A well-known comedian/entertainer in NZ has pleaded guilty to performing an indecent act on a child - a 4 year old girl.
This man has had his name suppressed all the time he was waiting for his trial, and if he was found not guilty, then this name suppression would have protected him from an unjust allegation that was eventually proven false. For that reason, I will grudgingly allow for concept that temporary name suppression is a good thing. Such a vile crime should not smear the innocent.
However, the man now admits to his guilt, and it appears from the news items I've been reading that he's not going to be jailed, and was offered a "non-custodial sentence" by the judge if he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge.
This is where I really have to question whether the NZ justice system really thinks that child sex abuse is a serious matter. Why not have a trial? Why not then imprison him on the more serious charge of unlawful sexual connection? At least other children would be safe from him while he was locked up. I don't get it.
Then there is the issue of name suppression, which appears as if it will continue. Hopefully it won't, hopefully when this pervert is sentenced then the name suppression will be lifted and all parents will know which man they need to keep their children away from. For it makes absolutely no sense to not lock the man up, but then also not let his identity be known. There is no justice in that, and gives him and men like him a free pass to keep molesting children with very few consequences.
Which makes me think that sexual molestation of children is not something NZ is terribly concerned about preventing.
Related links: NZ comedian pleads guilty to indecency charge
This man has had his name suppressed all the time he was waiting for his trial, and if he was found not guilty, then this name suppression would have protected him from an unjust allegation that was eventually proven false. For that reason, I will grudgingly allow for concept that temporary name suppression is a good thing. Such a vile crime should not smear the innocent.
However, the man now admits to his guilt, and it appears from the news items I've been reading that he's not going to be jailed, and was offered a "non-custodial sentence" by the judge if he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge.
This is where I really have to question whether the NZ justice system really thinks that child sex abuse is a serious matter. Why not have a trial? Why not then imprison him on the more serious charge of unlawful sexual connection? At least other children would be safe from him while he was locked up. I don't get it.
Then there is the issue of name suppression, which appears as if it will continue. Hopefully it won't, hopefully when this pervert is sentenced then the name suppression will be lifted and all parents will know which man they need to keep their children away from. For it makes absolutely no sense to not lock the man up, but then also not let his identity be known. There is no justice in that, and gives him and men like him a free pass to keep molesting children with very few consequences.
Which makes me think that sexual molestation of children is not something NZ is terribly concerned about preventing.
Related links: NZ comedian pleads guilty to indecency charge