Well- not reckons, but does wonder.
The pre-sentence hearings are currently underway for the men accused of the bashing murder of Liep Gony. The case is being reported in considerable detail in the newspapers. Surely these two men could then turn around and claim that they could not get a fair trial in Melbourne. Why are pre-sentence hearings reported anyway?
The Resident Judge of Port Phillip 
The ways of justice are myserious, Janine, to we ordinary mortals – though, not perhaps, to resident judges? Why ARE they reported, then?
Actually, I’ve just realised that the two men have pleaded guilty and it’s a pre-sentence hearing, so my fears are allayed. Although I wondered the same thing when Theo Theophanos had his pre-sentence hearing a few months back and it was found that the case could not proceed.
Ah, of course, pre-sentence really means that the guilt has been decided and it is about factors that might affect the sentence. Juries etc not involved. So, that doesn’t really make sense re Theo Theophanos? Ah, I’ve just researched – his was a committal hearing? What is your concern? That future juries will be swayed if the case goes ahead? That an innocent person might be slandered if the case doesn’t go ahead? Both are pretty valid points: I think there is a tension between our wish for privacy (and not being slandered) versus our drive for transparency.
Yes- both of the above. The whole case is presented to the public who see the parties parading in and out of court night after night on the news; we read about it in the paper and make our judgements about the plausibility and integrity of witnesses and the accused— and THEN there might or might not be a court case?