A press agency journalist has successfully overturned a secrecy order preventing the naming of a former professional footballer who police say poses a serious risk to children.
David Graham, of Blackpool-based Watsons Press Agency, has been covering the case of 70-year-old Alan Burrows, who police applied to be given an interim then a full Sexual Offences Prevention Order.
The former Blackpool FC player was given the order last week at Blackpool Magistrates Court which prevents him having contact with children under 16.
He was allowed to be named following a ding-dong battle between David and Lancashire Police over the course of four court hearings.
At the first hearing, no applications were made for Burrows’ identity, age or address to be kept secret.
But at the second hearing, an application for secrecy under the Contempt of Court Act was made by Lancashire Police and Burrows’ defence team.
Magistrates rejected this following a plea in open court by David.
However, at the third hearing in front of a district judge, at which there were no press representatives present, a further secrecy application by police and the defence was allowed.
When David found out about the order, he made an official request for another hearing to take place before the court dealt with the SOPO application, so he could contest the anonymity ruling.
He argued that any application for secrecy should have been made at the start of all the proceedings and not part way through.
Despite the objections of police and the defence, David was successful in overturning the secrecy order so Burrows’ details could finally be reported.
He said: “It is becoming an increasing practice for the defence and police to apply for personal details to withheld by the media – usually when the media are not in court to fight.”
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Our overpaid public servants in blue will do anything for an easier life. Paedo on the patch? Keep it quiet and we’ll get less bother. Sod the risk to the public with a molester in their midst.
You can understand the defence solicitor trying it on – if only to go through the motions for their client – but the police should be ashamed of themselves for going along with it.
The district judge should have known better than to allow a ban in the first place.
Hats off to David for going back to court and fighting… and winning.
Report this comment
Well done, David. If, as seems likely the district judge made the order under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, it was invalid any way because the Act says the order can be made only when the particulars (name, address age or whatever) has been withheld from the public,. If the information was freely available on the defendant’s earlier appearances in court, it had not been withheld from the public and the district judge’s purported order fell at the first hurdle.
Recommended reading for district judges :: Essential Law for Journalists .
Report this comment
This particular gent played one game for Blackpool in 1959…his some total as a pro. Not exactly Stan Matthews is he?
A bit naughty to bring Blackpool FC into the story.
Report this comment
According to the Blackpool Gazette, he was a ‘former Pool star’
http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/local/former-pool-star-given-sex-offences-order-1-4623505
Report this comment