AddThis SmartLayers

Watchdog dismisses complaints over regional press court stories

IPSO_logo_newComplaints about two regional newspapers’ reporting of court cases have been dismissed by the press regulator.

The unnamed mother of a man convicted of manslaughter complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that The Chronicle, Newcastle, had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in a number of reports about his trial.

The complainant claimed greater weight had been given to the prosecution’s evidence than the defence’s by The Chronicle, adding allegations the victim had been killed “for a laugh” and a comment from the victim’s mother that the defendant had shown “no remorse” had not been proven in court.

She further claimed the judge had criticised the reporting of the trial, but provided no specific information regarding the nature of his concerns.

The Chronicle said its reporter had attended the prosecution opening, the hearing of the defendant’s evidence, the verdict and the sentence.

It further added there was no requirement to publish a balanced report of events, but had covered both the prosecution and defence cases, and that the judge’s remarks had not been solely directed at The Chronicle.

The reporter had approached the judge and asked him to clarify his comments so he could ensure the accuracy of the articles, but he responded that he could not remember exactly what the issue was or whether it had been in the reporter’s articles.

The prosecution had alleged the victim was “killed for a laugh”, while the victim’s mother’s comment was clearly distinguished as such.

The complaint was not upheld, and the full adjudication can be read here.

In a separate case, Stuart Ford complained the North Devon Journal had breached Clause 1 in its reporting of an ongoing trial in which he faced 10 charges under the Animal Welfare Act.

The complainant was concerned that the article had misrepresented the evidence he had given in court, and that the Journal’s coverage had initially referenced allegations that he had “kicked a puppy in the ribs”, which was later ruled inadmissible by the judge.

The newspaper said the comments had been reported accurately, and the reporter had left court by the time the judge had ruled the evidence inadmissible.

It offered to publish a clarification on this matter.

The complaint was not upheld, and the full adjudication can be read here.

2 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • July 21, 2015 at 3:44 pm
    Permalink

    no requirement to publish a balanced report (Chronicle). Some mistake surely?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • July 21, 2015 at 3:49 pm
    Permalink

    legal pedant. if that is not true those papers who publish one-sided cops handouts better watch it. They might come across a lawyer who knows what he is doing and take it up on his client’s behalf. Interesting point.
    Any legal eagles out there to give us a definitive answer?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)