News of George Pell’s convictions for sexually assaulting two choirboys in the 1990s has dominated debate this week. Many survivors of child sexual abuse, and their supporters, have expressed relief at the guilty verdict. They believe justice has prevailed, especially when such a high ranking member of the Catholic Church, who is seen not only as an abuser but also an enabler of the perverse culture of sexual abuse, has been found guilty.

But with relief may also come a reliving of painful events. Clinical psychologist Kim Felmingham advises people take care of themselves during this time, as the coverage may trigger past trauma to emerge.

There’s another part of the debate. Many people, even those people who may not hold Pell in high regard, have doubted the verdict. They’ve questioned the fairness of the trial that seemed to have relied on the evidence of one surviving victim and the denials of Pell and his defence lawyer.

There’s also some outrage at the suppression orders that banned reporting of the December verdict until this week. But as legal experts Michael Douglas and Jason Bosland, have written, every Australian should be entitled to a fair trial. The suppression orders were not put in place to protect Pell or the Church, but to ensure the integrity of our justice system.

For his part, Pell is going to appeal the verdict. Professor David Hamer, an expert in evidence law, has explained what this process might look like. But regardless of what that outcome may be, Andrew Singleton says the Church has a massive reform task on their hands. One that includes “changes to Canon law, doctrine and practice, characterised by an accountability to and understanding of the world outside the church”.

Contact us here to list your job, or here to list your event.

For sponsorship opportunities, email us here