People wonder why I pick fights on issues. Look no further that today’s Press where we find that the piece of crap that mugged an 86-year-old victim of a vicious street mugging has received name suppression out of consideration for his 90-year-old grandmother. Surely it can’t take more than a day to the old duck her grandson is an asshole, more to the point she probably already knows it. Where does she live? Iceland? Surely there isn’t anywhere in New Zealand that takes a week just to get to to tell them their grandson is a pig.
If the cops thought that doing me over Christmas would make the issue nice and quiet they were wrong and they clearly don’t understand the power of social media over the Mainstream media.
Yesterday, arguably the quietest news day in the world and on blogs, I was on every radio station, every TV channel and today in every newspaper, including the frontpage of the DomPost highlighting this issue. My site has had the highest number of pageviews EVER, including eclipsing by a factor of 4 my previous best day at the height of the election campaign last year. I have lost count of the interviews I have given.
Now people will be sitting down at their BBQs talking about how crap the suppression laws are, how the perception is that the thugs, the famous and the rich can easily access name suppression willy-nilly.
The laws were written in 1985, the WWW wasn’t even written about until 1989 and it wasn’t until 1990 that a more formal proposal (on November 12, 1990) to build a “Hypertext project” called “WorldWideWeb” was put forward at CERN. On August 6, 1991, he posted a short summary of the World Wide Web project on the alt.hypertext newsgroup. This date also marked the debut of the Web as a publicly available service on the Internet, a full 6 years after the law was written.
Since that time we have seen the emergence with force, of the social media phenomenon with Twitter, Facebook and Myspace as most prominent examples.
The horse has bolted, the law hasn’t and will never keep pace with developments on the internet. Essentially the world has become smaller and the world has become borderless. My story is all over Twitter, it is syndicated worldwide via RSS and through traditional media syndication. It will probably make Boing Boing and Mashable as it is net related, it is just a matter of time.
All the Police have managed to do is make a small issue of a breach of name suppression into a global debate about the rights and wrongs of criminals being able to hide their details when the victims are often publicly named and their pictures shown for all the world to see. This is a first and firsts make news.
I have even considered using social media and net techonologies to develop my defense by putting up a wiki and letting any lawyer or interested party help develop the defense. Then of course there is the possibility of live Tweeting the case. It has even got to the point where Kiwiblog is hanging off Whaleoil in a Wonderwheel search
This will not go away, and has turned for me from being a bit of a lark to being a full on campaign.
Consider my treatment with that of Michael Laws, who has pledged his support for my cause.
On 16 December 2008, at about 11:22 am, former MP Michael Laws briefly discussed the Peter Ellis/Christchurch Civic Creche case on Radio Live. He referred to two current MPs – Nick Smith and Lianne Dalziell – and their connections to the case. In effect, he identified three of the complainants who testified against Peter Ellis. You will be aware that suppression orders are in place preventing the identification of the child complainants in that case. Interestingly, Laws had previously been warned about breaching suppression orders in regards to a separate case.
The police have never charged Laws in relation to his comments about the Ellis case. It is unclear why that is so, given Laws’ history of breaching suppression orders. Maybe police are simply unaware of Laws’ comments (which is odd when you consider Laws’ history). You would think that police might monitor what Laws says on his radio show. But the argument could be made that Laws’ comments have not harmed the administration of justice. Theoretically I could make a similar argument, using Laws’ comments as an example of how, say, a technical breach may cause no harm to those being commented on. (Have the individuals in my case been harmed by what I have said or done?) I could also argue that police have been selective in charging me but not Laws. Surely, the law applies to all. Furthermore, I could argue that Laws’ breach is more blatant and more serious. He made it very clear who he was referring to.
Note the recording of the Michael Laws piece is posted on Youtube. Does this mean that the person posting it to Youtube is in contempt? How can a NZ court force Youtube to divulge the information about the account holder. What about the person who sent the information to Michael Laws in the first place? Where does contempt begin and end?
Michael Laws was also charged with contempt regarding a separate case of breach of name suppression. For example, Laws testified that ”both the local Police prosecutor and I considered the matter a waste of the court’s scarce time. We could have handled this with a simple and sincere apology.” (Would the police accept an apology in my case?) He was discharged without conviction.
As you can see this is not as simple as simply breaching Name Suppression.
Popularity: 34% [?]
{ 25 comments }
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Keep up the great work Whale. God is on your side.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
What happenned to same suppression being for 24 hours so the filth could let their family know they are in shit again?
Now criminal after criminal gets to “try” and hide forever….. Or is that buy??
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
I dont think you have anything at all to worry about. You are obviously in the right, and willing to fight. Breach of court suppression orders? Bah! Mere flies to be batted away at ones whim.
Someone with your intelligence and wit and expert opinions on everything from NZ politics to the global warming conspiracy can easily beat our so called courts, and their oh-so-obviously-wrong “laws” ( which we are all going to change…fight the good fight!! )
You will prevail because you are RIGHT!
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
That is a very erudite and well wriiten post Whale, you could easily present that post as your defence in court. There are many so called brilliant legal minds out there that couldn’t put together a defence as well written as that even after invoicing you for five grand.
Use that post plus numerous examples that already exist on the net to illustrate the farcical nature of the present suppression laws and you should be fine not fined hopefully.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
And all your detractors do is attack the messenger instead of taking on board the ‘message.’
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
When will you all fucking understand that, in the criminal justice system only the criminals get justice the victims can all just get fucked.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Just finished my Havana and the Dom at my favourite cafe on Cuba St and was thinking after reading the ‘front page’ lead item that what I admire most about the position you have carved out for yourself in the ‘blogosphere’ (The totality of blogs, especially the unique jargons, cultures and shared interests created by their interconnection) is that there are many people now who walk the hallowed corridors of power in this country who must often think, ‘fuck I hope the whale doesn’t get hold of this or we’re fucked!!!”
That’s a good position to be in but it also means that those who practice hypocrisy and double standards and those who work on the ‘dark side’ will gather up their resources and use that power to try and shut you down or punish you somehow.
You have often targeted the MSM and referred to their paid serfs as ‘repeaters’, and rightfully so but it does mean that you increasingly earn the ire of the dark side and the prominence they are now giving your story could well be partly due to the glee they are experiencing seeing the establishment coming after you.
The net of course can make all the difference when it comes to competing on a level playing field and in 2010 it is my fervent hope that those who hold the highest political, corporate, judicial, media positions in this country remain fearful of the fact that, ‘I hope the whale doesn’t get hold of this or we’re fucked!!!”
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Wow google ‘nz blogger to fight charges’, 681,000 results at the moment…far out!!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
Funny how you talk so much about ‘criminals’ when you essentially named a rape victim. Does she matter? Do you care about her at all? Maybe you should think about the victims before you grandstand. While I totally agree with you in the case of the attacker who wasn’t named so his grandmother wouldn’t find out – you’re wrong to hint at the name of sexual assault victims. It’s just cruel.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
I did not name a rape victim, I wouldn’t know her name if I tried to find it, and neither do you.
I never hinted at the name of a sexual assault victim, so get your facts straight. I think you will find the Olympian involved changed his name by deed poll and also the victim has a completely different name, so unless you knew them closely it is unlikely you can discover it.
Cameron Slater
m: 021 535724
e: camslater@gmail.com
w: http://www.whaleoil.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I did not name a rape victim, I wouldn’t know her name if I tried to find it, and neither do you.
I never hinted at the name of a sexual assault victim, so get your facts straight. I think you will find the Olympian involved changed his name by deed poll and also the victim has a completely different name, so unless you knew them closely it is unlikely you can discover it.
Cameron Slater
m: 021 535724
e: camslater@gmail.com
w: http://www.whaleoil.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
What I don’t understand about our ‘musician’, is that he is BETTER off now that his has victim pressed charges.
If the girl did not go to the police, and simply let the media know about this there’d be no escape for the asshole – we could name him. Since she did the “right thing” and went the the proper channels, the tosser gets off scotfree, AND NOW NO-ONE CAN NAME HIM!!!
Hopefully there’s a bit of boycott at Rhythm & Vines, although I feel everyone’s gonna be a bit too out-of-it to do much.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
google the name of this entertainer followed by the words name suppression and you get 76,000 hits. Whale, you have 76,000 defendants of the stand with you.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I did the same thing for the ex Olympic boxer Bob but included the year 2009 in the search parameter and got 57 hits – the 12th result makes what is happening to whale so incredibly farcical, check it out
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I doubt its registered in NZ, but there’s a similar issue in the UK; the boss of a premier league football team has been visiting brothels – making no real secret of it – but the press wont publish his name due to the Sun being dragged through the courts in reference to Max Mosley’s themed orgy and ‘Human Rights’. Meanwhile its widely known all over the internet. Keeping your name secret is no longer realistically possible, and if you live a public life, then you accept the consequences – bad or good.
http://tinyurl.com/ycdwmwq
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Keep up the good work Cam – have you thought of opening an account to help with your legal fees? I would be happy to contribute, and I am sure there would be many others who would do likewise. You have shown courage by making a stand against a law which places the rights of criminals above the rights of their victims and of the public – kia kaha!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Jackson complains about the naming of a rape victim (whether she has was named or not is unclear). I am not sure of the logic behind Jackson’s argument. Why shouldn’t victims be named? Those who are wrongly convicted are named (and shamed), even if they are lucky enough to have their convictions quashed. Yes, rape victims suffer trauma but don’t most victims? What about Susan Crouch who suffered horrific injuries at the hands of William Bell? Her trauma must have been (and possibly contiues to be) indescribable but there was no name suppression in her case (to my knowledge). Many (if not most) victims are named. Why the special treatment in some cases but not others?
I do not believe in name suppression for an accused or an accuser, except in very special circumstances. For example, if someone is a whistleblower or is in the witness protection scheme, suppression may be warranted depending on the circumstances of the case. Otherwise, it is difficult to justify suppression and simply leads to names being published online. I note that the Law Commission is considering this issue as I write this.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Apologies, that should be Susan COUCH.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I’m with you on this Whale, stick it right to them. Your idea of using pictograms in court is brilliant. SHow them up for the backwards luddite idiots they are.
I’ll be there on the 5th to support you, I hope the soft-cock msm is there too.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
KiwGirlUK: wrong comparisons. What Max Mosley and the football league boss do with their dicks in their spare time is nobody’s business, if it is legal, involves consenting adults, and does not impact adversely on the execution of their duties or on anyone else. Which is why Mosley won, in a rare example (lately) of the diseased British justice system getting it right. I suspect you simply don’t like what Mosley and co do – but then it was never your (i.e the public’s) business in the first place. What the “name suppressed musician” has done is commit a crime, about which you have a right to be aggrieved. .
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
The police didn’t charge Laws because they spend every waking moment hoping that the Ellis case will just go away.
It won’t.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Not that I support these pictorially-outed people, but aren’t they innocent until proven guilty…by the court? When was WhaleOil given the right to scream “J’accuse!”?
If Cameron Slater wants a jolly joust with the judiciary, that’s his call – but as the law stands (outdated though it may be), he’s in the wrong…and he knows it.
This feels awfully like publicity-seeking.
PhilBee, NZ
http://yardyyardyyardy.blogspot.com/2009/12/to-bl...
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I figure everyone should automatically get name suppression until guilt is established then their name should be made public. Personally if I was wrongly accused of a hideous crime like child molestation, naming me while I proved my innocence would be enough to drive me to suicide. But anyone who WAS guilty needs to be named, end of story, and it takes long enough to try someone that the family can emmigrate if they want to
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
You rock! Let’s start a mass campain e.g facebook-everyone out’s P-Dollars and the others at once, the system will grind to a halt if they try to prosecute everybody! I have outed P-Dollars, the comic and others on facebook already. People have a right to know!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I have no problem someone who is convicted being named but what about those falsely accused – and yes, it does happen. They don’t get legal aid if they’ve been hard working citizens all their lives and happen to own a family home and everyone remembers the front page rubbish reporting, not the retractions.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }