quickymart  (from the Trump thread):

 

Oh good, finally the cowards are getting to pay their dues (hopefully).

 

....

 

Speaking of cowards:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/128654072/couple-on-charges-relating-to-occupation-of-parliament-fight-to-keep-names-secret 

Stuff:

 

The couple’s duty lawyer Ian Miller requested interim name suppression while the couple’s lawyer examined the evidence for the case.

 

“The public exposure they face in the interim will constitute some fairly significant hardship,” Miller said.

Should've thought of that when you were busy being an idiot, shouldn't you.  (Yes, I know they're entitled to a fair trail, innocent until proven guilty and all that but I haven't forgotten the grief, frustration  and hardship these protesters caused.)

Interesting how they were protesting and fighting for something they so strongly believed in and cared about but they don't want to put their names to it.

Must also be one of their "freedoms" to choose not have their name out there too, I guess 🙄

I am of the opinion that name suppression should be the default until after a conviction and then it should be determined based on the impact to the *victim*. 

However, there are so many complexities to consider like the impact to the friends and family of a convicted felon, that it's pretty hard to set a hard and fast rule. The impact to the convicted party should be the last consideration if it's considered at all. 

Any law needs to be applicable to all situations. 

The issue is consistency. There should be name suppression for everyone all the time, as per the European model. This isn't perfect but it is the least imperfect. Victims are always covered and it isn't really the business of the law to name and shame. Punishment belongs in the court, not the newspapers. In really notorious cases, everyone will know the names anyway, in other cases they don't need to.

Rikkitic:

 

The issue is consistency. There should be name suppression for everyone all the time, as per the European model. This isn't perfect but it is the least imperfect. Victims are always covered and it isn't really the business of the law to name and shame. Punishment belongs in the court, not the newspapers. In really notorious cases, everyone will know the names anyway, in other cases they don't need to.

 

 

 

This.

I'd go so far as to ask why it's even necessary to name the felon anyway? What purpose does it serve the public interest other than a bit of lavacious excitement? The courts are responsible for determining punishment. 

“Chaotic scenes erupted as hundreds of police descended, armed with riot shields, and shoving protesters out of the way. Protesters could be heard crying in pain after being pepper sprayed and police were lined several people deep to move them on … a police helicopter circled above …”
This was not reporting Russian authorities clearing demonstrators against Vladimir Putin’s attack on the Ukraine, nor French police breaking up a violent protest after Emmanuel Macron won re-election. It was New Zealand’s police moving in on the men, women, and children peacefully camped on parliament grounds to protest vaccine mandates on March 2.