Suppression advocated

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33106, 22 December 1972, Page 3

Suppression advocated

(N.Z. Press Association) HAMILTON, Dec. 21. Suppression of the names of persons charged with criminal offences until their conviction could avoid unwarranted suffering by those who were later acquitted, a Hamilton stipendiary magistrate, Mr E. S. Tuckwell, said today. Expanding on comments he made during a court case, Mr Tuckwell said it was “ordinary, commonsense justice” that a person’s name should not be published until after he had been convicted. “This may well soon become the law. I hope so,” he said. “A person is innocent until proven guilty. That is a fundamental principle of British law. “If a name is not sup-

pressed and the person is found not guilty there is, in my opinion, a stigma attached to him. The stigma exists in the public eye because of possible doubt.

“This could do irreparable harm, both to his own personality and to his relationships with the out-

side world,” Mr Tuckwell a aid. There could always be the element of — “He got <off, but . . .” s Justice could be “seen to be done” when a guilty person’s name was published after he was convicted. i “Justice is neither done nor seen to be done until >,a trial is finished and sentence is passed,” Mr Tuckwell said. I Then there would be the to continue the if the circumstances warranted it. i “Suppression is never granted lightly. In some •.eases the good that would have been done by publicai tion is far outweighed by ' the possible harm to a defendar t or to others. Only [then is there a case for continued suppression,” ksaid Mr Tuckwell.