Detective says police did not seek out Pell’s diary records or archival information on his movements in relation to alleged event

The committal hearing into sexual offence allegations against Cardinal George Pell has concluded, with senior detectives saying they did not ask Pell for his diary records nor approach St Patrick’s Cathedral for archival information about his movements.

On Thursday Det Chris Reed was cross-examined by Pell’s defence barrister, Robert Richter QC. Richter pressed Reed on events alleged to have occurred at Melbourne’s St Patrick’s Cathedral in 1996 after Sunday mass while Pell was dressed in his robes. Richter said a review of a church newspaper as well as church records revealed Pell only gave mass at the church on two dates in 1996, both in December and after he became Archbishop of Melbourne.

Pell's barrister accuses magistrate of bias towards prosecutors Read more

Richter added many former choir boys who sang at the church gave evidence that Pell was never alone in his robes when he gave mass, because he was always accompanied by other church staff who helped him put on and take off his robes, or surrounded by parishioners with whom he spoke on the steps of the church afterwards.

But police had not taken formal statements from many of those choir boys, Richter said, putting it to Reed that they were not taken because they would be “favourable to Pell’s defence”.

“If Pell ... has always had hangers-on and Pell didn’t hang around [after mass] ... those are critical bits of information,” Richter said.



Reed said detectives had not obtained the exact dates Pell gave mass in 1996 because they had executed search warrants at the Melbourne Archdiocese. But the archives of the church, which included records of dates Pell gave mass, were kept at a different location, Richter told the court.

“Warrants were never executed at the archives of the diocese, which were in a different place,” Richter put to Reed. “There was no warrant for that. Ever.”

“No there wasn’t,” Reed replied. “I didn’t know where the archives were.”

Richter then asked: “Did anyone ever ask Cardinal Pell to show them his diaries?”

“No,” Reed replied.

The court also heard police did not reinterview a witness who made allegations about Pell in a formal police statement that were different to allegations he later made to ABC journalist Louise Milligan.

Reed responded that this would not necessarily be cause to reinterview a complainant. “My experience in dealing with especially historical matters is what’s stated and what has actually occurred are entirely different things, depending on personal perception,” he said.

George Pell: former student says he never saw cardinal do anything 'untoward' Read more

Richter said police had not interviewed anyone who could corroborate evidence against Pell.

Reed responded that this was “not uncommon”. “I don’t think I have ever been involved in a child sexual assault matter where someone has seen the event,” he said.

Despite some of the complainants making serious allegations of abuse against other people, Richter put it to Reed police did not focus on those allegations closely because they were “zeroing in” on Pell.

“I disagree,” Reed responded. He said other complaints were referred to a separate police command.

The evidence followed the cross-examination on Wednesday afternoon of Snr Const David Rae, who told the court it was not his practice to take notes during the first conversation with someone making a complaint of historical abuse.

Richter put it to him that not taking notes was a breach of police procedures.

“No, it’s my practice,” Rae replied.

“Your practice then,” Richter replied, “is appalling.”



The committal hearing concluded on Thursday after running for almost four weeks. However, it was closed to the public and the media during its first 1.5 weeks to protect complainants who were cross-examined. Once the courtroom at the Melbourne magistrates’ court was reopened, former choir boys, family members of complainants and police were cross-examined by Pell’s defence team.

Magistrate Belinda Wallington will now consider whether there is enough evidence to order Pell to stand trial. He does not need to enter a plea unless the case goes to trial, though he has strenuously denied all of the allegations. Further details of the charges cannot be revealed for legal reasons.

Wallington is expected to hand down her decision in April.