Overview
On December 5, 2025, following an earlier August ruling, Kirralie Smith was handed an obscenely unjust fine and a compulsory public-apology order as punishment for pointing out that two men are competing in women’s socker in New South Wales. The judgment was issued by Deputy Chief Magistrate Sharon Freund of the NSW Local Court. [^] This ended a legal crusade taken against her by trans-identifying males Riley Dennis and Stephanie Blanch as retaliation for Smith courageously pointing out that they were unjustly competing in a women’s soccer league despite being male.
This case was significant. It marked what media and civil-rights organizations described as the first time someone was found guilty of “transgender vilification” under NSW’s legal regime, and a new extent of authoritarian creep by trans ideology.
On top of being fined roughly $95,000 AUD (with a payment deadline after which the fine will double), Smith was forced to publicly apologize on every social media account and website she controls for daring to speak against the harm of trans ideology. What she did “wrong” was identify males as males—something that has been legally and scientifically uncontroversial for millennia. With this ruling, speaking of reality itself has become a punishable offense. This is an instance of state-mandated re-education.
Court Record: Dennis_26.8.25
Timeline of Events
Early 2024—Smith Publishes Posts on Male Players in Female Football
Kirralie Smith reposts information from Football NSW and a local club identifying two biologically male players competing in a female division. She asks why males are being permitted into women’s sport and questions the purpose of having sex-segregated categories at all.
These posts contain only factual statements and publicly available information.
Mid–2024—Riley Dennis and Stephanie Blanch File Complaint
Two trans-identifying male players, Riley Dennis and Stephanie Blanch, file a vilification complaint under Section 49ZT of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act. They claim Smith’s posts:
- “misgendered” them,
- “humiliated” them,
- “incited contempt,”
- and caused them “hurt feelings.”
- I would gladly suffer someone “hurting” my “feelings” for $100,000.—J.C.
This initiated a civil action, not a criminal prosecution. Though the punishment is obscenely harsh.
August 27, 2025—The Ruling
The court/tribunal formally found Smith guilty of unlawful transgender vilification, a special concept in NSW law that allows the trans cult, via trans privilege they have sewn for themselves unchallenged, to prevent the competing view (that sex in humans can’t be changed by wishing—aka biological reality) from being expressed.
Punishment
Smith was punished for the following actions:
- Calling the two male players “men” or “males.”
- This was considered disrespectful to their gender identity and therefore “humiliating.”
- I told everyone this was coming in the 00s…—J.C.
- This was considered disrespectful to their gender identity and therefore “humiliating.”
- Publishing their photos and names from public sources.
- Even though she used publicly accessible information, the court ruled that reposting it “in a critical context” was harmful.
- Wokebane will make up for her no longer being able to do so.
- Questioning why males were allowed in female sport.
- This was ruled to “encourage negative public sentiment” toward the plaintiffs.
- Which is what the plaintiffs deserve. Wokebane will continue to encourage negative public sentiment toward these pieces of excrement.
- This was ruled to “encourage negative public sentiment” toward the plaintiffs.
- Asking what the point of female divisions is if males can enter.
- This was labeled “demeaning.”
- It is not.
- This was labeled “demeaning.”
- Suggesting that allowing males in female sport is unfair or unsafe.
- This was ruled “incitement to contempt.”
In other words, she was punished for accurately recognizing biological sex and for raising legitimate policy concerns.
The draconian punishment for wrongthink handed down by Sharon Freund includes:
- Deleting all existing content relating to the plaintiffs within two months [^]
- Being ordered to pay $95,000 AUD [^]
- The fine must be paid within 28 days or it will double to $190,000 (!!!).
- This amount of money would cripple/financially ruin most households before doubling.
- This money is not taken by the state but instead goes directly to Riley and Blanch. This is a lifesteal mechanic, to borrow from video game terminology: Not only has our side been financially weakened, but the trans side has been financially strengthened.
- This should terrify everyone and should not be tolerated or ignored.
- Being ordered to make a public apology on every social media account/website she runs [^]
- The post must be pinned to the top of her profile.
- This is beyond suppression of speech and into the realm of state-compelled speech.
This punishment is nearly unheard of for what amounts to a factual dispute on the nature of sex in humans and fairness in sport. But if the trans cult is not stopped, it is a legal tyranny we will all be forced to cower under.
Public Opinion
Many have derided this decision as extreme and unjust:
- “In particular, it seems to me clear that any concerns were expressed, not at the fact that the
plaintiff was “transgender”, but that the plaintiff was a biological male person playing in a
sporting competition designated for biological women.” [^] - https://laeffm.org/2025/09/07/christian-campaigner-guilty-of-vilification/
- https://www.starobserver.com.au/news/court-finds-anti-trans-activist-kirralie-smith-binary-australia-vilified-trans-women/238264
Prior Case: The “Nuggin” Complaint
Before the 2024–2025 vilification ruling, Smith had already faced a similar complaint under Section 49ZT when a male athlete known as “Nuggin,” who competed in female sporting divisions, filed a transgender vilification claim against her. The matter was eventually withdrawn or resolved without full penalty, but it signaled an emerging pattern: male athletes using NSW anti-vilification law to suppress criticism of their participation in women’s sport.
Infractions and Retribution
The activist actors involved in this perversion of the law must be made to pay severely, or this cancerous trend of policing thought like out of a cautionary folk tale and disallowing people to recognize the two sexes will only continue to rain terror on us all. This is beyond typical activist whining on social media and into the realm of ruining someone’s life, which will not be tolerated.
- Sharon Freund—Issued the punitive order against Smith.
- “I am satisfied that the defendant unlawfully vilified the plaintiff … when she referred to the plaintiff as a male or a man”—Sharon Freund [^]
- Freund must be removed from the judiciary and prevented from ever serving there again. Appealing her obscene judgment is not enough, no more than healing a gunshot wound justifies letting the shooter walk free.
- Riley Dennis—Initiated and pursued the vilification claim.
- Stephanie Blanch—Initiated and pursued the vilification claim.
- Representation for the Plaintiff is listed as Mr. C. Gregory of Counsel instructed by Ruth Nooka, solicitor working for Dentons Australia Limited (from the court record).
- Dentons should have their reputation tarnished for participating in this farce.