Steven Price

My book

Media Minefield


Guide to NZ Media Law

Official Information Act

Official Information Act


Bill of Rights Act

Media law resources

Feeds (RSS)


« | Main | »

Bain call

By Steven | March 25, 2009

Can’t say I understand why Justice Pankhurst refused to allow the media to broadcast David Bain’s telephone call from the day of all the killings. We could hear reporters describing what he said. The jurors can’t be prejudiced by a repetition of evidence they’ve already heard. I can accept that there are problems allowing live streaming of the whole trial if particular witnesses to be called later are not supposed to hear the evidence of earlier witnesses (so that their evidence will be independent) … but that doesn’t seem to apply here.

Where’s the harm? More to the point, where’s the demonstrable justification for limiting freedom of expression?

Topics: General, Suppression orders | 1 Comment »

One Response to “Bain call”

  1. Kirry Says:
    May 12th, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    I for one am uncomfortable with the media’s use of this audio now that they have the right to use it. TV3 has been using it in an advertisement for their online news and it is being played around the clock. I agree that there was no justification for limiting their right to play it, but perhaps there should be some limitation on the way in which it is used i.e. not for advertising purposes!

Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.