A prominent political figure fights to keep the name secret

stuff 7d9a6c106569d11b892437d69edeb097d4830a02edeb6b7fa2ce16d0fc63fbdc

By Edward Gay of

Auckland District Court

The Auckland District Court where the case of the prominent political figure was called on Tuesday
Photo: ABIGAIL DOUGHERTY/THINGS

A prominent political figure accused of sexually assaulting children and young people is continuing his legal battle to keep his name secret.

While Stuff cannot identify the man, it can be reported that he is not a sitting MP.

The man has pleaded not guilty to nine indecent assault charges relating to two alleged victims in the 1990s and is due to stand trial in August 2024.

His case was called in Auckland District Court on Tuesday, where he continued his bid to remove the name. Parts of the legal argument cannot be reported as it could identify the man.

The man’s lawyer, Ian Brookie, said naming his client could ruin his ability to earn a living and continued media reports could affect his rights to a fair trial.

Brookie pointed to an affidavit from a recruiter who said the man was unlikely to be offered job opportunities if employers knew his active duty positions.

He said this could result in him having to sell his house.

“Obviously there is a degree of speculation, but we are trying to resolve questions of probability based on future events.”

Crown prosecutor Alysha McClintock said the potential loss of earnings argument was entirely speculative.

He said the man had filed an affidavit saying he had lost potential job opportunities and people were not calling him back.

“If that’s true, it’s hard to see how the publication is a problem. On their own they know, the horse has already been thrown.”

He said another reason for the lack of calls could be that they weren’t interested.

McClintock said the social media posts showed that suspicion was falling on other people and that it was always a risk with names being redacted.

He said naming the man could also bring other whistleblowers forward.

McClintock acknowledged it was speculative, but said, “You don’t know what you don’t know.”

Judge Anna Skellern said she had a lot of material to go through and reserved her decision.

* This story originally appeared on things.



Source link

You May Also Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *