« Hooten boasts of flouting the law | Main | Harvey’s online gag »
Unprejudiced
By Steven | August 25, 2008
Some defence lawyers have been getting their knickers in a knot about reporting on the Veitch case in yesterday’s Sunday Star-Times and Herald on Sunday.
Can’t say I share their concerns. Certainly, now that charges have been laid, publishing material that tends to create a real risk of prejudice to Veitch’s trial will be a contempt of court. But there doesn’t seem to be much in these stories to create such a risk.
They essentially summarise the police allegations. It looks like they came from the police summary of facts. The papers reported them as allegations. They note that Veitch denies them. They don’t get into assessing the evidence. They have reported no more than is almost certain to come out in depositions. Any trial is a good long way away, so any possible effect on jurors is almost sure to dissipate.
The police have denied leaking the information, so there’s some chance that it came from Veitch’s camp – perhaps to help get us used to the idea that the case won’t be about a one-off assault, and highlight the fact that one of the allegations includes throwing water and thereby discredit the case.
(The Herald on Sunday made the most of this, but its headline was a bit of a stretch:
Water assault charge for Veitch
In fact, as the story notes, the alleged circumstances are that he pushed her onto a bed and threw water in her face. I don’t think the water-throwing alone – while technically an assault – would have formed the basis of a charge).
There is some danger in reporting the summary of facts as the papers have done here. It’s possible that some charges may be withdrawn or that better information may become available as the case proceeds. It also effectively gives one side a chance to put its spin on the case. Both of these things mean that readers – potential jurors – have their perceptions coloured by material that may be inaccurate or irrelevant. But the risk seems pretty low to me here.
Topics: Contempt of Court | 46 Comments »
46 Responses to “Unprejudiced”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 26th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
[…] Steven Price is less concerned: Some defence lawyers have been getting their knickers in a knot about reporting on the Veitch case in yesterday’s Sunday Star-Times and Herald on Sunday. […]
May 26th, 2020 at 11:21 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 4148 more Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
June 23rd, 2020 at 9:44 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 63005 additional Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
July 1st, 2020 at 11:16 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
July 17th, 2020 at 1:50 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
August 2nd, 2020 at 2:47 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
August 2nd, 2020 at 5:46 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
August 6th, 2020 at 3:21 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
August 6th, 2020 at 10:36 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
August 25th, 2020 at 8:28 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 2nd, 2020 at 6:36 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 2nd, 2020 at 7:26 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 77550 more Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 3rd, 2020 at 1:08 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 23rd, 2020 at 1:42 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 94441 more Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 26th, 2020 at 1:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 29th, 2020 at 6:23 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
September 30th, 2020 at 10:41 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
October 10th, 2020 at 1:50 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
October 16th, 2020 at 11:47 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
October 30th, 2020 at 3:28 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 7th, 2020 at 1:00 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you can find 58634 additional Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 11th, 2020 at 5:36 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 12th, 2020 at 2:05 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 12th, 2020 at 2:38 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 13th, 2020 at 1:09 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 27th, 2020 at 10:31 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 30545 more Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 30th, 2020 at 10:13 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
December 19th, 2020 at 6:06 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
January 5th, 2021 at 12:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
March 2nd, 2021 at 4:32 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
April 22nd, 2021 at 4:02 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
April 28th, 2021 at 12:03 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
May 8th, 2021 at 1:00 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 13881 more Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
June 21st, 2021 at 9:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
June 28th, 2021 at 9:55 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
June 29th, 2021 at 12:52 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
July 3rd, 2021 at 4:33 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
July 3rd, 2021 at 11:03 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
August 21st, 2021 at 4:02 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
October 16th, 2021 at 12:24 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 87452 additional Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
October 22nd, 2021 at 5:00 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
October 25th, 2021 at 9:16 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
November 10th, 2021 at 12:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
February 8th, 2022 at 1:26 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
April 1st, 2022 at 11:34 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]
April 23rd, 2022 at 9:14 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=149 […]