Judge names alleged Nelson arsonist accused of lighting February fires, despite fears of vigilantism

A helicopter fights the massive fires in the Tasman bush during early February. Photo / Mark Mitchell

A man accused of lighting two fires in Nelson during the devastating bush blazes earlier this year can now be named.

Benjamin Philip Durrant faces two charges of arson.

He was initially declined name suppression in the Nelson District Court but appealed the decision to the High Court.

Today, the High Court publicly released its decision and allowed Durrant's name to be published.

Details of the allegations against Durrant, however, remains suppressed.

This judgment was embargoed until 2pm to give Durrant's mother a chance to inform her father of the imminent publication of the charges against her son.

Several serious fires broke out in the Nelson Bays area in February and resulted in mass evacuations of residents, livestock and businesses.

When Durrant first appeared in court on March 7 alongside his co-defendant, who has name suppression for potential mental health reasons, his lawyer argued there was a risk to the safety of both defendants.

Screenshots from a Facebook page were produced in support of the argument.

But when the District Court judge declined Durrant's application he said while social media posts reflected "a backlash from the Nelson-Tasman community", this was no more than an expression of "heightened emotions" given the impact of the fires.

"[The Facebook posts were] no more than the sort of venting of spleen one might expect from those living in this area when it comes to notice that somebody who has in fact allegedly deliberately lit fires in this area is brought to justice," he said.

Justice Karen Clark agreed with her fellow judge.

"I see no error in the judge's approach. I am not convinced there is a 'real risk of vigilantism or retributive offending against the defendants or even their families'," she said in her decision.

"The Facebook comments, the more extreme of which included comments such as 'get dads shotgun out' and 'they need a f*cken curb stomping', are more akin to venting frustration rather than posing a genuine threat to personal safety."

Justice Clark said the importance of open justice and transparency and genuine public interest "in knowing the identity of the person, or persons, charged with responsibility for lighting fires" outweighed Durrant's argument.

"It is also possible that the vacuum created by the existence of the suppression orders will be filled with rumour and speculation. Such speculation is not in the interests of justice," she said.

Durrant did not enter a plea on his first appearance and is due back in court later this year.