Of course, there can't be a fair trial. You have to remember that this is all a drama, and that the "trial" is therefore no more than the last act in the drama. The aim of the entire exercise is to put the stamp of reality on illusion, and to ensure that the "live stream's" many anomalies do not become common knowledge. The only questions that interest me are: (1) Will the "survivors" of the "massacre", who have told many lies in their various interviews, repeat those lies, under oath, in court, and thereby commit perjury? and (2) Will the defence team fail to challenge any of the testimony of these "survivors", despite the blatant falsehood of it?
If this website - Islamic State Watch - were a conscientious website, it would also be asking these questions - and looking at some of the analysis of what really happened (and didn't happen) on March 15. Instead, it does its best to portray all Muslims in the worst possible light, without reference to what might be described as the bigger picture. Yes, the Muslims have a lot to answer for. But at the end of the day - as far as Christchurch is concerned - they have done little more than volunteer their services as crisis actors. Ultimately, neither they nor Tarrant is responsible for the charade that has been characterized as "New Zealand's darkest day", and which was specifically designed to facilitate and expedite a wholesale rollback of civil liberties.
It is imperative we all get a good grasp of what is really going on, and unite to resist those who would control us, and eventually enslave us, by using "terrorist attacks" to stampede us into the protective arms of the authoritarian/therapeutic state. The "terrorist" may be portrayed as a "rabid Leftist", a "radical Muslim", or a "white supremacist". It doesn't matter. These labels do little more than whip up our emotions, so that we do not pursue any rational inquiry - and do not notice the modus operandi that the globalist elite has been pursuing since the days of Operation Gladio in the postwar era.