A regional daily revealed a school on its patch had hired a convicted murderer after winning a courtroom fight to name the killer.

The Oxford Mail revealed Iria Suarez-Gonzalez had been taken on as a teaching assistant despite being one of Spain’s most notorious killers who, along with her friend, was convicted for the murder of schoolgirl Clara Garcia in 2000.

Suarez-Gonzalez had been up in court in February accused of fraud by false representation for allegedly not disclosing the murder as a previous conviction in her initial job application to the school, but the Crown Prosecution dropped the case altogether at a hearing last week after accepting that there was “no evidence” to convict her.

Her identity had been protected while proceedings were ongoing due to the placing of a Section 4(2) reporting restriction, and Mail court reporter William Walker successfully fought to name her after making representations at the latest hearing.

The lifting of the restriction allowed the Mail to reveal Suarez-Gonzalez’s past on its front page on Saturday, pictured, and the story has since been picked up nationally and in Spain.

Oxford Crown Court had heard representations on behalf of the CPS, the defence team for Suarez-Gonzalez and interested parties on behalf of the school that a further injunction may be sought to permanently ban aspects of the case.

William argued that, with proceedings now over, a postponement order could not be enforced and that only a High Court judge could order an injunction.

In a supporting letter, the Mail argued: “The Crown Court is a creature of statute and has only those powers expressly conferred on it by Parliament.  The only place that could possibly hear such an application is the High Court, under its inherent powers.”

Judge Nigel Daly sided with the Mail and called the argument “detailed and thorough”.

He said: “I am quite satisfied that this court does not have the power to make a restriction.”

William told HTFP: “While the issue was obviously a contentious one and we had heard arguments for not naming the school before the hearing it was felt that ultimately the public interest was too great not to.

“Fortunately in this case the Judge sided with my argument and both the CPS and the defence barrister who had represented Suarez-Gonzalez dropped their opposition altogether, leaving only un-named parents in favour of a ban.

“Ultimately if it had gone to the High Court we would have fought it there but thankfully we didn’t have to.

“Challenging the courts like this is always important and it meant that a story of significant public interest – picked up by most of the national press – and the discussion that surrounds it, could be reported fully.”