Lucia Maria over at NZ Conservative wrote:
‘A well-known comedian/entertainer in NZ has pleaded guilty to performing an indecent act on a child – a 4 year old girl.
This man has had his name suppressed all the time he was waiting for his trial, and if he was found not guilty, then this name suppression would have protected him from an unjust allegation that was eventually proven false. For that reason, I will grudgingly allow for concept that temporary name suppression is a good thing. Such a vile crime should not smear the innocent.
However, the man now admits to his guilt, and it appears from the news items I’ve been reading that he’s not going to be jailed, and was offered a “non-custodial sentence” by the judge if he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge.
This is where I really have to question whether the NZ justice system really thinks that child sex abuse is a serious matter. Why not have a trial? Why not then imprison him on the more serious charge of unlawful sexual connection? At least other children would be safe from him while he was locked up. I don’t get it…’
To which Wabbit commented:
We have too much law and not enough justice. Give me his name and I will publish it.
and that’s a promise, consequences be damned.
UPDATE: does the name Jamie Linehan ring a bell for any Kiwis out there? hmm?
we have the right to know