-
Source: ONE News
The issue of name suppression is back in the spotlight after the Court of Appeal granted it to a man caught with a year's worth of horrific child pornography.
The 50-year-old from Manawatu was yesterday granted the right to remain anonymous after he argued that naming him would hurt his family.
The man admitted 21 charges of possessing objectionable material, and was sentenced to six months' home detention and fined $5250 at the end of last year.
The 100 images and videos he held showed children as young as 18 months involved in sexual acts, including rape.
In granting him permanent name suppression, the judges said that publishing the man's name would lead to "incalculable hurt" to his family.
But Denise Ritchie from the advocacy group Stop Demand told TV ONE's Breakfast this morning that the ruling sent a dangerous message - particularly considering the family members being protected had not lived with him for years.
"What you've got is special protection now being offered to special people in specific jobs and I think that sets a very dangerous precedent," she said.
"The reality is all crimes hurt families, he should have thought about that before hand."
Ritchie added the ruling was "specifically about the kind of jobs that his extended family members hold" and that if the public knew there would be an outcry.
"These are the modern day ways kids are getting sexually abused," she said.
The man was assessed as a low to medium risk of reoffending.
Ritchie said part of the problem was that it appeared to be a victimless crime, but that it was in fact worse as it involved children being raped and that rape being used for sexual excitement.
She added she did not want to demonise the offender, but that parents had the right to decide, with full knowledge, whether they wanted their children to be around him.
She said the ruling showed the Government was "absolutely not" living up to its promise to take a hard line on name suppression.
"These offenders operate in secrecy and ongoing secrecy is something the court should not be endorsing," she said.
Should the man have permanent name suppression? Have your say on the messageboard below.
Latest NZ News Video
-
ONE News Minute 9am update: May 26 (1:00)
-
Kids cough up $14m for Government (1:50)
-
Education ministry 'barbaric' (1:55)
Add a Comment:
Post new commentThousandDemons said on 2011-07-23 @ 03:04 NZDT: Report abusive post
He has - according to the article - a year's worth of this terrible stuff. I don't want the case endangered - everyone has the right to "innocent until proven guilty" - he DOESN'T deserve PERMANENT name suppression. It sets a dangerous precedent. If found guilty, we should know who he is. If he's let out in future, would you want him living near YOUR family?
reddwarf52 said on 2011-07-22 @ 22:47 NZDT: Report abusive post
I
AndyC said on 2011-07-22 @ 21:10 NZDT: Report abusive post
I am absolutely flabbergasted and sickened by the fact that his pervert has been granted name suppression. what is wrong with the justice system in this country the decision makers are totally out of touch with reality. I heard on talk-back radio that this sicko's act was considered to be at the lower end of the "scale." I believe that the matter is now going to the High Court and hopefully commonsense, common decency and justice will prevail and name will be lifted.
Lisa76 said on 2011-07-22 @ 18:22 NZDT: Report abusive post
Like most people I am sick of hearing these stories against children, pornography and general abuse...I agree he knew the risks before he did the act and i'm sorry but rather his family than mine or yours!!! Why should he be spared would/does he spare our children/family? I think not.These men no mater how they are rated will generally always re offend some way,its the nature of the beast with them.I for one would want to know if my family is in danger...Naming him is the least he deserves....
kiwimannz said on 2011-07-22 @ 17:38 NZDT: Report abusive post
I believe he should be named... Yes it hurts the family, which he had no regard for. This is a crime against young children... If he gets his excitement from those type of pictures.. every citizen should have the right to know who he is. A low risk of re offending.. does not mean he won't do it again. Does that mean everyone with families that commits a crime can get name suppression!