A teenager who raped and sexually assaulted fellow high school students at parties will ask the Supreme Court to hear his case, as he tries to keep his name secret.
The 19-year-old’s name suppression was due to be revoked on Friday at 2pm.
However, his lawyer, Emma Priest, has signalled she will be asking the highest court in the land to consider hearing the case.
The Court of Appeal has confirmed the man’s name suppression will continue in the meantime.
READ MORE:
* Auckland teenager who raped and sexually assaulted fellow teens to be named
* Crown considers appealing home detention sentence for teenaged sex offender
* Teen sex offender targeted young women at parties, wants to keep his name secret
So far the teenager has had his bid for name suppression declined in the District Court, High Court and Court of Appeal.
The teenager has admitted 10 charges including rape, unlawful sexual connection with a child, indecent assault and sexual conduct with a child.
The charges relate to offending when he was aged between 14 and 17 and attacked six young women.
He was sentenced to 12 months’ home detention and a further 12 months’ supervision when he appeared at the Auckland District Court in April.
The Court of Appeal’s decision on name suppression, released this week, said the teen was concerned for his personal safety. His lawyer, Emma Priest, pointed to “vigilante attacks” and the possibility of condemnation on social media.
Priest said her client had autism and ADHD and the district and high court judges wrongly assessed his culpability.
The Court of Appeal disagreed.
“One need only read the sentencing notes to see that this argument has no real prospect of success,” the decision said.
In sentencing the teen, Judge Claire Ryan started at seven-and-a-half years in prison before applying various sentence discounts for his mental health, early guilty pleas, youth, remorse and rehabilitation.
In the end she reduced his sentence by 73%, allowing her to impose home detention while acknowledging he was getting “a lucky break”.
The judges said publishing the teenager’s name was consistent with the principle of open justice that allowed the media and the public to scrutinise the courts.
Three of the young man’s survivors have taken the unusual step of waiving their rights to automatic name suppression.
They have previously addressed the court, sharing details of suicide attempts and ruined years following the teenager’s attacks. They support naming the offender.