Cardinal George Pell has been convicted of abusing two choirboys in the sacristy of Melbourne cathedral. He is appealing the verdict. An Australian Jesuit who has followed the trial hopes that Pell is not the victim of a wounded nation in search of a scapegoat

In December, a jury of 12 of his fellow citizens found Cardinal Pell 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 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.