DistantNews
Support us
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia /Crime & Justice

Contempt charge looms for man who allegedly breached suppression order

From ABC Australia · () English

Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Ongoing story
  • A Queensland man faces potential contempt of court charges for allegedly publishing suppressed details of an extortion case.
  • Police are considering the more serious charge after the 35-year-old allegedly continued to post the material online.
  • The man, who cannot be named, has pleaded not guilty and is seeking legal representation.

A man in Queensland, Australia, is facing serious legal repercussions for allegedly breaching a court suppression order. The 35-year-old, whose name is suppressed, is accused of publishing details related to a Cairns extortion case, despite a non-publication order being in place.

I suspect the most appropriate action will be to file an application for contempt of court.

โ€” Maynard MarcumThe police prosecutor informed the court of his intention to consider a contempt of court charge.

Police prosecutor Senior Sergeant Maynard Marcum indicated that a contempt of court charge is being considered, a move that carries significant potential consequences. The man had initially pleaded not guilty to disobeying the order, arguing it was not active when he first posted the information on social media. However, the court heard he continued to publish material even after being notified.

The contempt charge might not be going ahead. But a contempt of court charge is not something to turn your nose up at; it doesn't go away and it can have serious outcomes.

โ€” Magistrate James MortonThe magistrate advised the accused man about the potential seriousness of a contempt of court charge.

Magistrate James Morton advised the self-represented man to seek legal counsel, emphasizing the gravity of a contempt of court charge. The prosecutor explained that publishing the threatened detriment in an extortion case could inadvertently fulfill the accused's threats. The man requested a copy of the suppression order, stating he had made efforts to comply but had not received it.

It's a typical and often-used protection, with respect to particularly extortion and blackmail cases, that the threatened detriment not be published because, otherwise, all that's achieved is that the accused's threats are achieved.

โ€” Maynard MarcumThe prosecutor explained the rationale behind suppressing the threatened detriment in extortion cases.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by ABC Australia. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.