Appeal will say jury neglected evidence

Stills from George Pell police interview in Rome

George Pell will argue that the jury that convicted him of five sex ­offences delivered unreasonable verdicts that disregarded the ­evidence.

Pell, 77, has appealed against the Victorian County Court verdic­t in a bid to stop him spending years behind bars.

The appeal grounds include that the verdicts were unreasonable, ignored unchallenged excul­patory evidence from more than 20 crown witnesses, and that it was not open to the jury to be satisfi­ed beyond reasonable doubt based on the word of the complain­ant alone.

Pell was convicted of the five charges on the word of the sole surviving choirboy, who gave evidenc­e that he was molested in 1996 and 1997 and that a fellow choirboy was molested by Pell in 1996.

The appeal, filed on Pell’s behal­f, says trial judge Peter Kidd erred by preventing the defence from watching a video that would have shown the jury where key people moved along the floor of St Patrick’s Cathedral.

The 19-minute video was not shown.

“The verdicts are unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence, because on the whole of the evidence, including unchallenged exculpatory evidence from more than 20 crown witnesses, it was not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on the word of the complainant alone,’’ the appeal states.

It also questions the way the jury was selected.

“There was a fundamental ­irregularity in the trial process because­ the accused was not arraigne­d in the presence of the jury panel,’’ the appeal, filed by Pell’s solicitor Paul Galbally, says.

Sydney barrister Bret Walker SC is set to represent Pell at the Court of Appeal when his appeal is heard later this year, probably in several months’ time.

The decision to engage a new silk is standard practice in cases of this kind and Pell’s original team of lawyers who fought the criminal trial will remain to help free the cardinal, sources said.

His current legal team consists of Robert Richter QC, his junior Ruth Shann, and Mr Galbally, all of whom will remain on the cardinal’s case.

All are criminal law specialists.

Mr Richter, considered the criminal barrister of his generation, apologised on Thursday for referring to Pell’s most serious charge as “no more than a plain vanilla sexual penetration case’’.

He released a remorseful statement after criticism for using what many perceived to be an inflammatory comment while arguing for a low sentence for Australia’s most senior Catholic.

The comment was made to Judge Kidd, who rejected the statement at the time during senten­cing submissions, declaring Pell’s ­offences were on a higher, rather than lower, level.

One of the five charges Pell was found guilty of involved oral pene­tration of a teenage boy.

Pell has maintained his innocence despite the guilty verdicts.

He was remanded at the Melbourne Assessment Prison, where he is expected to remain until he is sentenced on March 13.

There can be lengthy delays in hearings before the Court of Appeal­. The timetable can vary from weeks to months. It is possible it could be up to six months befor­e the appeal is heard, which will be served in prison unless the Court of Appeal grants Pell bail.