Judge Bans Using Murder Suspects' Names Online -- Offline Is Fine, Though
from the huh? dept
A judge in New Zealand has apparently banned the internet publication of the names of two men accused of murdering a 14-year-old boy, though print, radio and TV are all still allowed to use the names. It's hard to make much sense of this ruling. Many are assuming that it's to somehow protect the murder suspects from having their name "Google-able," but that seems a bit silly. They are a part of the news, and it's hard to see what benefit it does to ban using their names online, while allowing it everywhere else. How do you enforce that from everyone else who hears their name on the radio or TV or in a newspaper and mentioning it online?And, of course, just in announcing this ban, Judge David Harvey is pretty much guaranteeing that more folks will seek out the names and publish them online. In some ways, he's accidentally making it even more likely that their names will be found via Google. The news report claims that Judge Harvey is no internet novice, either, having authored an entire textbook on cyberlaw. So, perhaps he realizes that he's actually just made sure that these two guys have their names plastered in even more locations than they would have otherwise.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: internet ban, murder suspects, new zealand, streisand effect
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
So...
(f1rst!!!1)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wow . . .
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So umm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So...
*(be real hardcore, learn binary)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Binary
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I could write a book on Warp Drive engines too, doesn't mean what's in there is worth anything of value; intellectually or otherwise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Editing History
I don’t think he is. Judge David Harvey is behaving no differently to, say, the Chinese government. He wants to make the web appear different to those within his own country. Google isn’t able to tell someone with a Chinese IP address the whole history of Tiananmen Square. A couple of years down the line, when most people have forgotten this case, someone with a New Zealand IP address will not come across it, if they happen to search using the names of the accused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Americans Can Still Post the Names...
The names are Nathan Williams and Daniel Tumata, as reported in online 'print replica' version of the New Zealand Herald, complete with picture!
http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/showlink.aspx?bookmarkid=V785FENTBGB1&linki d=a5583263-f810-4f7e-a4a3-980f156b83d1&pdaffid=cImi%2fqnnWpmZvQcOu0u5SA%3d%3d
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yeah, I bet that's a real good textbook (snort).
No wonder we see so many problematic court rulings involving the internet when judges who obviously don't understand the internet very well at all actually think they're expert enough to write books about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Internet Novice
This same Judge Harvey has previously come up against the power of the Internet to render his orders moot. He tried to suppress the name of a USian billionaire prosecuted for importing illegal drugs into NZ, only to see the name get widely reported across the Internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hang about. The accused are on trial. The judge is the agent of justice who sees, as you should too, that a fair trial is needed for anyone accused but not yet tried.
The way you argue, it is as if the accused had been found guilty - that hasn't happened. Time enough for thier names to appear on the Internet when they are found guilty.
Or would you rather the judge just threw them into jail and lock them up without a trial?
Ka kite
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The problem with this ban is it is only for one medium.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The reason...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thanks for the links Andy!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The reason...
What's so hard to understand that the information will be available through numerous other sources and will find it's way onto the internet anyway. If you don't want the jury to be prejudiced you restrict ALL mediums, not just one.
I hope you never get jury duty, you're too dense to understand basic concepts, let alone pass judgement on someone else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They deserve to be named
http://www.nutterz.com/nutterz/index.php?showtopic=77698
[ link to this | view in thread ]