They’ll have to take Twitter & Facebook down too then I take it? 
A certain somebody’s Wikipedia page got a work out over night.
Has been edited and changed a number of times…
1 Like
So is he currently in jail now awaiting the second trial?
So George, how do you make gravy?
If he is to be sentenced in February - he will likely immediately appeal that conviction and sentence at that hearing, and then likely be granted bail pending the outcome of his appeal.
It’s a while yet to go until there is any prospect of jail…
2 Likes
The Herald Sun front page isn’t subtle.
2 Likes
They’re running this really close.
Most of what they reported today could have been reported while the trial was occurring, but they didn’t report it because they obviously thought they weren’t permitted to do so pursuant to the suppression order. Yet they do so today because of the pressure to say something.
I reckon the second trial is farked. Even though they don’t name him there’s enough detail that everyone knows who they’re talking about. There’s no chance he gets an unbiased jury (at law) for the second trial now.
On bail
1 Like
Mokbel still proceeded to a trial by jury even after half the state had watched pirated DVDs of Underbelly…
1 Like
What’s the Defense argument for that.
The suppression is in place it hasn’t been broken. So it’s just rumour and innuendo at this point. That can’t be the bar surely, otherwise you could never try people like Mick Gatto.
It would have to be a brave judge to dismiss the case with no solid evidence of jury tainting. It’s basically saying the current jury system is unworkable.
2 Likes
They will argue that the charges should be permanently stayed as a fair trial is impossible.
Everyone tries it. Very few (if any) ever are succesful with it. Dupas, Mokbel both tried it… both failed.
I get what you mean. But it doesn’t work in the way that a suppression order is in place = therefore any subsequent trial is fair. The suppression order is designed (but not guaranteed to) protect his ability to get a fair trial. That may or may not happen in reality though.
Here - you have the major newspapers skirting very close to the line (if not stepping over). It’s the combination of that, PLUS the overseas reporting which specially states he’s been found guilty (and which Australians are free to read) that’s the problem.
Richter will be mainly focused on the fact that it’s all over Facebook and Twitter and the rest of the internet that he’s been found guilty, and that regardless of the suppression order, the fact is everyone knows he’s been found guilty and that means he can’t get a fair trial on the second charges.
1 Like
PS I’m not saying that the second trial won’t go ahead or will be stayed, more that it’s the most obvious appeal point in the history of appeal points. They’ll literally keep appealing till he dies
If it is a name suppression order & he hasn’t been named, I can’t see how a breach of order, under common law contempt of court or even as a statutory offence, has been made. The second trial will go ahead for mine.
1 Like
Is it the guilty verdict or that facts of the case that’s important.
If you have previous charges does that really prevent you from being charged for something else. Chopper couldn’t be tried for murder becuase everyone knew he’d been found guilty before?
I’m not a lawyer, just seems odd.
Wait…wait!
Philip Wilson’s conviction was overturned?
The use of suppression orders is outta control in Victoria. Higher Courts have stated that they should only be used in exceptional circumstances (I’m guessing this is one of them, given the person involved).
Impossible & impractical to restrict Australian access to global media. As good as Richter is, I can’t see how he will be able to prove a real interference in the administration of justice, based on the stories (in Australia) that have been run thus far, therefore scuppering any chance of the second trial.
p.s. Point on appeals is noted, but it is fair to assume that everyone realises that these cases will be mired in appeals for some time (given the resources available).
A better example for my thinking is Risdale. We all know who he is and what he’s done. If there were new charges against him why does he get a fair trail?