Sponsor's Message

For reasons known only to the judge presiding over the case, the names of these famous people were suppressed -- what folly!

Of course, in theory, anyone who engages in spreading the many unofficial reports about who was involved is risking harsh penalties but that's not stopping anyone.

If you find a report on the Net somewhere that discloses the names of these people and you pass it on then one of two dangers arise:

If the reports are correct, you're going to be in contempt of court - a very serious offence.

Now have your say Got something to say about today's column, or want to see what others think?  Visit The Forums While you're here, why not visit the Aardvark Hall of Shame and perhaps make your own nomination.

If the names you pass on are not actually implicated in the court case then you are guilty of defamation - an offence that carries its own set of risks.

Of course we all know that the reality is that nobody will be prosecuted by the courts for spreading these rumours, and it's most unlikely that any innocent celebrity would take action against an individual for simply propagating such misinformation.

If you are one of the few who haven't already come across the Net postings which purport to name and shame those involved, just drop into Google Groups and do a search for some obvious keywords.

Now the big question must be: has Aardvark breached the court-ordered name suppression by telling *you* where to find this information?

Well it's all down to that issue of "degrees of separation" again isn't it?

Could any court possibly accept that linking to the root page of one of the world's most popular websites constitutes breaching a suppression order?

Quite frankly I think that in today's cyber-age, the idea of name suppression is somewhat akin to nailing jelly to a tree -- it's just not going to work.

What's more, by actually suppressing the names of those who are implicated, many other innocent people are suddenly viewed with suspicion by the uninformed public.

If you look at all the rumours surfacing on the Net, it's clear that at least some of those who have been named as involved clearly can't be. We're told that there are only two former sports stars involved but I've seen as many as half a dozen names proffered. The rest of these poor people are being unfairly defamed due to a suppression order that seems to serve little purpose.

If the courts really want these orders to work then I suspect they'll have to make an example of someone who uses the Net to flout them -- and they'll probably have to do it pretty soon or risk having the whole concept of suppression turned into a big joke by rampant public disobedience.

It would now appear that the number of celebrities who could be implicated as drug *users* (as opposed to dealers) may be significantly wider than first thought however. This story in today's Herald suggests that a number of other big names could have been customers of these "former sports stars".

I wonder whether their names will also be suppressed - likely on the basis that naming them would have an impact on their careers which would be far in excess of the weight of their offending.

What do you think?

Has the Net destroyed the ability of courts to enforce suppression orders?

Should those celebrity customers be given the protection of name suppression?

Do *you* know who's involved and how did you hear? (don't tell me, I've already heard all the rumours :-)

Aardvark Forums
The forums are back up at: www.aardvarkforums.co.nz/forums, have your say on today's column

If you feel that this is a good thing and/or you hold a "geniune affection" for yours truly -- then you are welcome to gift me some money using the buttons provided. In gifting this money you accept that no goods, service or other consideration is offered, provided, accepted or anticipated in return. Just click on the button to gift whatever you can afford. NOTE: PayPal bills in US dollars so don't accidentally gift more than what you were intending :-)

Contacting Aardvark
I'm always happy to hear from readers, whether they're delivering brickbats, bouquets or news tip-offs. If you'd like to contact me directly, please this form. If you're happy for me to republish your comments then please be sure and select For Publication.

Other media organisations seeking more information or republication rights are also invited to contact me.

Just add a couple of lines of JavaScript to your pages and you can get a free summary of Aardvark's daily commentary -- automatically updated each and every week-day.

Aardvark also makes a summary of this daily column available via XML using the RSS format. More details can be found here.

Contact me if you decide to use either of these feeds and have any problems.

Linking Policy
Want to link to this site? Check out Aardvark's Linking Policy.

Did you tell someone else about Aardvark today? If not then do it now!