Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 54953	2005-02-26 23:26:00	All Black Named	Obelix (752)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
328595	2005-03-04 20:31:00	OK its . . . "insert name here" The problem with this is that EVERY all black will now be under public suspicion . If the name that was passed around is false then an innocent man is being acused . How do you know that the person named is actually guilty? Because you read it on a website? Where is the validity in that? I would have more respect for the person if he just came forward, and named himself, instead of hiding behind the law . The other all blacks would be released from suspicion (afterall they ALL must know) and he could give his side of the story and show public contrition . The present farce only serves to prolong the ordeal beyond its news worthy date .	netchicken (4843)
328596	2005-03-04 20:46:00	BTW I found out who it was, but it doesn't mean diddly squat to me as I had never heard of the guy :) So its not a "famous" All black.	netchicken (4843)
328597	2005-03-07 20:06:00	No beating about the bush with you Highlander :D I like the nancy boy bit. Bring back Pine Tree more like it. I still have not found out his name, do you know it ?	trouble (7445)
328598	2005-03-07 20:40:00	The one piece of information missing is that the AB allegedly dragged his wife back to the house " BY HER HAIR". The identity is quite commonly known but I am not going to take on the judiciary by telling who it is.	theother1 (3573)
328599	2005-03-07 21:58:00	I would have more respect for the person if he just came forward, and named himself, instead of hiding behind the law. And that would do what? Breach the name suppression order, that's what. Whoever it is, has no more right to publish the name than anyone else unless he goes back to court to ask for it to be lifted. The one piece of information missing is that the AB allegedly dragged his wife back to the house " BY HER HAIR". The identity is quite commonly known but I am not going to take on the judiciary by telling who it is. You know about the hair dragging for a fact do you, or is this more speculation. The reasons for the judges decision to supress have been given and are quiet explicit in their intent, what follows is not verbatum because I did not take special notice of it: To protect the identity of the partner and her/their family, that the person was discharged without conviction but with conditions imposed, that publication would impose an impediment to the persons carrer beyond the scale of the offence, which may place a burdon on the family and, there being no public good in publishing the name when balanced against the potential harm to the family and relationship (Obviously the judge does not view tittle tattle and voyerism into someones private life as being a public good). The overiding theme I got from it was that the suppression was to avoid punishment of the partner and the family overall, and provide all with a way to rebuild their lives without the added pressure of the public glare. In no way can the judges decision be read as condoning voilence or showing sympathy to the status of the person (whatever that may be). We have to accept that the judge is more adept at making these decisions than we are along with the facts at his disposal that are not available to us. Despite that, I think this person has been very lucky that no permanent physical harm was done to his partner or unborn child, that they are not at this moment being introduced to a new partner in Mt Eden. Hopefully they recognise their good fortune in being given a chance to rectify their ways.	Murray P (44)
328600	2005-03-08 00:16:00	All Black's name to be removed from website 04 March 2005 The lawyer for an All Black whose identity was suppressed when he appeared in court for assaulting his wife said today that the rugby player's name would have to be removed from a New Zealand website . In one of the "forum" pages on the site, a member of the public has identified the rugby player, who was discharged without conviction by a judge in west Auckland last week . On the same webpage, other members of the public have speculated, wrongly, about who they thought the offender was . Defence lawyer Richard Earwaker said naming the man was a breach of the court order for permanent name suppression and he would be taking instructions from the player's manager . "My advice would be to do something immediately about it in terms of trying to get it removed," he said . "We have to consider how it got there . We will then know what other action is appropriate, but certainly the first thing is to get it removed . " :cool: :cool: I still can not scource his name, do you have it or a web site that I can visit, been in Google but no luck there either .	trouble (7445)
328601	2005-03-08 03:26:00	I understand that overseas rugby sites and sports papers have published the name. Try searching Australia and the UK.	Winston001 (3612)
328602	2005-03-08 03:43:00	here it is...	netchicken (4843)
328603	2005-03-08 03:52:00	Netchicken: I dont think this really needs to be posted in full-public, Im not a fan of stirring things, and really if people want they can PM you for info, rather than leaving this on the Forum. It _was_ classified after all..... If I am wrong in doing this, please let me know Chill.	Chilling_Silence (9)
328604	2005-03-08 03:59:00	You do have a point CS, however all I did was save people 15 minutes it took to find the information . loks like its coming out into public in a BIG way after that link . Also we surely are not breaking any laws by having a link to a foreign website with the information on it .	netchicken (4843)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8