Name Suppression

When Simon Power put through his changes tot he name suppression law he told us all that celebrities would find it harder to get name suppression.

As is usual with politicians thee days he was speaking out of the side of his mouth with his fingers crossed behind his back:

A rising Hawke’s Bay professional sports star charged with a driving offence has been granted name suppression.

The 20-year-old man appeared in the Hastings District Court yesterday and entered no plea to a charge of driving while suspended. Police allege he was spotted driving along Karamu Rd on October 7.

His lawyer, Amit Malik, sought suppression due to his client’s “public profile”. Mr Malik said the man needed more time to tell his employer of the charge.

Name Suppression for a driving offence and name suppression because he is a “rising star”. What a load of bpllocks.

I said the law changes wouldn’t do a thing, looks like I was right.

Community Magistrate Lavinia Nathan needs to read up on the new law regarding name suppression:

A man has pleaded guilty to 22 separate charges of filming up women’s skirts at shopping malls.

He will be sentenced in the North Shore District Court in December on charges of making 22 intimate visual recordings.

The Herald on Sunday cannot name him or show his face because Community Magistrate Lavinia Nathan granted him interim name suppression – again.

Police said there were no “known” victims because he discreetly filmed strangers below their waists from front-on and behind. He was caught at Albany’s Westfield Centre after a security guard alerted police.

The 41-year-old West Auckland man was allowed to keep his identity a secret for two weeks after his guilty plea to inform his sick elderly mother about his offending, which took place over three months.

This week however, Public Defence Solicitor Liesje Garraway-Lina requested the interim name suppression be continued for another seven weeks because he had not informed his employer or other family members, including a young daughter.

Police prosecutor Mike Hayden said her argument held no weight because the offender had already had enough time to let people know about his charges.

Community Magistrate Nathan decided to protect the offender by hiding his identity until sentencing.

The law has changed now and there is no way that this man remotely qualifies under the new provisions for name suppression to enjoy continued name suppression.

The Comedian who got off without a conviction because “he makes people laugh” is having his sentence reviewed by the high court.

Christine Rankin sums it up nicely:

Christine Rankin, a family commissioner, but speaking as a child advocate separate from her official position said the comedian may have been given credit for making people laugh, but the court’s decision to allow him to walk free without even a conviction “made people cry”.

Meanwhile I remain convicted for publishing his name, and some say I make people laugh too.

The boy who made bomb threats has been named:

A south Auckland high school student who allegedly made bomb threats in retaliation to a new internet copyright law has lost his bid for continued name suppression.

Fijian-born Ifraaz Joseph appeared in the Manukau District Court today on charges relating to a video that was allegedly posted on YouTube and threatened the New Zealand Government.

The clip included threats about bombs hidden in Government buildings, as well as Government and media websites being hacked.

The 18-year-old pleaded not guilty.

His lawyer Giles Harvey argued for continued name suppression on the grounds that the teenager’s name was very similar to other male family members, including his brother.

He said the family also feared they could face a public “backlash” from any perceived affiliation with international terrorism.

So if you are a paedo comedian who “makes people laugh” you can have name suppression, but threaten to makes some bombs and you get named.

The inconsistency of name suppression continues.

You’ve gotta love this kid though, willing to make bomb threats against the government but still afraid of getting the whack from his mama !!!!

So tough he can issue threats but afraid of his own name.

A south Auckland secondary school student accused of making bomb threats against the Government is seeking name suppression so his Muslim family avoids the “extreme shame” the charges bring.

The 18-year-old Fijian-born student appeared in the Manukau District Court today after allegedly making threats in a YouTube video.

The threats, posted online earlier this month, included claims that explosives had been hidden in New Zealand Government buildings.

The video also said Government and media websites would be hacked.

The man has been charged with threats of harm to people and property.

Duty solicitor Nicole Smith sought interim name suppression for the student.

She said his extended family had not yet been notified and because the family was Muslim, the charges would “bring extreme shame to the family.”

Smith said the student’s mother and father were in court and were “very upset”.

Convicted kiddie fiddler Graham Capill is out of jail.

Disgraced politician and ex-police prosecutor Graham Capill is free after more than six years behind bars for child sex offences.

The Department of Corrections yesterday confirmed the former Christian Heritage party leader had been released from jail nearly three years early.

“Mr Capill will be managed according to the standard and special conditions of his parole order set by the New Zealand Parole Board,” Community Probation Services area manager Nick Scott said.

Last month, the Parole Board granted parole to the Christchurch-based church minister and morals campaigner to an undisclosed residence.

He had been declined five times previously.

Capill, 52, was sentenced to nine years jail in July 2005 after admitting sex crimes against three young girls over a 12-year period, starting in 1990, the year after he became party leader.

He was paroled with seven special conditions, including being banned from contact with children aged 16 years old or younger unless under approved supervision.

We can know who this man is because the judge in his trial sensibly removed name suppression from him. We can also know if Graham Capill breaks his parole conditions because we can know it was him. Far too many people like him are released into the community still hidden by name suppression and because of that the general public can not know about who their new neighbour is.

Jan Logie is a Green candidate, and after she published an open letter to the Judge who discharged the “comedian” without conviction, I think she is a politician with the courage of her convictions. Sadly most politicians are poor facsimiles of a party line.  Hopefully she will enter the parliament after the election. On curent polling she will.

Dear Judge Cunningham,

I am writing to express my dismay and disquiet at your ruling last week.

My heart goes out to the partner and mother who did what we would all hope and expect a mother to do.

Our media in recent years has profiled more family cover ups of child abuse than cases like this. Having worked for women’s refuge in the past and supported a mother and child through the process of laying a complaint of child abuse I have seen first hand the fear and trauma involved in taking a case to court.

In this example the comedian concerned admitted his guilt and while this will certainly have made the process prior to your ruling easier for the family your ruling must have been absolutely devastating.

I am not a proponent of punishment for the sake of punishment but I do believe an essential part of justice is the acknowledgement of a crime and rehabilitation and or restitution.

You reportedly decided the comedian had no paedophilic tendencies I am supposing this is because he was drunk. This suggests that if you’re drunk and your partner doesn’t want sex and you have a child in your bed then anyone might end up conducting sex acts on that child. I would suggest this is not true. How was it he didn’t perform a sex on (attempt to rape) his partner while she slept if he was so drunk he was not accountable for his own actions? He knew it was his daughter and this is not the behaviour of a man with a healthy sexuality.

I believe this judgement sends a harmful message to victims and their families. So few cases of sexual abuse make it to court in this country and even fewer manage to get convictions. Now there is even less incentive to try.

I also believe it sends a message to men that they are less responsible for their actions if they’re socially privileged and drunk.

We need a justice system that we can all have confidence in. Your decision has undermined my faith in justice in this country.

You can’t change this ruling, but at the very least I do hope you reflect on the reaction to your ruling and organise time to talk to some of the agencies working with victims of sexual abuse.

Yours sincerely

Jan Logie

The judge reckons a man (if you can call someone who molestes his 4 year old a man) who plead guilty to molesting his own child doesn’t deserve a conviction because “he makes people laugh”.

We are all laughing at Judge Philippa Cunningham today.

Here is a funny thing. It’ll make you laugh, I have a conviction for naming this piece of scum.

This is just bullshit.

Nothing else can describe this stupid decision, by a numpty judge:

A drink driver has had his name suppression extended to protect his mother from visitors who “might kill her with kindness” if his name is made public.

The High Court at Auckland heard yesterday that the offender’s mother was 86 and her heart was operating at about 20 per cent efficiency.

The drink driver’s lawyer, Neelam McDonald, had sought continued name suppression because if her client’s conviction was known, his mother would be inundated with concerned visitors which “could prove fatal”.

The man had represented himself in court and only sought name suppression after his recent conviction, against which he is now appealing.

Justice Christopher Allen said the case was unusual in that name suppression was not being sought to protect the mother of the convicted man from the news, but from visitors that may “kill her with kindness”.

He asked McDonald why it was not possible for guests to be turned away or told not to visit the man’s mother’s Westmere home.

“In Indian culture the guest is treated like a god… it is very rude to turn them away,” McDonald said.

The man’s mother would be forced to entertain her guests to the point where “she might die”.

I’ll tell you what is very rude. Bringing bollocks like this to a court. What else is very rude is driving drunk and then being afraid of your own name.

With such cowardice and hiding behind the skirts of a dying mother it is him who should be dying of embarrassment. This case should be chucked out and the drunk driver named and shamed.

Under the law there are no grounds to have this name suppression, unfortunately as the law stands only the media or the parties can re-visit this. The NZ Herald spent over $100,000 overturning Mark Hotchin’s name suppression, why don’t they trot down to the court and have a crack at this one in the public interest of knowing who this drunk driver is who is afraid of his own name.

High-profile sports identity arrested for assaulting woman

Why didn’t they say Olympian?

The tough guy afraid of his own name bashes another woman. A perfect case of why name suppression stinks.