The Evening Chronicle’s acting editor has been summoned to court by a judge who claims the paper is in contempt of court.

The judge labelled the Newcastle paper’s page one splash – 12-year-old mum’s sex case ordeal – the most “irresponsible piece of journalism he had come across”.

And he summoned acting editor Murray Morse to court to explain his actions in naming the victim of a sexual offence.

But Murray is refusing to attend – until the judge explains what his paper has done wrong.

At Newcastle Crown Court, a 12-year-old boy admitted unlawful sexual intercourse after a rape charge was reduced.

He received a 12-month supervision order and no court order was made at the time to prevent him being named. But naming him would have indirectly identified the girl who was entitled to anonymity under the Sexual Offences Act.

After the case – which the Chronicle did not report – the girl and her family decided to waive her right to anonymity and tell her story to the newspaper.

They believed they had been let down by the legal system and objected to the lesser charge faced by the boy and the fact that he escaped a custodial sentence.

Judge David Hodson sat at 5.30pm on the day the story appeared and said the Chronicle was in contempt of court for identifying her.

He also questioned whether, as a minor, the girl could waive her right to anonymity. He also made a S39 order preventing any publication naming the boy in future.

Murray said: “I heard about this at 6.30pm, at home, third-hand and that’s less than satisfactory.

“We are convinced we are on solid ground legally and I am satisfied there was a public interest or we would not have run the story.”

“This judge was the very same judge that accepted the reduced plea and handed out the sentence, and the same judge that did not put any banning orders on regarding identification of the minor involved,” said Murray.

“I think it’s wrong for a judge to speak in open court condemning an editor and his newspaper and leave it hanging in the air. We have asked the court to show where we are supposed to have gone wrong.

“This has again highlighted judges and their lack of knowledge as it is applied to journalism, something that is happening more often.”

Murray said: “The mum of the 12-year-old girl came to us with the story. I went to great lengths to ensure the family knew what they were doing by going public – and explained the possible pitfalls of their action.

“We took the view it was in the public interest, not just that a 12-year-old was pregnant, but that the 12-year-old lad, who was a possible rapist, had never been tried for that.

“It seemed to us it had been easier for the court to accept a guilty plea to reduced charges.”

Back to the law index

Do you have a story about the regional press? Ring 0116 227 3122/3121, or
e-mail [email protected]