Here we will provide updates on the charges against Sean Plunket as the public searches the Internet for them. The public is browsing the internet to find out more about him and not only that they also like to know more about the charges against him. So for our readers, we have brought the information about him in this article. Not only that, we are also going to give details about the chargers for him in this article. So he keeps reading the article to find out more.
What did Sean Plunket do?
Charges against broadcaster Sean Plunket for disseminating court documents were dropped. Journalist David Farrier was mentioned in documents posted to social media by Plunket last year in connection with a temporary protection order and Family Court proceedings. The order was later revoked and the case was dismissed. Farrier claimed that during this time he was subjected to a “torrent” of harassment and false felony charges. As he stated on his website, Webworm, “My hands were tied by the crackdown… from the Family Court,” he couldn’t set the record straight. Police charged Plunket with two counts of publishing a report of Family Court proceedings without court permission to do so, which contained identifying information about a person.
Plunket, the man behind The Platform’s online radio show, has entered a plea of not guilty. According to a statement sent to Stuff, police requested that the charges be dropped as they did not meet the criteria set out in the Family Court Act of 1980. Farrier expressed surprise at Plunket’s conduct in a March letter, citing the “notoriously confidential” nature of Family Court hearings. Following the dismissal of the charges on Wednesday, Farrier stated in his newsletter that publishing the details of any Family Court matter is acceptable as long as the parties involved consider themselves “non-vulnerable.”
Farrier received a temporary protection order from the Family Court last year when she was in Aotearoa, New Zealand, promoting her film, Mister Organ. Plunket posted information about the case and identified Farrier on social media. The case was dismissed and the order was revoked many months later. Farrier later said that he believed con man Michael Organ, the subject of his documentary, “was pulling the strings on this whole case” in an effort to thwart the film’s distribution. He went on to paraphrase the judge’s decision, which read: “Suggestions that the application was designed to prevent the publication of the Farrier documentary have considerable substance.”
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn