Talk:Roman Catholic Diocese of Ballarat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 12:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bribing David[edit]

While David and his sisters claim Pell tried to bribe him, this was found to be implausible by the Royal Commission. I am not making any excuses. Simply pointing out what the Commission concluded about it.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/pell-knew-in-1982-that-ridsdale-was-moved-to-save-church-from-scandal-20200507-p54qr9.html

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-07/royal-commission-findings-on-cardinal-george-pell-released/12217362

"The commission found a claim by David Ridsdale, the nephew of Gerald Ridsdale, that he was offered a bribe by Cardinal Pell in 1993 was unlikely.

Mr Ridsdale told the commission he called then-Bishop Pell about the abuse he had suffered as a child at the hands of his uncle.

He said he was seeking a "private process" to resolve the matter due to concerns about his grandmother.

Sexual abuse stories disturb many of us. Be sure to look after yourself

For survivors of child sexual abuse, reading the details of crimes can provoke a wide range of emotions. We spoke to experts about how to deal with triggering, traumatic news.

Read more Mr Ridsdale told the commission during the phone conversation, Cardinal Pell told him: "I want to know what it will take to keep you quiet."

Cardinal Pell denied the claim in his royal commission evidence and the commission said it was not satisfied that Cardinal Pell said the words attributed to him.

"It is more likely that Mr Ridsdale misinterpreted an offer by Bishop Pell to assist as something more sinister," the commission said."

So it cannot be claimed that the commission supported or affirmed David's claim that Pell tried to bribe him. It did the opposite. Any edits suggesting the contrary are false. 83.128.99.144 (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]