Why John Barilaro wants FriendlyJordies lawsuit decided by judge

Deputy Premier John Barilaro’s lawyer says a court bid by a YouTube comedian being sued for defamation could become ‘frankly terrible’.

NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro has argued that his courtroom showdown with FriendlyJordies shouldn’t be decided by a jury because of Covid and the YouTube comedian’s $1m legal war chest.

Mr Barilaro is suing Jordan Shanks, known as FriendlyJordies, in the Federal Court over two videos that he claims defamed him in “vile and racist” attacks that portrayed him as a “corrupt conman”.

The Nationals MP is also suing Google, the publisher of YouTube, over the two videos titled “bruz” and “Secret Dictatorship”.

Mr Shanks’ barrister Matthew Collins argued that the case should be decided by a four or 12-person jury rather than a judge because of what he described as changing community standards.

He said the case would hinge on whether it could be proven that Mr Barilaro was a “corrupt conman”.

Mr Shanks has claimed in his defence it was true that Mr Barilaro had committed perjury and in his honest opinion the member for Monaro should be jailed.

Mr Collins told the court on Tuesday that the meaning of “corruption” had evolved and now carried a broad meaning, including “the debasement of institutions he was supposed to uphold”.

Mr Shanks’ lawyers previously announced that they had raised about $1m for his legal fund through 24,000 donations.

They said the money would go towards defending the lawsuit against Mr Barilaro as well as a FriendlyJordies producer who has been charged with stalking or intimidating the Monaro MP.

Deputy Premier John Barilaro is suing Jordan Shanks for two videos that he claims portrayed him as a ‘corrupt conman’.

However, Mr Barilaro’s high-profile barrister Sue Chrysanthou argued that should any trial suffer a last-minute setback because of coronavirus, and be forced to be heard by a judge, it would provide Mr Shanks with an advantage because his defence was crowdsourced.

She argued that a jury trial was substantially different and would require a vastly distinct approach from his legal team, which would lead to Mr Barilaro incurring significant additional legal costs should it suddenly be shifted to judge-alone.

“It’s frankly terrible to think that days and days and costs in particular could just be thrown away at the last minute when the whole cost could be avoided now,” Ms Chrysanthou said.

“That submission is underpinned by the fact that Google has unlimited resources and Mr Shanks is spending other people’s money.

“We don’t approach it in that way, we don’t think it’s appropriate that cost be thrown away at the last minute.”

Ms Chrysanthou also argued that Covid represented a roadblock to holding a jury trial, saying while the state was moving towards opening up it could still represent problems in the new year.

She said that some jurors who had young children – who are ineligible for vaccination – might not be willing to come to court for fear of catching the virus. Or any trial could be held up if a juror became infected.

Mr Collins argued that Mr Shanks’ YouTube viewership was overwhelmingly young, with 75 per cent of them being under 35.

Jordan Shanks aka Friendlyjordies is defending his lawsuit against Mr Barilaro. Picture: Facebook

The court was also told that about 90 per cent of his audience was male.

He argued that Mr Shanks’ videos were a combination of information, comedy and satire that would be viewed differently by the public as opposed to a judge.

“An ordinary reasonable viewer is likely to perceive information, comedy, satire and parody conveyed by videos, such as in this case, quite differently from what they would on A Current Affair or Four Corners or 60 Minutes,” Mr Collins argued.

“The great advantage would be that the jury would better represent the very audience to which the matter complained of would address better than any judge sitting alone.”

However, Justice Steven Rares questioned: “But what about a jury of old-age pensioners and women?”

The interlocutory application before Justice Rares continues.