Auckland man accused of baby's death to keep name suppression to protect parents overseas

The name suppression hearing was held in the High Court at Auckland. Photo / NZME

An Auckland man accused of causing an infant girl's death will be allowed to keep his identity secret until the completion of his 2024 murder trial due to fears that villagers from his hometown overseas could burn down his parents' house and banish them.

The 24-year-old was charged with murder in May after the infant was taken to Watford Medical Centre in Ōtara suffering critical injuries. CPR was administered but the child was pronounced dead at the clinic.

The man pleaded not guilty to the charge in July while appearing in the High Court at Auckland.

During a name suppression hearing last month, defence lawyer Joanna Murdoch noted that her client's parents live in a small village in the Pacific where the village chief has the power to mete out punishment to entire families when learning of alleged crimes.

The man's parents said they expect to receive "the harshest penalty available" if their village chief learns of their son's murder charge, which would be seen as bringing shame to the village's name even though the accusation hasn't yet been tested by a judge or jury.

"This may take the form of monetary penalty or a requirement that they hand over livestock," Justice Graham Lang noted in his written decision, which was released last week.

"[The defendant's mother] also says it is probable that they will be evicted from their home and that other villagers will attack the family and set fire to their house.

"She is concerned that she and her husband will be told to leave the village and never return."

The defendant's mother said she had no doubt news would travel from Auckland to the village within hours if name suppression was to be lifted due to the "village grapevine" and diaspora of others to New Zealand.

The stigma of such an allegation is so severe that social consequences could also extend to other members of the man's family living in New Zealand and to his wife's family overseas, an expert witness said.

Justice Lang agreed the village punishment, if carried out, would amount to "extreme hardship" for the parents.

"Such consequences would plainly fall well outside those that would normally follow publication of the fact that a person has been charged with criminal offending," he wrote.

Crown prosecutor Chris Howard opposed continued name suppression. The defence provided no examples of a village chief meting out punishment for something that happened overseas, he said, adding that the defendant hasn't lived in the village in years.

Justice Lang said prosecutors could raise the issue again if it finds material suggesting the evidence from the defence witness was unreliable. But in the meantime, name suppression will remain, he said.