George Pell impostor theory floated


One of Australia’s top Catholic priests has called for the Child Sexual Abuse Royal Commission to be reconvened immediately to uncover the identity of the impostor who in early 2016 gave evidence before it pretending to be Cardinal George Pell. 

Melbourne Catholic Archbishop Peter Comensoli (pictured at top) made this sensational claim and demand for immediate action overnight as he continues to defend Pell as an innocent man in the wake of a Victorian court’s dismissal of his appeal against conviction on historic child sex charges.

Archbishop Comensoli’s call for the commission to resume its work comes on the heels of his stated belief that both sides in the case of Pell’s current convictions told the truth at trial.

The archbishop is convinced George Pell is completely innocent of the offences at St Patrick’s Cathedral in the 1990s but the abused boy has also told the truth, although he has clearly made an honest mistake and identified the wrong pedophile out of those operating at the cathedral at the time.

“I’ve also been giving Cardinal Pell’s appearance at the commission three years ago a lot of thought over recent times,” Archbishop Comensoli said.

“It’s become clear to me that it wasn’t George Pell giving that testimony but a lookalike out to tarnish his reputation.”

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was established in 2013 by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and its final report was made public in December 2017.

Making his amazing claims, Archbishop Comensoli said: “I don’t know who the person was who gave evidence at the [royal commission] but he needs to be unmasked and brought to account.

“The Cardinal George Pell I know is a truthful and honest and decent man and there is absolutely no way he would have said the things the impostor told the commission more than three years ago.”

“The George Pell I know, love and respect would never have stated in video evidence over those four days from Rome that he had been alerted to alleged activity by one priest and that it ‘was a sad story and of not much interest to me’.

“The George Pell I know, love and respect would never have said in his testimony from Rome that ‘in those days, if a priest denied such activity, I was very inclined to accept the denial’.

“The George Pell I know, love and respect would never have said  that ‘it was much more difficult for the child to be believed back then’.

“The George Pell I know, love and respect would never have described a Christian brother who openly kissed boys as they left the school for the day as ‘eccentric’, or that his swimming naked with boys was ‘most unusual but not untoward’.

“The George Pell I know, love and respect would never, ever, deliberately have put the reputation of the church or its finances above any child who had been sexually abused. It’s unthinkable that he would. It really is.

“So the obvious question  rises: who gave that evidence in Pell’s place?” Archbishop Comensoli said.

“Who is the identity of this uncaring impostor who has not only pulled the wool over the commissioners’ eyes but tarnished the reputation of a decent and kind servant of God?

“Indeed, how was the real Cardinal George Pell sidelined and silenced? Was Cardinal Pell drugged and locked in a room somewhere in the Vatican and when he was subsequently released he was too embarrassed to come forward?

“The Commission needs to be reconvened and given the funding and time it needs to get to the truth of this matter, no matter how high this conspiracy might extend within the hierarchy of the Church of Rome.

“For Cardinal George Pell’s sake, we really do need to get to the bottom of this.”