Junkee's former political editor Osman Faruqi, who is now an ABC journalist. Credit:Facebook/Osman Faruqi In a judgment that pulled no punches, Justice Wigney said it was "no mean feat" to "come to grips" with Latham's "extraordinary" defence, which had 12 parts and nine schedules. Loading He said the document included a dictionary, which featured "amongst other things, a dramatis personae ... references to 'internet terminology', and a description of certain 'Islamic terrorist atrocities'". Justice Wigney said Latham's wide-ranging defence raised a series of "beguiling questions", including what "the martyrdom of Christians in the Roman Empire between the reign of the Emperor Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus and Emperor Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus have to do with a defamation action commenced in Australia in 2017".

This was one of a host of historical references in the unusual defence, which also included references to "the segregation and ill-treatment of ethnic Negro people" in South Africa between 1948 and 1991. Loading In the YouTube episode that gave rise to the defamation claim, Latham accused Faruqi of "anti-white racism" after the then Junkee editor tweeted about the citizenship saga that led former Greens Senators Scott Ludlam and Larissa Waters to quit Parliament. "Dude wtf is happening...?" Muslim activist and television host Yassmin Abdel-Magied tweeted at Faruqi in July 27 last year. "The white people are getting f----ed Yas, it's happening," Faruqi replied.

Latham concluded that the comments fomented "hatred of white people" and Faruqi was "effectively encouraging the terrorists in this political environment to do their worst". Justice Wigney said "it may readily be accepted" that some people may disagree with the views Faruqi expressed in tweets, many of which were "plainly intended to be little more than a humorous or satirical commentary", while other people "may, perhaps with some justification, consider some of the tweets to be rather puerile, shallow, trite or even hackneyed". "But really, what does one expect from Twitter, or social media generally; deep, insightful analysis?" he said. Some "white-skinned" and "thin-skinned" people might be offended by some of the tweets, he said, but this was "a long way from the proposition that the tweets vilify or dehumanise white people, and an even longer way from the proposition that the tweets, or their author, incite or encourage violence against white people". Loading Replay Replay video Play video Play video

Justice Wigney also took aim at Latham for using a tweet by Faruqi criticising "rich old white male Sydney Uni[versity] graduates" to bolster his case. "Is it seriously to be suggested that middle-aged white men who graduated from the University of Sydney constitute a vilified or demonised sub-class in Australian society?" he said. "Could it seriously be suggested that social media posts such as this are likely to encourage or facilitate anyone taking up their cudgels against middle-aged white male university graduates, let alone incite terrorist acts by Islamic terrorists against the 'white' population generally?" Likewise, he said a tweet by Faruqi suggesting "labradors are to dogs what straight white dudes are to politics" – because they are "boring, too common, [and] entitled" – might "may well have been offensive to owners of Labradors, or perhaps even Labradors themselves" but was "hardly" vilification. Faruqi had asked for only parts of Latham's defence to be struck out, but Justice Wigney said it was preferable for the entire document to be scrapped so he could "start from scratch".