Steven Price

My book

Media Minefield

Guide to NZ Media Law

Official Information Act

Official Information Act

Bill of Rights Act

Media law resources

Feeds (RSS)

« | Main | »

Sure enough…

By Steven | October 22, 2009

The Solicitor-General has applied for Vince Siemer to be held in contempt of court for breaching the court order that he remove from his website his article about a suppressed HC judgment. (This time, he has sensibly just gone for a three-month jail term, seeking to avoid the Bill of Rights right-to-jury issues that continue to plague his earlier contempt application). The hearing is today, though no-one seems to be reporting it.

No-one, that is, except indefatigable campaigner Penny Bright, who says she’s proudly distributing exactly the same suppressed material as Vince and is miffed because she hasn’t been charged with contempt too. It’s a question of equality before the law, she says.

Topics: Contempt of Court, Suppression orders | 5 Comments »

5 Responses to “Sure enough…”

  1. ernesto Says:
    October 22nd, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    I always thought it was interesting that the S-G never made any fuss about the comments about judges on Vince’s site. Perhaps this is a signal from the S-G that Crown Law don’t see ‘scandalising the court’ as a form of contempt that has survived BoRA rights to freedom of expression.

  2. Steven Says:
    October 22nd, 2009 at 5:33 pm

    The Nick Smith contempt case seems to have established that scandalising survives the Bill of Rights (though for my part, I don’t think it should). I figure that the S-G simply didn’t want to call attention to Vince’s site.

  3. geoff Says:
    October 23rd, 2009 at 7:59 am

    Aren’t you ignoring the elephant in the room regarding Vince Siemer’s blog?

    Surely the claim that Supreme Court Justice Bill Wilson failed to disclose in full the nature of his relationship with Alan Galbraith QC, during the the appeal of a High Court decision is worthy of comment. I note the NBR has been running with this for the last few weeks, and ‘ponygate’ is dated August 5th.

    As David Lange would say, your silence on this matter is deafening.

  4. Steven Says:
    October 23rd, 2009 at 10:00 am

    The Wilson case is a matter of alleged bias, not media law. I claim no expertise in that.

  5. Philip Says:
    October 30th, 2009 at 11:12 am

    I always enjoy reading Vince’s website, it really brightens up my day.

    The judge files are great. Potter and Duffy JJ in particular are very entertaining.

    My favourite interesting coincedence is that judges which have ruled against Auckland businessman Vince Siemer or in favour of New Zealand’s most litigious man Michael Stiassny tend to get worse reviews!


You must be logged in to post a comment.