The National Union of Journalists is urging its members not to comply with a police request for help in the search for information into the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman.

Cambridgeshire police issued a plea for journalists to hand over notebooks, video film, photographs and unused interviews so they can be scoured for evidence.

They are also asking who has been paid or signed up by the press for future stories.

But the NUJ says this flies in the face of a basic principle not to reveal confidential sources and information.

Union general secretary Jeremy Dear has written to branches at newspapers, agencies, TV and radio, pointing out that the NUJ Code of Conduct requires journalists to protect such sources.

The letter reminds members of the legal procedure for the police to obtain information from journalists.

This involves seeking an order from a Crown Court Judge.

The letter says: "If Cambridgeshire Police want your members' information they should go to court for it.

"Of course journalists are human beings too and if individuals have information they believe is vital to the investigation then they can act voluntarily, as a matter of conscience. But they cannot be required to give information.

"In the case of Soham it is unlikely that your members have any vital information the police do not have. Their enquiries were intensive; every person in the town was interviewed. Their interest is presumably in what may have been said to journalists by the two people arrested, but it is improbable that there was anything indicating their guilt that is not already in the public domain.

"The Soham murders were a particularly horrible crime but it should be investigated like any other. Police and press have worked together well and it is unfortunate that the Cambridgeshire force is now trying to take advantage of good relations to entice us to breach an important principle."

The police have reacted to opposition from some areas of the press by writing a second letter to media organisations.

The letter from the Cambridgeshire constabulary, said: "It was not my intention to compromise in any way the integrity and confidentiality of any journalistic source.

"I am also aware that the sheer breadth of information sought was a cause of concern for you."

Would YOU hand over your information if you were involved?

Vote now: Send an e-mail for
YES, or for NO.

Is it different from protecting your sources if you exposed a council officer as corrupt?
Which is more in the public interest?
Let us know

Do you have a story about the regional press? Ring 0116 227 3122/3121, or
e-mail pastill@nep.co.uk