Stacey Lee: This is what justice really looks like

We often see it in high-profile cases overseas but watching the sentence delivered live in an Australian court is rare. For our faith in the justice system to improve, it should happen more often, writes Stacey Lee.

The sentencing of Cardinal George Pell was broadcast live across the globe.

It’s expected millions of people watched Chief Judge Peter Kidd tell Pell he’ll spend at least three years and eight months behind bars for the sexual assault of two young choirboys.

We often see it in high-profile cases overseas but watching the sentence delivered live in an Australian court is rare.

It should occur more often.

The story has immense public interest given Pell is the world’s most senior Catholic figure ever to be found guilty of sexual offences against children. It’s only right we were all allowed to hear the reasoning behind the judge’s sentence.

RELATED: Pell’s words that expose the core of the church’s problem

Pell has consistently denied any wrongdoing and has already launched an appeal. This will be heard in June but no doubt before then there’ll be fierce debate about the sentence itself. Some will say it’s too high, others will say it should be harsher — but at least those with a view either way can hear the reasoning before they pass judgment.

It was surprising to a lot of us in the media that the court allowed cameras inside, especially given the secrecy measures in place throughout the trial itself.

Cardinal George Pell is the most senior Catholic cleric to be found guilty of sexual abuse. Picture: AP/Asanka Brendon Ratnayake

The 77-year-old was convicted before Christmas but in Australia we couldn’t tell you until recently due to suppression orders in place because Pell was potentially facing a second trial. It was a move criticised by many, especially given international media could report the conviction outside of Australia.

You’d open the local paper or turn on the local radio or TV station and there was no news of one of the world’s most important trials.

RELATED: Why didn’t you look after the kids, George Pell?

But if you had social media or access to a search engine you had the information at your fingertips from overseas news agencies. It showed how out of touch our system can be.

But the court’s decision to allow a camera inside has been praised by many as it shows a commitment to open justice.

“I thought it was absolutely fantastic that it was broadcast,” Melbourne-based lawyer Justin Quill said outside court.

“I think it will allow people to better understand the sentence and I hope it’ll mean that there’ll be less outrage.”

It’s believed that in broadcasting the sentence, more people will understand the decision reached. Picture: AP/Andy Brownbill

Less outrage, maybe not so much — but a better understanding, let’s hope so.

My first thought was that the sentence was too light and probably should’ve been higher, given the power imbalance between the victims and the offender. But listening to the full sentencing remarks my mind was changed.

Judge Kidd described Pell’s crimes as “breathtakingly arrogant” but made a point of saying he was not to be “made a scapegoat” for wider failings of the Catholic Church.

He acknowledged Pell’s age and said there was a “real” possibility he might not live to be released from prison.

RELATED: Catholic Church cannot hide from Pell verdict

He took those things into account, along with Pell’s health, to come up with the maximum prison sentence of six years.

After hearing his reasoning, I think the punishment is right.

Many will disagree, but at least we can all make up our own minds after watching the sentencing remarks in full.

If only other hearings were as open, maybe the courts would face less public criticism.

Stacey Lee is a presenter for Sky News. @Staceylee_