Another abuse of the name suppression law
The Solicitor-General is considering appealing the name suppression granted to an Auckland businessman convicted for trading in what a judge described as “gross and objectionable” child-abuse images.
The man, known in court as Q, admitted his guilt in June, was denied suppression, and began serving 10 months’ home detention away from his family.
But the battle over his identity continued until earlier this month when he was granted permanent name suppression by the High Court.
Q persuaded Justice Susan Thomas to grant suppression by citing medical evidence to suggest his wife was at risk of dying from a stress-related heart condition if he were named.
The Sensible Sentencing Trust and advocacy group Stop Demand have both written to the Solicitor-General urging him to consider an appeal. A spokesman for the Solicitor-General’s office confirmed the matter was still under consideration and no decision date had been set.
An experienced criminal lawyer told the Sunday Star-Times the decision was a “precedent-setter”.
“Every offender with a mum with a dicky heart will be citing this decision from now on.”
Not just that. Â Family might develop depression. Â Might end up suicidal. Â Neighbours might live in fear. Â And so on. Â If people’s names can’t be known because they are such a threat to public health, you can justify any kind of name suppression. Â Read more »