I hope that they name him and increase his sentence. 

old3eyes:

 

I hope that they name him and increase his sentence. 

 

Wouldn't that be nice?

old3eyes:

 

I hope that they name him and increase his sentence. 

 

Pretty easy to find his name though. Widely reported elsewhere in the world so the idea that not mentioning it here somehow means he is anonymous is a bit silly in this day and age.

I'm just puzzled as to why he still has name suppression. Someone here said before it was possibly due to other pending charges, but how long is that going to take to happen?

elpenguino: I never saw any mention of pending charges in the overseas media.

You would also have to say if there was pending charges they aren't related to this case otherwise those charges would have been bundled into the same trial.

The reason for name suppression is puzzling as this cretin is essentially a nobody.

because the case is still before the courts and he still might get a retrial.

I don't care how much name suppression he has if it means he stays behind bars forever.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300186721/grace-millanes-killer-loses-eleventhhour-bid-to-keep-his-name-a-secret

Looks like he's finally going to lose his name suppression.

Why is it in the public interest to name this person? If he is being punished for his crimes in accordance with our local laws after receiving a fair trial, surely, that is all that matters?

"New Zealand's Supreme Court has made a last minute order suppressing the identity of the man who murdered British backpacker Grace Millane."

 Disgusting.

He doesn't appear to have heard of the Streisand effect...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

freitasm:

 

"New Zealand's Supreme Court has made a last minute order suppressing the identity of the man who murdered British backpacker Grace Millane."

 

 Disgusting.

 

The Supreme Court have not considered the appeal to them yet so they have ordered that the suppression continues until they do.

That is due process and one should expect nothing less from our courts, not something which should be regarded as "disgusting".

The reporting was down to our usual low standard. I don't think it is a done deal. If it is due process, then it is not unreasonable. Apart from that, everybody in this country and every other knows who the loser is, not that it means anything. I certainly never heard of him before. He is just another low-life predator who wanted a victim.

Right, so we wanted to keep name suppression in case he managed to quash the sentence and get out of prison. Still disgusting.

 

This haunting description was how the Court of Appeal started its 63-page judgment, which today dismissed an effort by the British backpacker's murderer to quash his conviction 17-year non-parole period.