In New Zealand, three victims of a sex offender decided to speak out and have their names public. But the perpetrator, and another undisclosed party, want his name to remain suppressed. The case is now in the hands of the Supreme Court.
Today, Thursday, October 19th, the Supreme Court of New Zealand hears on a case that intersects issues of youth justice principles, rehabilitation prospects for offenders and victims of sexual assault, and the consequences of publishing their names.
The case is one of underage sexual offenses, in which a male teenage perpetrator attempted to rape three female teenage victims and sexually assaulted them in different instances.
Two of the victims were 17 years old and friends with the perpetrator in 2020, and were taken into his bedroom during house parties. There, he raped one of the victims, and in another instance attempted to rape the other, but was stopped by the first victim.
Another offense occurred in 2014, between him and another victim, who were both 14 years old at the time. She reported being sexually assaulted in the outdoors by the perpetrator.
The victims decided to go public
The three victims came out in the year 2022, after talking to each other about the events, leading to a court case and the sentencing of the perpetrator to 12 months of house arrest, as well as the publication of his information.
The three victims, Rosie Veldkamp, Ellie Oran and Mia Edmonds, have revoked their own name suppression, which was possible since they became adults, and spoke out about the crimes committed against them. The three disclosed the locations, times and context of their assaults in the piece “Not Our Shame”.
They would like the offender, who was attending the University of Auckland last year, to be “publicly accountable” and his name disclosed.
But an undisclosed party — it can be a witness, victim, or connected person to the case — requested name suppression for herself and the perpetrator. This, in addition to the repeated appeals of name suppression from the perpetrator’s lawyer, has landed this case on the docket of the Supreme Court. As of right now, his name has not been published.
The law in New Zealand provides automatic suppression of a complainant’s identity in all sexual offense cases. But the court system can also allow the suppression of the name of anyone related to a case, given certain conditions.
The perpetrator’s side appealed to the Auckland District Court to request name suppression on the basis of undue hardship, considering he could be singled out due to becoming a high-profile case.
It was denied. The High Court dismissed the same appeal after a second attempt. There was then an appeal by the perpetrator to the Court of Appeal, trying to overturn the decision by the High Court. However, this was denied as well. The appeal has now been handed to the Supreme Court for the final decision.
All the while, an undisclosed party also submitted an appeal to suppress her own name and the perpetrator’s name entirely, so as to not create any link to herself due to the case.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the request to suppress the perpetrator’s name, saying there was “no basis” for it, even if it would help prevent harm to this undisclosed party. However, this party is also a part of the Supreme Court’s considerations now.
His lawyer argues mental health issues warrant name suppression
The perpetrator’s lawyer, Emma Priest, said that his recent diagnosis of autism should warrant name suppression. She said that “if the court was to allow her client to be named, it would greatly affect his ability to be rehabilitated,” according to Stuff. She also said that his treatment had lowered his risk of re-offending.
The Supreme Court has granted the perpetrator name suppression in the interim until the decision is made, and publication of his name will be suppressed for a “short period” to “provide the respondent with the opportunity to communicate the result as it needs to,” if the appeal is finally denied.
According to Ministry of Justice data, the name suppression applied to a person charged after a Court ruling only accounted for 0.7% (1,440) of all charges brought to a New Zealand Court in 2022–2023.
Sexual assault and related offenses accounted for 43% of those name suppressions, more than any other type of offense.
As for the victims’ side, in 2020 a research memo on name suppression processes for victims of sexual violence by the Chief Victims Advisor to the government noted that victims and complainants rarely invoked their right to remove their anonymity until the 2010s. However, in the past few years, However, in the past few years, an increasing number of orders have been seeking to lift suppression “so they can prevent offenders from concealing their own identities.”
Barrister Nikki Pender added that the “courage of survivors who share their stories inspires others and their stories can provide powerful narratives to counter entrenched rape myths” but also regretted that the “current system creates unnecessary impediments for those who wish to speak out and forces them to spend large amounts of money on legal fees.”
