No matter how Pell’s appeal pans out, he will never recover

In the court of public opinion, George Pell is forever tainted.

From what emanated from pulpits on Sunday, the reality of the George Pell conviction has not sunk in. Much reliance is based on the incomplete nature of the judicial process — the appeal, that is. It may result in a complete acquittal. On the other hand, the outcome may be a retrial or the verdict may be upheld.

But really there’s no going back. Whatever the appeal outcome, the guilty verdict will never be expunged. Pell will never recover from it. The genie is out of the bottle. He will never be acquitted in probably most minds.

With those sort of allegations floating around for years he should never have been so elevated. An own goal. The Catholic Church will take many years of great effort to recover. And it must accept the full authority of the civil government and forget about the Vatican, a nest of reactionary snakes, in my view.

There are no clerical-dominated halfway houses between the complainant and the police authorities. The Catholic Church — if it wants to be an Australian citizen — must accept this as other Australians do.

Paul Everingham, Hamilton, Qld

Uncertain memories

A “false memory” is a fact. They are encountered often enough by psychiatrists and psychologists — they have many characteristics. By definition “the content is false but believed to be true” by the person with the false memory. It can be called “a delusionary memory content”.

It can be shown to be a false memory when its content is shown to be false by overwhelming other evidence that makes it impossible for it to be true.

The suspicion that it is a false memory when there is no corroborative or contradictory evidence rests on a value judgment of the plausibility of it being true. The quality of a person’s value judgment rests on the appropriate-to-the-content world experience of the person making that value judgment. What ends up being “true” or “false” in any particular sphere depends on the majority decision of those with world experience in that particular sphere. In two words: “common sense” (but often not common enough).

Bob Tym, Yarralumla, ACT

Climate suffering

Nick Cater is correct (“Labor’s last word: it’s the poor what gets the blame”, 4/3). The people who can least afford higher energy prices in the quest to tackle so-called climate change are the ones who will suffer the most in almost every way.

Higher energy costs will result in higher costs of almost every consumable one can think of. Wealthy retired inner-city folk will not be concerned in the slightest when energy prices escalate. My thoughts go out to young families battling to keep their jobs, run their cars, feed and clothe their children, educate them and pay off their mortgages.

What this will eventually mean is that there will be a greater demand on government through added welfare. Yes — those who want to see climate change tackled irrespective of the social cost are among the most selfish people in Australia today.

Peter D. Surkitt, Sandringham, Vic

No guts for nuclear?

Chris Kenny again (“In a climate of nonsense, virtue-signallers need to weigh the nuclear option”, 2/3) offers a clear, concise appraisal of what my poor benighted country is suffering in this never-ending climate debacle.

The time must surely be due for thinking Australians to say enough. To all politicians, most sections of the media, the national broadcaster and virtue-signallers, I offer the comment by Joseph Welch at the McCarthy un-American hearings in 1954: “Have you no sense of decency?”. I would add, “Have you no honesty?”.

Let’s have the guts to at least open a debate on nuclear power.

Tom Murphy, Kenmore Hills, Qld