Wrong to keep fighting for name suppression

1 News reports:

A prominent former political figure found guilty of eight sex crimes dating back to the 1990s has taken his bid for continued name suppression to the High Court. 

In August, the man was found guilty of eight historical sexual offences against two teenage boys. 

At the last hearing, four weeks ago, he applied for interim name suppression until his sentencing on November 22. That was denied by the judge who granted the man 20 working days to consider whether to appeal. 

That period expires today – and the man’s lawyer has now appealed the District Court decision to the High Court. 

The application will be heard on November 25, three days after the man’s sentencing.

The decision to appeal is bizarre. There is close to zero chance of success. If someone has actually been convicted of serious crimes, then they are almost always named. There have been political figures in the past who got name suppression but that was for relatively minor offending such as taxi chit fraud, not sexual offending.

It may take time, but the person convicted will be named. As it happens I suspect a large portion of the population already knows their name, or at least their former role.