George Pell trial: journalists and publishers face court over coverage

You havent read the OP, or if you have it has gone over your head. I have explained the reasons and shown you that your government operates similar measures. And yet you still persist with your bovine abuse.In fact all you have is abuse. You seem incapable of engaging with the topic. Probably because it is a bit too complex for you.

You are a joke.

 

You weren't following my argument. If a person has had a prior high-profile trial, or so your argument, any further trial thereafter would be "compromised". So, we can't charge them. That is obviously absurd.

This all doesn't add up.

 

Not at all.It is the closeness of the two trials that is the issue. Pell is convicted in the first on friday and steps into court again on the monday on , I assume, similar charges.. There isnt a hope in hell that he would get a fair trial.
A simple reporting restriction until the second one is resolved ensures fairness and nobody is disadvantaged.

 

It's amazing. You have a high-profile trial behind you, and you get a one-year (two-year? five year?) hiatus when you can get away with murder because any trial would be compromised. Why is the flaw of your argument so hard to see?

Or, you get two trials against one person at the same time, the defense teams leak a steady stream about each trial, and each team crows the trial is "compromised" because of public information from the other trial.

And Trump you couldn't charge at all, because everyone has a preconceived notion about him.

Why is all that not a knock-out argument against trial by jury?

 

Trial by jury protects us from the over mighty state. Would you want a trump appointed judge sitting in judgement on a gay,black, muslim climate change protester ? Its not perfect and you highlight potential issues but its better than the alternative..