60 Minutes TV Documentary in Australia

On Sunday 21 April 2019, 60 Minutes Programme in Australia had a 25 minute feature on child abuse cases within the fellowship in Australia. It interviewed several survivors and named some perpetrators: Noel Harvey (a worker convicted of 19 charges of child sexual abuse); Ernie Barry (a worker who pleaded guilty to 5 counts of indecent assault); Chris Chandler (a worker with 9 counts of child sexual abuse); Cecil James Blyth (13 counts of child sexual abuse); Greg Aylett (sexual abuse); Carl ?; together with a further perpetrator who was unnamed due to a court order for name suppression. Allan Kitto, the New South Wales Overseer, declined to be interviewed but provided a brief comment. See youtu.be/hE76OlNwIOs

Some have commented that the programme had some inaccurate depictions and unjustly used the words ‘cult like’. However, it was informed by the memories of the victims who were interviewed, and their experience of the NSW fellowship from prior years, together with the programme’s limited knowledge of the fellowship.

Court documents make it clear that the name suppression was to prevent harm to the convicted person, primarily because of previously attempted harm by members of the public, apparently provoked by his suspended sentence and by some incorrect reporting and social media comments.

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5b14e8cde4b087b8baa899c9 (19 pages)
R v AB (No 1) [2018] NSWCCA 113
Catchwords:

CRIME – suppression and non-publication orders – where respondent pleaded guilty to historical sex offences – where Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 15A prohibits identification of respondent in connection with criminal proceedings involving certain offences – where complainants consent to the publication of their names for the purposes of that Act – whether order under Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), s 8 necessary because s 15A prohibition apparently not complied with – whether order necessary to protect the safety of respondent or his family – order not necessary
https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5b4ecab8e4b09e9963070fce (19 pages)
R v AB (No. 2) [2018] NSWCCA 148
Catchwords:

CRIME – where respondent convicted of historic sexual offences – where Court of Criminal Appeal set aside orders of District Court under Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) in relation to identity of respondent – application under Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW), r 50C to set aside orders on appeal – whether Court misapprehended facts – whether respondent denied opportunity to address particular issue – whether Court overlooked evidence and submissions regarding respondent’s psychological safety – no ground for re-opening appeal made out   CRIME – application for stay of orders pending determination of application for special leave to appeal – assessment no realistic prospects special leave be granted – fact of application for special leave alone not warrant stay, notwithstanding refusal will result in application being of no utility   CRIME – application for stay of orders pending fresh application to the District Court under the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act – stay not reasonably required for, or incidental and necessary to, exercise of appellate powers under that Act or to preserve efficacy of the Court’s judgments – no power to grant stay   CRIME – application for indemnity certificate under the Suitors Fund Act 1951 (NSW) – whether appeal under Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act, s 14 one to which Suitors Fund Act, s 6 can apply – power to issue certificate enlivened but not exercised
https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5c806b69e4b0196eea404f58 (30 pages)
AB (A Pseudonym) v R (No 3) [2019] NSWCCA 46
Catchwords:

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – suppression and non-publication orders – appeal against decision not to make non-publication order – leave granted on grounds that court below materially misconstrued s 8(1)(c) of Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) by adopting probable harm test – calculus of risk approach adopted   CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – suppression and non-publication orders – rehearing under s 14(5) of the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) – evidence of risk of physical harm to the applicant – evidence of significant psychological harm to applicant and applicant’s family – order necessary to protect the safety of the applicant – circumstances of misreporting by media and threats to applicant – orders made

 

Like to make a comment? Your 'name' and comment will be posted here after review by a moderator

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s