Page 187 - Law and the Media

Law and the Media
tried either in the magistrates’ court or in the crown court. These are known as offences that
are ‘triable either way’. In such circumstances, the magistrates decide whether to try the
offence themselves or send it to the crown court for trial.

If the defendant has been committed to the crown court on a summary offence or an offence
triable either way and feels that he should not have been sent to the crown court, he can apply
to the crown court for the case to be dismissed on the grounds of insufficiency of evidence.
An application to dismiss is subject to reporting restrictions (Regulation 3 of Schedule 3 of
the Crime and Disorder Act 1998). The only matters that may be reported are:

The identity of the court and the name of the judge
The names, ages, home address (past and current) and occupations of the defendant
and any witnesses
The offence or offences
The names of counsel and solicitors engaged in the proceedings
Where the proceedings are adjourned, and the date and place to which they are
adjourned
The bail arrangements
Whether legal aid was granted to the accused.
The media may publish a full report if the application is successful and the proceedings
against the defendant are dismissed. If the application is not successful, a full report may be
published at the end of the trial. The judge hearing the application to dismiss has the
discretion to lift the reporting restrictions. If two or more defendants are jointly charged and
both apply for the proceedings to be dismissed, a full report can only be published if all the
applications are successful or at the end of all the trials. Where there are two or more
defendants and one of them objects to the lifting of the restrictions, the judge may only lift
the restrictions if he is satisfied, after hearing representations from the defendants, that it is
in the interests of justice to do so.

9.7 Hearings concerning sexual offences and indecency

9.7.1 General principles

The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 introduced the unique concept of anonymity in
the reporting of rape cases. However, the protection only commenced at the issue of a
warrant for the arrest of the defendant or the defendant’s first appearance in court. This
loophole in the law was brought to the fore in 1985 when the victim of the ‘Ealing Vicarage
Rape’ was identified by the press and subjected to massive media coverage whilst her
assailants remained unknown and at large. Successive amendments to the Sexual Offences
(Amendment) Act 1976 resulted in the complete removal of anonymity of the defendant in
rape cases, and the protection of the identity of victims of rape from the time the complaint
is first made.
150