Graham Philip is accused of sabotage. That’s all we can tell you

ANALYSIS: A man named Graham Philip has been charged with sabotage, an obscure, never-before-executed law in New Zealand.

Philip has been held without bail since his arrest on December 8. He lives in Taupo. He likes sunsets and Miter 10.

that is about all we can say about this, led by the court. Details of the offense – which stuff knows – have been suppressed, and to say more about his background would be contempt of court.

It’s a fascinating thing; it reflects the fractures that have arisen in society and online, and how that manifests in the real world. It is clearly in the public interest.

READ MORE:
* The Detail: Why and How Do Some People Get Name Suppression?
* Why Grace Millane’s Killer Still Not Named After Being Convicted
* Murder of Grace Millane: Man accused of murderer’s name despite repression order

The suppression order is understandable, but it is also frustrating. It’s supposedly there to prevent copycats, which it very well could have done – it’s impossible to know.

It has also led to confusion in a way that is likely to encourage the distrust that primarily serves as the context of this situation.

First some background.

Until recently, Graham Philip had name suppression. His name was nevertheless plastered on social media – mainly on a messaging app – in flagrant violation of the court.

Many of those who violated the suppression orders did so under their own name. One person even did it in front of the camera, in front of a room full of people. Nobody, as far as stuff aware, has had consequences.

It’s hard to blame them – how are they supposed to know about name suppression? Suspension orders were orally placed by the judge during a court hearing. Unless you’re in the habit of lurking in courthouses on the central North Island and happen to be within earshot of that particular hearing, you wouldn’t know.

Think for a moment about the people who visit these online spaces. Many of them distrust authority and tend to believe that there is a conspiracy between mainstream institutions (the government, the police, the media, the courts) to suppress the truth. They tend to collect bits of information and piece them together into a narrative structure, even if they don’t fit. If there are gaps, they fill them with what sounds good.

One day they see a photo of a friendly-looking man named Graham. He believes many of the same things they do. He is in prison. No, they can’t know why. The media doesn’t report it. Interesting snacks; the story writes itself.

It was predictable, based on these bare facts, that Philip’s supporters called him a political prisoner, jailed for misconduct and held without charge. They called on Amnesty International and the Human Rights Commission to get involved. They raised money for him and organized protests outside the courts. They even mailed his handwritten letters from prison. Some called for retaliation against the authorities.

Few of these people knew what he was accused of, and many were curious to find out. He was already the perfect character to fit into their narrative structure; the brave truth-teller, crushed by the state. Those of us who knew what was happening couldn’t correct the misinformation as it would be illegal.

Name suppression has since been lifted. You can now publish Philip’s name and the accusations being made against him.

It probably made the situation worse. An ordinary man named Graham faces obscure and sinister-sounding accusations of sabotage. How those two facts are related remains a mystery; a hole in the story structure that begs to be filled.

Since the NZ Herald published the existence of this case on Friday, online dot-connecting has been rampant.

People who are inclined to both support and taunt Philip have come to wild conclusions based on the meager public details available about what he supposedly did. Unsurprisingly, the speculation tends to align with their existing views – an innocent man, unjustly held; a saboteur, rightly imprisoned.

The end result is that would-be copycats now have a rich vein of sabotage-adjacent ideas to tap into, and the net amount of confusion in the world has increased. There are no winners.

This is not intended to be a criticism of the court. It is a uniquely challenging situation; Philip deserves a fair trial, which may require details of the allegations not to be publicly litigated beforehand.

But it pays to be honest about the consequences. It would be difficult to create a situation that increases distrust in mainstream institutions, which has come at a particularly useless time.

An online community, ready to distrust authority, knows that one of them is in prison, but authorities say they should not know why. Without concrete information, this community is free to speculate haphazardly, get basic facts wrong, and give in to their instincts that a conspiracy is taking place.

None of us who do know what is happening are allowed to correct it and are therefore unwittingly involved in the conspiracy.

It is likely that by the time we can fully write about this matter – probably not for more than a year – the horse will have stalled. These narrative structures have had months to form.

Partial information can be just as problematic as outright misinformation. Many of the world’s conspiracy-fuelled statements, particularly regarding vaccines, contain information that is partially true.

During a varying infodemic, it pays to be alert to how this happens. Unfortunately, the court has given us an ideal example.