Friday 6 November 2009

Court confusion

HEARTY congratulations to a good friend on a local newspaper are in order after he stood up and challenged Crown Court for the first time in his career.

In doing so, my friend proved two lawyers and the judge wrong, and ensured that his newspaper would not lose the story to an invalid court order.

The newspaper was looking to report the fact that some heinous toe rag had just been sent down for six years after stabbing his victim, only narrowly missing his heart.

The confusion arose because the case involved a 15-year-old defendant, a juvenile.

The lawyers and the judge thought that this gave him automatic anonymity under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.

But section 49 of that Act which gives automatic anonymity only applies at a Youth Court.

In order for the defendant to be protected in an adult court, a section 39 order would need to be applied.

Any decent media law student will know the big difference - a section 39 order is not automatic. It must be announced to the court and logged in the records.

After checking that there was no section 39 order in place in this instance, my friend was more than happy to be able to correct the lawyers and the judge.

I understand that he now takes a well-earned break for a couple of weeks. Well done, again, mate!

No comments:

Post a Comment