By Michael Morrah
A lawyer for controversial blogger Cameron Slater has tried to convince the court his client is exempt from name suppression laws, by arguing that blogging is a form of commentary.
Slater is on trial for nine charges of breaching name suppression, and one of identifying a victim in a sex case on his website.
Clutching legal notes and his iPad, Slater was unequivocal about his views on name suppression when he arrived at court.
“I still maintain my stance against name suppression,” he says.
The charges relate to several instances where Slater outed high profile New Zealanders on his blog, including a former Olympian and an entertainer. Both had name suppression and were facing charges of a sexual nature.
The Crown says Slater's actions were dangerous.
“The outing prominent people by publishing their names is going to have the effect that the victims of serious offending are less likely to come forward,” says Crown lawyer Ross Burns.
The court heard Slater posted articles alongside pictograms and encrypted messages which identified defendants.
“Anyone who is familiar with the site and is even modestly internet savvy is able to link to two together,” says Mr Burns.
But during an interview with police in December, Slater said the pictures that apparently revealed the identity of a former Olympian were random and could be interpreted in many ways.
The law states that “a court may make an order prohibiting the publication of any account or report relating to any proceeding”.
But Slater's lawyer argued his client's blogs weren't accounts or reports - they were merely commentary.
“Accordingly, on those grounds there is no case to answer,” says Gregory Thwaite.
In response, the Crown said Slater was trying to find any loop hole in the law he could crawl through.
The court also heard Slater suffers from clinical depression and takes pills everyday.
Not surprisingly, Slater didn't want that suppressed. The judge will make a decision on the case on September 14.
3 News