« Book Review: Media Law in New Zealand | Main | Why I bang on about protesters’ rights »
Media suppressing judge’s name?!
By Steven | April 28, 2011
An old mate of mine, former Fair Go editor Chris Mitson, wonders why the media aren’t naming the judge who gave Malcolm Chaston bail. After all, Chaston had 71 previous convictions and during his previous stretch in prison, a prison guard had warned of his ambitions to become a serial killer. Police reportedly opposed bail. Chaston went on to murder Vanessa Pickering. Why shouldn’t the media be asking the judge a few questions about why bail was granted, he asks.
There’s nothing to stop the media naming the judge. As far as I can tell, they don’t seem to have done so. I don’t know why not.
The reports do suggest that Chaston had been out of prison for a time before the alleged assault for which he was given bail. The judge is reported as saying: there was nothing in your recent history to suggest you would offend in that way. I’m not sure what this means. Offend in what way? Was the prison officer’s warning put before the judge? But the judge may have been saying, in effect, “he’s been out of jail for a while, and kept his nose clean, apart from this allegation; there’s nothing to justify keeping him locked up pending trial for this assault”.
Judges must grant bail in a case like this (I’m assuming the charge was common assault, with a maximum penalty of one year in jail) unless there’s “just cause for continued detention”. That might be because he’s likely to abscond, or to interfere with evidence or witnesses, or commit further offences. The judge can take into account his history of offending and the seriousness of the charge he’s facing, among other things. I don’t know all the circumstances here. There may be questions to ask about whether the judge exercised the discretion properly, or whether our bail laws strike the right balance. This seems a good case in which to debate those things. The media don’t seem to be doing so.
I wouldn’t recommend approaching the judge directly. He or she will simply refuse to comment. Questions could be put to the Chief District Court Judge, but his response would probably only be a general one. Still, the debate can still take place without them…
Topics: General | Comments Off on Media suppressing judge’s name?!