"What is a podcast?" Gertie's Law executive producer Sarah Dolan talks to StoryCraft host Ben Hart about how the Supreme Court of Victoria embraced new media to educate and inform in an entertaining way.

"What is a podcast?" Gertie's Law executive producer Sarah Dolan talks to StoryCraft host Ben Hart about how the Supreme Court of Victoria embraced new media to educate and inform in an entertaining way.

The Story Behind Gertie's Law

We've received your questions and in this final episode of Gertie’s Law, they get answered.

What influences lawyers to challenge a juror during empanelment? Does a murder involving family violence attract a larger sentence? When does criticism become defamation? And are there more right wing terrorist cases coming to the court?

Hear the answers to these questions and more in the final episode of Gertie’s Law.

We've received your questions and in this final episode of Gertie&rsquo;s Law, they get answered.
What influences lawyers to challenge a juror during empanelment? Does a murder involving family violence attract a larger sentence? When does criticism become defamation? And are there more right wing terrorist cases coming to the court?
Hear the answers to these questions and more in the final episode of Gertie&rsquo;s Law.

Closing Statement: Judge and Lawyer Q&A

Last episode we looked at completed terrorist acts, and why they attract such large sentences, however cases involving completed terrorist acts are rare, indeed the first one in Victoria was in 2019.

Most terrorism cases which come before the Supreme Court occur before an act of terrorism has taken place. They’re preparatory offenses, that is, preparing to commit a terrorist act or conspiring to prepare for a terrorist act. 

In this episode we look at the difficult problem of how far back is the right time to criminalise preparatory offenses. Too far back and you confront the idea of thought crimes. Too late and the results may well be horrendous. 

Hear from judges, defense and prosecution barristers and find out how these cases are argued and what happens when they come to the Supreme Court. 

Links to cases discussed in this episode.

The Queen v Cerantonio & Ors

R v Fattal & Ors

 

 

Last episode we looked at completed terrorist acts, and why they attract such large sentences, however cases involving completed terrorist acts are rare, indeed the first one in Victoria was in 2019.
Most terrorism cases which come before the Supreme Court occur before an act of terrorism has taken place. They&rsquo;re preparatory offenses, that is, preparing to commit a terrorist act or conspiring to prepare for a terrorist act.&nbsp;
In this episode we look at the difficult problem of how far back is the right time to criminalise preparatory offenses. Too far back and you confront the idea of thought crimes. Too late and the results may well be horrendous.&nbsp;
Hear from judges, defense and prosecution barristers and find out how these cases are argued and what happens when they come to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;
Links to cases discussed in this episode.
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2019/284.html">The Queen v Cerantonio &amp; Ors</a>
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2011/681.html">R v Fattal &amp; Ors</a>
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

Terrorism - Part 2

Terrorism cases are among the most high-profile offences to come to the Supreme Court. The trials are complicated and usually long, as are the resulting sentences. The cases attract a lot of public interest. On the day of a sentence, the public galleries and press seats will be full, and TV cameras, lights and journos will be set up outside the Court to film what they can. 

Only a few terrorism trials have been heard in Australia, and in this episode we look closely at two of them. This episode of Gertie’s Law details what terrorist offences are, and what happens when they come before a judge of the Supreme Court.  

Links to cases discussed in this episode.

The Queen v Shoma

The Queen v Mohamed, Chaarani & Moukhaibe

Court of Appeal

Chaarani & Ors v The Queen

High Court

Chaarani v The Queen; Moukhaiber v The Queen

 

Terrorism cases are among the most high-profile offences to come to the Supreme Court. The trials are complicated and usually long, as are the resulting sentences. The cases attract a lot of public interest. On the day of a sentence, the public galleries and press seats will be full, and TV cameras, lights and journos will be set up outside the Court to film what they can.&nbsp;
Only a few terrorism trials have been heard in Australia, and in this episode we look closely at two of them. This episode of Gertie&rsquo;s Law details what terrorist offences are, and what happens when they come before a judge of the Supreme Court. &nbsp;
Links to cases discussed in this episode.
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2019/367.html">The Queen v Shoma</a>
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2019/498.html">The Queen v Mohamed, Chaarani &amp; Moukhaibe</a>
Court of Appeal
<a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VSCA//2020/88.html">Chaarani &amp; Ors v The Queen</a>
High Court
<a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCATrans//2020/161.html">Chaarani v The Queen; Moukhaiber v The Queen</a>
&nbsp;

Terrorism - Part 1

Courtrooms can be stressful places, especially if you’re giving evidence. Two of the court’s recent employees, Lucy and Coop are helping to take the stress out of being in court. 

Courtrooms can be stressful places, especially if you&rsquo;re giving evidence. Two of the court&rsquo;s recent employees, Lucy and Coop are helping to take the stress out of being in court.&nbsp;

Court Dogs, Lucy & Coop

Most Victorians have heard of Sir Redmond Barry, not least because there’s so many things named after him in Melbourne. And notoriously, he’s the judge who sentenced Ned Kelly to the gallows.

But his impact on Melbourne extends far beyond the Kelly story. From defending Aboriginal resistance fighters to getting into a duel, Barry is undoubtedly one of the courts, and indeed the city's, most influential and fascinating figures.

Most Victorians have heard of Sir Redmond Barry, not least because there&rsquo;s so many things named after him in Melbourne. And notoriously, he&rsquo;s the judge who sentenced Ned Kelly to the gallows.
But his impact on Melbourne extends far beyond the Kelly story. From defending Aboriginal resistance fighters to getting into a duel, Barry is undoubtedly one of the courts, and indeed the city's, most influential and fascinating figures.

Barry

Defamation. Often salacious or scandalous, especially when it involves Hollywood Stars or high profile federal politicians. It’s about defending one’s honour - and earning capacity. It’s an area of law where a person’s right to protect their reputation rubs up against someone else’s freedom of expression. Defamation cases are the juridical stage on which these incredible battles of fundamental rights and freedoms play out.

There’s a lot to consider before launching defamation action, not least whether the action itself increases the damage of the offending material. 

And a lot of defamation is now happening online but our laws were written before the internet was invented, so keeping up with technology is essential to successful defamation laws. But it’s not a new problem. A case against the ABC when broadcasting began in the 1930s faced similar issues.

Hear from judges and barristers about prosecuting and deciding these difficult cases.

Links to matters discussed in this episode

Meldrum v Australian Broadcasting Co Ltd

Webb & Bloch

Dow Jones and Company Inc v Gutnick

 

Defamation. Often salacious or scandalous, especially when it involves Hollywood Stars or high profile federal politicians. It&rsquo;s about defending one&rsquo;s honour - and earning capacity. It&rsquo;s an area of law where a person&rsquo;s right to protect their reputation rubs up against someone else&rsquo;s freedom of expression. Defamation cases are the juridical stage on which these incredible battles of fundamental rights and freedoms play out.
There&rsquo;s a lot to consider before launching defamation action, not least whether the action itself increases the damage of the offending material.&nbsp;
And a lot of defamation is now happening online but our laws were written before the internet was invented, so keeping up with technology is essential to successful defamation laws. But it&rsquo;s not a new problem. A case against the ABC when broadcasting began in the 1930s faced similar issues.
Hear from judges and barristers about prosecuting and deciding these difficult cases.
Links to matters discussed in this episode
<a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VicLawRp/1932/46.html?context=1;query=meldrum;mask_path=au/cases/vic/VicLawRp">Meldrum v Australian Broadcasting Co Ltd</a>
<a href="https://jade.io/article/63395">Webb &amp; Bloch</a>
<a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2002/56.html">Dow Jones and Company Inc v Gutnick</a>
&nbsp;

Defamation

It’s time to talk about manslaughter - one of the most controversial and misunderstood offences that comes before the court, due to its high range of culpability and sometimes fine line between it and murder. From a legal point of view it’s a very clear line between murder and manslaughter. The problem is that factually it’s not always easy to look at a case and say which of the categories it falls into. 

Links to sentences mentioned in this episode.

The Queen v O’Connor (2018)

The Queen v Moreland, Tippins & Thorp (2015)

DPP v Turner (2009)

The Queen v Donker (2018)

It&rsquo;s time to talk about manslaughter - one of the most controversial and misunderstood offences that comes before the court, due to its high range of culpability and sometimes fine line between it and murder. From a legal point of view it&rsquo;s a very clear line between murder and manslaughter. The problem is that factually it&rsquo;s not always easy to look at a case and say which of the categories it falls into.&nbsp;
Links to sentences mentioned in this episode.
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2018/516.html">The Queen v O&rsquo;Connor (2018)</a>
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2015/324.html">The Queen v Moreland, Tippins &amp; Thorp (2015)</a>
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2009/409.html">DPP v Turner (2009)</a>
<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2018/210.html">The Queen v Donker (2018)</a>

Manslaughter

Welcome to season two of Gertie's Law. In season one we heard from almost everyone at the Supreme Court - the judges, associates, reporters, tipstaves and even the prison officers. But now it’s time to meet the people who do the lion’s share of the talking in the courtroom, the people sitting at the bar table - the lawyers.

Welcome to season two of Gertie's Law. In season one we heard from almost everyone at the Supreme Court - the judges, associates, reporters, tipstaves and even the prison officers. But now it&rsquo;s time to meet the people who do the lion&rsquo;s share of the talking in the courtroom, the people sitting at the bar table - the lawyers.

In the first season of Gertie’s Law, we heard from almost everyone at the Supreme Court - the judges, associates, reporters, tipstaves and even the prison officers. But now it’s time to meet the people who do the lion’s share of the talking in the courtroom, the people sitting at the bar table - the lawyers.

The Bar Table

When COVID-19 hit Victoria, schools, pubs and restaurants closed. The AFL season stopped after only one round. But the courts couldn’t shut down because crime didn’t stop. People were in custody awaiting trial. Family violence continued unabated, disputes needed settling, appeals needed to be heard, and trials needed to continue to provide justice for both accused and victims. As an essential service, the courts had to move quickly.

This episode of Gertie's Law looks at how the Supreme Court of Victoria responded to the challenge of a global pandemic. Hear how judges maintained order when the courtrooms went virtual, why Coronavirus was mentioned regularly in bail hearings, and whether beef carpaccio is better if you use shallots.

When COVID-19 hit Victoria, schools, pubs and restaurants closed. The AFL season stopped after only one round. But the courts couldn&rsquo;t shut down because crime didn&rsquo;t stop. People were in custody awaiting trial. Family violence continued unabated, disputes needed settling, appeals needed to be heard, and trials needed to continue to provide justice for both accused and victims. As an essential service, the courts had to move quickly.
This episode of Gertie's Law looks at how the Supreme Court of Victoria responded to the challenge of a global pandemic. Hear how judges maintained order when the courtrooms went virtual, why Coronavirus was mentioned regularly in bail hearings, and whether beef carpaccio is better if you use shallots.

Court in a Pandemic

Drama has unfolded in these courtrooms for more than 130 years, from serial murderers and gangland wars to multimillion-dollar commercial disputes and celebrity defamation cases. Follow Greg Muller and Evan Martin as they take a step behind the bench of one of Australia’s oldest institutions and hear from judges as they explain why they make the decisions they do. Gertie's Law takes a deep dive into some of the lesser-known, misunderstood or complex parts of the court’s work, such as sentencing, mental health, juries and the criminal trial process. Revisit historic cases, meet the many people who work here, from judges to Corrections staff, and take a close look at how a modern justice system operates in a 19th century building. Authorised by the Supreme Court of Victoria, 210 William St, Melbourne

Drama has unfolded in these courtrooms for more than 130 years, from serial murderers and gangland wars to multimillion-dollar commercial disputes and celebrity defamation cases. Follow Greg Muller and Evan Martin as they take a step behind the bench of one of Australia&rsquo;s oldest institutions and hear from judges as they explain why they make the decisions they do. Gertie's Law takes a deep dive into some of the lesser-known, misunderstood or complex parts of the court&rsquo;s work, such as sentencing, mental health, juries and the criminal trial process. Revisit historic cases, meet the many people who work here, from judges to Corrections staff, and take a close look at how a modern justice system operates in a 19th century building. Authorised by the Supreme Court of Victoria, 210 William St, Melbourne

Gertie's Law

Social links:

Follow the podcast:

25 clip(s)