George Pell Tells Sex Abuse Royal Commission Case against John Ellis Was Unfair "from a Christian Point of View"
By Thomas Oriti
Cardinal George Pell says that from a "Christian point of view", the Church did not deal fairly with former altar boy and sex abuse victim John Ellis. Mr Ellis was abused by a priest in the 1970s, but lost a legal battle in 2007 when the Court of Appeal ruled the Catholic Church was not an entity that could be sued. Cardinal Pell, Australia's most senior Catholic cleric, has given evidence at the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in Sydney. He said although lawyers never acted improperly, he had "moral doubts" and believed the case was mishandled from a spiritual perspective. "Any reservations I might have about particular stands of our lawyers, I would not want to suggest that they did anything improper," he told the hearing. "But from my point of view, from a Christian point of view, leaving aside the legal dimension, I don't think we did deal fairly." Cardinal Pell said that he endorsed the aggressive strategies of the church's lawyers, who were instructed to "resist" Mr Ellis's claim, despite the fact that he believed Mr Ellis. "Part of that wording, 'vigorously' or 'strenuously', was, at least in my mind, an attempt to encourage people not to go into litigation," Cardinal Pell told the hearing. Counsel assisting the commission Gail Furness questioned the Cardinal's stance. "So by having a vigorous defence, that would show potential plaintiffs that they should think twice before litigating against the church?" she asked. "That they should think clearly," Cardinal Pell responded. Cardinal Pell said victims should settle the matters outside court. In a statement to the commission, Cardinal Pell apologised to Mr Ellis for the abuse committed by Father Aidan Duggan. Cardinal Pell admitted endorsing a decision not to enter mediation at the time the legal action began, but now concedes that was a mistake. "I could have. I regret that I didn't. As a general rule, though, I handed over the carriage of the case to our legal advisers and I should have been more vigilant," he said. Before the case Mr Ellis asked for $100,000 but was offered $30,000. The court costs far exceeded Mr Ellis's original request for compensation. The Cardinal said at the time the legal action commenced in 2004, he was mistaken about Mr Ellis. "He presented so well. He's such a senior lawyer; he was represented by two very high-profile lawyers," Cardinal Pell said. "I understood insufficiently just how wounded he was. "We would never have run this case against many of the victims who came forward because they're manifestly so wounded. "That was not apparent to me at this stage." During the litigation, Cardinal Pell expressed concern to his colleagues about exacerbating the victim's psychiatric condition. He was today asked whether he was actually attempting to avoid bad publicity as a result of the case. "That was always one of my concerns, yes, but it was not my first concern," he said. Cardinal Pell has denied being involved in the day-to-day running of the legal battle with Mr Ellis. A second man came forward with a complaint about the priest during the litigation Cardinal Pell admits that would have strengthened Mr Ellis's case, but said he did not discuss it with the lawyers. The hearing continues.
|
.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.