Media Law - Lecture 2. Reporting the Courts.

Arguably, court reporting is the most difficult thing for journalists to do, with so many rules and regulations that govern what we can't write, however when push comes to shove, the rules are there to protect us.

Journalists must (as juries must always do as well) presume that the defendant in a court case is INNOCENT. This is known as the 'presumption of innocence', it underpins one of the main principles of this country's of the justice system - innocent until proven guilty. The jury must find the defendant guilty beyond reasonable doubt, one of main pieces of evidence needed to do this (in my opinion) is an eyewitness. These days, DNA can be used to prove anything - including whether A killed B, however an eyewitness is the thing that should (arguably) come above DNA, because he/she saw A killing B - with their own eyes (however in very rare circumstances, an eyewitness may appear from nowhere).

Another major concept in justice and court reporting is prejudice. The jury and journalists must not have ANY prejudice towards the defendant e.g. because he's wearing a baseball cap or wearing a t shirt with a Union Jack on it, in Northern Ireland (not a good move). It's human nature for people to be prejudiced and anyone who says they're not, is a liar. However, journalists must never be prejudiced whilst reporting a court case because it can throw up all kinds of problems, including the prevention of a fair trial and the big one - contempt of court.

Contempt of court

This is a strict liability offence, which can result in a 5 year prison sentence for the offender, however it is more common for people to be fined e.g. the Colin Myler case. Whilst Colin Myler was the editor of the Sunday Mirror, he allowed an article (including the interview of the victims of footballers Jonathan Woodgate and Lee Bowyer's 'aggravated racial assault') to be published during their trial. This didn't go down well with the Attorney General, who said "The Sunday Mirror newspaper will face contempt of court proceedings". The outcome of this was that Myler was fined £30,000 and the case against Woodgate and Bowyer's was annulled - meaning that they got off completely scot-free. (Although Woodgate got his just desserts - a shed load of injures!)

Contempt of court means that people sitting in the public gallery can't shout things like 'Hang him' or give the jury funny looks. As these will probably influence the jury into making a certain decision.

For a newspaper/magazine/TV or radio programme to avoid CoC, they can only report these 6 categories:

Name & age

Address & occupation

Charge(s)

Date & place of Crown Court hearing

Bail & legal aid conditions

Names of counsel

These things are banned from being reported:

Publication of any material which might prejudice a fair trial

Reporting opinions expressed by jurors

Anything which interferes with the course of justice

Any breach of a court order

This brings me to the case of Jo Yeates' murder, where the Daily Star newspaper reported various things about the case - including calling for the hanging of a suspect! These kinds of reports can influence a jury's decision and will ultimately prevent a fair trial taking place.

The best thing for a journalist to do is to make their report fair and accurate.

Justice must be seen to be done

Criminal trials must be held in public, unless there is strong reason for one not to e.g. matters of National Security, however these are subject to challenge from journalists and the public - especially as journalists are the 'eye and ears of the public' and I'm sure there must be someone who is interested in a national terror threat.

Types of offences

Indictable only - this includes all the major offences such as murder, rape and robbery. If you commit ones of these, your trial will take place at a crown court - never a magistrates court.

Summary - this includes very minor offences such as not paying parking fines etc..., these will only be taken to a magistrates court because the crown courts are far too busy and important to deal with petty fines.

Either way - this is where it gets a bit grey. If you plead guilty to a summary charge, you will be tried at a crown court - much to the annoyance of the judges (not the X Factor ones by the way). This is where you can take a chance on the jury finding you not guilty.

Criminal Courts

This stuff will seem very simple and patronising...

In criminal courts, there is a jury which decides whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty, as mentioned above, the jury must always presume the innocence of the defendant, until there is enough evidence to suggest otherwise.

There are two teams of barristers - prosecution and defence.

The judge presides over the case, rarely doing anything meaningful until the best part of the case - the sentencing. The judge acts as the 'referee' in the case and tries to keep the peace, he/she will summarise the case for the jury and will advise them on the law.

I think that just about covers court reporting...

TB 2011