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. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 9: Closing Statement: Judge and Lawyer Q&A

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

Society & Culture

Personal Journals

History

Philosophy

Places & Travel

"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. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Story Behind Gertie's Law

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
 
  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 8: 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
  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 7: 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.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 9: Closing Statement: Judge and Lawyer Q&A

Download our free app to listen on your phone