Pedophile’s name suppressed and the public in the dark
This week, news broke that a pedophile sentenced to preventative detention has appealed to receive permanent name suppression.
We know that this individual is a “former political candidate” and he pleaded guilty to the abuse of young girls. We also know the offending is so severe and his behaviour so unlikely to change that he has been sentenced to preventative detention. But,because he’s appealed for permanent name suppression, his interim name suppression remains.
This has gone too far.
We cannot challenge this culture of secrecy without resourcing the legal fight. Will you chip in now so we can get to work immediately?
Society deserves to know who to be wary of, and victims should be free to share their story. There is legitimate and considerable public interest at stake and frankly, I have had enough of seeing a “prominent New Zealander” or “former political figure” or “sportsman” has name suppression.
Preventative detention is rarely ordered. It's the most severe sentence in New Zealand law reserved for offenders who pose a significant and ongoing threat to public safety. It’s reserved for the worst of the worst.
And despite that, this convicted pedophile’s name is still secret and could remain so indefinitely if his appeal is successful.
This level of public danger demands public accountability. If you want us to push back against suppression in cases like this, your support ensures we can act fast and aggressively.
Why are we placing a pedophile’s privacy above the rest of society? He has already been convicted and sentenced. This is not about protecting his right to a free trial.
Name suppression appears to be dished out far too liberally without any stock being placed in the needs of the victim and the safety of society.
This case is the final straw for me.
Open justice depends on transparency. Kiwis have a right to know what is happening in their communities and who poses a risk to them. How can we make our own judgements on individuals and institutions if the media are not allowed to report the facts?
This culture of suppression from our courts is not consistent with our democratic values.
Something needs to be done. So we decided to intervene in the courts and fight against this pedophile’s appeal for permanent name suppression.
But you won’t believe what happened when we tried to request the relevant documents and court records to initiate proceedings...
We were told we needed the person's name to even locate records. That’s right! Apparently, we need to supply the very name that is currently suppressed!
We laughed at the irony of this roadblock, thinking ‘how hard can it be to track it down?’ It turns out his name is well-buried, our legal team is struggling to track it down even going through proper channels.
It is beyond belief. We won’t give up because, as I say, this was a last straw for me. But it is no simple task! We’re jumping through hoops because someone needs to stand up for transparency. If you want us to keep pushing through this nonsense, support us today.
The pattern of recent cases where violent offenders have had their names and details of their crimes suppressed should alarm us all, John. Check out these examples:
Recent reports confirmed that the teenager responsible for the violent death of a 25-year-old security officer was granted permanent name suppression. The public will never know who committed this brutal, unprovoked attack.
Jevon McSkimming, the former Deputy Police Commissioner, was initially shielded by a 'super-injunction' so secretive that even its existence was suppressed. We very nearly never found out about the shocking cover ups surrounding his behaviour.
A member of a wealthy family, convicted of possessing over 11,000 files of extreme child sexual abuse material received permanent name suppression for himself, his family, and their high-profile company. This has resulted in a lot of speculation and several innocent men who share his demographics being unfairly named as the perp.
Meanwhile, Storm Constable-Carter, a 22-year-old in Nelson man who pleaded guilty to 50 charges involving over 61,000 files, and who created and distributed material, was named publicly. This begs the question: What distinguishes this case from the last? Wealth? Connections? We cannot know, because even the reasoning is suppressed!
The 29-year-old man who allegedly used a crowbar to smash a window at Winston Peters' Auckland home was granted interim name suppression. He chose to commit a very public crime against a very public figure at a public protest. Why is his identity suppressed?
The Tom Phillips case exposed the futility of suppression in the digital age. An injunction on certain details had the immediate and predictable Streisand effect: rumours spread across social media within hours. When suppression orders can be circumvented by anyone with a smartphone, we must ask what purpose they truly serve.
Name suppression is not a neutral act. It is a speech restriction. Every time a court stretches suppression further, trust in the justice system erodes. And when trust erodes, accountability collapses. But now we’re doing something about it.
We’re prepared to go all the way on this appeal, but only if we have the resources. Stand with us today by making a contribution, big or small. Transparency is worth fighting for.
At the end of the day, John, this isn’t just about one offender or one case. This is about whether we still believe in open justice, public accountability, and the basic principle that New Zealanders deserve the truth.
Every suppression order that stretches beyond its purpose chips away at those values.
We’re stepping up because someone has to. If you believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant, then please partner with us in this fight.
Jillaine Heather | Chief Executive
SHARE THIS POST
