Exonerated, not forgotten
An inquiry into serious allegations against one of Australia's most powerful cleric has found they were unsubstantiated. Yet both sides are claiming victory, with their integrity, they maintain, intact.
The casualty of the whole Pell affair, it seems, is reputation: the reputation of Sydney's Catholic Archbishop, George Pell, falling short of complete exoneration given the inquiry's terms of reference; the reputation of the Catholic Church buckling under the weight of what has been fashioned as a sex-abuse epidemic; and the reputation of the accuser himself well-sullied but still largely protected under the umbrella of anonymity.
The case centred on allegations by a Melbourne man that he had been sexually abused by the archbishop at an altar boys' camp on Phillip Island in 1962 when he was 12 and Pell was a student priest.
In his report, the retired judge Alec Southwell observed that the acts attributed to the respondent amounted to the crime of indecent assault, which was then punishable by imprisonment for a term of up to 10 years. Pell consistently and vehemently denied the allegations throughout the ordeal.
Southwell found much credible evidence over the five-day hearing.
Witness "H", a former altar boy who also attended the camp, told the inquiry he had a clear recollection of the complainant, who told him on one occasion to "just watch out for Big George". "H" took the advice without requiring further explanation because "it was the way he said it. I assumed."
Southwell ruled, however, that evidence of what an 11-year-old boy "assumed" about a possibly misunder-
stood "warning" was "no sound basis for adverse findings in an inquiry of this nature".
The inquiry was also unable to establish a motive for the complainant making the allegations, stating that "extensive inquiries made on behalf of the respondent have unearthed no evidence of any other matter or incident which might have aroused spite or malice on the part of the complainant towards either the respondent or the church".
"On the other hand, the respondent has had a strong motive to push memory (if there ever was memory) of these fleeting incidents by a 19-year-old into the recesses of the mind, from which there could be no recall."
And the complainant's ex-wife, "Mrs C", whom Southwell described as an honest and impressive witness, told the inquiry how her then husband had told her in 1975 he had been interfered with "by a big bastard called George". In 2000, "Mrs C" said she received a call from her ex-husband, who told her he had seen his molester on television and his name was George Pell, Melbourne's archbishop. "Mrs C" said she had not heard of Pell before.
The complainant's evidence, however, began to falter during questioning over when he first recognised Pell as his alleged abuser.
The complainant has always insisted that he first recognised Pell in 2000, and then took his concerns to Broken Rites, a group which represents the victims of church abuse. He was urged to go to the police and the inquiry was told how a Broken Rites representative, "B", told him about the compensation provision the Melbourne Archdiocese by then had in place. But the complainant did not want police involvement or compensation, so he let the matter drop. In May this year, however, he decided to make a formal complaint under the church's process for handling sex-abuse allegations, Towards
Healing.
In an interview on June 11 with Sister Angela Ryan, Towards Healing's executive director (or "G" as she is referred to in the inquiry), he made the statement: "One night I was sitting at the television and it was announced that Archbishop George Pell had been transferred to Sydney and I looked up and was confronted by Big George."
But Pell was not appointed Sydney Archbishop until March 26, 2001, and was installed on May 10. In a redraft less than a week later, the Sydney reference was removed, but the complainant added that Pell was wearing purple robes. It was noted in the inquiry that the complainant was in fact colourblind, although to what extent was not determined.
In cross-examination the complainant said he thought "G" had "put in a few things in that document that didn't agree with me," then added: "G was leading me when I was talking to her. She was, you know, she was sort of leading me rather than me doing the talking."
In response "G" said she could not recall being told about Sydney but added: "I presume that there was something like that in my notes, otherwise I wouldn't have typed it ..." This interview led Southwell to conclude that "except in relation to the interview with 'G' I did not form a positively adverse view of him as a witness."
Also going against the complainant was the lack of witnesses. "Of the numerous people who were at the camp either as adult helpers (including seminarians) or as altar servers, and who have made signed statements and/or who have given evidence, none was aware of any inappropriate behaviour by the respondent or any other adult," Southwell observed.
The complainant has been before the court on many occasions, resulting in 39 convictions from about 20 court appearances. Most of the convictions involved drink-driving or assaults, between 1969 (when he was 20) and 1975. In 1995 he pleaded guilty in the County Court to three counts of trafficking in amphetamines and was sentenced to imprisonment for three years and nine months.
Southwell said in his report that the complainant's record was notable more for alcohol and violence than dishonesty. "However, there is sufficient evidence of dishonesty to demonstrate that the complainant's evidence must be scrutinised with special care."
Southwell's conclusion to the inquiry thus read: "In the end, and notwithstanding that impression of the complainant, bearing in mind the forensic difficulties of the defence occasioned by the very long delay, some valid criticism of the complainant's credibility, the lack of corroborative evidence and the sworn denial of the respondent, I find I am not 'satisfied that the complaint has been established', to quote the words of the principal term of reference."
The allegations of sex abuse against Pell received extensive overseas coverage. It is doubtful the clearing of his name on these charges will receive the same prominence.
His knack for polarising a church already in crisis over issues of faith, morality and power means he is unlikely to be free from attempted slurs upon his character and even further allegations against him for long.
But according to John Allen, the Vatican correspondent for the US-based publication The National Catholic Reporter, Rome is unlikely to allow Pell's latest ordeal to alter the trajectory of his career.
He remains the man most likely to become Australia's next cardinal.