there are few 'crimes for assault' that warrant this kind of name suppression. Especially considering that National changed the law in regards to name suppression around 2010 and actually made it harder to get name suppression. So in order for anyone to get suppression not only of the names of the victims, but also the perpetrator and the court the deed needs to be a bit more than just 'assaulting' someone one.
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/g...ion-harder-get
there is then the 'prominent New Zealander' that had name suppression til end of Feb 2015, wich then was extended till end of March 2015 to be again extended in an emergency hearing until April 20th, 2015 - which is the date of the courtcase.nder the proposals, the court will only be able to make an order prohibiting the publication of a defendant's name, address, occupation, or other details likely to lead to their identification, on the following grounds:
Where there is a real risk of prejudice to a fair trial.
To prevent undue hardship to the victims.
Where publication would identify another person whose name is suppressed by order or by law (e.g. a victim).
Where publication would endanger the safety of any person.
Where publication would cast suspicion on other people that may result in undue hardship.
To prevent extreme hardship to the accused and/or people connected to the accused.
Where publication would be likely to prejudice the interests of the maintenance of law, including the retention, investigation, and detection of offences.
Mr Power said the legislation would make it clear there is no presumption of extreme hardship solely on the grounds that an alleged offender is well known.
"Being famous is not a good enough reason to be granted name suppression.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11394223 - Jan 30th
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11404727 - Feb 19th
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/promine...nded-vy-170285 - March 19th
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11424208 - March 27th - appeal to lift name suppression granted again.
so there is a prominent new zealander, facing charges for 12 instances of indecent behaviour, who is on name suppression.
But for all we know this got nothing to do with Mike Sabin and his personal issues, this is just the story of a prominent New Zealander who had to indecently to assault someone cause obviosly now one gave it up for free to that prominent New Zealander.




Reply With Quote


Bookmarks