Source.The Prime Minister has said he understands Cardinal George Pell will be stripped of his Order of Australia honour, as Pell plans to take his rejected appeal against his child sex abuse convictions to the High Court.
This morning two of the three judges from Victoria's Court of Appeal turned down Pell's primary ground of appeal, that the jury's verdict was unreasonable.
The judges unanimously dismissed two other grounds of appeal which argued that there were errors in the way the trial was run.
Pell was in March sentenced to a six-year jail term after last year being found guilty by a jury of five offences including sexual penetration of a child.
The 78-year-old must serve a minimum jail term of three years and eight months.
Chief Justice Anne Ferguson and Justice Chris Maxwell dismissed the appeal on the ground of an unreasonable jury verdict, while Justice Mark Weinberg upheld that appeal ground.
Chief Justice Ferguson and Justice Maxwell agreed it "was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt Cardinal Pell was guilty as charged".
A statement was released from a spokesperson for Pell at the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney which confirmed his team would "thoroughly examine" the judgment in order to determine a special leave application to the High Court.
"Cardinal Pell is obviously disappointed with the decision today," the statement said.
"While noting the 2-1 split decision, Cardinal Pell maintains his innocence. We thank his many supporters."
Pell holds onto Order of Australia honour
Prime Minister Scott Morrison suggested Pell was likely to lose his Order of Australia honour as a result of the court outcome.
At a press conference shortly after the outcome, Mr Morrison said his sympathies were with victims across Australia.
"The courts have done their job, they've rendered their verdict," he said.
"And that's the system of justice in this country and that must be respected.
"Of course, my understanding is that this would result in the stripping of the honours that are decided externally to the Government, that is a process that is done independently and that of course will now follow."
Pell became a Companion of the Order of Australia in 2005 in recognition of his contribution to the Catholic Church.
In a statement, Governor-General David Hurley appeared to suggest no action would be taken until any appeal by Pell to the High Court had been decided.
"Appointments to the Order of Australia may be terminated and one of the grounds is conviction for a crime or offence under a law of the Commonwealth, State or Territory," he said.
"Once all legal proceedings have run their course, the Council for the Order of Australia may make a recommendation to me as Chancellor of the Order, which I will act on."
Two-one ruling backs jury's verdict
Pell's legal team had argued during the appeal hearing there were 13 reasons why the offending was "impossible", but Justice Ferguson said she and Justice Maxwell rejected all 13.
One of those reasons was that Pell's robes were too heavy to be moved aside to commit the sexual acts he was convicted of.
The robes "were not so heavy or so immoveable as … had been suggested," Justice Ferguson told the packed courtroom.
Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume.
Video: Cardinal George Pell loses appeal against historical child abuse convictions (ABC News)
She said Justice Weinberg, who dissented on this ground of appeal, found the complainant's evidence had discrepancies.
"He concluded that his evidence contained discrepancies, displayed inadequacies and otherwise lacked a probity of value so as to cause him to have a doubt as to the applicant's guilt," she said of Justice Weinberg's conclusions.
Justice Weinberg found that the other evidence made the complainant's account "impossible to accept".
"Nevertheless, the appeal on the unreasonableness ground has been dismissed because two of us took a different view of the facts," Justice Ferguson said.
Argument of errors during trial rejected
All three judges agreed with County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd's ruling not to admit the defence's animation, which purported to show the movements of all people present at St Patrick's Cathedral in December 1996.
Justice Ferguson said it was a "distorted picture" of events at the cathedral.
There was also a unanimous ruling to dismiss the appeal on the third ground — that Pell should have been arraigned in front of the jury.
Reading a summary of the court's decision, Justice Ferguson said she wanted to note the context of the case and stressed that the conviction only concerned the five offences Pell was convicted of.
"Cardinal Pell's conviction and this appeal have attracted widespread attention, both in Australia and beyond," she said.
"He is a senior figure in the Catholic Church and is internationally well known.
"As the trial judge, Chief Judge Kidd commented when sentencing Cardinal Pell, there has been vigorous and sometimes emotional criticism of the Cardinal, and he has been publicly vilified in some sections of the community.
"There has also been strong support for the Cardinal by others. Indeed, it's fair to say that this case has divided the community.
"It is important to stress at the outset that Cardinal Pell's conviction only concerns the five offences alleged to have been committed by him."
Pell's surviving victim wants to 'get on with his life'
Vivian Waller, the lawyer representing Pell's surviving victim, said her client was "very relieved" by the outcome.
"It's been a very long journey for him," she told ABC Radio Melbourne.
"He's a very private person and very family-oriented, and he's very much focused on doing his best to look after his family and get on with his life."
Dr Waller said she expected Pell's legal team to seek leave to appeal to the High Court.
"I think we'll all be carefully reading and considering the full judgment, which will take a little bit of time," she said.
"I'm told it's 300 pages long so no doubt there will be lots of legal minds poring over that decision."
Victim advocate welcomes 'joyous moment'
Outside court, anti-abuse advocate Chrissie Foster said it was a "joyous moment" when the decision was handed down.
"I'm so glad that it was not overturned after everything," she said.
Ms Foster's daughters Emma and Katie were raped by Melbourne priest Kevin O'Donnell while they were at primary school in the 1980s.
"It sends a message that they will be believed," she said about other victims of institutional abuse.
"It's a wonderful, wonderful day for survivors, for victims. I think it sends a message that justice will be served, no matter how high you are, or how old you are, or what your job is.
"This is a crime, it's against children. That innocence just taken and destroyed. [Abuse] ruins people's lives.
"This is a good day, a good counter for that."
It'll go to the High Court without a doubt, but it warmed my heart to read this story this morning. I won't have the time to read the decision any time soon but I don't doubt that the impending High Court challenge decision will become a case study for every criminal law student in the next ten years one way or another. Men like Pell have too long been allowed to harm others with impunity and it will take us many years to scrub the stain of complicity out of society and the church alike, but every step on the way is to be celebrated.
