4 ms·

> his sentence is under seal, as are the offences under which he is convicted.

• ineedasername 6y ago
  It's rather scary that such a thing is possible.
  • xxpor 6y ago
    It's common after convictions that judges can seal or expunge charges. It's with the permission of the convicted. The point of a public trial is to protect the defendant, not just so the public is aware generally.
    • thaumasiotes 6y ago
      No, public awareness is an explicit goal of the system, and one of the factors that must be considered in a motion to seal legal filings.
    • ineedasername 6y ago
      I believe the interests of the public are best served with transparency of our justice system. Unless public knowledge would truly pose more harm to the convicted than the sentence itself and stigma that any conceited criminal bears, then it should be public. If sealed under the "additional harm" principal, the public should be provided with at least the broad strokes of that potential harm so that public scrutiny of our justice system is possible. The more such scrutiny is lacking, the more room for abuse.