The newspaper challenged an order that the part of the defendant’s trial for rape which related to his character and history should be heard excluding the press.
Held: The order stood. Clearly such an order could be made only after careful consideration, and was a metter of great sensitivity. The fact that some element might already have been disclosed by accident did not undermine the order. The particular facts which could not themselves be relayed openly in this case supported the need for the order.
Gross LJ, Wyn Williams J, Hilliard QC HHJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 887, [2016] 1 WLR 4366, [2016] WLR(D) 381, [2016] Crim LR 939, [2016] 2 Cr App R 28, [2016] EMLR 25
Bailii, WLRD
Contempt of Court Act 1981 11
England and Wales
Criminal Practice, Media
Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.566817
