A Woman and the Evening Herald

Complaint

A woman complained about the Evening Herald’s coverage of a District Court case in which her husband was convicted of assaulting her. She complained under Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy) and Principle 3 (Fairness and Honesty) that the front page headline gave readers a misleading impression of the circumstances surrounding the assault. She also complained under Principle 3 and Principle 4 (Respect for Rights) that the use of her photograph in connection with the case was unfair, and under Principle 5 (Privacy) in relation to publication of the name of the road on which she lived.

In acknowledging that the circumstances of the court case were difficult for the complainant and her family, the newspaper rejected the view that there had been any breach of the Code of Practice in its reporting of the court case. It stated that in relation to the alleged breach of Principle 1, the headline was not misleading and that in the event of any possible misinterpretation, the very first line of the story beneath the headline highlighted its true meaning. The newspaper argued that while it understood that some victims of crime find the publicity attaching to court cases distressing, its accurate reporting of the court case was not in breach of Principle 3. The newspaper maintained that the publication of the complainant’s photograph did not breach the Code, and that the publication of her address did not breach Principle 5, since, having been mentioned in the court’s proceedings, her address was on the public record. On this latter point the newspaper further pointed out that addresses in court cases are published not only because they are a matter of public record, but also to distinguish the accused from any other person of the same or similar name who might live in the same area.

Decision

The article, taken in its entirety, was a report of a court case, during the course of which the complainant had given evidence to the effect that an assault on her by her husband had taken place. The headline did not breach the Code of Practice, since the report immediately clarified the full circumstances surrounding the assault.

Principle 3.1 of the Code of Practice states that newspapers shall strive at all times for “fairness and honesty in the procuring and publishing of news and information”. In this context, the complainant felt that the use of her photograph in the article was unfair, as she was the victim of an assault and should therefore not have been the object of so much publicity. Although the use of the complainant’s photograph was understandably unwelcome to her and her family, its use did not amount to a breach of Principle 3.1 or Principle 4.

The complainant’s understandable distress at the publication of the name of the street in which she lived is acknowledged. However, as this information formed part of the evidence given in court in relation to the location of the assault, it was information that was on the public record, and therefore no longer private. The newspaper’s defence that this information is also used to distinguish those involved from other people of the same or similar name who might live in the same area was also accepted.

11 March 2008