High Profile Kiwi's Busted in Drug Ring

**SixPackBack** · 20th July 2005, 18:48

.........Yawn..........fuck thats never happend before!!!!

**FROSTY:Me** · 20th July 2005, 18:56

guys n gals --possibly being paranoid here but this is a public forum --covered by the same laws as any other media--radio/tv etc
Thiose people have name supression and the fine to the forum might be pretty huge
sorry if Im bein paranoid

**oldfart** · 20th July 2005, 19:26

Originally Posted by FROSTY

guys n gals --possibly being paranoid here but this is a public forum --covered by the same laws as any other media--radio/tv etc
Thiose people have name supression and the fine to the forum might be pretty huge
sorry if Im bein paranoid

Don't see how this can be breaching court suppression orders as this forumn is only engaging in idle speculation & gossip. Someone saying it's Marc Ellis etc is doing so with out a shred of evidence so would chill

**badlieutenant** · 20th July 2005, 19:27

mike king
nothing to see here

**ajturbo** · 20th July 2005, 19:38

NNOOOOOOooo.

they are all my idolls!! (SP?)

hope you guys are wrong!!!

**Hitcher** · 20th July 2005, 19:42

Originally Posted by oldfart

Don't see how this can be breaching court suppression orders as this forumn is only engaging in idle speculation & gossip. Someone saying it's Marc Ellis etc is doing so with out a shred of evidence so would chill

By naming names you are doing one of two things: Breaking the suppression order (if the name is correct); or defaming an individual (if the name is incorrect). Both practices are illegal, the former punishable by fine or imprisonment; the latter by Court-determined damages. As mentioned earlier, be very careful what you post here.

**oldfart** · 20th July 2005, 19:48

Originally Posted by Hitcher

By naming names you are doing one of two things: Breaking the suppression order (if the name is correct); or defaming an individual (if the name is incorrect). Both practices are illegal, the former punishable by fine or imprisonment; the latter by Court-determined damages. As mentioned earlier, be very careful what you post here.

So, say I speculate the sportsman is, I dunno say Sean Fitzpatrick, & it's not, or it is. I'm only blowing hot air. How can I be prosecuted for idol gossip. Surely this public forumn is no different than you'n me discussing it in a public place?

**Skyryder** · 20th July 2005, 19:55

Originally Posted by Zed

Simple rationale behind it really - celebrities are idols, they are this worlds role models who are invited into our homes through the idiot box, computer, etc to entertain us, and many a child/adult is influenced by them. When they get involved in unlawful activity they are breaching any trust that society has put in them. That is a big no-no!

Can't fault you on this one Zed. Once sportspeople get themselved involved in the entertainment, advertising and related industries they are placing themselves in the public areana. As such they are highly paid to promote whatever show or product that they endorse. Generaly speaking their value as entertainers and product endorsers relies on the amount of exposure that they can generate for themselves. Once they cross that line of public acceptance by a criminal act then celebs can hardly complain if the public takes an interest in their downfall.

Skyryder

**Skyryder** · 20th July 2005, 19:58

Originally Posted by oldfart

So, say I speculate the sportsman is, I dunno say Sean Fitzpatrick, & it's not, or it is. I'm only blowing hot air. How can I be prosecuted for idol gossip. Surely this public forumn is no different than you'n me discussing it in a public place?

The difference is in the written word as against the spoken word.

Skyryder

**Big Dave** · 20th July 2005, 19:58

Originally Posted by Hitcher

By naming names you are doing one of two things: Breaking the suppression order (if the name is correct); or defaming an individual (if the name is incorrect). Both practices are illegal, the former punishable by fine or imprisonment; the latter by Court-determined damages. As mentioned earlier, be very careful what you post here.

Serious question - Do you think either would be likely?
'Anonymous' words on a discussion forum isn't exactly a tip off from 'deep throat'?

And if so do you think spankme would draw any heat?

**KATWYN** · 20th July 2005, 20:04

Originally Posted by Hitcher

be very careful what you post here.

One word...LIBEL. Apparently it applies to high profile people, polititions
etc...not so much the lay people like the rest of us. (I only know this
cos I asked our lawyer recently about a defamation issue)

So it is serious stuff like what Hitcher is saying

BTW just found this on another part of the net:

What is the definition of libel?
The classic definition is:
"a publication without justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule."
(Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108)

So I spose does it come down to "is this website a publication??" maybe

**TonyB** · 20th July 2005, 20:21

From what I've seen, the way name suppression is handled is all wrong. The media should NOT be allowed to give clues as to who it is- it encourages speculation. People automatically think of the most high profile person they now of, gossip circulates, and before long everyone "knows" who it is.

Case in point, a few years back the media published that a "high profile Chch businessman" was on trial for child molestation. Everyone "knew" that it was Rick Armstrong (probably because he did a lot of advertising for his car yards on the radio). My boss knew his mother and late father- the stress the rumours put on them was huge. It turned out to be someone else. The exact same thing happened AGAIN with the Graham Capell case- again, everyone "knew" that it was Rick Armstrong.

Has anyone stopped to think that this time the people everyone is implicating are just the first names the come to mind when you think of high profile Auckland sports people?

**Skyryder** · 20th July 2005, 20:24

Originally Posted by Big Dave

Serious question - Do you think either would be likely?
'Anonymous' words on a discussion forum isn't exactly a tip off from 'deep throat'?

And if so do you think spankme would draw any heat?

I just took a look at Str8J's original post. She states four names that a little birdie told her were 'implicated,' then in the next sentance states that these four names are supposed to be supressed.

I'm no legal expert on this but being implicated is not the same as being charged and on this I would say that the court order has not been breached. But it is the next sentance that gives me cause for concern, because she states clearly that she thought the names are supposed to be surpressed. This refers to the four people that STR8J named. By this STR8J has implied that the four names are indeed the four that have been charged and given a supression order against the publication of their identidies.

As I understand the law on this Spankme can not be charged with any breach of a court order. He may decide to remove the post or the thread but the fact remains that four names that may or may not be involved with the drug bust are now out in the public arena; this through no fault of his own.

Skyryder