Judge under fire for awarding name suppression - Story - National - 3 News
3News » Home
Full Story

Judge under fire for awarding name suppression

11 comments | Post Comment Email Print Text Size:
aA
aA
aA
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 10:25p.m.

By Tova O'Brien

A judge is facing strong criticism after granting permanent name suppression to a prominent Manawatu man in possession of child pornography.

The man has been sentenced to four months' home detention.

The Maori Party says they are outraged and are urging the prosecution to appeal the sentence.

The man was found in possession of more than 300,000 pornographic images, many of young naked girls and some of children being sexually abused.

The Maori party says his sentence is a perfect example of the double standards available for privileged people.

"It is concerning to see that it is still here in this day and age that somebody who's prominent, or from a prominent family has a different standard to somebody who may not be from such a prominent family," says Rahui Katene.

But sentencing judge Grant Fraser disagrees, saying: "The punitive consequences are more extensive for the man than for other people, particularly in light of his position, achievements and the consequential outcome."

But the editor of the Manawatu Standard says it is precisely that comment which has unanimously irked their readers.

"I think people accept that if you do reach that status in the community and you behave in a manner that's unbecoming of that status then the scrutiny is warranted," says Michael Cummings.

The Maori Party says the repercussions will now affect more than just the man and his family.

"There are a whole lot of prominent families in the Manawatu who are now going to have people pointing fingers at them, you know - is it you? Is it someone you know?" says Mr Katene.

The man was sentenced to four months' home detention - the very same place the offending has been occurring over the last two years. But the judge said the consequences of the man's actions were severe and beyond anything the court could impose.

3 News

Comments [11]

ANON
10 Feb 2010 9:29p.m.

When I first heard this story I thought that this person should not be sheltered from accountability of his revolting actions, however after learing who this person is and the greater implications of having his name public, I think the judge has made a very difficult but potentially wise decision.

James
10 Feb 2010 11:10a.m.

Surely some one should review the continued service of this judge, his stated opinions appear to be at odds with many of the common values held by most New Zealanders, and it would be of interest to establish if the unnamed person is a major supporter of any political party

jungle bunny
10 Feb 2010 5:21a.m.

Historically,Name Suppression has been enjoyed by Aristocracy,the famous,the rich priveledged few, champions of the nation (sportsmen,entertainers,royalty,and prominent members of masonic lodges, rotary clubs, those of high military status, and of course members of the Judiciary),so now we find this Name Suppression Rort has been extended to child pornographers and their deviate mates. This carry-on has been prevelant for years and I cannot see it changing in the foreseeable future as it is the abovementioned people that have the power to lobby Parliamentarians to maintain the status quo, and to legislate further statutes to protect them being exposed if they are caught at it.We can but hope that through the media,those citizens who find the Name Suppression laws totally unacceptable,publically critise this abuse of our justice system at every chance.

tania kean
09 Feb 2010 8:00p.m.

are you serious your honour?I thought we were suppose to protect our tamariki from sexual predators.When did we start protecting these animals? what rights did those children have?no wonder so many kiwis have so little faith in the justice system.whoever this judge is.he is almost as sick as this "secret sicko".you have no honour "your honour"

nick
09 Feb 2010 12:37p.m.

the maori partys is classic, they are upset so it must be a white guy, otherwise they would be all for it.

cherie
09 Feb 2010 12:15p.m.

So children overseas don't count. So what if they are raped and abused for a bloke in NZ to watch. Who cares they are not from New Zealand.

Mr Judge I do hope your grand daughters are always safe in the knowledge that people like you let arse wipes like him off with a slap on the hand.

Merv
09 Feb 2010 10:56a.m.

My thoughts are that Justice is blind meaning that it doesn't differentiate between the so called socially responsible (a joke in this case) and the perceived criminals of the land. This is no more than a lowering of standards that follows with the social engineering and PC nonsense we had forced on us in the last 9 years. Publish his name and let him fall on his sword. Individuals that get involved in this sort of behaviour are a danger to society. Can the judge say with impunity that the problem has been solved. I think not!

Andrew
09 Feb 2010 7:56a.m.

Of course there’s never any excuse for keeping CP but in his sentencing and decision to award permanent name suppression the judge as always would have taken into account the victim impact report.

But no punishment dished up by the courts could compare with what this guy faced when his wife found out.

benny
09 Feb 2010 5:23a.m.

If he is of such a prominent position then it is even more important for them to obey the morality and the laws not use their position to flout them and thus the punishment should be more punitive

eveangel
09 Feb 2010 4:04a.m.

This judge needs to recuse himself from this case.Not because of the judgement,but rather how he came about.He blatently admits to holding a different standard of justice for socially prominent people.In other words,his judgement was made before the case hit his desk.I shudder to think what will happen with future cases if this man is not held accountable.

Post a comment

Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:


3News Video 3News Audio

Post your opinion

3News -
Comments (24)

Wellywood: tacky or choice?

Wellington is about to introduce a bold new sign to recognise the film industry....