While his name has been a very widely known secret for a long time, international press were not concerned about, or refraining from publishing his name from the start, it is seriously about time this man's name was shared openly in NZ without fear of reprisal.
The man who murdered British backpacker Grace Millane can now legally be named in New Zealand.
He is Jesse Shane Kempson.
And it can now be revealed Kempson faced two further trials for violent sexual offending against two other women.
The 28-year-old Auckland man's identity was due to be revealed last Friday, but with just minutes before an 11am deadline, the Supreme Court decided to keep suppression in place until it could make a final determination.
Today, the top court ordered suppression to lapse.
The one thing that really bothers me in this, and something I wish we could change our laws to address, is that this animal is serving 3 sentences for 3 different crimes concurrently. Meaning, he really is only serving a single sentence for all 3 crimes. Worse, he only has to spend 17 years in gaol for murdering a woman, and brutally assaulting at least two others (that are known to the police.)
Suppression for the Aotea College alumnus was continued throughout last November's high-profile murder trial in the High Court at Auckland, the guilty verdict and sentencing - the reasons for which were also suppressed until today.
His name was suppressed to protect his fair trial rights, the courts ruled, because of two sexual violence trials.
He has already been convicted and sentenced for those crimes against both women after judge-alone High Court trials were held in October and November this year under a shroud of secrecy.
His additional prison sentences will be served at the same time, alongside his life term for murdering Millane, which includes a non-parole period of 17 years.
In situations such as this, where crimes of violence are all of a similar kind, the sentences should be required in New Zealand law to be served consequtively. He should have to pay a penalty for each crime he has been found guilty of. Otherwise, how is there any fairness and restitution for the women he brutally assaulted? They have to live with the repurcusions and memories of his assault for the rest of their lives. He gets to pretend there was no punishment at all for them, simply because he got caught and found guilty of a brutal murder.
Fairness would mean that he doesn't even start the sentence for the murder until the sentences for the lesser crimes have each been served individually.