...and here is why:

1. The allegation was that he had committed a sexual act in the vestry. At the time stated, he was actually walking in a procession in a crowded cathedral  accompanied by a number of other people, and then greeting people outside, watched by a large crowd. Witnesses gave evidence to this.

2. He was not in the vestry at the time described, nor could it have taken place later (see 3). He was fully robed and it would not be possible for him to perform the act described in the way described. On returning to the vestry after greeting people he was accompanied by other clergy, who were present with him until all left the cathedral together. They gave evidence to this.

3.The man making the allegation stated that it took place in the vestry while he was a chorister. Choristers did not use the vestry  nor could they have been drinking Communion wine as claimed as it was locked away elsewhere. At the time of the alleged act, the then-chorister and his companion (who has since died, and before doing so admitted that the whole event had not occurred) were with the rest of the choir, rehearsing for a Christmas recording. Had they been absent, this would have been noted.

4.All of this was established at the first trial when the Cardinal was acquitted. Attempts to invent other incidents have failed.