The NZ Herald published the story of a teenage girl who alleged she had been gang-raped by three men weeks after she had allegedly suffered another rape. The story, Teen’s fight for justice after alleged pack rape by Auckland gang members, published on January 27 2024, said the men involved had been charged with sexual violation by rape. The men’s names were not suppressed but the NZ Herald chose not to name them in order to protect their fair trial rights.
The story was deactivated five days after publication. This happened after the teenager contacted the reporter having been told by police that an upcoming trial might be put off because of the story.
At the time of publication, the NZ Herald understood the trials were scheduled for later in the year. As it turned out one of the men, represented by lawyer Kelly-Ann Stoikoff, was facing trial about two weeks after publication.
Ms Stoikoff complained her client was immediately recognisable in the story. She felt she had no choice but to apply for the trial to be adjourned. Ultimately this request was successful when it became clear a juror had read the article and remembered much of its detail. Ms Stoikoff also complained the story breached her client’s privacy and inaccurately stated he was a gang member.
In upholding the complaint the Media Council says It was incumbent on the NZ Herald before publishing a disturbing victim’s account prior to a defended trial to find out with certainty when the trial was to take place. The Council says once the hearing has occurred and a verdict delivered, the victim’s account can be published and their voice heard. However unless it is certain that the trial is a long way off and memories of the article will be forgotten, the risk is too great and publishers should exercise great caution.