Nathan Williams, Daniel Tumat accused of murdering NZ teen John Hapeta
Normally I’d be uninterested in the story of how three New Zealand teen allegedly murdered 14 year old John Hapeta in New Zealand. According to the New Zealand Herald, “Two men charged with the murder of 14-year-old John Hapeta allegedly armed themselves with a revolver-style pistol and a claw hammer when they went to his house looking for drugs and cash. John Hapeta was celebrating his friend’s 15th birthday at his home in Justamere Place, Weymouth, when the attack occurred. Police allege the three went to John’s home on August 12 with the intention of robbing what they thought was a ‘tinnie’ house. The draft police summary of facts said Tumata and Williams pulled black bandannas over their faces and walked up to the house, confronted a man and allegedly shouted, ‘Where’s the drugs, where’s the drugs?’”
The story now becomes interesting when Judge David Harvey bans online mention of the accused’s names. No one is sure why print media (which is searchable, through interfaces like Lexis Nexus) gets special treatment here. I certainly disagree, and I’m free to publish whatever I’d like, as a journalist, including the names of the accused.
Anytime anyone wants to suppress totally free speech, I say RESIST!!
| This entry was posted on Monday, August 25th, 2008 at 10:03 pm and is tagged with judge david harvey, black bandannas, new zealand herald, claw hammer, nathan williams, 15th birthday, weymouth, revolver, free speech, nexus, pistol, two men, journalist, intention, faces, drugs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback. |
The following opening statement caught my attention “Normally I’d be uninterested in the story of how three New Zealand teen allegedly murdered 14 year old John Hapeta in New Zealand”.
Other than the name suppression, are you still interested in the case?
I have an interest in this case and would like to hear from you if you have are.
John Hapeta r.i.p .17 year old who has name suppression,of assault with intent to rob.This young man lives not far from me I tell you nip him in the bud or we will be reading alot more about him in years to come
it was not a tinnie house !!!!!!
Judges in NZ are increasingly using supression of all medias and often even supress the reason that they are supressing. I have seen it from the victims perspective and it is a staggering betrayal of the victims and of justice.
The Jury/justice system is on it’s last legs, but Judges and Lawyers are fighting to keep the system as it is, even though it is completely failing to provide justice for victims and for society as a whole. (Jurors only get $30 per day so most people wriggle out of it, leaving the quality of jurors low. AND then they only hear half of the story)
TheJudge and Lawyers reasons are twofold
1. they profit from the staus quo. The whole system is a game, where they write the rules and where they can not lose, however long they draw things out. They just get paid, whatever, for playing their game and they actually enjoy the intellectual stimulation of discrediting the other side as opposed to seeking truth and justice..
2. they are of a generation who thought that we could cure criminality by being nice to criminals and educating them. Wake up! They are scumbags.It doesn’t work! The public are only safe when offenders are locked away. (And the right offenders, not framed up innocent ones)
So, now they are trying to use supression to block public scrutiny.
And in this case, the Judge is using the inevitable discussion of his bizarre action to publicise his new book.
How corrupt is that? Justice for the victim is out of the window to make a few bucks.
Name suppression is used far too much in NZ, a case could be when it is a celebrity of sorts or someone with high public profile, even then only in some circumstances.
If the accused plead innocent and jury find them innocent then media will report such – no harm done. Big IF on the media though.
But, in this case the suppression order issue seems to be overtaking the actual news in that someone was murdered in their own home.
good on you, I’ll stick with that intent.
Maybe he knew it would be the best way to get the names out there?