ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: June 13 Recording online, July 11, August 15 details

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

2020 ACSOL Conference – Postponed to Oct 10-11

International

Australia: Alleged sex offenders to lose anonymity under changes to South Australian law

[msn.com – 5/7/20]

South Australian legal reforms that strip alleged sex offenders of their right to anonymity have been hailed as an important safety measure by the victim of a notorious paedophile.

But senior legal figures have warned the change could lead to vigilante justice and destroy the reputations of those who are charged but later acquitted.

The changes, which have come into effect today, mean anyone charged with a sex offence can be named from their first court appearance.

One of two brothers preyed on by convicted paedophile Vivian Deboo in the 1990s said the move would bolster public safety.

“As a community, for us to be aware of who people being charged with these offences are, is probably a very good thing, I think, for safety,” the victim, known as brother B, told ABC Radio Adelaide.

“If [a] neighbour … had been charged with a child sex crime, I would want to know about that.”
In early March, State Parliament passed the changes, which rewrite part of the Evidence Act, but SA Police and the Courts Administration Authority were allowed time to adapt their internal processes.

Previously, the identity of alleged offenders was protected until they pleaded guilty or were committed for trial.

Under the changes, an accused can still keep their identity secret if they can convince a judge there is good reason for a suppression order.

An alleged sex offender will also remain anonymous if there is a risk that revealing their identity would also identify a victim.

 

‘Right to know’ versus ‘destroyed reputations’

Attorney-General Vickie Chapman said she was proud the State Government had removed the “archaic” law.

“I believe that, in the vast majority of cases, the public has the right to know the identity of someone who has been charged with an offence of this nature,” she said.

However, Tony Kerin of the Law Society of South Australia said the amendment created more problems than it solved.

“Accused persons can now have reputations and quality of life destroyed, even if they’re not guilty,” he said.

Read the full article

 

Join the discussion

  1. Jack

    So Australians have decided it’s best to behave like a bunch of animals then.

  2. Facts should matter

    “Accused persons can now have reputations and quality of life destroyed, even if they’re not guilty,” he said.

    Not to mention loss of enjoyment of life and diminished standard of living.

    America should not be looked upon as a role model for other countries to aspire to.

  3. Jax

    This is not surprising. Australia has long started down the fear mongering road. It’s the country most closest to America when it comes to sex offender registry laws, but still the Aussies can’t beat the good ole USA when it comes to punishment for sex offenses. I would skip Australia and go to New Zealand. Although they sometimes turn sex offenders away, NZ does have a criminal rehbilitation process.

  4. Bill from CA

    Why stop there? Don’t Australians have the right to know who sold life destroying drugs in the past? Or who drove drunk a long time ago? Or how about closet case homosexuals that got caught in public? They NEED to know these things!

    This is the slippery slope of politics, once on it, there will be no end to these public crucifixions…

  5. Edwin

    There’s nothing here. This is not news in America. Every court, media outlet and vic rights website trots out the names of not only folks being charged with sex crimes but arrested for them too. CCAP is our infamous public website clearing house for people charged with sex and other crimes. The Aussies are only trying to catch up to the US.

  6. Adama

    A notorious pedophile who abused 3 young children gets only six years? Even Australia is less harsh than the us.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.