Cardinal Pell's appeal

is due for argument in the High Court today. "For argument" means it could go either way. 
I am not going to comment on which way I believe it should or could go but I was interested to see that the Twitterati were out in force - all of them apparently trying to make sure the High Court judges would see it their way.
Whichever way it goes the decision will  be analysed and criticised. I do not envy the judges. This is one they will not be able to get "right" in the minds of some people.
What has surprised me throughout this saga however is how many people have believed that "it must be true because the victim said so". In the minds of many there is absolutely no doubt at all.
We want to believe victims. We also want to believe alleged victims. We rarely want to believe defendants accused of some heinous act.
It is also all too easy to plant an erroneous belief in the mind of another person. There has been more than one psychological experiment showing just that. I have used techniques like that in teaching.  I did it once to a group of law students. I hope it made them see criminal law and what goes on in a law court in an entirely different way.
I also tried to make the same students see that an alleged victim can genuinely believe that something occurred and that, as a result, they are telling the truth as they see it. They are not lying to the court. Lying is a deliberate act designed to deceive. 
And that is where it all gets murky and difficult. Our legal system is not perfect. Some guilty people get off and some innocent people get convicted. 
There are those saying that there should have been no right of appeal in this case and that, should the appeal go in the appellant's favour, then that is the end of the jury system as we know it. That is wrong. Juries are made up of ordinary human beings. They can get things right or wrong. The rest of us need to wait and see what happens.