Canadian Newspaper Under Investigation For Violating Ban On Publishing Names Of Child Pornography Victims
from the where-good-intentions-meet-the-friction-of-real-life dept
A Canadian newspaper is under investigation for violating a court-ordered ban on publishing the names of child pornography victims. The Chronicle Herald covered the sentencing of a young man on child pornography distribution charges but included the name of his victim, Rehtaeh Parsons.
Rehtaeh Parsons was 15 when the then-17-year-old young man sent a photo of him having sex with her to two other females. Parsons was apparently unaware she was being sexually assaulted. The photo showed not only the young man's actions, but her vomiting out a window.
The subsequent distribution of these photos, along with additional harassment from both the participants and Parsons' peers, eventually led to her suicide. Her suicide then prompted Nova Scotia's legislators to enact an extremely unfortunate cyberbullying law in late 2013, nearly two years after the incident and four months after Parsons took her own life.
In May of 2014, the legally-ordained ban was upheld, forbidding anyone or any media entity from publishing Parsons' name, despite objections from Rehtaeh's parents, who were actively seeking an exception from this part of Canada's child pornography laws. But the Royal Canadian Mounted Police had decided to pursue child pornography charges rather than sexual assault charges and the resulting indictments dragged Retaeh's name under the cover of this ban.
The Chronicle Herald's story on the guilty plea entered by of one of the two perpetrators (whose names are still being withheld because they were minors at the time) leads off with this editor's note:
We’ve decided to publish the name of the victim in this story, despite a court-ordered ban. We believe it’s in the public interest in this unique case, given the widespread recognition of Rehtaeh Parsons’ name, and given the good that can come, and has already come, from free public debate over sexual consent and the other elements of her story.As is noted here, Parsons' parents fought to keep her from being "forgotten" by this ban, but to no avail. The Parsons' have given their blanket permission for publication, but that has had no effect on whatever sort of busybody it is that reads this disclaimer and still files a complaint. An accompanying story notes that the Chronicle Herald is being investigated by local law enforcement.
Rehtaeh’s parents want her name printed, and Judge Jamie Campbell, who upheld the publication ban, wrote in his decision that “the ban serves no purpose,” though he had no choice but to uphold it. Waiving Rehtaeh’s privacy rights “would be a good thing, if it could be done just for this case, just this once,” the judge wrote.
It is difficult for readers to follow a news story when the name associated with it is omitted, and we want to inform Nova Scotians of the outcome of this legal case. We would like to reassure other crime victims that their own court-ordered privacy rights will be respected as always.
Police have launched an investigation into a possible breach of a publication ban after a major news outlet in Halifax published the name of a teenage girl at the centre of a high-profile child pornography case.Now, it would seem that the only party with any true claim over Parsons' name would be her parents, but apparently, certain members of the public feel otherwise. The good news is that this isn't the police's first run-in with the publication ban and they seem to be handling other cases in a responsible manner using context and common sense, rather than blindly asserting that "The law is the law" and punishing those who violate the letter, rather than the spirit.
Const. Pierre Bourdages said Tuesday that they had received several reports from citizens complaining about the use of the girl’s name, which is subject to a publication ban under the Criminal Code.
“There’s already been a number of complaints filed with the department in relation to this article,” he said.
“There’s an alleged breach of the publication ban … so we have an investigation ongoing now.”
“Investigators considered whether the victim’s name was used in connection with the child pornography charges as well as the overall context in which her name was used,” police said in a statement.Even the prosecutor seems uninterested in laying charges just to be laying charges.
Based on that and consultation with the Crown, charges were not laid, police said.
Chris Hansen of the province’s Public Prosecution Service said they consulted police in the seven previous instances, but concluded that there was either not a likely chance of conviction or that if there was, it was not in the public interest to pursue it.It's refreshing to see this recognition that the law isn't always binary. The Parsons' have repeatedly stated they don't want their daughter's name removed from additional coverage of this case. The judge upholding the ban also noted that exceptions were needed but wasn't something that could be handled from the court's end. Meddling citizens with no actual stake in the matter may be trying to make things more difficult for the press by complaining about ban violations, but so far it appears they won't be receiving any help from those actually charged with enforcing the law.
She said they considered several factors, including the past publicity and widespread publication of her name, the wishes of her family to have her name published and the possibility that it would facilitate public debate on a “serious societal issue.”
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: canada, child porn, free speech, harassment, journalism, rehtaeh parsons, reporting, sexual assault
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
They probably have a very large interest in keeping the names hidden though. They got away with rape and don't want their names associated with the heinous act they committed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I have no idea why you'd think that (nor why you think we'd care). Parents have given their children lots of wierd and wonderful and silly names. Check out the lyrics to "A boy named Sue" sometime. Why not "Heather" spelled backwards? It's, at least, a bit more inventive than recycling two thousand year old names of religious figures and other long dead obscurities.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sanity
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Interview with the father
The craziest part is her name was all over the news for weeks after she died but when introducing the clip yesterday, CBC was not even allowed to say the name of her father.
http://www.cbc.ca/player/AudioMobile/Mainstreet%2BNS/ID/2616842787/
http://www.cbc.ca/mainstre etns/
Guilty but not sorry - victims dad about convicted men in child porn case.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Cheat mode activated: Stupidity immunity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I've seen the error of my ways and come up with a new screen name, all in honor of you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Start advertising/publishing your products or iterms freely online at: CynMart.com: Free classified ads in Ghana and beyond . attract more costumers to your company or products.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Binary enforcement?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Child pornography" victim?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bans
Searches for information on this case will bring up articles from news sites around the world, most of whom don't give a flip about and aren't obligated to follow Canada's censorship law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There was this guy named Leonardo DaVinci. He invented a way of hiding (encrypting) his thoughts by writing them backwards. Try it: "toidinaeruoy".
It's not a very good (as in strong) form of crypto, but it appears to still work on some people, hundreds of years after he came up with it. A screen door will deter a paper boy. Burglars will not even be slowed down by it, and it may even serve to tempt them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Become a victim = "the bad guy"
Victimize = "the good guy"
How did that happen? When did we get our priorities so utterly screwed? And who the hell wants people who are capable of that living in their home with them? I wouldn't.
Is it really just a case of cognitive dissonance? Is "Johnny wouldn't do that" really strong enough to cause you to deny that a girl committed suicide because she was made to feel so worthless and expendable?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "Child pornography" victim?
[ link to this | view in thread ]