The Manchester Evening News has been found guilty of contempt of court after writing about the killers of Jamie Bulger.

Click here to read the full story.

After publication the Attorney General wrote to the editor, Paul Horrocks, and invited him to make representations.

The publishing company instructed its solicitors to write on behalf of both itself and the editor to the Attorney General. The letter was later described by the Judge as “long and apologetic”.

It said: “It is the wish of the board, as it is the wish of Mr Horrocks, that our response to the Attorney General’s letter should be plain, that it should acknowledge that there has been fault and that it should convey to the Attorney General the deep regret which all involved in this unfortunate sequence of events feel at what has occurred.

“The board and Mr Horrocks are extremely concerned at what has occurred and have no wish to avoid the issues which gave rise to the complaint.

“They therefore acknowledge at the outset that there was a grave error of judgment on the part of a member of the Manchester Evening News’ staff, a subsequent failure of its internal controls and an inexcusable breakdown in communication between those who, together, should have prevented publication. They apologise unreservedly for all those errors.”

The letter pointed out that Greater Manchester Newspapers Ltd was invited to join a group of newspapers seeking to oppose the granting of injunctions and declined to do so.

It refused to do so because “it considered the injunction sought to be absolutely necessary to give the boys a real chance in what would in any event be very difficult lives”.

The letter continued: “The board consider that it was extremely unfortunate that the news editor failed to discuss the meaning of the word [institutions (where the boys were held)] which he had chosen with his colleagues and, by not doing so, failed to stimulate the discussion which would inevitably have made it clear that the meaning contended for by the Attorney General might all too readily be taken by readers.

“That he made the decision on his own, notwithstanding that over the previous two days Mr Horrocks had specifically warned him to take very great care over the “geography” contained in any article, was a gross error of judgment.

“…As to the availability of information about such “institutions”, it is accepted that there was a “chance” that publication could have allowed a determined person to discover the addresses of the “institutions” at which the boys were held. That too is regretted.”

See also:
Communications breakdown caused lapse

Would publication have revealed boys’ location?

Conscientious effort to avoid situation