Anyone tempted to believe that George Pell did what he was convicted of doing should read first the majority judgment of the Court of Appeal majority (“Judgment”), next the fuller transcript of the complainant’s allegations that is given in paragraphs 415 to 455 of the dissenting judgment (“Dissent”), and then the Wikipedia account (with numerous links) of Operation Midland in the UK. If you take this short tour, you will see the Judgment fall apart under your eyes. The Judgment’s sequencing (Falsity, Improbability, Impossibility) reverses the rational order of treatment. Its hand­ling of Archbishop Pell’s alibi defence concludes abruptly in…