbourne.

Most other witnesses had been choir boys, altar servers or Cathedral officials in 1996 when Pell first became archbishop of Melbourne.

The complainant claimed that the first event, involving four charges, occurred after a solemn Sunday Mass celebrated by Pell in the second half of 1996.

It was common ground between the prosecution and the defence that the dates to which these four charges must be attributed were 15 December 1996 or 22 December 1996.

These were the dates on which the first and second solemn Sunday Masses were celebrated by Pell in the Cathedral after he had become archbishop in August 1996. The Cathedral had been undergoing renovations and thus was not used for Sunday Masses during earlier months of 1996.

• The complainant said that he and another choir boy left the liturgical procession at the end of one Sunday Mass and went fossicking in the off-limits sacristy where they started swilling altar wine.
• The archbishop arrived unaccompanied, castigated them, and then, while fully robed in his copious liturgical vestments, proceeded to commit three vile sexual acts including oral penetration of the complainant.
• The complainant said that the sacristy door was wide open and altar servers were passing along the corridor.
• The complainant said that he and the other boy then returned to choir practice.
• The choir was making a Christmas recording at that time.

These two choir boys stayed in the choir another year but, the complainant said, they never spoke about the matter to each other, even though they sometimes had sleepovers at each other's homes.

The second boy was once asked by his mother if he had ever been abused by anybody and he said he had not.

• The complainant claimed that a month or so later, after a Sunday Mass when the archbishop was presiding (but not celebrating the Mass), Pell came along the corridor outside the sacristy where many choristers and others were milling about.
• He claimed that Pell grabbed him briefly, put him against the wall, and firmly grasped his genitalia.

This was the subject of the fifth charge.

Pell knew neither boy and had no contact with either of them thereafter.

Prosecution's case

The prosecution case was that Pell at his first or second solemn Sunday Mass as archbishop decided for some unknown reason to abandon the procession and his liturgical assistants and hasten from the Cathedral entrance to the sacristy unaccompanied by his Master of Ceremonies Monsignor Charles Portelli while the liturgical procession was still concluding.

Portelli and the long time sacristan Max Potter described how the archbishop would be invariably accompanied after a solemn Mass with procession until one of them had assisted the archbishop to divest in the sacristy.

There was ample evidence that the Archbishop was a stickler for liturgical form and that he developed strict protocols in his time as archbishop, stopping at the entrance to the Cathedral after Mass to greet parishioners usually for 10 to 20 minutes, before returning to the sacristy to disrobe in company with his Master of Ceremonies.

The prosecution suggested that these procedures might not have been in place when Pell first became archbishop. The suggestion was that other liturgical arrangements might have been under consideration.

Richter's compelling reply

In his final address, Richter criticised inherent contradictions and improbabilities of many of the details of this narrative.

I heard some of the publicly available evidence and have read most of the transcript. I found many of Richter's criticisms of the narrative very compelling.

Anyone familiar with the conduct of a solemn Cathedral Mass with full choir would find it most unlikely that a bishop would, without grave reason, leave a recessional procession and retreat to the sacristy unaccompanied.

Witnesses familiar with liturgical vestments had been called who gave compelling evidence that it was impossible to produce an erect penis through a seamless alb.

An alb is a long robe, worn under a heavier chasuble. It is secured and set in place by a cincture which is like a tightly drawn belt. An alb cannot be unbuttoned or unzipped, the only openings being small slits on the side to allow access to trouser pockets underneath.

The complainant's initial claim to police was that Pell had parted his vestments, but an alb cannot be parted; it is like a seamless dress.

Later the complainant said that Pell moved the vestments to the side.

An alb secured with a cincture cannot be moved to the side.

The police never inspected the vestments during their investigations, nor did the prosecution show that the vestments could be parted or moved to the side as the complainant had alleged.

The proposition that the offences charged were committed immediately after Mass by a fully robed archbishop in the sacristy with an open door and in full view from the corridor seemed incredible to my mind.

A devastating verdict

I was very surprised by the verdict. In fact, I was devastated.

My only conclusion is that the jury must have disregarded many of the criticisms so tellingly made by Richter of the complainant's evidence and that, despite the complainant being confused about all manner of things, the jury must nevertheless have thought — as the recent royal commission discussed — that children who are sexually violated do not always remember details of time, place, dress and posture.

Although the complainant got all sorts of facts wrong, the jury must have believed that Pell did something dreadful to him.

The jurors must have judged the complainant to be honest and reliable even though many of the details he gave were improbable if not impossible.

Pell and the legal system

Pell has been in the public spotlight for a very long time. There are some who would convict him of all manner of things in the court of public opinion no matter what the evidence.

There are others who would never convict him of anything, holding him in the highest regard.

The criminal justice system is intended to withstand these preconceptions. The system is under serious strain, however, when it comes to Cardinal Pell.

The events of the Victorian parliamentary inquiry, the federal royal commission, the publication of Louise Milligan's book Cardinal and Tim Minchin's song Come Home (Cardinal Pell) were followed, just two weeks before the trial commenced, by the parliamentary apology to the victims of child sexual abuse.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said, "Not just as a father, but as a prime minister, I am angry too at the calculating destruction of lives and the abuse of trust, including those who have abused the shield of faith and religion to hide their crimes, a shield that is supposed to protect the innocent, not the guilty.

"They stand condemned ... on behalf of the Australian people, this Parliament and our government ... I simply say I believe you, we believe you, your country believes you."

Such things tend to shift not the legal, but the reputational, burden upon an accused person to prove innocence rather than the prosecution to prove guilt.

Would the verdict have been different if Pell had given evidence?

Who can tell?

All one can say is that, although the defence seemed to be on strong ground in submitting that the circumstances made the narrative advanced by the prosecution manifestly improbable, that failed to secure the acquittal.

A reasonable verdict?

Was the verdict unreasonable? Can it be supported having regard to the evidence?

Those are questions for the appeal court.

I can only hope and pray that the complainant can find some peace, able to get on with his life, whichever way the appeal goes.

Should the appeal fail, I hope and pray that Cardinal Pell, heading for prison, is not the unwitting victim of a wounded nation in search of a scapegoat.

Should the appeal succeed, the Victoria Police should review the adequacy of the police investigation of these serious criminal charges.

When the committal proceedings against Pell first commenced in July 2017, Fran Kelly asked me on ABC Radio National Breakfast: 'Do you have concerns about this case, regardless of the outcome, and how it's going to affect the Church?'

I answered: 'Fran, I think this case will be a test of all individuals and all institutions involved.

'And all we can do is hope that the outcome will be marked by truth, justice, healing, reconciliation and transparency. A huge challenge for my church, and yes a lot will ride on this case.

'But what is absolutely essential is that the law be allowed to do its work.

'And let's wait and see the evidence, and let's wait and see how it plays out. And let's hope there can be truth and justice for all individuals involved in these proceedings.'

And that is still my hope.

• Frank Brennan is a Jesuit priest who attended some of the Pell proceedings. A former professor of law, he is CEO of Catholic Social Services.
• This article was first published in The Australian.

The jury in a County Court of the State of Victoria, delivered a unanimous verdict on Tuesday.

The verdict came after three days of deliberation and sentencing will take place in early February.

Until then Pell is released on bail.

This was the second trial on these offenses.

In September, a hung jury forced the trial, dubbed the "cathedral trial", to be declared a mistrial.

Few details are known about the nature of the charges against Pell because in Australia the entire first and second trials are covered by a strict suppression order issued by Judge Peter Kidd.

A second trial, called the "swimmer's trial", is expected to hear evidence that a then young Father Pell allegedly sexually offended two men when they were boys playing games in a swimming pool in Ballarat, Victoria.

The "swimmer's trial" will probably take place mid-February or early March, after sentencing for the "cathedral trial."

Most recently at the Vatican, Pell has had prime responsibility for cleaning up the Vatican's finances, and the work is paying dividends.

"The aim of the clean-up was to fight money laundering and terrorist financing and to bring Vatican finances into compliance with international norms.

"Thousands of accounts have been closed as a result.

"Last week (late November), the Board of the European Payments Council extended "the geographical scope of the Single Euro Payments Area [SEPA] to Vatican City State and the Holy See," reports CathNews NZ.

Pell took leave from his job at the Vatican in order to stand trial in Australia. However, the Vatican has not commented on the news of the cardinal's conviction out of respect for the suppression order.

"The Holy See has the utmost respect for the Australian judicial authorities. We are aware there is a suppression order in place and we respect that order," said the Director of the Holy See Press Office, Mr Greg Burke.

Earlier in 2018, Pope Francis told journalists in an airborne press conference he would speak only after the judicial process (which includes the possibility of an appeal and sentencing) had run its course.

In early December, former Adelaide Archbishop Philip Wilson had his conviction overturned by an appeals court.

Pell has always insisted on his innocence.

Sources

• NZ Herald
• The Daily Beast
• America Magazine
• CathNews NZ
• Image: Crux

He will be defending historical sexual offence allegations which he denies.

The Vatican has issued the following statement about the court's decision:

"The Holy See has taken note of the decision issued by judicial authorities in Australia regarding His Eminence Cardinal George Pell.

"Last year, the Holy Father granted Cardinal Pell a leave of absence so he could defend himself from the accusations. The leave of absence is still in place."

On Tuesday the Australian magistrate presiding over last month's committal hearing, Brenda Wallington, dismissed some of the most serious charges of "historical sexual offences" against Pell.

However, she also ruled that Pell must stand trial on at least three other complaints.

Wallington's decision was not unexpected. She announced during the hearing that she believed a person should be committed to stand trial unless there was a "fundamental defect" in the evidence.

"I think issues of credibility and reliability are matters for a jury, except where you get to a point where the credibility is effectively annihilated," she said.

Pell has consistently denied the charges. He pleaded "not guilty" on Tuesday during his court hearing.

He is expected to face a directions hearing in Melbourne's County Court in the future, when a trial date will be set.

Pell's attorney on Tuesday said he may seek separate trials, given the nature of the remaining allegations.

Source

• Vatican News
• Crux Now
• Image: Huffington Post

Pell, who is Pope Francis's former finance minister, is facing several sexual abuse charges.

The alleged offences date back to when he was living in Victoria.

Police have described the charges as "historical" sexual assault offences.

During the hearing, the Melbourne Magistrates Court heard testimony from 50 witnesses.

The head of Pell's defence team, Robert Richter, then counter-attacked the Victorian Police, who opened a special operation in 2013 to investigate Pell.

He called it "an operation looking for a crime because no crime has been reported.

"The allegations are a product of fantasy, the product of some mental problems that the complainant may or may not have, or just pure invention in order to punish the representative of the Catholic Church in this country," Richter said.

Furthermore, the most serious complaints "ought to be regarded as impossible and ought to be discharged."

Richter said the false accusations could have been fabricated to punish Pell for the crimes of other clerics and for failing to act against abuse within the church.

A ruling will be made on 1 May about whether Pell will stand trial.

Richter called on the magistrate, Belinda Wallington, to throw out the charges.

The prosecutor, Mark Gibson, disagreed.

He told the court there is no evidence to back Richter's theory.

Wallington said questions of credibility and reliability were for a jury to decide, "except when you get to the point where credibility is effectively annihilated."

Source

• NZ Herald
• Crux Now
• Catholic News Agency
• Image: France 24

Prosecutor Mark Gibson told the court last Friday one of Pell's accusers is medically unfit to give evidence, so the charges cannot proceed. No other details were given.

Another charge against Pell was dropped at the beginning of the hearing because the accuser had died. Read more

Mark Gibson SC, crown prosecutor, told the Melbourne Magistrates Court on Friday the charge following the death of key witness Damian Dignan was being withdrawn.

However, Pell still faces numerous other sexual offence charges.

He is denying all of them.

His four-week committal hearing began yesterday in the Melbourne Magistrates Court.

The hearing will decide if he must stand trial on the remaining complainants.

The exact details and nature of the charges laid against Pell have not been disclosed to the public.

Police have described them as "historical" sexual assaults. This means they are alleged to have occurred decades ago.

Pell is the highest-ranking Catholic official to be charged with historical sexual offences.

His barrister, Ruth Shann, says the question to be decided involves the timing of complaints.

"... but relevant to that particular witness [ie Dignan] it is also the timing of the ... allegations because of material that we are aware of which makes those people in those locations at that time, in essence, impossible," Shann says.

The potential penalties Pell may face if he is found guilty have not been made public.

Source

• The Guardian
• Catholic News Agency
• Catholic Herald
• Image: The Courier

The director of prosecutions told the Melbourne Magistrates Court that, although no decision has been made yet, the charge by the late Damian Dignan was "likely to be withdrawn".

Ruth Shann, a member of Pell's defence team, said Dignan's accusation, which arose after he read about other cases in the commission in newspapers, had had a "domino effect".

She called Dignan an "unreliable witness". She said Pell's lawyers would be examining Dignan's credibility when the formal four-week committal hearing begins next month.

Dignan died in January this year.

Shann said Pell's lawyers have subpoenaed material from the Dignan's lawyer and they would pursue material connected to his complaint.

This will be used to decide whether it can be included as part of the case or not, since he was the "starting point".

Dignan's complaint inspired a number of other complainants to contact police with claims of historic abuse against the Australian cardinal, she said.

Shann went on to say other accusers who spoke out after Dignan can't be understood without first dealing with their knowledge of Dignan's own complaint.

Dignan's complaint against Pell was lodged in March 2016 when he accused Pell of touching him inappropriately in a public swimming pool forty years before.

At the same time Dignan, who had a criminal record for assault and drunk driving, also accused former St. Alipius School teachers of abuse.

Both Dignan's allegations were corroborated by a former classmate, Lyndon Monument. Monument, a former drug dealer, also has a criminal record for assault.

Cardinal Pell, who has always maintained his innocence, has pleaded not guilty to all charges. He has previously been accused of acts of child sexual abuse dating as far back as 1961.

The head of his defence team, Robert Richter, told the Sydney Morning Herald that the cardinal had been "set up to fall".

"The cardinal has been set up to fall by people who know nothing about the actual charges," Richter said. "He's innocent, and he needs help."

Source

• Catholic News Agency
• Sydney Morning Herald
• Lifesite
• Image: ABC

The October 6th "mention" at the Melbourne Magistrates Court did not specify charges but reported that there would be up to 50 witnesses testifying in court proceedings.

The "mention" occurs to set a date for the committal hearing which establishes whether Pell has a case to answer and provides rules so that all parties have access to the available evidence.

The process is likely to drag on for a long time. After the committal hearing, trials may follow for each of the charges or clusters of them if there be a collection that can be broken up into different trials.

It's a process that will attract intense, global attention from the media.

Cardinal Pell's profile has been high for decades. Now he's an object of international interest after his web televised appearance before the Royal Commission into the abuse of minors in institutions.

Whatever the outcome of the legal process, charges against clerics, whether proven or dismissed, stick in the popular imagination.

Once the finger is pointed at a cleric on sexual matters, the game is up and his life in the chosen profession is finished.

What's more, for Pell, his life in the Vatican is over as these court proceedings will extend well beyond his current contract there.

When Cardinal Pell is charged, under the rules that now apply to Catholic clerics in Australia, he will not be allowed to operate as priest - celebrating a public Mass, bless weddings, etc.

What is tragic in the Greek sense of what is happening to Pell is that here is a person who for thirty years has created his profile.

He also linked his considerable ambitions to being the re-maker of Catholicism in Australia and, through his international alliances, in the global Church. Continue reading

• Father Michael Kelly SJ is executive director of ucanews.com and based in Thailand.

No formal plea was entered although Pell's legal team lead, Robert Richter, told the magistrate:

"For the avoidance of doubt ... Cardinal Pell will plead not guilty to all charges, and will maintain the presumed innocence that he has."

This will be the first of several court appearances for the 76-year-old Pell. His appearance in court on Wednesday was mainly to set out a timetable for future hearings.

The magistrate set the date of 8 September for the prosecutors to give their evidence to Pell's legal team and a day in October when he will reappear in court.

At the October hearing the magistrate will decide whether there is a strong enough case to go to trial.

Pell, who is on leave from his position as the Vatican treasurer, is the highest-ranked Catholic prelate to face sexual abuse charges.

Intense media interest has focused on him since the abuse charges were laid.

Hundreds of journalists from the U.S., Europe, Hong Kong, New Zealand and Australian media groups as well as members of the public crowded around the courthouse, almost mobbing Pell and his legal team as they entered and left the building.

Others packed the small courtroom for the short court hearing. Most of the 60 or so people crammed into public seating were journalists.

The magistrate refused media requests to issue details of charges.

Source

• The Sydney Morning Herald
• National Catholic Reporter
• The Guardian
• Image: The Australian

At the time, of course, his name wasn't even being mentioned.

But as the events unfolded that would later be referred to as "Vatileaks II," media reports of new allegations of financial mismanagement at the Vatican left the question open of whether Pell, as the man put in place to sort things out, would be in the crosshairs.

At the time, there was already a creeping sense that Pell, during the tenure of his investigation into the Vatican bank (also known as the Institute for the Works of Religion, or IOR), had quickly become persona non grata.

When he signed on to the 13 Cardinals Letter expressing concern about how the Synod was being conducted — something Francis was reported to have taken rather personally — his fall from grace accelerated.

Things were quiet for a while, particularly after Pope Francis pulled the plug on his own audit of the Vatican bank in September last year.

And then, this week, things exploded.

Allegations that Pell engaged in sexual molestation decades ago originally surfaced two years ago, but have now transitioned from an investigation into formal charges.

According to sources with knowledge of the Australian cardinal, the media in his home country have been hostile towards him for many years, and he isn't well-loved by a significant portion of the clergy there.

Pell's own response has been an eagerness to finally have his day in court and fight the accusations he categorically denies.

Nevertheless, in an article by Nancy Flory at The Stream, the entire affair is characterized as a "witch hunt" designed to destroy Pell's reputation:

"Pell can never receive a fair trial," writes The Australian columnist Angela Shanahan. She is describing the "media witch-hunt" that has dogged Cardinal George Pell for two years.

New and vague charges — of "historic sexual offenses" — were filed against Cardinal Pell yesterday morning. Cardinal Pell has repeatedly denied allegations of sexual abuse leveled against him.

Still, the media in Australia have repeated claims about the Cardinal's guilt. They've printed leaked information about the investigation against Pell, and claimed that charges were "imminent."

And a hostile book on Cardinal Pell (Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell) came out in May. Continue reading

• Steve Skojec is the Founding Publisher and Executive Director of OnePeterFive.com.

"He has cooperated in every way with multiple police, parliamentary and Royal Commission investigations," Fisher said.

"Everyone supports just investigation of complaints, but the relentless character attacks on Cardinal Pell, by some, stand the principle of innocent-until-proven-guilty on its head," Archbishop Fisher said.

"Australians have a right to expect better from their legal systems and the media. Even churchmen have a right to ‘a fair go'."

He said until it has, he has nothing further to say about allegations of Pell's sexual misconduct. Some of these allegations stretch back several decades.

Pell denies the allegations.

Several people have accused Pell of sexual assault. Allegations came to light last year about Pell's history of sexual crime in an Australian Broadcasting Corporation report.

At least one of these allegations was taken to court and found to be unsubstantiated back in 2002. Other accusations date back to the 1970s.

None have been proven so far.

Whether Pell will be brought back to Australia from Rome where he is the head of the Vatican Secretariat for the Economy has yet to be decided.

Source

• Catholic Herald
• Crux
• Image: Xt3

In reply, Pell says the Green Party's actions show it is "anti-religion".

A spokesperson for Pell said the move is really about political point scoring.

"The Greens have opted for an obvious political stunt while knowing full well Cardinal Pell has consistently co-operated with the Royal Commission and the Victorian police.

The suggestion that Cardinal Pell should be accountable for all the wrongdoings of Church personnel throughout Australia over many decades is not only unjust and completely fanciful but also acts to shield those in the Church who should be called to account for their failures."

The Green Party's Rachel Siewert launched the motion after acknowledging Australia's 4,444 alleged victims of clerical child sexual abuse.

In doing so, she noted "the allegations of criminal misconduct against Cardinal George Pell have been forwarded to the Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions by the Victoria police".

She then called for the cardinal to "return to Australia to assist Victorian police and the Office of Public Prosecutions with their investigations into these matters."

Source

• CathNewsUSA
• The Guardian
• Catholic Herald
• Image: Stay at home mum

In a statement, Victoria Police confirmed to the ABC's 7.30 program that "three members of Victoria Police travelled to Rome last week where Cardinal George Pell voluntarily participated in an interview regarding allegations of sexual assault".

"As a result of the interview further investigations are continuing. We are not prepared to comment further at this time," the statement said.

Pell, says he will continue to co-operate with Victorian police as they investigate alleged historical sexual assaults on boys.

On Wednesday Pell confirmed his voluntary interview in a brief statement that also rejects the allegations.

"The Cardinal repeats his previous rejection of all and every allegation of sexual abuse and will continue to co-operate with Victoria Police until the investigation is finalised," the statement says.

In July the chief commissioner of Victoria police, Graham Ashton, confirmed allegations against Pell had been referred to the office of public prosecutions for a recommendation as to whether police should drop the investigation, investigate further or lay charges.

AT that time Pell previously described them as "nothing more than a scandalous smear campaign".

He accused police of leaking to the media, and called for a Victorian government inquiry into the alleged leaks.

"If there was any credibility in any of these claims, they would have been pursued by the royal commission by now," a statement released by Pell's office in July said.

Asked in July about the allegations and Australian investigation into Pell, Pope Francis told reporters it was important for the process to go forward without him making a "first judgement".

"We don't know what the result will be but be attentive to what justice decides. Once justice speaks, I will speak," he said.

In August, Pope Francis told reporters: "We must avoid a media verdict, a verdict based on gossip."

Source

• theguardian.com
• abc.net.au
• skynews.com.au
• thejournal.ie
• sbs.com.au
• Image: www.sbs.com.au