A magistrate in Cairns has decided to keep a non-publication order in place to protect the identity of a well-known man mentioned in an extortion case.

凱恩斯的一名地方法官決定維持非公開命令，以保護一起勒索案中提到的一名知名人士的身份。

The legal case involves a man accused of trying to extort money from a former partner. The prosecution claims that the defendant accessed a laptop without permission and found evidence of a secret relationship between the victim and a prominent Queensland man. The defendant allegedly used this information to threaten the victim with public exposure and financial loss, specifically demanding $15,000 related to a property settlement. Additionally, it is claimed that a second threat was made against another person connected to the victim.

此法律案件涉及一名被指控試圖向前伴侶勒索金錢的男子。檢方聲稱，被告在未經許可的情況下進入一部筆記型電腦，發現了被害者與一名昆士蘭知名人士之間存在秘密關係的證據。被告據稱利用此資訊威脅被害者，稱將公開此事並導致其面臨財務損失，特別是要求一筆與財產分割相關的 15,000 美元。此外，據稱被告還對另一名與被害者相關的人士發出了第二次威脅。

Lawyers for several media companies challenged this order, arguing that the court's power should only be used to protect the victim. They emphasized that the identity of the famous man is not directly linked to the victim's anonymity. Furthermore, they suggested that the order was designed to avoid embarrassment for the high-profile individual rather than to meet a legal necessity. They also argued that because the man did not seek a separate privacy order from the Supreme Court, he had given up his right to privacy.

幾家媒體公司的律師對此命令提出質疑，認為法院的權力應僅用於保護被害者。他們強調，該名知名人士的身份與被害者的匿名性沒有直接關聯。此外，他們暗示該命令旨在避免高知名度人士感到尷尬，而非出於法律必要。他們還主張，由於該男子未向最高法院申請獨立的隱私令，因此他已放棄其隱私權。

However, Magistrate Gelma Meoli rejected these arguments, stating that the order is necessary for the fair administration of justice. The court explained that revealing the man's identity would actually help the defendant achieve his goal of extortion through the legal process. The magistrate clarified that the decision was not based on the man's social status, but on the need to ensure that victims of extortion feel safe enough to report crimes. Consequently, the court was closed to the general public, allowing only accredited media to attend.

然而，地方法官 Gelma Meoli 駁回了這些論點，表示該命令對於公平執行司法是必要的。法院解釋，揭露該男子的身份實際上會幫助被告透過法律程序達成勒索目的。法官澄清，此決定並非基於該男子的社會地位，而是為了確保勒索被害者有足夠的安全感來舉報犯罪。因此，法院禁止一般大眾進入，僅允許獲認證的媒體出席。

The non-publication order remains active, and the case is scheduled for another hearing on July 28.

非公開命令維持有效，案件預計將於 7 月 28 日再次開庭。