The Show Trial of Derek Chauvin

Derek Chauvin has been found guilty by a jury of his ‘peers’ of second degree murder, third degree murder, and manslaughter (!) almost one year after the death of patron saint and didndunuffin exemplar George Floyd within his custody. For those of you unfamiliar, George Floyd was an alleged perp and ex convicted perp of African American descent who was murdered (now officialized by a jury) by police officer Derek Chauvin after Chauvin was called to the scene to investigate Floyd for allegedly passing a counterfeit $20 bill to a cashier in the American city of Minneapolis, Minnesota in May 2020. Floyd was behaving erratically upon the arrival of the police, which eventuated in Chauvin restraining Floyd within the prone position for over 9 minutes while awaiting an ambulance. Floyd announced that he “could not breathe” during his restraint, but Chauvin continued to hold him in the prone position anyway, where, apparently, he died.

Video of the nine minutes and 29 seconds Floyd had been held in the restraint was released to the world shortly after, and the usual suspects were pissed. Protests, as well as violent rioting and looting broke out across the United States, despite stipulations to remain at home as the world was still in the grip of the terrifying Covid epidemic at that time. Floyd dindunuffin — this was a clear cut example and consequence of ‘systemic racism and white supremacy within American policing and society at large. The story sent global shockwaves — in EZFKA, young and old alike bravely risked contracting Covid as they took to the streets in every capital city to use the incident to protest racism, and to highlight the issue of Indigenous deaths in police custody — effectively putting a local spin on their protests, even if it was obvious they were memetically responding to the protests in America. The irony is most of these protesters would describe themselves as ‘anti-imperialists’, but their reflexive civil action over American sociological minutiae would make them more seem like browbeaten subjects of a suzerainty under the control of global U.S imperium than that.

However, there was one problem with the narrative that had spread like wildfire across the world. Like almost all stories of this nature, it was all bullshit.

It did not take long for information to surface that cast doubt upon the original media story. The autopsy of Floyd found no evidence of strangulation, bruising or trauma to his body. Floyd happened to have been high as a kite at the time of his death – with deadly levels of fentanyl in his body, as well as methanthemetamine. He was in extremely poor health, with severe (75-90%) clogging of his arteries, heart disease, covid, and later, as revealed in the trial, a paraganglioma tumour.

That infamous 9 minute video played by the media over and over again told only part of the story — a full body-cam recording of the incident that lead to his restraint and death showed Floyd was aggressively resisting arrest, and that he announced he could not breathe before he had been placed on the ground, which he requested the police to do anyway. Floyd was himself an inveterate womb-to-tomb criminal and had spent many years in prison for an armed home invasion where he threatened a woman with a firearm by placing it on her abdomen. But it didn’t matter. The media had set the story, and the public, overwhelmingly, was convinced of Chauvin’s guilt and accepted the martyrdom of Floyd as a patron saint in the church of Negrolatry. Chauvin was charged with both murder and manslaughter and released on bail, with his trial set to begin in March, 2021. The proceedings would be televised.

I actually followed the whole trial. This is unusual for me as I am typically indifferent to current events, but I felt this was such a clear case that had so much reasonable doubt attached there was no conceivable way a rational jury would have convicted Chauvin, especially of the higher level charges. But that was assuming the jury was going to be rational; a fatal and naïve assumption.

Chauvin’s lawyer, Eric Nelson tried to plead the judge, Peter Cahill, an archetypally pleasant ‘Minnesota nice’ type, for a change in venue, arguing that it was unlikely Chauvin could get a fair trial in Minneapolis. It was denied, with the judge arguing that Floyd’s death had been given so much coverage it is unlikely the jury pool could be any less exposed to the media coverage of it anywhere else in the state. Of course, if it was so hard to find an unbiased jury pool as the judge admitted, the right thing to have done would be to dismiss the charges against Chauvin with prejudice, but of course this was not going to happen. About as egregiously, a 27 million dollar civil agreement with Floyd’s family was reached prior to the commencement of Chauvin’s trial, and the judge refused to sequester the jury despite the obvious biasing effects of the civil settlement, the growing BLM hordes outside of the courthouse and the 24/7 media coverage of the case. Chauvin’s head was going to be delivered on a silver platter one way or another as a sacrifice to the mob and the gods of woke orthodoxy, which Floyd had recently ascended to.

To summarise the trial, The prosecution at first trotted out a bevy of misfit and emotionally dysregulated witnesses to pull at the heartstrings of the jury. Among them included a nine year old child, a sobbing teenage girl, one of Chauvin’s hecklers, a self-professed MMA ‘expert’ who alleged Floyd died of a ‘blood choke’, and Floyd’s own brother who testified that Floyd liked banana and mayonnaise sandwiches, and enjoyed Tecmo Bowl on the Nintendo Entertainment System. There was even a paramedic Karen who behaved so badly on the stand she had to be admonished by the judge. To a rational observer, these were mostly useless and duplicitious witnesses, but apparently they made quite a good impression on the jury, with one of the alternate jurors describing the previously mentioned EMT Karen as a ‘particularly strong witness’ (paraphrase) in her recently released trial notes.

A very strong witness

The prosecution brought in some of it’s meatier expert witnesses towards the end of its case in chief, and this is where the jurors were apparently particularly convinced of Chauvin’s guilt, had they not already made their minds up about that before the trial began (unlikely). Their star witness was a reputable Irish pulmonologist named Martin Tobin with an inherent mick gift of the gab and remarkable ability to deduce Floyd’s exact moment of death from video evidence alone. His certainty over something so medically complex must have been comforting to the probably scientifically illiterate jury, as it would have helped re-confirm the beliefs they likely held before the trial even began.

According to Tobin, Floyd had not died of a blood choke or run of the mill asphyxiation (of which there was no evidence), but ‘positional asphyxia’. The crux of Tobin’s argument was that Floyd became oxygen deprived as a result of “shallow breathing” after being placed in the prone position and restrained by Chauvin. To illustrate his point, he marshalled a broad array of highly speculative evidence, including Yr. 11 math style freebody diagrams, play-by-play commentary of video stills, , and even a (really funny) CGI model. Unequivocally, this could only be interpreted to be due to the restraint applied; no possibility that Floyd’s alleged ‘shallow breathing’ was the result of his heavy usage of fentanyl, meth and the fact that he had physically exhausted himself struggling with the police for the past 10 minutes. Not only that, all of this was apparently dumped on the defense at the last minute the day before, giving Chauvin’s already severely overworked and outgunned attorney little time to prepare.

Then came the defense’s witnesses. Nelson called forth FBI use-of-force expert Barry Brodd, who performed well on direct but crumbled on cross. The media made a big deal of this, but most of the prosecution’s witnesses similarly crumbled, including their own use-of-force expert, Lt. Stiger of the LAPD. Despite his mostly ineffective performance in the trial, Brodd, for his sin of daring to help ensure Chauvin could receive a fair hearing, had his former residence vandalised Godfather style with a decapitated pig’s head and then smeared in blood. Clearly, this was not done to influence his decision to testify, as it occured after he had testified; in fact, it was done to ensure the jury decided the way BLM et. al wanted them to. The media ignored the incident.

The defense’s star and, in the eyes of a better jury, most effective witness was Dr. Richard Fowler, a Rhodesian-South African (!) medical examiner who detailed all of the known and potential medical factors implicated in Floyd’s death. There was more than enough for reasonable doubt in his testimony; Floyd was effectively a walking medical time-bomb with severely grave cardiac health and dangerously congested arterial pathways. His encounter with the police triggered a chain reaction that led to his cardiac arrest at the scene, owing to situational adrenaline production and ensuing arterial constriction, heavy fentanyl consumption, and methamphetamine. This is a reasonable, plausible explanation for Floyd’s death, but one that Fowler notably did not even fully endorse; he simply concluded that the substantial cause of Floyd’s death was undetermined, a much more circumspect and scientifically grounded explanation than that of Dr. Tobin’s, and one that was much more reflected by Floyd’s autopsy. He also hypothesized that carbon monoxide poisoning from the running vehicle adjacent Floyd’s restrained body may have contributed to his death, a potential deliberate red-herring that for some reason greatly spooked the prosecution, to the extent that they had to recall Tobin afterwards to provide a rebuttal. Nevertheless, exposition regarding the autopsy, the admissions of many of the prosecution’s witnesses, and Dr. Fowler’s testimony seemed to have laid a solid foundation for reasonable doubt, but it was not to be.

My favourite moment of the trial; Prosecutor Blackwell tries to stump Dr. Fowler regarding the specifications of the vehicle Floyd’s head had been placed adjacent to, only to be btfo by Fowler’s autistic vehicular knowledge

The jury came back in less than a day after closing arguments. As soon as I had heard they had concluded deliberations so quickly I knew Chauvin was fucked, I just didn’t realise how fucked. Guilty on all counts. All three of the extremely convoluted prosecution charges proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and figured out by the wizards on the jury in a couple of hours of deliberation, if that. Truthuflly, from he composition of this jury, it’s more likely they weren’t deliberating Chauvin’s innocence at all so much as spending their time working out how guilty he was. Of the jurors and their alternates, only five were men. Of those actually participating in the deliberations, two were white men, four were white women, three were Black men, with another Black women and two women identifying as “mixed race”. Notably, one of these “white men” was not a white man at all, but a member of a particular diasporic Middle Eastern tribe. For contrast, the juristiction of the trial, Hennepin county, is about 80% white. Truly, a panel comprised of 3 martians, 3 eskimos and 6 Japanese war-veterans camped out in the jungles of Borneo unaware WW2 had ended yet might have been closer to a jury of Chauvin’s peers than the one he actually got.

Chauvin is to be sentenced in about two weeks. My prediction is the judge is going to throw the book at him and then some. Chauvin’s sentence would ordinarily be in the realm of 10-15 yrs (as this is his first offense), but the prosecution has successfully managed to including supposed aggravating ‘Bradley’ factors into the determination process, which may bump his sentence up to 30 years.

So, does this case have any lessons for the denizens of EZKFA? The fact that you’re reading this on a site is a good example of how greatly the tentacles of Americanisation extend across the globe. The coverage of this case in the EZFKA media was nothing short of loathesome, as is typically the case when the parochial, pig-ignorant cosmopolitan tryhard class down undah attempts to peer into the mists of lands that extend beyond our shores. I can say that as our country becomes increasingly ethnically divided our justice system will increasingly resemble that of America’s, where the principles of fact finding, presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt will be sidelined in favour of allaying inter-ethnic grievances and score-settling. The EZFKA’s version of extreme race-grievances however are generally gender related issues, with our George Floyd equivalents being the young white women who occasionally get raped and murdered in parks every couple of years by lone wolf psychos. Whatever the case, the future of justice (especially given how Gen Y/Z are turning out to be) is to severely punish anybody suspected of messing with or defiling members of ‘victim’ classes. My advice is to increasingly avoid said classes as much as possible, whether in your personal life, at work, or on the street, lest you end up like Derek Chauvin.

3.7 3 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Hard to really give a shit

the cop is a scum bag , I’m glad his life is ruined

the dead guy was a scum bag, I’m glad he’s dead

having said that I’m sure that most people have forgotten about all this now, and the sentence will be quietly overturned to a lesser one on appeal and no one will pay much attention

But I’m glad the initial verdict was guilty , so at least we didn’t have to put up with more hand wringing and flagellation


the cop is a scum bag , I’m glad his life is ruined

What makes you say this?
You think he shouldn’t have arrested and detained a violent criminal?
Would you prefer criminals be allowed to roam free to do as they please?

What would you recommend?


Fuck me can you please stop following me around with your horrendously stupid opinions


Stop talking unsubstantiated BS and justify ONE of your horrendously ignorant ones.

Alternately feel free to fuck right off.

Did you even read the article? Understand what it means?

Last edited 2 years ago by bjw678

The whole BLM thing is a load of bollocks. None of the weird ‘performance art’ they were involved in had anything to do with improving the lives of the working classes or black people. The fact that the MSM everywhere made such a huge story out of it showed it was never a threat to those in power. BLM has done an irreparable amount of damage to racial harmony though.


You’d be preaching to the choir, because smithys seek out safe spaces

but I like your reviews – they’re very level headed and balanced

like an Aussie


The movement was an anti-Trump movement and the media was anti-Trump.


Thanks for this detail. I honestly do not know enough medically or legally to comment, but I am always glad to read commentary from someone who is capable of understanding that a just system is one that follows due process, not one that delivers desired outcomes. Vengeance is not justice. Let’s see what happens on appeal.


Well, a simple point in laymans terms.
Someone who is telling you they can’t breathe is lying.
You try talking without passing air and see how well it goes.
A person being held laying on the ground isn’t exactly running a marathon so if they can pass enough air to talk then they can breathe enough that they aren’t going to die.

Shortness of breath on the other hand:-

shortness of breath is generally caused by disorders of the cardiac or respiratory system, other systems such as neurological,[11] musculoskeletal, endocrine, hematologic, and psychiatric may be the cause.


Potentially but one would think having a knee on your neck for nearly 10 minutes doesn’t help the process… Clearly Floydy wasn’t an upstanding citizen to say the least but the policing tactics are arguably just as bad. It’s all a grey area like how deaths from covid-19 can be dubiously measured but that cop deserves to go to jail, whether that’s murder though instead of manslaughter IMO is what’s really up for debate here. Oh, and how to fix the busted police training system in the US.


Have you ever tried to restrain someone who is acting violently towards you?
The police had called an ambulance already from the article above.
Ultimately if you act aggressively against police then you give up some of your rights.
If you think he should have been allowed to behave like that and not be detained what is your bar for him having to be detained?
Of course without the knowledge of underlying heart/drugs/whatever actually killed him condition.

It reminds me of all the re-enactments all the do gooders did after the to show all the alternatives that the police could have used to subdue him such as nets. I had an overwhelming urge to participate with a black sharpie and show them all how dead they’d be if they had an aggressive person instead of a co-operative person for the re-enactments. A black streak across the neck would probably wake a few of them up quick smart.


Can’t say I have, but that’s a straw man anyway. The bloke said he couldn’t breath as a cop had a knee on his neck, for 9 minutes. How is that reasonable use of force? Why did none of the other officers intervene, when he was already on the ground in handcuffs? How much of a risk was he at any point when handcuffed on the ground?

Last edited 2 years ago by The90kwbeast

Firstly, he had a knee on the side of his head. And this was a concession to his claims of inability to breathe. Standard procedure would be to apply weight to the middle of his back.
None of the others intervened because it WAS REASONABLE.
Do you suggest they just put him on the ground and just get up and walk away? A limited amount of weight is what is used to keep him from getting up again.
Police all over the world do this, even here in australia, it’s standard.

But my point was you and many others have made clear what shouldn’t have happened. I am yet to see anyone describe any sensible thing that should have happened instead.


Lol what a crock of shit. In the 9 MINUTES that elapsed they easily could have placed him in the back of a car, shackled and shut in, problem solved.

Keep up that mental gymnastics




Do they do that for 9 minutes straight…

He should have been in the back of the patrol car handcuffed minutes in, if you’re handcuffed in a locked vehicle you can’t get out. There were multiple officers on the scene to enable this to happen and get him inside the vehicle to be appropriately restrained.

Instead he was laying on the street, face to the road with some blokes knee on his neck and head.

No one deserves that sort of policing, seriously its not rocket science…


ok, so how many of you have an experience in this field at all?
None? Thought so.
You should spend a week or 2 out on patrol in a lower socio economic area and get a dose of what the world is really like.
The reality is he probably would have died even if he had been placed in a patrol car. He didn’t die because he was lying down. And he didn’t die because his ear has some pressure applied to it.
Did you read the medical report? He had no injuries from being held down at all.


Ok so your argument is now that low socio economic people deserve inhumane brutal policing, using a technique that with better training shouldn’t have been used in the first place, because they are low socio economic people?

It’s a long bow to draw saying that the 9 minutes of restraint, even if not directly the cause of death, didn’t hugely increase the odds of it. He was handcuffed on the ground, was obviously barely able to breath yet the officers ignored his appeals and did nothing. I don’t disagree he had a concoction of drugs running through him but to say he otherwise would have survived if he was instead left in a police car or restrained differently is horse shit. The guy was fine before the cops showed up, died after they were done with him..

Last edited 2 years ago by The90kwbeast

I think what he is saying is that the blokes policing these areas are blokes who want to go home to their wives (or gay partners, I suppose) at the end of each day.

and each day they might have to deal with half a dozen violent & dangerous dudes. So they have a way of working that tends to keep them safe & maximises their chances of seeing their family at the end of the day. It’s not designed to maximise the comfort of the person being arrested.

it’s the reality, and it’s not pretty. But it’s prettier than the alternative (police routinely getting hurt & eventually no effective policing – because who wants to put up with that shit?!)


“using a technique that with better training shouldn’t have been used in the first place”

I see your points – but if the issue is that they were improperly trained, is it really the police officers fault?

He died because he ingested a toxic amount of fentanyl, and the police officers were poorly trained in terms of recognising the signs of overdose by a violent crim who’d secretly swallowed his stash while resisting arrest.

There seems to be very little intent in regards to Floyds death, negligence is most culpability I can see – poor training, etc quite possibly. But if that is the case then the blame lies with the district police and the city.

Last edited 2 years ago by Stewie

Agreed on lack of training it’s seemingly a large issue all over the US as it’s so localized. Probably it should be a case of manslaughter instead but the problem with that is, the bloke was yelling for air and the officer didn’t relent. So I would argue that in fact there was intent there due to that.


A quote from your article:

but officers are taught to press a part of the lower leg, such as the shin or top of the ankle, across the shoulders or the back.

What do you think that does to someone’s ability to breathe? And in the photo at the top the knee is clearly on the side of the head, and not the neck, you really can’t fit it on the neck as on any normal person their head is simply wider than the neck and anywhere except under the chin with the head tilted back it doesn’t fit.

Do you think NSW police are properly trained and reasonable?
Because if you resist arrest in NSW you are likely to be restrained like that and probably for more than 9 minutes as you will be there until a paddy wagon comes to pick you up. On a friday or saturday night with lots of “customers” it might be half an hour, an hour or more.

Ultimately you need to decide if you think police, or the people who are violent towards the police deserve to have more risk of injury placed on them. Someone who was violent a couple of minutes ago is very likely to become violent again if given the opportunity, even if restrained now.
If you were a police officer who assumed that someone who is handcuffed is no longer a threat you are very likely to end up injured or dead.
If you have no experience dealing with those sorts of people how can you make any sort of determination of what is reasonable.
If you haven’t experienced the violence of a lower socio-economic area then you have no idea what they do or don’t deserve. I saw enough growing up to have realistic expectations of what can and can’t be done. Police predominantly deal with the “worst” of society, the sorts of people you have probably never ever met.


Mate you’re running off on tangents and setting up strawmans.

The crux of the issue is, the bloke couldn’t breathe appropriately due to the restraint mechanism employed, no cop did anything about it to change the restraint approach, Floyd later died after passing out. There was a squad SUV right behind him, could have been left inside the car the whole time, but no. Could have been hog tied.

The continued police response was therefore totally not in proportion to the threat he posed upon being handcuffed and at minimum was a contributing factor to his death. The police training was also clearly inadequate that the other two officers didn’t do anything about it.


The bloke was YELLING. your word. He could breathe. You can’t have one without the other.
To say someone yelling can’t breathe is outright idiotic at best.
Criminals lie, all the time, to try and escape arrest and custody, but even so:-

 eventuated in Chauvin restraining Floyd within the prone position for over 9 minutes while awaiting an ambulance. 

They had called for treatment, what else could they do?
The police could not know he had a medical issue, so I will ask again, how do you think ALL criminals should be treated?
Do the australian police treat people acceptably, because go watch one of the many cops shows and you will see them doing exactly the same thing.

How do you feel about this as a suitable form of restraint?
That is a demonstration of applying pressure to the neck,
but is apparently Heroic.

Last edited 2 years ago by bjw678

I’m glad you didn’t become a cop is all I can say. Zero empathy, zero decency.

“They had called for treatment, what else could they do?”

Chauvin could/should have removed his knee when he was saying he couldn’t breathe. Jesus Christ is that so difficult to understand? He could then have been hog tied or attempted to be put back in the SUV squad car. They did nothing. Chauvin only removed his knee when the EMS told him to.

Yes, he was resisting arrest at the start. He was far from doing so when on the ground. Fucking atrocious policing and if you can’t see that then there’s no helping you.


I can’t help but notice you completely ignored the image link.
Good, bad, work of a hero, or excessive force?
Should they have let him up if he said he couldn’t breathe given he no longer had a knife and was on the ground and no longer a threat? Only if he was going to die if they didn’t?

Last edited 2 years ago by bjw678

And I can’t help but notice you can’t debate a point but instead like to set up strawmans and run off on tangents.

What does the milk crate guy in Australia have to do with the actual topic? These are (supposedly) trained police officers with the tools and equipment, versus a bunch of guys on the street in the case of milk crate guy doing their best.

I’m ending engaging you on this because you clearly have a predetermined view, being that all suspects should receive whatever treatment police deem necessary regardless of policy, training circumstance or empathy. Oh, and all the better if they have any criminal past because they deserve it, right?


The only point you have ever made is “HE CAN’T BREATHE” which is demonstrably false as I have pointed out many times.
You clearly also have a predetermined view, established by the media.
You talk about my lack of empathy, but that milk crate guy is the reality that police have to deal with daily. If chauvin is guilty of murder, jamming a milk crate across someones throat is objectively worse than a knee on the side of the neck/head so they are clearly guilty of attempted murder by the same standards.

It’s great you get to cherry pick a single incident and say they did it wrong but the reality is that they have to do this thousands of times and don’t get to sit around for hours beforehand deciding how to respond to a given person, and being lax on the wrong person means they end up dead.

The reality is that 1 person has been sent to prison and several others had their lives ruined for DOING THEIR JOB PROTECTING THE PUBLIC the way they do daily because a DRUG ADDICT OD AND DIED in their custody while someone was filming and the media chose to spin it differently for political reasons or financial gain.

Last edited 2 years ago by bjw678

I was going to write a good summary, but a I think I’ll say good detailed summary – there are so many things wrong with this conviction, from the manner in which the media interjected itself into the case, the city deliberately paying compensation BEFORE any verdict was found, right through to the judge presiding over it and all the denials that given in term of the opportunity for a fair trial. It was without a doubt a show trial…. something I fear we are going to see far more of under our new elites.


How are you surprised by any of this?! It’s like you’ve never before witnessed how retarded the US is and there’s no way that’s possible, they have retarded stuff like this happening every day.


By the time the verdict arrived I wasn’t particularily surprised – the optimisim I felt that justice was going to be served had gradually faded as the pre-trial antics with the compensation and then the trial itself progressed.

Just like with O.J. being found not guilty, white normies are still under the mistaken belief that race doesn’t matter – if basically matters to everyone but white people, who are probably the least racist folks in the world:

“I was a red-diaper-baby. That is, my father was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA. Years later, he came partly to his senses, but remained a liberal on all issues, including race…. Another sister was raped by a black open-enrollment “student” at City College in a locker room after she attended a co-ed swim class. The prosecuting attorney told my sister it was an open-and-shut case because she did everything she was supposed to do: She reported the event immediately, gave a detailed description of the accused (including a bizarrely shaped goatee), and then went directly to the hospital. However, after all the evidence was given, when the jury was polled, the whites voted to convict, but the tribe hung together and hung the jury.”

Sub-Saharan Africans are the only population group who I oppose large scale migration of, even under policies of assimilation and integration.

Last edited 2 years ago by Stewie

The other thing was how two of the jurors in the trial had their addresses released.

What would have happened to the jurors if they had come back with not guilty?

Whatever the merits of either side were, there is no way DC would get a fair trial. The jurors are not about to face down a mob looking for blood. No way he was going to get acquitted, irrespective of the facts.

Its a show trial, designed to demoralize the left’s enemies.


Does anyone know if there will be an appeal etc?

This is certainly a case that warrants a judge-only trial. Maybe it’s not possible in the US (I think in some AU states it’s not possible either). There was the very high profile case in WA of the Claremont Murders, which rightfully in my view was judge-only. The case was far too high profile for the accused to get a fair trial.


I believe that a non jury trial is an option for any case in australia at the defendants whim, but in a high profile case a jury is far more malleable than a judge. NAL so may not be true.


A non jury trial is not available in all states. Victoria does not have this option as shown in the Pell trial.



2.14Whether a jury trial is available for offences under state and territory criminal laws depends on whether the offence with which a person has been charged is indictable and whether the trial proceeds by way of indictment. The categorisation of offences in Australian jurisdictions is usually stated in the legislation, or provided for by reference to the maximum penalty that can be imposed for the offence.

2.15In five Australian jurisdictions—New South Wales, South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory—whether a trial for an indictable offence proceeds as a jury trial may also depend on whether there has been an application for the accused to be tried by judge alone without a jury.12

2.16Jury trials are compulsory where the prosecution of a federal offence proceeds by way of indictment. This is because section 80 of the Commonwealth Constitution guarantees trial by jury in such circumstances.13

So yes it does seem victoria is “special”.


yes that’s what I recall…


Hey Stagmal

I actually followed the whole trial. This is unusual for me as I am typically indifferent to current events

i had been completely indifferent to the trial and your post is the first thing I’ve read about it. It was interesting, so thanks for putting in the time and effort.



Yes it was great thank you

Chinese Astroturfer

F*** Floyd