Blogger appeals conviction and fines

Cameron Slater. Photo / Paul Estcourt

Internet blogger Cameron Slater was back in court today to appeal his conviction and fines and costs of nearly $8000 for breaching suppression orders.

Slater was convicted in September on nine of the 10 charges he faced - eight of breaching non-publication orders for several high-profile offenders and one of naming a victim in a sexual abuse case. The 10th case was thrown out.

His lawyer Gregory Thwaite today outlined various submissions to Justice Douglas White at the High Court at Auckland.

He said police evidence was inadmissible and there was no evidence that Slater was in any of the courts when suppression orders were made.

Mr Thwaite added that in some cases, interim name suppression had expired.

"There is no automatic renewal of name suppression so the court has to make a conscious decision whether to renew an order," Mr Thwaite said.

He also argued that it was not clear whether the details published in Slater's blog were likely to lead to identification of the offenders concerned, as the cases had already received a lot of public attention through the media.

He said there was not enough evidence before the court that any member of the public had made that identification.

Mr Thwaite said the suppression orders were invalid for a number of reasons. These included that Slater had not used the exact names of the accused as they appeared on court documents.

Crown prosecutor Ross Burns told Justice White the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act was designed to preserve a number of individual rights.

"While it's true the Bill of Rights Act provides for exchange of information and freedom of expression, it also provides the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial court.

"It also provides the right to be tried as innocent until proven guilty, and people should not be tried on the basis of their previous convictions," Mr Burns said.

There was no issue with whether what was posted on Slater's blog was classed as a publication in New Zealand.

Mr Burns said it was quite clear from the tone of Slater's blogs that he knew names and details could not be published, but he went ahead anyway.

"The internet is used by people who are computer literate and more likely to be able to work out the binary code used in his blog to identify offenders. Slater wouldn't have bothered to do this if he didn't think people looking at his blog could work it out," Mr Burns said.

Last September Auckland District Court's Judge David Harvey fined Slater $750 and ordered him top pay court costs of $130 on each of the nine cases after rejecting submissions from Mr Thwaite that there was no case to answer.

Judge Harvey said Slater had been using the internet to mount a political campaign to change the law regarding suppression orders and had deliberately published names knowing the suppression orders existed.

Justice White reserved his decision.

- NZPA