Media Law: Courts: Reporting and structure

The court system in England is divided into two parts: civil and crown (or state court). Both have a pyramid hierarchy that tries defendents on the severity of their offences.

Criminal courts deal with cases of a defendent against the Crown. Crown courts only try defendents for indictable offences meaning they can go to prison for 5 years or more. Mainly cases like murder, rape etc.

The civil side of the law deals with minor offences such as disputes over who owns a tree that overhangs two gardens for example. The civil umbrella covers all disputes both personal and corporate. From magistrates to county court, they deal with summary offences like public drunkenness.

Each-way offences are cases that can be heard in either a Crown Court or a Magistrates Court.

Laws can come from a number of sources. Mainly common and statute law and of course acts of Parliament. However in recent years, EU law has had a profound effect on law in this country.

REPORTING THE COURTS

The main pitfalls for journalists when it comes to reporting the courts are contempt and prejudice.

Contempt of court occurs when something is published that breaches the rules of court reporting by potentially causing prejudice. In 2002, Leeds United footballers Jonathan Woodgate and Lee Bowyer were accused of assualting another individual but were eventually aquitted after a newspaper printed an article with a relative of the alleged victim. This could have prejudiced the jury and therefore the pair would not have had a fair trial.

Prejudice is the other side of this legal coin and occurs when an article jeopardises the right of an individual to a fair trial.

When it comes to reporting the courts there are strict guidelines to avoid being hit by the legal sledgehammer.

In the immediate aftermath of a crime there are no restrictions in place on reporting. Every detail can be printed.

As soon as police make an arrest the case becomes LEGALLY ACTIVE. This now puts restrictions on what you can and cannot report and any material that COULD potentially prejudice a jury must be removed or not reported.

As soon as Police lay charges and a trial becomes the next step then only UNCONTESTED FACTS may be reported.

When it comes to reporting the trial there are 7 key steps from which a journalist cannot stray.

You may report:

- The name, age, occupation and of the defendent.

- The names of the magistrates

- Names of solicitors/barristers

- Date and place of adjournment

- Whether legal aid was granted

- Whether bail was applied for ONLY - not whether it was granted or not and arrangments

- Charges faced

In Crown Courts a journalist may ONLY report when a jury is present.

There are measures to prevent minors from being identified in court. Section 49 affords anonymity to under-18s in youth courts and Section 39 affords them anonymity in adult courts. Journalists simply cannot report the names of minors in court.

Following on from this, journalists must be careful not to fall into the trap of jigsaw identification. If a minor's name is not reported then by reporting details like how old they are and what school they go to may allow people to piece together these bits of information and identify a minor.

Media Law: Codes and Practises

Codes of conduct are, quite literally the rules and regulations that journalists must abide by. The main regulatory bodies and their codes of conduct are the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), OFCOM and the BBC's own guidelines.


The PCC code is important because it ensures that the industry has a degree of self-regulation.

Despite it's advantages, the code is fairly toothless when it comes to clamping down on journalists. The same can be said of the BBC guidelines.

Ofcom is perhaps the most effective of all the regulating bodies and regularly dishes out fines to media corporations for breaches of the rules. It is the only body that has statutory power and can therefore impose fines and even remove licences. Under OFCOM guidelines it is imperative that a journalist be both impartial and accurate.

In recent years, the BBC has been the most high profile casualty of OFCOM strict rules. Among other things, the body slapped a heavy fine on the BBC for fabricating telephone calls on the popular children's television programme Blue Peter.

On a personal note, I was working at a local BBC radio station at the time all of this came to light and received the blanket e-mail to all staff. From that moment on we had to ensure that every competition was above board and as a broadcast assitant had to log every call and hand in my sheet at the end of my shift - utter madness!

Media Law: Defamation, Libel and Privilege

If the journalism industry was mapped out like a World War One battlefield, with the journalists one one side and the story/news on the other and no-mans land containing a mass of legal snares. Mines marked "defamation" would probably be laid in large clumps ensuring that, should a journalist step on one it would quite simply be the end of him (or her, for those of you mindful of political correctness). Describing this experience was perhaps not as eloquently put as Captain Edmund Blackadder but nevertheless it serves as a reminder to all journalists how dangerous defamation is.


In simple terms, defamation occurs when someone produces a permanent (written or broadcasted) statment that affects an individual's reputation. Specifically if:

- it lowers them in the estimation of right thinking people

- causes them to be shunned and avoided

- if it affects them in the their trade profession or industry. Slander is the non-permanent sister of defamation.

- exposes them to hatred ridicule or contempt

When a libel writ is brought against a journalist for a defamatory statement then there are four defences.

Justification - I can prove that the statement (although defamatory) is true.

Fair and honest comment - The statement is comment based on fact and is an honest and fair opinion. Must also be in the public interest

Qualified Privilege - The statement is protected by qualified privilege

The Reynolds Defence - If defamatory material is in the public interest AND adheres to the Nicholls List. Must also be a product of RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM


Libel laws in the UK are perhaps the worst in the world. Many celebrities bring a libel writ to UK courts because they know that they will win. A good example of this sort of action was when a famous boxer had defamatory statements written about him in a boxing magazine. Although not protected under US law, his lawyer proved that the magazine could be downloaded in the UK and therefore fell within UK court jurisdiction.

Journalists must also be aware of inference and innuendo. Television journalists must also be aware of 'wallpaper pictures' to ensure that no-one is postitively identified.

PRIVILEGE

Privilege is something that is afforded to journalists that allows them to report without fear of legal reprimand providing they stick to an agreed reporting formula.

Qualified privilege is a cast-iron defence against defamation providing the material is:

FAST/CONTEMPORANEOUS
ACCURATE
FAIR

Finally, it was interesting to hear a recent discussion that took place on Radio 5Live on the subject of super-injunctions. Victoria Derbyshire's show centred on a debate with Max Mosely about how super-injunctions should be lifted. One of the arguments from a caller was that a company who had take out a super-injunction in order to stop the world from finding out that they had dumped nuclear waste in Africa should not have been allowed to do so simply from a humanitarian point of view. Interesting to note that people are now wanting to apply common sense to super injunctions.