I wondered what Iffy might make of this:
www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/sep/14/local-newspapers-medialaw
Newspaper in MK fined for naming juveniles in court proceedings.
|
Your subject line reminds me of the Tommy Cooper gag:
"D'you know, somebody actually complimented me on my driving today.
They left a little note on the windscreen, it said "Parking Fine."
So that was nice. "
|
...I wondered what Iffy might make of this:...
Poor error, but the position of youths in court is far from clear.
Seems this court was sitting as a youth court which means the names of the defendants can not be published.
In a 'mixed' case, where youths appear in the dock with adults, there is no automatic ban.
Gagging orders are meant to be used only to prevent harm to the child by publicity, not to prevent shame, embarrassment, teasing, etc.
They are certainly not automatic.
Routinely magistrates slap orders on cases for no good reason.
If the case goes to crown court, there's another argument as to whether the mags' court order still applies, or whether all bets are off.
One judgment suggested the latter, on the very sensible grounds the reporter can only be expected to check if an order has been made in the court they are sitting in.
We can't be expected to check every court and hearing in a case, it would be impossible anyway.
Records of these orders are sketchy, the judge/magistrate mumbles something about it and unless the clerk is awake and bothers to mark the file there is no record.
Surprising there aren't more foul-ups than there are.
Some go unnoticed - I've got away with one or two over the years - and editors are increasingly cautious, meaning the name of the youth is left out when it could be published.
|
Court Reporting Fine - Alanovich
