[ad_1]
The duo charged in connection with the First New Zealand Foundation donations case have failed in their attempt to maintain the suppression of names, but cannot yet be named.
The couple is alleged to have fraudulently deposited more than $ 740,000 into an NZ First Foundation account and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) uploaded it in September.
Media entities, including Things, tried to reveal the identities of the couple before the October elections. However, despite the hearings in the District Court, the Superior Court and the request for authorization to the Court of Appeal, it was rejected.
In November, at a hearing in North Shore District Court in front of Judge Deidre Orchard, one of the defendants sought continued name removal until the end of the trial on the grounds that he and related individuals would suffer extreme hardship. .
READ MORE:
* NZ First Foundation case: Accused’s attorney says there will be a ‘media trial’ if named
* NZ First Foundation Defendant Denies Charges, Chooses Jury Trial
* NZ First Foundations scandal: Court of Appeal rejects media permission to appeal decision
* The couple accused in the NZ First Foundation case continue to keep their identities secret
Both the OFS and attorney Robert Stewart, acting on behalf of the media, objected.
Judge Orchard dismissed the man’s request. However, a provisional suppression order for both men involved continues until 9 a.m. on December 14 and the man can also appeal.
At the hearing, the man’s lawyer said there had been a “media storm” after the charges were brought, criticizing the SFO and the media for “actively politicizing” the charges.
Bevan Read / Stuff
The hearing was held in North Shore District Court in November.
The defendant’s attorney accused the media of being “irresponsible” in their reporting and NZ First leader Winston Peters had become the target of attacks from the media and trolls despite not being charged. .
He filed numerous affidavits in support, including one by right-wing blogger Cameron Slater, who was also present in court.
“It is about the ability of the media and social networks to use the hateful methodology established by Mr. Slater to attack Mr. Peters and thereby harm [my client]. “
Attorney Robert Stewart, acting on behalf of media entities including Things, again opposed the continuation of the repression, saying that the accused did not reach the threshold of extreme difficulty.
He said that the media had not politicized the information. It was the NZ First party that did it when it tried to suppress the position.
“The political party generated speculation,” Stewart said.
“The claims made by the defendant’s attorney and Mr. Slater are all speculative … and are not supported by evidence,” Stewart said.
Stewart asked the judge to dismiss Slater’s affidavit.
Slater said in an affidavit that media entities were seeking the lifting of the crackdown out of political spite, out of dislike of Peters and anyone associated with him, the court heard.
THE CHARGES
Collection documents obtained by Things allege that the couple, between September 30, 2015, and February 14, 2020, deposited a total of $ 746,881 into two separate accounts, including that of the First New Zealand Foundation.
The Serious Fraud Office alleges that the couple adopted a “fraudulent device, trick or ploy” and donations for the party were entered into bank accounts of a company and the foundation without declaring them to the party secretary and / or the Election Commission.
The undeclared funds were then used to pay for party expenses and develop a fundraising database, the documents allege.
None of the accused was a minister, sitting deputy or candidate prior to the 2020 elections. They were also not a current member of the NZ First party or a member of staff.
