A blog in support of Whale Oil.
On the 5th January, Cameron Slater, the author of the Whale Oil blog will be in court on charges of breaking the Name Suppression orders in the “Entertainer” case and the “Olympian” Case. WhaleOil blogged pictures that “could” lead to the identification of the people charged in these cases. And that’s not allowed. Unsurprisingly – he received the summons just before Christmas, when lawyers are on holiday, and wont be back till after his court date. Sometimes this is a horrifyingly corrupt country!
(Note: the Whale Oil blog contains a lot of bad language – so please don’t go on there if you are likely to be offended.)
If found guilty, he faces a $1000 fine. Which is more than the “entertainer” got for sexually assaulting a 19 year old girl as he was acquitted. Not that he denies doing it – just that it wasn’t a crime.
The entertainer had admitted performing an indecent act on a teenage girl who has since spoken out against the court’s decision as she wanted the public to know his name.
Says it all really.
Oddly – its also 100 times less of a fine for breaching a court order, than I would get for giving someone advice on how to emigrate to new Zealand. Which also says much about the crap state of the law in New Zealand. Farcical is a good word I think.
I think there would be less problems with people having nothing but contempt for these laws is they a/ made sense, and b/ were applied fairly. But when name suppression is granted at the drop of a hat for “celebrities” – it becomes a joke.
And why is Cameron Slater being singled out for a kicking???
Ok, he’s a political blogger and has frankly pissed off a lot of people. But lets just take a look at this entertainer thing for a moment. I found out the name of the guy (didn’t know who the hell he was mind you) on Yahoo Answers – it came up in a Google search. Is that person also being summoned to court? And what about John Key – the Prime Minister – he was on TV a few weeks back talking about this and it seems he asked someone who he thought would know – and found out that way. Now if our Prime Minister thinks so little of this name suppression law that he feels he can just ask someone who it is – then it’s a joke. I mean – name suppression doesn’t just mean you can’t tell anyone who the accused is – surely the whole point of it means you do not have the right to know who it is. And yet – the Prime minister himself went on National TV and told us all he went and found out. But a Blogger gets hauled to court because he apparently published the informtion (even if he actually didn’t), and the law actually only makes it illegal to publish the name.
I have no answers – but I hope Cam Slater makes a fine job of his day in court. If we need a name suppression law (and its supposed to be there to protect the victim not a debauched entertainer who cant keep he’s bits in his pants) – then it has to be applied fairly. Which means everyone gets the same crack at name suppression – and there’s an end to this “Permanent name suppression” for people who are “celebrities”. They are criminals. Start treating them like it.
Like what Avalon has to say?
Click Here to buy Avalon's Guide or Click Here to buy the E-Book
Related posts:
- What the hell is going on with “Name Suppression”???
- Weekend Blog and Forum Roundup July 4th
- Weekend Blog Roundup June 20th
Comments
3 Comments on A blog in support of Whale Oil.
-
PhilBee, NZ on
Mon, 28th Dec 2009 1:00 pm
-
Avalon on
Mon, 28th Dec 2009 3:48 pm
-
Hubby on
Mon, 28th Dec 2009 10:20 pm
Not that I support these pictorially-outed people, but aren’t they innocent until proven guilty? 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-blog-or-not-to-blog-that-is-question.html
I guess whether its publicity seeking or not (um – arent all bloggers seeking some sort of publicity – we wouldnt blog otherwise – nor would we leave links to our blogs in comments 
) – it ignores the point that there are an awful lot of people who should be joining him in court for breaking the same law, on the same issue. There are plenty of sites where the entertainer is named (and not just in pictures). They also break the law. Why do they not have summons?
But in the same way that the IAA says I am breaking the Immigration Advisors Licencing act if I give advice but someone posting on a forum isnt, for no other reason than I am a blogger and thus identifiable – the law is being applied with no view to justice or fairness.
Unfortunatley – because if I break the IALA I risk $100,000 in fines or 7 years in jail – I am not in a position to do the same as Cameron and break the law to make a point (if that is what he did). I wish I could 
When the law is an ass – it needs to be changed. People do not need to be carted off to court for showing that the law is an ass. Its fixing the wrong problem – much as with the IAA. Meant to fix the problem of rip of Immigration agents – it instead gives them a Carte Blanche to carry on ripping people off, and makes it illegal for me to advise people not to use them.
I guess having seen the injustice in the IALA I’m looking at this from a slightly different perspective. I write my blog within the law – but there are plenty of people out there on the internet breaking the IALA and getting away with it simply because they dont own a blog. I think all blog writers need to take some notes here.
Sorry that was a bit longer than I thought it would be
Cheers
Helen
Hi PhilBee,
While Whale Oil may have flouted the spirit of the law, he wasn’t the first. That the identity of this person is so much common knowledge the PM admits in a TV interview to asking someone and finding out – illustrates how we all just take this as a joke.
The name suppression laws clearly don’t work as they should, which is very serious in itself when protecting victims and the innocent. Targeting Cameron in this manner, on Xmas eve, only illustrates how much the spirit and intent of the legal system is being flouted by people. Access to legal representation? Not causing undue stress to someone?, who is after all innocent until proven guilty.
This court summons worries me on so many levels. Everyone who knows the identify of the name suppressed should be presenting themselves at court as co-respondents – since they’re all (allegedly) guilty of the same ban.
Sometimes it does take a rebel to flout a daft law in order to get it changed.
Perhaps, and I’m being a little cynical here, those responsible for upholding the law know it takes a simple case with a motivated defendant to create a precedent and get things changed.
What Cameron did was the right thing, to expose the hypocrisy and lunacy of a law that doesn’t work, even if the law currently say he shouldn’t.
Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Buy Avalon’s Guide
-
