Court Reporting

Presumption of innocence: those charged with criminal offences are not required to prove their innocence.

Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt

An arrest automatically makes a case active under the Contempt of Court Act 1981.

‘Helping with enquiries’ – journalists should check whether the suspect is helping the police voluntarily or is under arrest. The charge makes the case active under the Contempt of Court Act, if it is not already active because of an arrest. The case ceases to be active if an arrested person is released without charge, unless they are released on bail.

Laying or presenting of information – written charge and requisition

A summons is a formal document, issued by a magistrates court, setting out one or more crime allegations in similar detail to a charge. The summons makes the case active.

The issue of an arrest warrant also makes the case active, if not already active.

A media report that includes name, or other detail identifying the suspect, could allow the individual to sue for libel if the investigation does not lead to a prosecution. Publishing a statement that someone is under investigation, even when this is factually correct, may be defamatory because it infers guilt.

*Chris Jefferies case*

If the media are officially given the name of a person under investigation or arrest by a governmental agency, they will have qualified privilege when reporting it. Some media organisations may choose to publish, in high profile cases, names before it is known if there will be a charge without qualified privilege. Police leaks could indicate that there will be a charge. If the person is charged, a pre-charge publicity libel action becomes less likely because the damage caused is usually outweighed or indistinguishable from the court case reports, which the media are safe to publish.

The Education Act 2011 gives automatic lifelong anonymity to teachers in respect of any allegation that they have or may have committed an offence against a pupil. It is illegal to publish any detail that could lead the public to identify him/her. The anonymity ends if they are charged or a court agrees that it should be lifted in the interests of justice.

Categories and definitions

Indictable-only offences: the most serious crimes punishable by the longest prison terms – e.g murder, rape, robbery. Tried in Crown Court.

Either-way offences: include theft, sexual assault and assault causing GBH.

Summary offences: minor offences include common assault, drunkenness and speeding offences. Tried in Magistrates.

Court reports must be fair, accurate and contemporaneous.

Accuracy with crime definitions is important because organisations could be sued for libel.

The section 8C reporting restrictions automatically apply for cases at magistrates courts where the defendant pleads not guilty. They ban the publication of any rulings made in pre-trial hearings on admissibility of evidence and points of law. Restrictions also apply in those hearings concerning applications for such rulings including legal argument and discussion about whether such a ruling should apply. The media can only report on seven categories under section 8C restrictions.

1. The name of the court and the magistrates’ names
2. The names, ages, home addresses and occupations of the defendant(s) and witnesses
3. The charge(s) in full or summarised
4. The names of solicitors and barristers in the proceedings
5. If the case is adjourned, the date and place to which it is adjourned
6. Any bail arrangements
7. Whether legal aid was granted

The effect of the restrictions is to ban publication of any reference to evidence, except those in the wording of the charge(s). The media should not report in most instances if or why the prosecution opposed bail. It would be safe to publish that someone was remanded in custody for their own protection because it was feared that their life would be at risk etc.

Section 8C restrictions automatically lapse when there is an acquittal or a conviction or if the court dismisses the case.

Trial procedure

Prosecution opening

Key prosecution witnesses

Defence opening

Key defence witnesses

Judges’ summary

Jury decides

Sentencing

There are no automatic reporting restrictions under the section 70 committal.

Section 52A automatic reporting restrictions place limits on preliminary hearings at magistrates court if the case has potential for jury trial. They are set out in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and cover all indictable-only cases and some either-way cases.

The restrictions are designed to prevent publication of any reference to evidence in the case apart from wording of the charge, a defendant’s previous convictions and any other material with potential to create prejudice.

The media can only report on eight categories under section 52A restrictions.

1. The name of the court and the magistrates’ names
2. The name, age, home address and occupation of the accused
3. In the case of an accused charged with fraud, any relevant business information
4. The charge(s) in full or summarised
5. The names of counsel and solicitors engaged in the proceedings
6. If proceedings are adjourned, the date and place as to which they are adjourned ‘sent for trial’
7. Bail arrangements but not why it was refused
8. Whether legal aid was granted

The media are free to publish that reporting restrictions are in force because that is not a prejudicial fact. The relevant business information which the media can report from a preliminary hearing at a magistrates court is the same as that which can be reported from Crown court.

Reporting denials of guilt and choice of jury trial, the media routinely publish:

• basic protestations of innocence made by the defendant from the dock or through a solicitor. In an indictable-only case no formal plea is taken at magistrates court, but it may be made clear that the charge is denied. In either-way cases, defendants are asked how they plead
• that a defendant, in an either-way case, has chosen trial by jury

Strictly speaking publication of this goes beyond the strict application of section 52A permissions but the media are safe because a denial of charge is not prejudicial and defendants have a right to quote their denial of guilt. Although, the media should be weary of reports suggesting that the defendant will later enter a mixture of pleas.

Describing the courtroom

Background material about the defendant and/or alleged crime from sources outside of the court hearing do not conflict section 52A restrictions but there is a danger of contempt of court.

*Andrew Partington The Sun case*

Section 52A restrictions cease to apply in three circumstances.

1. If restrictions are lifted by the magistrates court. The defendant can request this and their solicitor may want to publicise the case as an appeal for witnesses. Magistrates can also decide to in the interests of justice. Even if the restrictions are lifted, the media should not publish any previous convictions while there is still the potential for a jury trial.
2. Automatically cease to apply if and when, for an either-way charge, it becomes clear as a result of the allocation procedure that the defendant is to be dealt with summarily. (If a defendant pleads guilty to it at a magistrates court.
3. When proceedings against all defendants in the case have been concluded. Evidence aired at preliminary hearings can be fully reported now.

Magistrates: maximum penalties are six months for one offence and 12 for more than one.

There are Crown courts at 77 locations in England and Wales, in administrative regions referred to as circuits. The most famous is the Central Criminal Court in London – Old Bailey.

Crown court reporting restrictions of pre-trial hearings are of the same format – restricted to seven categories:

1. The name of the Crown court and the judge’s name
2. The names, ages, home addresses and occupations of defendants and witnesses
3. The charges or a summary of them
4. The names of solicitors or barristers in the case
5. If proceedings are adjourned, the date and place to which they are adjourned
6. Bail arrangements
7. Whether legal aid was granted

The types of hearings for which the above format of restrictions apply are:

Unsuccessful applications for a case to be dismissed

Preparatory hearings

Relevant business information: any address used by the defendant for carrying on business, the name of the business, the name of any company the accused was a partner or engaged in, the name of any company that the accused was a director of and its address, any working address of the defendant

If there is an appeal against a ruling made by a Crown court judge, section 71 automatically bans reporting of any court discussions about the appeal. It restricts reports of the Court of Appeal hearing and of any further appeal made to the Supreme Court to the same seven categories as previously mentioned.

If a defendant is convicted by a majority, rather than unanimously, the media should report this.

A youth court case which must or may be sent for trial to the Crown court has the potential of being tried by jury so section 52A restrictions automatically apply. The public cannot attend any youth court case but journalists can cover them because section 47 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 gives ‘bona fide representatives of newspapers or news agencies’ the right to attend.

All juveniles involved in youth court cases are given automatic anonymity – defendants, witnesses and victims. The media must not reveal the name, address, school, or any information that could lead to identification of an under 18-year-old, or include any image or footage of the juvenile. But a juvenile victim/alleged victim who is dead can be identified by the media. Section 49 anonymity also applies to Crown court and High Court hearings of appeals and, proceedings in a magistrates court for breach, revocation or amendment of youth rehabilitation orders. However, the restrictions do not apply to reports of Crown court proceedings involving a juvenile sent there for trial or committed there for sentence.

When section 49 ceases to apply:

• To avoid injustice
• Unlawfully at large
• In the public interest
• Automatically expires when the juvenile turns 18

There is no automatic ban on identifying a juvenile who appears in a criminal court other than a youth court but the court has discretion to impose anonymity.

Jigsaw identification describes the effect when someone to whom the law has given anonymity is identified by the media to the public because of a combination or accumulation of detail published.

The media must consider jigsaw identification in abuse cases to not identify the juvenile or in some cases the defendant’s relationship to the victim.

Courts can impose orders to ban anti-social behaviour. The default position in law is that a juvenile made subject to such an order, or accused of breaching one, can be identified.

Contempt of Court

The law of contempt of court protects the judicial process. The greatest risk for the media is publishing material which could prejudice a fair trial.

• Giving the impression that the defendant is the sort of person to commit such a crime or vilifying them so witnesses refuse to come forward to help the defence or prosecution case
• Seeking to discover or publishing information from the jury’s confidential discussions about a verdict
• Publishing information which breaches the common law of contempt
• Contaminating a witness’s evidence by interviewing them or offering payment for their story
• Publishing material breaching a court order

Common law contempt is publishing material that creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice to proceedings which are pending or imminent with the intention of creating that risk. *Deliberate or recklessness intention*

Strict liability contempt is publishing material that creates the same risk of prejudice to active proceedings. The writer’s or publication’s intention is irrelevant to the breach.

Molestation and witness interviews pre-trial are a bad idea – anything that could influence the witness’s memory or testimony. Vilifying witnesses could deter others from coming forward as witnesses in the future – media organisations could be punished under common law contempt for this.

Strict liability means that the prosecution does not have to prove that the editor or media organisation intended to create risk. Breaching this is punishable by an unlimited fine or a maximum of two years in prison.

What makes a case active?

• Arrest
• Arrest warrant
• Summons
• Charged orally

Police may not make clear whether a person is under arrest or just helping police with their enquiries. Journalists must press for clarification.

When is a case no longer active?

• The arrested person is released without being charged
• No arrest is made within 12 months of the issue of an arrest warrant
• The case is discontinued
• The defendant is acquitted or sentenced
• The defendant is unfit to be tried, or plead

A Crown court case remains active until the defendant is sentenced. It is possible for the media to breach strict liability contempt between a verdict and sentencing but Crown court judges are usually deemed to experienced to be influenced by the media.

When an appeal is lodged, the case becomes active again but then is inactive when the hearing of the appeal is completed.

Section 3 defence of not knowing proceedings were active. There must be proof that all reasonable care was taken to check the case was active.

Examples of what would breach contempt of court:

• References to previous convictions
• Information suggesting the suspect is dishonest or of bad character
• Any evidence linking to the crime
• Any other suggestion of guilt

It could also be strict liability contempt in an active case to publish:

• A witness’s detailed account of a relevant event after a case becomes active
• A photograph or physical description of a suspect when there is visual identification

In contempt law it is safe to identify the alleged victims of crime before any prosecution begins. The victim/alleged victims of a sexual offence have automatic anonymity from the time the offence is alleged.

Publishing information which will be common ground for the defence and prosecution at the trial would not be prejudicial.

The court should consider: the likelihood of the publication coming to a potential juror’s attention, it’s likely impact on an ordinary reader, and the residual impact on a notional juror at the time of the trial.

The fade factor and limited publication and archive

The section 4 defence does not protect an unfair or inaccurate court report.

WINOL Bulletin Debrief 3rd March

Could see the effort everyone was putting in and wanting to get on air – prolific

Too long a bulletin – overfill? Just as bad as underfilling. Finite time, we need disciplining in the news editor. We should aim for a 15 mins maximum bulletin.

Heads: rat was fantastic – a good grab, police dogs was good visually, totton stuff okay

Wooly links, be more conversational about what we’re doing. No and finally in heads – just say and. Words run over on the heads, it was clipped should have been rerecorded. Edits production wise was not good enough, should be one big chunk

Dogs murder: heads? Should say but first, need junction in there. Signpost things so people understand. Legally straight down the middle, not straying over the line, facts, no implication of guilt, well balanced. Slow down VoiceOver? Ptc, didn’t need to refer to notes it was short enough.

Don’t brand exclusive, if others have it

Highlight the right person in shot, differentiate clearer – killer punch clarification

Edit in the link? Production jump cut

Bracken: look at this story. Absolutely no pictures, guilty buildings, no victim or defendant. Newspaper story should never be on tv, underlay? Too long too detailed, DSLR

John: shots have been repeated, move it away from the people we’ve already seen, go somewhere else, good range of shots, ptc be careful of walk, good quotes, too much expo must be shorter

Tate: fifth story but number one head? A bit one dimensional, environmental health maybe? Flooding archive footage – date it but don’t say flooding. Didn’t get full sign off, cut out. Captions: cllr, party, ward

Coming up needed to see that because of length, mix up shots

Police dogs: great opening shots, two good sequences, good scripting, good access, soft pics? NATSOT, police are, hampshire constabulary is. Must go below, feature really

Bees: nicely shot, good ptc, interviews explain cut it out – they slow down package, you explain, very soft ptc out of focus – reporters responsibility. All on the day no archive. NATSOT interesting shots different angles. Guidance for interviewees, coach them

Mine: nobody understands Winchester bid, why are we so good? Explain it more. Exactly same place for interviews, move them, time confusion in script, good interviews but cut some out – too much. Good quotes. Have confidence in the story

Lucy Britt: script needs to say European elections not euro. Do the whole hit without stopping, don’t put the edit in, no to separates. Bit excessive for news? Well written could have been subbed – too much detail, good authority. Careful with hands, slightly colloquial, tone is right but not length. Zeena needed to add a back ref

Sport: like the facts in the link, move away from team played team. Joe good voice, script was okay, be careful not to say what you see, compliment not describe. Penalty incident to penalty spot for cutaways because there might be a jump cut! good choice of clips for the edit. Too tight on the edit for Eastleigh goal, run record the whole time, last goal couldn’t see – spare battery. Mention Ben strevens. Raveena, good to get an angle on this, worth running, be careful of sponsors and beneficiaries different, good reveal, quotes

Zeena softer thanks, word perfect make it more conversational

And finally: we needed an interview with them after winning the award, can’t interview one of our own, what is the award? Needed explanation, good voice

*580 unique ip addresses and 3800 page impressions record circulation*

Front page has to be like Velcro

Heads some of the best we’ve had

Roughly cut in half packages

Role of chief: go and get it ‘fireman’ , get interview with police, GVs, vox pop with local people, Farnham on patch?

Use tautology not to get things wrong, attribute, no blame

WINOL Profile – Christina Michaels

Media Law revision

In order for there to be a case of libel there must be defamation, identification and publication.

Defamation occurs when the published statement tends to cause any of the below;

• Cause the claimant to be shunned or avoided
• Incite hatred, ridicule or contempt
• Lower the claimant in the eye of right minded people in their profession or trade

Jigsaw identification = innuendo/ implied identity

Broad brush identification is particularly dangerous – it is generalised and has the potential to defame all so positive identification is most ideal.

Fines for libel are unlimited and set by the jury so unpredictability in cases is almost inevitable.

Defences of libel are:

• Justification: must include proof

–          The best proof a journalist can have is a conviction

• Privilege: must be without malice and a fast, accurate and contemporaneous report
• Comment

The danger of libel is cancelled out when a case is made active; there is now a danger of contempt. Contempt of court has qualified privilege but is a strict liability criminal offence.

Subterfuge must not contain selective quoting otherwise the justification defence is lost if content is damaging.

The evidence gap is the gap between the two definitions of the necessary standards of criminal and civil evidence to produce a conviction.

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (Investigative Journalism)

These types of news stories are those initiated by the journalist off of the news agenda. Main frameworks for investigative journalism are:

Miscarriages of justice

Exposing corruption

Exposing political manipulation

Previously, journalists had to rely solely on Article 10 of the Human Rights Act to express themselves; this changed with the appointment of Tony Blair and therefore the New Labour policy objective. The change came in the form of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 coming into force in 2005.

‘Unnecessary secrecy in government leads to arrogance in government and defective policy decisions’ Tony Blair 1995

Between the years 2000 to 2005, civil servants campaigned to safeguard information and create limitations upon the act.

The act covers 130,000 bodies named on the national archive and receives 100,000 requests a year costing a total of £34 million. Journalists, however, make up only 12% of the requests.

 What does it cover?

Everything – ‘any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled…to have information communicated to him’.

There is a legal right of access to any information held by most public authorities unless there is a valid reason. Any information request should be in writing – it is a free process where email can even be used.

Exemptions

Organisations can refuse a request if the costs exceed £600 or £450 for smaller authorities.

• Absolute (e.g. security services, court)

–          This exemption means there is no duty to confirm or deny that any information exists

• Qualified (ministerial communications, commercial confidentiality)

–          The information should still be given if the balance of the public interest favours disclosure

Public Interest

• Promoting accountability and transparency
  • Furthering the understanding and participation in the public debate of issues of the day
  • Allowing individuals and companies to understand decisions
  • Public health and safety

Organisations are given 20 days to respond to a request – 40 days if the public interest test is necessary. There is no need to provide a reason for the information request, it should not be relevant.

What if there is a refusal?

• Internal review
• Information Commissioner
• Information Tribunal
• High Court

Common law can challenge the decision

Chapter 27: News-gathering – avoiding intrusion

Judges consider the rights to respect for privacy under Article eight alongside Article 10’s right to freedom of expression.

Civil law may be breached if people have been photographed, filmed or recorded without their consent. A judge should ask these such questions:

• Did the individual have ‘a reasonable expectation of privacy’?
• Has the person been persistently harassed by the media? Therefore can have public place exceptions
• Was the person in a condition, situation or event giving rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy, even though the individual was in or could be seen from a public place?
• Is there a ‘public interest’ exception to the rights of privacy?
• Is the photo or footage or recording so widely published that a ban would be pointless?

Courts also consider the degree of harm the publication could cause and the detail/extent of the images captured, for example covert photography is likely to be more intrusive.

There is no law banning photography or filming or recording in public places but the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 deals with ‘stalkers and paparazzi who hound celebs. Harassment is not defined in detail under the act but can include causing alarm and distress more than once.

The Editors’ Code of Practice and Ofcom Code give guidance on when publication is unethical. Breaching the codes may not be breaching privacy law but complying can reduce the likelihood of a privacy lawsuit.

• Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home, health and correspondence
• Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual’s private life without consent
• It is unacceptable to photograph individuals in private places without their consent

Doorstepping is the filming or recording of an interview or attempted interview, or announcing that a call is being recorded for broadcast purposes without any prior warning. This is an ambush technique which can be used against someone who is unlikely to agree to an interview.

Clause eight of The Editors’ Code makes it a necessity for journalists to identify themselves and obtain permission before entering non-public areas of hospitals or similar institutions. There needs to be a two- stage consent: one before recording begins and another for broadcasting the footage.

Under the Editors’ and Ofcom codes, journalists should respect an individual’s refusal.

• Journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit
• They must not be persistent once asked to desist or leave and if requested journalists must identify themselves and who they represent
• Editors must ensure these principles are observed by journalists

Approaches involving grief or shock must be made with sympathy and discretion, publication must be handled sensitively. Articles breaking this news should not contain graphic detail likely to add to the distress as the breaches clause five.

Protecting children’s privacy and welfare

• Young people should be free to complete their time at school without unnecessary intrusion
• Under 16s must not be interviewed or photographed on issues involving their own or another child’s welfare unless a responsible adult consents
• Pupils must not be approached or photographed at school without the permission of the school authorities
• Minors must not be paid for material involving children’s welfare, nor parents or guardians unless it is in the child’s interest
• Editors must not use the fame, notoriety or position of a parent or guardian as sole justification for publishing details of a child’s private life

Ofcom states that broadcasters should pay particular attention to the privacy of under 16s; consent must be obtained by a parent, guardian or an adult in loco parentis and wherever possible the individual concerned. Consent may not be needed is the subject matter is trivial or uncontroversial.

There are public interest exceptions including exposing crime or negligence imperilling people’s safety and exposing deception by an organisation or a hypocritical politician.

Publishing material from social media sites could potentially be a breach of copyright and an intrusion into privacy if the individual was portrayed in a private situation and was unaware of the uploaded content.

COURT

Winchester Crown Court is a grand and prestigious law court, being an attribute to the media law section of my journalism degree. My knowledge of the importance of Winchester as a law court assured me that there would be serious allegations discussed but witnessing it was still a shock from the standard safety bubble I usually live in. McNae’s reading was brought to life when put into practise in the court case witnessed today; it was an absolutely fascinating experience that confirmed my understanding of the law court system. The public gallery was empty but I still felt fully part of the proceedings even without being addressed the case was easy to pick up. To my surprise the Head Judge took notes throughout the entire hearing of which seemed to be in longhand, I thought this was impressive to pick up all the detail accurately. I didn’t realise that the jury could ask questions during a witness’ questioning, this occurred when clarification of an acronym was needed – this proved especially helpful for me as I wasn’t completely certain of the definition either. One thing of particular interest was the fact that dependant on which judge was questioning, the tone of speech differed. At some points the manner of the court was fairly intimidating and pressurised but others were more considerate and aimed to obtain the evidence sensitively. It was clear from the beginning that all persons in the court room were fully attentive to the case but were still constantly busy making notes or gathering files to contemplate over. The biggest factor of interest for me was the jury and how ordinary citizens could suddenly be thrown in at the deep end to change society. A brilliant experience no doubt.

McNae’s chapters 2-7

So it’s week two of my journalism degree and I feel I’ve been pounded with so much knowledge but I love learning and if I didn’t I wouldn’t be here. I’ve discovered that reading is paramount to lectures, seminars and general understanding. By paramount I basically mean there is lots and lots of reading, an abundance of pages scattered around the flat to be exact. This week’s reading prep for the media law lecture was intense; consisting of 28 pages of notes and now I’ve made the decision to rewrite in a blog format – am I mad? Possibly.

Chapter 1:

The Editors’ Code of Practice sets the standards for journalists working for newspapers, magazines and free-standing editorial websites – broadcasting journalism has its own alternative regulatory system. In the UK, there are no state controls on who can own or run these publications however there is one exception this being the anti-monopoly laws on corporate mergers. These privileges mean that the UK’s media is relatively free from influence of the state so able to be biased about social issues and can support certain political parties. Editors are free to campaign on any issue and can publish any fierce criticisms as long as they are subject to the restraints of libel and other laws. Owners in the industry recognise the irresponsibility of journalists could lead to Parliament introducing a statutory system of regulations, specific standards of accuracy and fairness etc or perhaps even to establish tribunals to impose financial penalties and force editors to publish corrections.

The PCC is responsible for tackling complaints against editors and journalists in these media sectors previously discussed; it requires editors to publish adverse adjudications but it cannot force this.

The Editors’ Code sets out ethical standards on 16 clauses including: accuracy, opportunity for people to reply to inaccuracies, privacy, harassment, intrusion into grief and shock, excessive detail in covering suicides, the welfare of children in the media, anonymity for children in sex cases and all sexual assault victims, hospital inquiries, crime reporting, secret filming and misrepresentation.

Public interest is a large factor in the justification of breaches in the Editors’ Code with the exception of cases of children where reasoning must be heavily assured. This includes, but isn’t confined to:

Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety

Protecting public health and safety

Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation

‘There is a public interest in freedom of expression itself’ relates to the idea that media is the essentially the voice of the people but there is no exception to inaccuracy.

The most serious restrictions lie on the ban of discriminatory material on the grounds of race, religion, sexual preference, gender, disability or physical or mental illness. All references to these must be relevant to the story.

Chapter 2:

Broadcast journalism’s regulation is controlled by Ofcom and not the Editors’ Code of Practice. Ofcom’s code states that broadcast organisations must be impartial when covering political and social issues, be accurate, treat people fairly, respect privacy and avoid harm and offence.

The watershed blockade is thoroughly covered in this chapter and an important note is that rules apply to radio too – at such times that children would be listening. Ofcom states that there must be clear information previous to the programme starting warning of any distress that it may cause, violence before 9 should be appropriately limited, offensive language and portrayal or discussion of sex should be limited. Broadcasters must also take precautions to avoid harm to viewers with photosensitive epilepsy.

Many clauses in Ofcom’s regulatory system are similar to the Editors’ Code of Practice especially on the areas of privacy, deception, due impartiality and accuracy and, public interest. Public interest does however have one more exception in broadcast journalism: disclosing incompetence that affects the public.

The BBC have their own methods of regulation, these exist in the form of the Royal Charter and the Agreement with Parliament which are renewed every 10 years. This ensures controversial subjects are treated with due impartiality and accuracy monitored by the BBC Trust, who publish appeal findings online but complaints are sent to the BBC itself. The Royal Charter and the Agreement with Parliament regulate the BBC in a similar way to Ofcom’s code but if a client intends to complain about an issue other than due impartiality and due accuracy they need to go through Ofcom.

Chapter 4:

Crime: media coverage prior to any court case

Police investigations are driven by the standard of proof needed for conviction, the media should understand the power to arrest and detain. There is a strong public interest in reporting crime therefore the media need to be particularly wary of contempt of law when the case is made active and not just to focus on the story sales. Libel risks are also a factor if the media identify a suspect before they are charged.

We must remember that the accused enjoy ‘the presumption of innocence’ so the responsibility lies on the prosecutor to prove guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

As soon as a case has been declared ‘active’ the Contempt of Court Act 1981 is immediately in force creating limitations on what can and cannot be published in the media. Police may release a statement when questioning a member of the public describing them as ‘helping with enquiries’.

The Crown Prosecution Service is independent of the police and its duty is to advise and direct the courts in whether the suspect should be prosecuted and the formal charges of the prosecution. The service can implement police bail to give the jury extra time but the case would still be active and therefore subject to the Contempt of Court Act. CPS lawyers have the final decision to assess if there is ‘a realistic prospect of conviction’ and the consideration of public interest, in most cases, leads to prosecution.

Any citizen has the fundamental right to counterbalance inertia or partiality in the form of a private prosecution. The ‘laying of information’ to the magistrates is the beginning of the process but ultimately the magistrates and the Attorney General have the final decision on the next proceedings. Magistrates can refuse summons if they believe the case to be frivolous and there is potential in the case becoming unsustainable as the individual lacks the investigatory powers given by law to the courts.

Libel is a significant risk when reporting the courts pre-trial in the media. If journalists publish a suspect’s name and he/she is later not prosecuted, the publication could then be liable for a claim of libel. Even publishing the phrase ‘under arrest’ is defamatory as there is a clear inference of guilt for the suspect. However there are a number of exceptions to the publication of identity, for example: if a spokesperson for a government agency releases the name it is safe to publish under the protection of qualified privilege, if there is a leak of police information indicating a definite charge and if the defendant is charged; the damage to their reputation is likely to be dwarfed by the consequent court case.

The Education Act 2011 bans the identification of a teacher who has allegedly committed a crime on a pupil at his/her school unless they are eventually charged. This is an automatic and indefinite ban therefore bestowing lifelong anonymity on the suspect but this of course lapses immediately with charge of the crime. Either courts can remove anonymity ‘in the interests of justice’ but teachers have the right to waive this. The Education Act is controversial as no other profession has the advantage of a pre-charge anonymity

Chapter 5:

McNae’s divides criminal offences into three categories

1.  Indictable-only offences are the most serious cases therefore carrying the longest prison sentences. Magistrates are seen to                                                         be too lenient for a defendant in such a case so it quickly progresses to the Crown court.
2.  Either-way offences include theft, sexual assault and GBH. These offences can be resolved in either the magistrate or Crown court dependant on its severity. The defendant can choose to exercise their legal right to opt for trial by a Crown court jury.
3.  Summary offences are more of a minor crime including common assault, being drunk and disorderly and speeding. Magistrates resolve these offences unless the same event is both a summary and either-way case where the defendant is summoned to the Crown court. However, the suspect has no right to be tried by a jury these cases are generally completed at a relative speed.

When defining criminality, there are two elements in which the prosecutor must prove before conviction. Actus reus is the lawyers’ Latin term for an act which is potentially criminal and mens rea is when an act is referred to as being carried out, planned or attempted with guilty intent in the knowledge of being morally wrong.

Strict liability removes or limits any legal defences to the charge. It can be seen as a practical and societal solution to discourage dangerous or anti-social conduct as mens rea is near on impossible to prove.

Chapter 6: Magistrates courts: summary cases

Pleas for defendants facing summary charges are taken in the magistrates’ court at first appearance. If their plea is guilty, they are convicted and sentencing usually takes place at a later time. However, if the defendant pleads not guilty, a very minor offence may be tried there but most cases will be adjourned for summary trial. The magistrates must then decide whether to grant bail.

Bail is the granting of liberty to a defendant until the case’s next hearing. The court may implement conditions of bail but under the Bail Act 1976 the general rule is that a defendant must be granted bail unless:

The court believes there are substantial grounds for believing that he/she will abscond, commit another offence or obstruct the course of justice

The court decides the defendant should be kept imprisoned for their own safety

When previously on bail, the defendant was alleged to have committed another offence

The defendant is already serving a prison sentence

There is insufficient information to decide on bail

In the minority of cases, the court may insist that the defendant must have a surety before bail can be granted. A surety is the guarantee of the defendant surrendering to bail, the person will agree to forfeit a sum of money in the event of the defendant absconding. Absconding during bail is a criminal offence so would likely result in an arrest warrant being issued. If in the event of the magistrates refusing to grant bail, the defendant can challenge the objection by appealing to the Crown court.

Section 8C is the automatic reporting restrictions for cases at magistrates’ court when the defendant pleads not guilty. When these restrictions are in force the media can only report on seven categories of information from the pre-trial proceedings, these being:

The name of the court and the magistrates’ names

The names, ages, addresses and occupations of the defendant(s) and witnesses

The charges

The names of lawyers in the proceedings (both solicitors and barristers)

The date and place of adjournment

Bail arrangements

Whether legal aid was granted

Magistrates can repeal the 8C reporting restrictions in full or in part for the interests of justice. If there are any objections to the retraction, they must not be reported until the disposal of the case.

There are other types of sentences in British courts, including: a community order, a conditional discharge with no immediately specified punishment or an absolute discharge where no punishment other than the fact of the conviction is deemed necessary.

Chapter 7: Magistrates: most serious criminal cases

When a defendant on an indictable – only charge appears before magistrates it is only a preliminary hearing before the formality that is the ‘sending for trial’. This is a relatively quick process that transfers cases to the Crown court.

The section 8 restrictions as discussed in the previous chapter prevent the publication from preliminary hearings of:

Any reference to evidence in the case other than that in the wording of the charge(s)

Any previous convictions the defendant may have

Any other material with potential to create prejudice

In the event of any breach of these terms, the proprietor, editor, publisher or broadcasting body can be prosecuted with a maximum fine of £5,000 but they could also be liable for substantially high costs under section 93 of the Courts Act 2003 if the case is aborted due to breaches creating prejudice.

There are certain exceptions to this for example: if a defendant requests the retraction of the restrictions, for an either-way charge if it becomes clear that the defendant is to be dealt with summarily, if magistrates decide there is insufficient evidence to commit any suspects of an either-way case to the Crown court and when the case has been concluded.

A few additional details from today’s lecture I will be adding in a further post to follow shortly.

Is it right to obey the law?

So philosophy has never been a significantly big interest of mine. For me it seems to be on a sort of spectrum, you get the eat, breathe and survive on philosophy people that thrive from any mention of Plato and have justifiable arguments for each baffling topic or you get the people that don’t care for philosophy that much. Don’t get me wrong, life’s questions are definitely fascinating but I find it easy to over think the subject and get completely muddled in a big tangled net of new questions.

We are programmed into thinking that the law should always be obeyed, like a Bible for both the religious and non-religious. I too held this view until Chris had questioned the idea in my first HCJ lecture.

There are laws that should unquestionably be enforced and complied with to keep societies in some sort of order and to prevent absolute chaos that can currently be seen in the Middle East demonstrations. We must take into consideration the circumstances of how laws have come into place, for example during authoritarian regimes oppressive laws can be created with a clouded view of society’s best interests and thus can be quite easily questioned.

Motives behind these laws can be greed which is a part of human nature, without any restrictions in place who is to say we wouldn’t constantly desire more? Leaving society always in a state of unrest, a time bomb for this previously mentioned chaos. Mad Max is one example, although somewhat exaggerated, of the negative traits of humanity when law and order collapses.

Law isn’t created as some sort of joke for the authorities or for people to like but it’s just there. In my opinion, it should therefore be unquestionably adhered to. The idea of a law and order safety bubble is a very comfortable one for me.

McNae’s and law introduction

Today was my first chance to grasp the subject of law, never been touched on before I was essentially a law virgin. Even the term ‘law’ is a pretty intimidating one so you could say I was fairly concerned at the thought of being thrown in at the deep end with the make or break topic of a journalist’s career.

I had prepared myself for the highest level of confusion to set in somewhere within the first fifteen minutes after the slight struggle of McNae’s. To say that this didn’t happen throughout the entire lecture is a delightful surprise for both me and the other journalism students I’m sure.

Globally, there are certain societies where free press is extremely limited and in some cases completely oppressed by authoritative regimes. The UK media could be envied in this sense fulfilling the role of the public’s watchdog in order to directly express the views of the people and to accurately inform them. Usually the majority can only participate indirectly in shaping public life, for example voting in the elections, forming pressure groups and reporting to the authorities. These actions in turn can easily be incited or inspired by the media which may have never before entered the public’s thoughts.

Although the European Convention on Human Rights helps to safeguard freedom of expression, this is the journalist’s job alongside safeguarding the principle of an independent judiciary when reporting the courts. In the UK, there are a growing number of restrictions on what can and cannot be published in the form of statutes. In particular, the Leveson Inquiry has toughened laws and made both the public and the most important people in the country more aware of their involvement with the media. So for us as journalists the law is integral not as a guideline but a permanent code of conduct that can never be strayed from. The punishments are almost always severe; a lucky escape would be a suing for liability where a million pound fine is not uncommon in the courts. I use the term lucky very loosely but as the penalty for contempt of court is a maximum of ten years imprisonment, I think it’s a small sacrifice.

In the lecture, we looked over the brief yet vital basics in Journalism practice such as: confidentiality, malice, accuracy, legality and regulatory issues. As students, we could still be penalised for these crimes in our blogs via the aforementioned suing and imprisonment. The burden of proof in its entirety is solely based on the journalist themselves; misrepresentation of sources and quotes is a dangerous aspect where accuracy can ruin a career. The basics in journalism can be somewhat overlooked in ‘new’ media, this being an importance in precision English. Sales can seem the primary concern over quality in the industry, perhaps ‘dumbing down’ for the generation we are today: disinterested in the facts of politics and desiring the gossip columns of Z list celebrities.

McNae’s defines the sources of law as custom, precedent and statute.

Custom; when the English legal system was shaped in the Middle Ages, royal judges administered the ‘law and custom of the realm’ this developing into the common law.

Precedent; the decisions recorded by lawyers giving the facts considered by court and their justifications. These precedents bind together all lower courts to shape future rulings.

Statute; when the common law can be changed by Acts of Parliament.

As mentioned earlier, the UK media are subject to the European Convention on Human Rights this is due to Britain’s involvement in the EU. Contained within the convention (article 8) is the guarantee of ‘the right to respect for privacy and family life and the right to freedom of expression.’ Countries that believe a breach of this right has occurred can put a case forward to the Strasbourg Court.

McNae’s states two divisions of the law as civil and criminal.

Civil law deals with tensions between individuals and organisations including the compensation of torts. Carelessness in medical environments, defamation and copyright breaches are all torts.

Criminal law concerns offences that affect entire communities; these are crimes against the sovereign.

In reality the two divisions frequently overlap.

It may also be worth noting that lawyers can either be barristers or solicitors. Solicitors have direct involvement with the client and may represent them in court. However, barristers are known as the counsel and after ten years in the role can apply to the Lord Chancellor for appointment as a Queen’s Counsel, reaching the height of their profession.