Legal Questions and Answers by
Jonathan Stones of John Barkers
Question :-
As a retired journalist I have been very surprised by the huge amount of information which has been published about the two individuals who have been arrested in connection with the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman.
Newspapers were always very careful not to print anything that could prejudice a trial.
Editors have recently been pushing the boundaries but I have never known the press - or radio and television - go as far as they have in this case.
As a result some legal experts have suggested that the extent of the coverage could undermine the prospects of a jury reaching a safe verdict.
I wondered what you views are?
Answer :-
As a former journalist you are clearly aware that there are strict rules to guarantee that an individual accused of an offence will receive a fair trial. To that
end, in the period from the arrest of a suspect through to the jury returning its verdict at the end of his trial, nothing must be published or broadcast which poses a substantial and serious risk of prejudicing the judicial process.
There has certainly been an exceptional amount of coverage in this case but volume of
coverage does not of itself produce a substantial and serious risk of prejudice.
Much of the coverage that I have seen has been concerned with fairly basic background information about the two individuals involved. The publication of such information does not pose a serious risk of prejudice.
| 
