Lawyers slam hacktivists for naming one-punch accused

A group of hacktivists who have named and shamed the man responsible for a one punch attack in Canberra have been criticised by the legal world.

Lawyers slam hacktivists for naming one-punch accused
Criminal lawyer Adrian McKenna said he is ‘astonished and disappointed’ by hacktivist group Anonymous, who claim to have named the man charged with a one-punch attack in Canberra on New Year’s Eve.

"Any charge of intentionally or recklessly causing grievous bodily harm must in the ACT end up in the Supreme Court," McKenna said.
“But if it is for trial then an option for the offender is for the trial to be in front of a jury.

According to a report by the ABC, the group has published what they claim is the attackers name on social media, also threatening to release his address and phone number.  The post has since been shared more than 10,000 times on social media.

The man turned himself in to police on New Year’s Day and was charged with recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm.

Martin Hockridge, president of the ACT Law Society told the ABC that any form of trial by social media was unhelpful to proceedings.
“Let the police do their job, let the criminal justice system take its course,” he said.

“In terms of a fair trial, and it will probably be a jury trial, you want the people that are sitting on the jury to be influenced by the evidence that is presented in court, and not anything that is presented in social media outside of the court that could be entirely wrong.

“When there are serious criminal charges, and this will obviously be a serious criminal charge, the best place for the matter to be sorted out is in a court of law.”

McKenna indicated that an application for the proceedings to be closed and for a non-publication order to be made may be sought.

“If this material ends up in the hands of a potential juror [then] it may lead the offender's lawyers to make an application for the matter to be heard by trial by judge alone and take the matter out of the hands of 12 members of a jury who would in effect represent the community for these proceedings,” said McKenna.

ACT Police would not comment on the matter as it is yet to be mentioned in the Magistrates Court.

Recent articles & video

US legaltech firm signs up seasoned vet for Australian debut

Federal Court rules registrar can reject ‘abuse of process, frivolous, and vexatious’ applications

Highlight: 2022 Most Influential Lawyer has an app on Microsoft’s AppSource

White & Case bolsters commercial litigation practice

Will more businesses implement pay transparency?

Employers pushing back against hybrid model

Most Read Articles

HSF wins landmark case for insurance company

New CEO steps up at KCL Law

Federal Court allows extension of time for compliance with statute despite counsel's error

G+T helps juice up Ausgrid with billion-dollar refinancing