|
|
Allegations of Sexual
Abuse in NZ |
|
|
|
|
The identity of a New Plymouth
doctor facing multiple sex charges remains suppressed. A bid by the Crown and the Taranaki
Daily News to have the doctor's name published has failed. In a just-released judgment,
Justice Rodney Hansen said the immediate and long-term damage to the personal
and professional standing of the accused, to his practice and, inevitably,
financially meant that the interim name suppression should continue. "He
should not have to suffer that injury in advance of trial unless, for special
reasons, the public interest requires it. The reasons put forward by the
Crown and the media interests do not establish that there is such a
countervailing public interest," Justice Hansen said. Last month, Justice Hansen heard
submissions from Crown prosecutor Cherie Clarke, as well as a lawyer for the
Taranaki Daily News, Patrick Mooney, during a pre-trial hearing in the High
Court at New Plymouth. The pair said the public had the
right to know who the doctor was and naming him could lead to further
complainants coming forward. The doctor has been charged with
35 counts of sexual offending against 10 women patients over a 20-year period
-- from 1981 to 2002. He has denied the charges and is expected to go to
trial later this year. In 2004, the doctor was arrested
and was originally charged with 13 counts of indecent assault and one of
sexual violation involving five complainants. But since then, seven more women
have contacted the New Plymouth police. All of them came forward after
reading newspaper articles The doctor is still practising,
but he cannot carry out intimate examinations and a chaperone has to be
present when he has women or child patients. He has also agreed to tell any
patients that he is the doctor facing charges, if they ask him. The same
conditions have been imposed by the Medical Council on his right to practice.
Justice Hansen said those conditions
protected patients. "In the particular circumstances of this case, I do
not think publication of the accused's name would affect a risk of
reoffending, which I assess as negligible. The consternation that publication
would cause for his more vulnerable patients can, in these circumstances, be
seen as an undesirable consequence of lifting the name suppression
order," he said. He also doubted that naming the
doctor would see more complainants come forward and there would be few people
in Taranaki who had not read or heard that a local doctor faced allegations
of sexual assault against patients. "I would expect any woman
living in the region who believes herself to have been the victim of
inappropriate conduct in a doctor/patient relationship, and who would be
encouraged to come forward by knowledge of other complaints, would already
have done so." Justice Hansen said no sector of
the community was entitled to favoured treatment, but the harm an accused
person might suffer from publicity was entitled to full weight. |
