A weekly newspaper has decided against trying to overturn a gagging order which prevented it naming a drunk driver who drove a military vehicle into the side of a house.
In January we reported that the Hereford Times wanted to fight a court’s decision to hide the identity of the man who caused £40,000 worth of damage when he smashed the van into a couple’s house.
The 29-year-old, known only as Mr G, was found to be twice the legal drink-drive limit but the Ministry of Defence successfully applied to keep his identity a secret to protect his ‘personal safety and security.’
Now a lawyer for the Times’ parent company Newsquest has revealed that time and resource constraints meant the decision was made not to appeal the order.
Simon Westrop from NMG Legal said there was a ‘super-injunction element’ to MoD applications in that media lawyers are not allowed to see the evidence so do not know what danger there is alleged to be in naming the soldier, meaning they are effectively ‘groping in the dark.’
He said crown courts and magistrates courts only have limited powers in these circumstances and that the orders that are being made go too far, because they also effectively protect a defendant’s anonymity in relation to his crime after the proceedings end.
Said Simon: “The issues need to be looked at afresh by the higher courts. There is no doubt in our minds that orders are being wrongly made. We admire the role special forces play in protecting the UK’s interests, but that does not entitle them to privileges not available to the rest of us.
“As a group, Newsquest is very active up and down the UK in challenging what we consider to be bad orders, but time and resources are limited and we have to prioritise.
“We were among those challenging a similar gagging effort by the MoD at Worcester Crown Court last year, where an SAS soldier faced charges of child rape. The order was eventually withdrawn and Corporal Ian Tuckley from Hereford was convicted. In my view, it was shameful that the MoD made the application in the first place.
He added: “The Telford matter was less serious, of course, but it’s important that the people of Herefordshire should know who has committed any crime in their community.”
In the Hereford case the driver, referred to as Mr G, pleaded guilty to drink-driving at Telford Magistrates Court and was disqualified from driving for 20 months and fined £520.
The newspaper splashed its 26 January edition with a story headlined ‘Secret Justice’ accompanied by a strongly-worded editorial on the case.
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
It’s a depressing but unsuprising reality that most local newspapers don’t have the resources to fight these kind of decisions. In an unrelated point – that is one ugly front page. I don’t even know where to start…
Report this comment
Just Tweet it. That seems to be one area where the law is unwilling or unable to invoke the same standards that we as journalists have to abide by.
Report this comment
Please do start, deadMaus. What would you change…?
Report this comment
Sadly, a sign of the times it seems.
Incidentally re the second par of the story, there’s no such thing as “worth of damage”. You can have a cost of damage but not a worth. Lots of journalist make this mistake, the BBC included.
Report this comment
Headline impact diminished by being over pic
Pic of van too small and lost
Main image of man is not really the point of the story
Plus picture doesn’t really illustrate anything since it, in turn, is obscured by headline
Sidebar fights the promo stuff
Dogleg text untidy
Prevailing wisdom is turns should run on to next page, not end on full stop
Positioning of sidebar might persuade some people to read it first (but they won’t understand what’s going on)
Bylines are enormous … why?
Complicated story … probably needs a b-deck
Sidebar not lined up with top of main heading is untidy
Report this comment
Surely the point of this story was to highlight the problems which the press face when unjust banning orders are imposed and the high cost needed to fight them?
It’s very easy to sit back in your arm chair and be critical when you’re not at the coal face.
The media has changed a lot over the past three years.
There are many enthusiastic and passionate people in this industry who are working as hard as they can, with limited resources, long hours and often low pay. They deserve support and praise for their efforts.
From from the comments I often read, former journalists and subs are far too quick to criticise today’s newspapers – whether it’s the Monmouthshire Beacon or the Pontypridd Observer – and their loyal staff. It’s very sad.
There are many of us who still believe in the local media and are passionate about what we do and the people we write about.
Report this comment
I’m at the coal face and I can see that front page is a total mess. Nobody denies there are passionate people working in local papers, the trick is to link that to some sort of skill or proficiency.
Report this comment