Leo unleashed: The Veterinary Council neuters free speech

03 December 2025
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Leo unleashed: The Veterinary Council neuters free speech

The Free Speech Union once again sounds the alarm on a deeply troubling pattern from New Zealand’s regulatory bodies to muzzle and effectively neuter professionals who dare express views that venture beyond the pens of 'permitted' opinion.

The Veterinary Council has censured Leo Molloy, ordering him to pay $23,000 in costs more than four years after his conviction for breaching a suppression order. The courts have already imposed consequences on Molloy of 350 hours of community service and a $15,000 fine.

The Free Speech Union says this case is less about one man’s conduct and more about the growing trend of professional bodies keeping professionals on a short leash far beyond their regulatory remit.

“This isn’t about whether Leo was right to breach the suppression order, the courts have already chewed that particular bone,” says Jillaine Heather, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. “The real question is why a professional body is now marking its territory by punishing him professionally as well.”

“Molloy hasn’t practised as a vet for more than a decade. His offence had nothing to do with treating animals, maintaining veterinary confidence, or professional ethics. No complaint has been made by a member of the public, a client, or another practising vet. Yet here we are, with the Veterinary Council attempting to ‘house-train’ him retroactively for behaviour entirely unrelated to animal care. And apparently spending an excess of $45,000 to pursue this complaint.”

The Veterinary Council’s disciplinary lawyer argued that “professional obligations don’t end when we close the office door,” and that vets handle sensitive information regularly.

“But Leo didn’t breach veterinary confidentiality,” Heather says. “He named a murderer on an online racing forum who was already being named by international media. He did not disclose the home address of a sick Labrador, selective breeding details, client records, nor the vaccination status of a tomcat. This was personal speech, not a professional act. Treating it as a veterinary offence stretches the Council’s mandate to breaking point.”

The Free Speech Union warns that if regulators can punish, and fine, professionals for off-duty speech, even decades after they last practised, then New Zealand has a much bigger problem than one outspoken ex-vet. 

“A teacher who gets a speeding ticket? A nurse who attends a protest? An architect who posts a spicy opinion on Facebook? If Molloy’s case becomes the template, every profession risks becoming an obedience school. Sit. Heel. Don’t bark.”

Heather adds that the inconsistency of enforcement reeks more of overreach than principle.

“International outlets published Jesse Kempson’s name with zero consequence. Google emailed it directly to New Zealand inboxes and got a polite warning. Multiple New Zealanders were cautioned but not prosecuted. Leo remains the only person convicted and now the only person professionally sanctioned. It’s hard not to conclude that the Veterinary Council’s issue isn’t the conduct, but the dog that did the barking.”

“When regulators start policing personal speech the way they police professional standards, they stop being guardians of competence and become wardens of conformity. Free speech should not be something to be neutered to appease the sensibilities of regulators. New Zealand needs skills-based watchdogs, not lapdogs trained to roll over.”